vancouverphotographer

<p>Yep, agreed with Dave, sounds like you're happy, your clients are happy, so just carry on with the winning formula - until such time the clients want something different or you want to try something different. Maybe you can post some photos and the masses at PN can see where some lighting might benefit an image?</p>

<p>How about a Craigslist Ad?</p>

<p>So far no issues for me .... but I have yet to try it in a studio type environment or similar where I am going to have to stop it down when using some studio type lighting - will need to explore the menu options in this case. Currently using the A65 ... previously used A33 and A55 with no issues as well but I think the viewfinder did go dark when in a studio type environment and there was no menu options to compensate as I recall.</p>

<p>I just have Adobe Elements but I just went to their site and downloaded the latest version of the ACR camera raw and install it and now when I go open up my Maxxum 7D raw file, it opens it up and I can makes some basic adjustments to the exposure, colours, white balance etc. and later I can make further changes when it opens up in Photoshop.</p>

<p>My Sony A33 died on me when I was up in Whistler, BC, Canada shooting in winter .... all of a sudden the camera just shut down and never turned on again after that. Not sure if something about the temperatures did it in or not but it's funny it chose that time to die on me.</p>

<p>I have both but haven't really done any testing side by side but just in practice, I feel my copy of the 100-200mm to focus faster and more accurately than my copies of the beercan. This could be related to focus but I think my 100-200mm images look sharper wide open than my beercan images in general. Colours seem a little different, images from the beercan seems warmer.</p>

<p>Sony's focussing sucks in general with most of my lenses (I have mostly Minolta glass though and just a few Sony branded ones) with most of my Sony bodies as well. The shots that you get, most of the time I get them sharp when the subjects are that big in the frame (and I almost always pick one single focus point to use) but I do get missed focus like that too sometimes. However where it really fails me regularly is when the subjects are smaller in the frame and in dimmer light, I can almost forget about getting a properly focussed shot when the subject is smaller in the frame. I had some backfocus on my 16-80mm as well and eventually sold the lens but I think the bigger problem is the body, not the lenses.</p>

<p>Sony's focussing sucks in general with most of my lenses (I have mostly Minolta glass though and just a few Sony branded ones) with most of my Sony bodies as well. The shots that you get, most of the time I get them sharp when the subjects are that big in the frame (and I almost always pick one single focus point to use) but I do get missed focus like that too sometimes. However where it really fails me regularly is when the subjects are smaller in the frame and in dimmer light, I can almost forget about getting a properly focussed shot when the subject is smaller in the frame. I had some backfocus on my 16-80mm as well and eventually sold the lens but I think the bigger problem is the body, not the lenses.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/notice-to-sony-alpha77-and-alpha65-owners-using-sigmas-sony-fitting-lenses">http://www.sigmaphoto.com/news/notice-to-sony-alpha77-and-alpha65-owners-using-sigmas-sony-fitting-lenses</a></p>

<p>i got a sony one ... forgot the model number and i use it with my canon flashes ... so they're out there.</p>

<p>I got a Fotodiox FD adapter - it's a a piece of glass inside ... haven't played around with it much ... someone gave me a free Canon FD 50mm macro lens and I tried it for macro shots, don't think I can focus to infinity even with that piece of glass in the adapter though.</p>

<p>I shoot both, Canon's images seem better overall with the balance of noise, details in the images but I'm shooting with my Sony more - I think the colours seem to be nicer to my eyes with Sony and plus Sony is cool with all the innovations happening. I have nicer glass for the Canon but I picked up a whole bunch of old used lenses that once I can nail the focus, the images look great too.</p>

<p>Soon after I started with photography, I grabbed a Canon 70-200mm f2.8 and I had used it a Rebel G and Elan 7 for about 7 years as my main setup. It was still my main lens when I went digital and I used mostly the Rebel series with it. Lately I have had other cameras but mostly the low end bodies and briefly used Sony A700 and Canon 60D bodies but both have been sold already and now I'm back to low end bodies and lately been pouring over Craigslist to grab old used vintage manual focus lenses and old Minolta auto focus lenses so now I shoot with mostly low end bodies and used older lenses.</p>

<p>I'd consider it used in your situation even though what you did is nothing more than someone at a retail store would do but from the store, at least I might have some reassurance that if it got dropped, the salesperson would have the decency to not box it back up as new. This is one of the reasons I rather take the chance and buy locally at a retail store and hope I get a real brand new unopened box rather than buy online where I figure there's a good chance I'd get a returned item reboxed.</p>

<p>Someone's been using your camera behind your back LoL<br>

Seriously though, one of the explanations above about swapping cards between cameras seems plausible to me ... though I can't really say if I have noticed a problem like you described and I do swap cards amongst my (different brand) cameras.</p>

<p>I don't know the motivation for the invention of the camera, I just remember as a kid I would take pictures to capture something I liked and wanted to remember so it was less about art or whatever and obviously I was oblivious to whatever manipulations that were done in the darkroom in the labs where our film was developed, so yes, when I look at images today that are obviously manipulated, I probably look at them differently.</p>

<p>I guess, just wait for now ... sounds like the rumours have more substance now that there are people actually testing out the A77 and providing feedback.</p>

<p>Frank, my friend has adapters from Hong Kong and he might be pleased with the results cuz he's gotten lots of older manual focus lenses since he's gotten the adapter - a mutual friend brought a couple back for me but it's just sitting in the closet for now as I have not gotten any of those older manual focus lenses.</p>

<p>John, thanks for the interesting story.</p>

<p>Hey Frank, not sure about adapters for those Rokkor lenses but my friends say there's adapters galore over in Asia (albeit likely cheap build and quality) for all sorts of lens/body combinations.</p>

<p>John and Richard, thanks.<br>

John, I have all the lenses you mentioned except for the 135mm f2.8 which I almost got my hands on, but it had a screw missing on the barrel.</p>

<p>Hey guys, how are you Minolta lenses doing on the A850, A900? What do you think about how they will perform on these rumoured 32 and 40MP cameras? Is it worth it to hang on to the lenses and/or keep a lookout for them on the used market? I guess some will fare better than others on these high resolutions cameras when they come out. I haven't been able to add any of the Minolta G glass to my collection yet, just the more common ones. Thanks.</p>

<p>... having said that, though I don't tend to shoot any studio stuff, I believe a quick google will bring back some info on how some people workaround the EVF for studio shots.</p>

<p>Mike, if you shoot studio stuff like Isaac, it's probably not useful to you like it's not useful to him until Sony improves it. I don't do studio stuff usually and it works fine for me despite some slow refreshing and lag times. In fact, sometimes I miss the EVF when I switch to using my other cameras.</p>

<p>Let me look more closely at the lens, I didn't want to go trying to unscrew things when I couldn't really see it properly - I'll take a closer look for threads - thanks for the advice Robert.</p>

 

<p>Thanks Robert. I have this lens now and tested it birding yesterday for a couple hours. I don't mind paying for an 82mm filter but as I look at the front (like Paul said above), I don't see a place to screw it in - would this be a specialized 82mm filter for this lens? I think I agree with you on the drop-in filters, I probably won't bother to change it. I'm looking at my lens as we speak now, so the hood on the lens is not removable either right? I can't see anywhere to remove it - also do you happen to have a link handy on the extended hood you got? Maybe with an extended hood, I might not feel a need to have an 82mm front filter for protection. Thanks.</p>