Reading mode: Light Dark

New to Sony, lens advice for new a77 user.

Go to last post
P

Patriot Missile

Member
Messages
44
Reaction score
6
Location
US
Hi,
I just got into Sony with the a77 and so far I absolutely love it.

I had been using the Canon 7D with the 24-105mm and 70-200mm both f/4, L, and IS. I absolutely loved those lenses and hate parting with them. If I could use them on my Sony I would!

So I'm looking for my new lenses for my a77. I've already ordered the 16-80mm Ziess.

The trouble I'm having is deciding on a telephoto lens. I'm looking at different lenses, Sony, Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, and I'm going cross eyed reading reviews. So I'm hoping maybe someone will have some advice, or say just the right thing that might help me make up my decision easier.

First of all, I'm more of a street photographer, so its important to me that a lens can focus fast, and that the lens is relatively maneuverable. And I'm a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to quality aslo. One reason I loved my Canon 70-200.

Simply put, what lens available for Sony would you say is most like the Canon 70-200 f/4? The most comparable?

The lens on the top of my list is the 70-300G, it seems to be the best image quality for its price range. And just an excellent lens over all (but feels a bit big and bulky even though it only weighs a bit more than my 70-200) I'd like to get something smaller than this if I could

Then there is the 55-200, $700 less money. And much smaller and lighter, which is attractive. But from what I've read its really just like a telephoto "kit" lens. Or am I being snobby to think that a $200 lens can't produce very good images? I've used the Sony 75-300 and didn't like it, and read enough to know the 70-300g is far better.

I've also been looking at Sigma and Tamrons 70-300 lenses, but the reviews for those don't sound to promising either to me.

I read that Tokina is coming out with a 70-200mm F/4, that caught my attention but its probably not going to have an A mount.

Anyway, you guys out there got much more experience with Sony and its lenses so I'm hoping one of you can help me make sense of all this :)

I'm expecting the 70-300g will be the lens I'll be getting, but I don't want to make a mistake and possibly over look a lighter, less expensive lens that might give me just as good results.

Thanks for any advice/opinions

Jim
 
As a proud and happy owner of an a77 camera, CZ 16-80mm , and Sony 70-300 G lens I think I can offer an opinion.

The CZ has build quality issues, but is a GREAT lens! The 70-300 G is also great but expensive. I've read a hundred threads and reviews and think if I had it to do over I'd probably buy the Tamron 70-300mm lens.

The older (i.e. used) Minolta Beer Can lens might work for you. The phrase "Beer Can" is a nickname for the highly regarded Minolta 70-210 F/4 zoom lens because it's about the same size as a 16 oz. can of your favorite adult beverage. eBay sellers are pretty quick to tag just about any lens with the Beer Can label. Big Beer Can, Small beer Can etc. etc. It's a film era lens, thus no fancy coatings on the lens elements, and it has it's weaknesses but is overall a very fine lens that can be had for about $100 + -.

--
I live, and try to learn. Sometimes it works, sometimes not so much.



Tacoma, Washington, USA
 
I have the 1680 also as well as the 2470. I had the beer can and although a great lens it is not in the same league as the Sony 70-200. I actually like the 1680 for walking around but when i am shooting inside or close street photography i prefer the 1650
 
Take a look at the Tamron 70-200/2.8. At F2.8 sharpness could be better, but if you treat it like a F4 (like your canon) you will be amazed. It is a very sharp lens. I had the Sony 70-300g and I prefer the Tamron, seems a little sharper. The autofocus is noisier though. People do complain about AF performance in low light. Indoors in low light it has trouble sometimes to find focus, but for the rest it is ok to me.
The newer Sigma 70-200 OS is maybe even better, but I don't have this lens.
 
Sony/Minolta will give you differently thematized perceptual characteristics (they "paint" differently) than what you are used to. That may change what you look at, and how you look at it.

The 70-300 is a fine lens (I don't own it -- relying on, amoung others, the Luminous Landscape review and comments there).

"Street Photography" is generally -- afaik -- not done with telephoto lenses. There are fine, fast, normal lenses in a-mount. Since you seem to want to be further away, the 100 Macro is very sharp, highly rec'd (not just by me), and of course does double-duty (and is light).

Everyone with a Sony camera should have the 24-70Z, imho.

The 70-400Z is excellent , but monstrous. Perhaps with the articulated LCD of your a77 you might rig up some stealth captures.

My comments are limited to my experience, which is with FF lenses.

Enjoy!
 
Like you, I’ve come from Canon world. I had the 24-105L on my 30D and absolutely loved the color. It was my best lens. I also had 10-24 and 50mm 1.4, but 24-105 was something extraordinary.

I just got my A77 with 16-50mm “kit” lens, Sony 70-300G, Vivitar 7mm, and Sony 35mm 1.4. Let me tell you that there is nothing like 24-105 in the Sony world, simply because the only lens that is weatherproof at this time is the new 16-50mm. However, you get much more out of any lenses from Sony because all of them turn into IS lenses. BTW, 16-50 is also a very good lens. It is very fast and responsive.

I have used 70-300G for a while and love the color rendition better than my other current lenses. It has a nice tone to it, but there is no way you can compare this to 70-200 f/4. It is slower and not that sharp. Tamron 70-300 is sharper, but it has a bookeh problem. Other than the cheap built, 75-300 rotates when you zoom, so it is the worst lens for CP use. 70-300G has none of these problems, and if you can afford it then go for it. It has a very good built quality, and is not too heavy.

--
take pictures to save your precious presents…

http://www.kooroshvaziri.com/gallery
 
Ray Maines said:
The older (i.e. used) Minolta Beer Can lens might work for you.
Click to expand...
yeah I had been looking at that also.

I've been using the kurtmunger.com site for his opinions. I didn't feel confident about the review, he mentions possibly using the 75-300 (which i think is awful) or 55-200.

But just like everything you read about a lot os based off opinions.....

I might very well try and pick this up cheap on ebay or something and try it out, can't hurt. if I can get it for the right price, and then don't like it, I can probably get my money back on it.

its a bit heavier than I'd like, but it is f/4 and the zooming is internal which of course is always a good thing.
 
Koorosh 77 said:
However, you get much more out of any lenses from Sony because all of them turn into IS lenses. BTW, 16-50 is also a very good lens. It is very fast and responsive.
Click to expand...
I considered the 16-50 kit lens when I got my a77, but the little extra zoom with the 16-80 is more important for me.

Now as far as IS goes. So far this is my only complaint with my Sony. The IS on my a77 doesn't come close to the IS in my canon lenses. one reason I got the a77 was so I could shoot more video. I just find it much more jittery.

I could use my 7D with my 70-200 and a 1.4x extender on it zoomed out all the way and it was steady as heck.

(ok so I moved to Sony, and don't regret it, but I'm still a canon lens fanboy lol)
Koorosh 77 said:
Tamron 70-300 is sharper, but it has a bookeh problem.
Click to expand...
Whats the bokeh problem?
 
Like you, I still love Canon lenses and especially the L series.

The bookeh problem is well documented, but to my eyes, it is not buttery enough. It is super sharp, but it has less aperture blades which creates that bookeh.

--
take pictures to save your precious presents…

http://www.kooroshvaziri.com/gallery
 
Patriot Missile said:
Ray Maines said:
The older (i.e. used) Minolta Beer Can lens might work for you.
Click to expand...
yeah I had been looking at that also.

I might very well try and pick this up cheap on ebay or something and try it out, can't hurt. if I can get it for the right price, and then don't like it, I can probably get my money back on it.

its a bit heavier than I'd like, but it is f/4 and the zooming is internal which of course is always a good thing.
Click to expand...
If money (and weight) is no object, go for one of the 70-200mm f2.8 lenses. But, the Beercan is super sharp at f5.6 + and quite usable at f4. It's screw drive and a little noisy focusing, but still quite a bargain if you get a decent copy.

One other issue. If you don't post process, you'll have to live with the CA/PF. Otherwise, it can be eliminated in most cases.
--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!
 
Koorosh 77 said:
Like you, I’ve come from Canon world. I had the 24-105L on my 30D and absolutely loved the color. It was my best lens. I also had 10-24 and 50mm 1.4, but 24-105 was something extraordinary.

I just got my A77 with 16-50mm “kit” lens, Sony 70-300G, Vivitar 7mm, and Sony 35mm 1.4. Let me tell you that there is nothing like 24-105 in the Sony world, simply because the only lens that is weatherproof at this time is the new 16-50mm.
Click to expand...
Have you tried the Minolta 28-135mm f4-4.5? Not weather sealed, but it is extremely sharp throughout the range and wide open. I don't think you'll find better colors either. Problems - minimum focus is 5 feet and you'll get some flare shooting into the sun. Otherwise, dynamite lens.

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/Minolta-AF-28-135-F4-4.5_lens38.html

--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!
 
I dont understand this ... The a77 video stability is awesoome as long as youre willing to live with a crop view.

EVF view is never stabilized with still shots...SSS only kicks in right before shutter.
Patriot Missile said:
Koorosh 77 said:
However, you get much more out of any lenses from Sony because all of them turn into IS lenses. BTW, 16-50 is also a very good lens. It is very fast and responsive.
Click to expand...
I considered the 16-50 kit lens when I got my a77, but the little extra zoom with the 16-80 is more important for me.

Now as far as IS goes. So far this is my only complaint with my Sony. The IS on my a77 doesn't come close to the IS in my canon lenses. one reason I got the a77 was so I could shoot more video. I just find it much more jittery.

I could use my 7D with my 70-200 and a 1.4x extender on it zoomed out all the way and it was steady as heck.

(ok so I moved to Sony, and don't regret it, but I'm still a canon lens fanboy lol)
Patriot Missile said:
Tamron 70-300 is sharper, but it has a bookeh problem.
Click to expand...
Whats the bokeh problem?
Click to expand...
--
JL Smith
http://www.clickingwithsmitty.com
 
I like Sony a lot. There are many nice features in A77. The only problem is that Sony does not have good variety of lenses--YET. They will reach there, if they invest a little more into their glasses.

I love to see 16-105 f/4 and 70-200 f/4 in G series.

--
take pictures to save your precious presents…

http://www.kooroshvaziri.com/gallery
 
Patriot Missile said:
Now as far as IS goes. So far this is my only complaint with my Sony. The IS on my a77 doesn't come close to the IS in my canon lenses. one reason I got the a77 was so I could shoot more video. I just find it much more jittery.

I could use my 7D with my 70-200 and a 1.4x extender on it zoomed out all the way and it was steady as heck.
Click to expand...
With steady shot in Sony camera's you don't see the effect in the viewfinder. So don't get confused.
 
What attracted you to the Sony side of things? I am moving the Canon side and am just curious.

The Sony 70-300 SSM G is my second favorite of the true Sony (as opposed to Minolta) lenses. The first being the Sony CZ 85/1.4. The SSM G is light, relatively compact and fantastic wide open.

Cheers!
Patriot Missile said:
Hi,
I just got into Sony with the a77 and so far I absolutely love it.

I had been using the Canon 7D with the 24-105mm and 70-200mm both f/4, L, and IS. I absolutely loved those lenses and hate parting with them. If I could use them on my Sony I would!

So I'm looking for my new lenses for my a77. I've already ordered the 16-80mm Ziess.

The trouble I'm having is deciding on a telephoto lens. I'm looking at different lenses, Sony, Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, and I'm going cross eyed reading reviews. So I'm hoping maybe someone will have some advice, or say just the right thing that might help me make up my decision easier.

First of all, I'm more of a street photographer, so its important to me that a lens can focus fast, and that the lens is relatively maneuverable. And I'm a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to quality aslo. One reason I loved my Canon 70-200.

Simply put, what lens available for Sony would you say is most like the Canon 70-200 f/4? The most comparable?

The lens on the top of my list is the 70-300G, it seems to be the best image quality for its price range. And just an excellent lens over all (but feels a bit big and bulky even though it only weighs a bit more than my 70-200) I'd like to get something smaller than this if I could

Then there is the 55-200, $700 less money. And much smaller and lighter, which is attractive. But from what I've read its really just like a telephoto "kit" lens. Or am I being snobby to think that a $200 lens can't produce very good images? I've used the Sony 75-300 and didn't like it, and read enough to know the 70-300g is far better.

I've also been looking at Sigma and Tamrons 70-300 lenses, but the reviews for those don't sound to promising either to me.

I read that Tokina is coming out with a 70-200mm F/4, that caught my attention but its probably not going to have an A mount.

Anyway, you guys out there got much more experience with Sony and its lenses so I'm hoping one of you can help me make sense of all this :)

I'm expecting the 70-300g will be the lens I'll be getting, but I don't want to make a mistake and possibly over look a lighter, less expensive lens that might give me just as good results.

Thanks for any advice/opinions

Jim
Click to expand...
 
I went to Canon - the lack of modern lenses on the Sony side.

Specifically the Canon 70-200/4. This lens is truly fantastic. Very nice wide open, small, light and fast focusing.

Cheers!
Koorosh 77 said:
I like Sony a lot. There are many nice features in A77. The only problem is that Sony does not have good variety of lenses--YET. They will reach there, if they invest a little more into their glasses.

I love to see 16-105 f/4 and 70-200 f/4 in G series.

--
take pictures to save your precious presents…

http://www.kooroshvaziri.com/gallery
Click to expand...
 
liquid stereo said:
What attracted you to the Sony side of things? I am moving the Canon side and am just curious.

The Sony 70-300 SSM G is my second favorite of the true Sony (as opposed to Minolta) lenses. The first being the Sony CZ 85/1.4. The SSM G is light, relatively compact and fantastic wide open.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Honest? In the past when walking down the street and seeing someone with a Sony SLR, I would think "What a noob!". But I used to think the same about Mac users. I can admit when I'm WRONG lol

This a77 is absolutely amazing in what it can do. Last fall at an event I shot a bit of video with my 7D..... it was very difficult to manual focus, and i liked how the video looked and wanted to get into that more. This a77 makes it much easier.

(Also, yes again I was wrong about the stabilization I mentioned earlier, I wasn't aware that the video is cropped to help with stabilization. the thing is, I haven't had time to install my new Premiere Elements to actually LOOK at the final results yet)

I used to own a 5DMII, but had focus issues with it, great quality, but not good if the focus is bad (I know 2 other people with the same issues!) So I moved on to the 7D for the last 2 years.

This a77 looks very much like my 5DMII IQ (if not better!), full frame! At this price, and still the zooming capabilities (1.5x)of a smaller sensor. Great fast focusing video..... amazing exposures, so many more unique settings.
(I was playing around with the ISO stacking last night. WOW!)

I think Canon and Nikon have become complacent after seeing all this a77 can do. The 5DMIII is coming out, and shouldn't it have been the MII? The main thing they are upgrading is the focusing, it just gets me mad I guess lol

I still feel I'm getting more with this $1400 camera than that $3500 camera. I'm sure if Canon or Nikon were to release the a77 the price would have been a lot more.

I'm not a fanboy however, I've owned Nikon (D40, D3), Canon (5DMII, 7D) and now Sony, i think they are all good and all have their strong points and weaknesses. Canons lenses are great, the best I think. I will admit i don't know a lot about Sonys yet, but so far I'm not too impressed, at least with the selection! hopefully.... I'm wrong...... again :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top