Posted by Andrea Hadley on August 26, 2009 at 5:52 PM
Okay, to lengthen or go into detail of what I am asking; I have a Sony A100, I bought it off Ebay this past March (due to finances) and it came with a Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 Normal and Macro lense, and the factory grade lense which is 3.5-5.6/18/70mm and a decent wide angle lense 58mm Professional HD DSLR MC AF 0.45X Wide Angle w/ Macro for $350.00, now since then I have bought a wide angle (or at least it says wide angle) but it is cheap. I'm interested in nature, landscape and wildlife photography and am wondering what other lenses I should look for (for this camera). I won't have the finances until probably around early spring next year, are there any good lenses for this camera or would I need to think about getting a different camera? Thanks!
For wildlife I would suggest a Sigma 500, but you will also need a good light weight triipod and a ballhead with this lens. It is too heavy to hold and shoot, but I love it.
Posted by Andrea Hadley on August 27, 2009 at 1:13 PM
The tripod I have now is great, I know the damn brand starts with a "T" (I think), but it is heavy duty and great. I'll put on here what it is when I get the chance. But do you happen to know the price of a Sigma 500 new or used? And where I could possibly find one? Thanks again for the advice.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on August 27, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Andrea, I'm sure you're aware that Sony basically took Minolta over in March 2007 and kept all mounts the exact same, which means ALL of the Minolta lenses of the past fit your camera. Problem is, about 85% of what they made were consumer-minded and therefore not great glass. But the 15% of the lenses that were the good stuff were REALLY good, such as the white G series (akin to the Canon L series). However, there is one lens that Minolta made that was inexpensive and REALLY sharp: the 70-210 f/4. On your Sony that would become 105-315mm with the 1.5 crop factor, f/4 straight across the board. These lenses sell in the $200 range and are a great way to get good glass on a budget. Here's an example of one on Ebay. For $200 it's a great start. Here's a shot I took with the same lens on a Maxxum 7D a couple of years ago... sharp enough for ya? And that was MINIMAL Photoshop sharpening. I'm an all-Canon user now with a 5D Mark II and big white lenses, but if I had to only use that 70-210mm f/4 on an older Sony body, that'd be fine with me! I know you already have a Sigma 70-300mm, I had one also... but now I realize that better glass on a 210mm lens beats OK glass on a 300mm.
You can work up to the 500mm in time, but be prepared to spend $3500 on a Sigma 500mm f/4.5. There are 500mm lenses in the $900 range but they are slow and the quality won't be as exciting.
Posted by Andrea Hadley on August 27, 2009 at 11:22 PM
Your flickr page is private, so I didn't get to see that photo. But yes I did hear about the Sony taking over Minolta, I was spending the last 6 months looking for some lenses for Sony (minolta or sony), but mainly on ebay due to money. Since I'm not yet experienced with lenses and all, I figured the sigma 70-300mm was a really good lens since it came with the SonyA100 on ebay for $350, but I will definitely keep your advice in mind, if I was to change camera brands, which would be the better camera? Also for its price, by the way! Also, I have a flickr page if you want to add me as a friend, my name is ARaccoon87 ( I made sure by searching myself on the people search ) I got photos on there if you want to take a look, but the majority of them are from my first great camera, it was an advanced point and shoot Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-H7 (I sold it though, once I got this one). Thanks again for the advice
I have a variety of lenses that I’ve accumulated over the years.
11-18mm landscape
18-200mm landscape
28-300mm (42-450 on my digital cameras) landscape and bugs
200-500mm – birds, bugs and flowers
180mm macro – flowers and bugs
90% of my landscape photography is done with the 28-300mm lens. You can look at my website and see what type of photography I do and see which lens I used.
Andrea, you have been using the camera for a while now. What shots would you like to get that you are unable to get with the lenses you have. If you have an area of intrest that you need a focal length for then that is where I would look. If you just need better glass IE sharper or faster then that woulld be what I would try to get. With that said If you are shooting birds & beasts then you may want a longer faster lens.
Posted by Andrea Hadley on August 29, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I've been using this one since March, my first one; the sony cyber-shot, I had gotten that one back in April of 2007 and had mainly got it for action shots (I wanted something fast enough to catch action) and then I also used it for wildlife (which is my biggest thing, and then landscape is second). So I guess I'm interested in a longer faster lens for wildlife, I mean if I was ever able to go out to the Rockies or somewhere like that, I wouldn't want to get too close to a bear or cougar or rutting moose (elk, deer, etc.). I mean I'm mostly interested in opinions on lenses because I'm not experienced enough to know which one is best for which purpose. And I like hearing other, more experienced photographers and what they enjoy shooting and what they use to shoot that.
Posted by Julie Roggow on August 29, 2009 at 2:26 PM
Andrea,
Your question was, "What are the best lenses available..." , right?
To answer your question: In my expeirence, if you have a Sony camera (as I do), Sony lenses are the best choice. I'm surprised some people have suggested Sigma because I've heard nothing but focus problems with Sigma lenses on Sony cameras. I've also tried Tamron but return each one I've tried. Choosing a lens for your camera really depends on exactly what you want out of your camera. If you are shooting for a hobby, the exact lens won't be as important as if you are shooting to sell photos professionally.
Sony's best lenses are the G series.
300mm f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 are my favorites. I also own an 11-16mm f/5.6 (Sony) and a 28-70mm f/2.8 Sony lens. I'm spoiled with the fast lenses. The clarity in the 300mm f/2.8 is uncomparable with anything I've every used before.
Get some nice lenses and keep them. If you ever do decide to upgrade cameras, you'll see a HUGE difference in sharpness and clarity with the Alpha 700 (when compared to the 100).
All of the photos on my website were shot with the Sony Alpha 100 or 700 (you may even be able to tell which ones were shot with the 700).
Posted by Andrea Hadley on August 30, 2009 at 12:13 AM
Thanks Julie, do you know the price of a 300mm f/2.8 used? And how much does the Alpha 700 go for? Used most likely.
Posted by Julie Roggow on September 3, 2009 at 12:26 AM
Andrea,
It's hard to find the 300mm f/2.8 used. You can find them on e-bay once in a while or a Minolta 300mm f/2.8 which will fit the Sony but I'm always afraid of buying such an expensive item from e-bay. If you get it from Sony or from B&H Photo, I believe the price is about $6200. Yes, it's worth every penny if you are using your camera professionally. Sony Alpha 700 cameras are high in demand and the prices on E-bay for a used one are sometimes even higher than buying from Sony direct. For pricing on Sony products, go to: http://www.SonyStyle.com If you are looking for a more affordable lens than the 300mm, you may want to check out the 70-200mm f/2.8. That is also a "G" series lens which is the best glass and most professional grade lens.
Discussion
10 repliesYou can work up to the 500mm in time, but be prepared to spend $3500 on a Sigma 500mm f/4.5. There are 500mm lenses in the $900 range but they are slow and the quality won't be as exciting.
I have a variety of lenses that I’ve accumulated over the years.
11-18mm landscape
18-200mm landscape
28-300mm (42-450 on my digital cameras) landscape and bugs
200-500mm – birds, bugs and flowers
180mm macro – flowers and bugs
90% of my landscape photography is done with the 28-300mm lens. You can look at my website and see what type of photography I do and see which lens I used.
Phil Schwarz
E2311 530th Ave
Menomonie, WI 54751
e-mail: schwarzp@uwstout.edu
web: http://philipschwarz.zenfolio.com/
Your question was, "What are the best lenses available..." , right?
To answer your question: In my expeirence, if you have a Sony camera (as I do), Sony lenses are the best choice. I'm surprised some people have suggested Sigma because I've heard nothing but focus problems with Sigma lenses on Sony cameras. I've also tried Tamron but return each one I've tried. Choosing a lens for your camera really depends on exactly what you want out of your camera. If you are shooting for a hobby, the exact lens won't be as important as if you are shooting to sell photos professionally.
Sony's best lenses are the G series.
300mm f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 are my favorites. I also own an 11-16mm f/5.6 (Sony) and a 28-70mm f/2.8 Sony lens. I'm spoiled with the fast lenses. The clarity in the 300mm f/2.8 is uncomparable with anything I've every used before.
Get some nice lenses and keep them. If you ever do decide to upgrade cameras, you'll see a HUGE difference in sharpness and clarity with the Alpha 700 (when compared to the 100).
All of the photos on my website were shot with the Sony Alpha 100 or 700 (you may even be able to tell which ones were shot with the 700).
It's hard to find the 300mm f/2.8 used. You can find them on e-bay once in a while or a Minolta 300mm f/2.8 which will fit the Sony but I'm always afraid of buying such an expensive item from e-bay. If you get it from Sony or from B&H Photo, I believe the price is about $6200. Yes, it's worth every penny if you are using your camera professionally. Sony Alpha 700 cameras are high in demand and the prices on E-bay for a used one are sometimes even higher than buying from Sony direct. For pricing on Sony products, go to: http://www.SonyStyle.com If you are looking for a more affordable lens than the 300mm, you may want to check out the 70-200mm f/2.8. That is also a "G" series lens which is the best glass and most professional grade lens.