|
Re: What is wrong with this Minolta lens?
In reply to Chioti,
5 months ago
|
Chioti wrote:
Thanks Paul and everyone who helped. The lens is being returned.
In terms of a newer lens a similar focal range to bridge the gap between the 16-50 and 70-300 what are good alternatives?
--
Stelios
Two spring to mind.
Minolta AF 24-105mm (D)
Minolta AF 28-135mm F/4-4.5 Macro (Secret Handshake)
The latter is the best and has a long MFD (unless macro is engaged to reduce it), but the former is a half decent lightweight walkabout. There are several other options such as the Minolta or Sony 24-85mm F/2.8 which again are both full frame as well as the Tamron SP 28-75/2.8 Di, but many have said the Sony AF SAL 16-105mm DT is a decent option as well and it's APS-C. Have you done a search on Dyxum and cross-referenced a short list on both the MHohner and Kurtmunger websites in addition to Dyxum? It would make sense to then sell the 16-50 if you went with the 16-105mm, but the options are many depending on price, format, aperture and focal length.
--
Mark @ Sonolta * Photography
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 4 months ago | 1 |