a580 to a99 - Crazy to upgrade? or go with an a77?

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP MikeNannie Regular Member • Posts: 443
Re: a580 to a99 - Crazy to upgrade? or go with an a77?

oklaphotog wrote:

MikeNannie wrote:

I didn't know that about the 5600 HS flash issue and therefore never had it re-calibrated. I really wonder if that's been the problem all along. Maybe my next step is to rent a newer flash and see how it performs.

I really appreciate your comments about the 24-85 mm lens. I always thought it was a pretty good lens and bought it based on solid recommendations back in the late 1990s. I really wonder if I'll be disappointed with it on an a99. After all, I'm use to my CZ 16-80 which to me is an amazingly sharp lens.

I doubt the CZ 16-80 is much better. I shot both of them side by side on a A700 at one point, and the difference was small. On an A900 it seemed pretty darned good, almost as good as my 24-70 L on a 5D2, which is quite a feat considering what the 24-85 goes for these days. The 24-85 has a bit of distortion on the wide end and a little CA on the edges, but that all corrects out easy in raw. It's much sharper than the famed beercan 70-210, even wide open. No lens is perfect, but the 24-85 has a lot going for it. It's very sharp wide open and gains little by stopping down, it's small/compact, relatively fast aperture, very fast focusing, and great color/contrast. The color saturation and contrast of this lens is one of the things that makes it so great. I think it would work plenty good enough until you can justify going to the CZ 24-70 at some point.

FWIW here are the photodo tests of it and the 28-70 G on a blad optical testing bench. They are very close and nobody ever thought the 28-70 G was soft. The G's only problem was slow focusing. Anything 3.5 or higher in these tests is pretty good. Using the beercan as a guide, it was originally made by Minolta and branded as a Leica for the R system. The tested R lens scored a 3.3.



And for kicks, the "Secret Handshake" that everyone raves about it's sharpness, yet it has a lot of CA.


Guide to what the numbers mean:


Thanks for the links and info. Like I said, I always liked that lens until I tested it against my 16-80z on my a580. But, I did have some problems with the 16-80 and/or the a580 and ended up sending them both to Sony for 'recalibration'. Sony ended up sending me a new 16-80 ultimately to correct the issue. Now, I don't remember if I tested my 24-85 before or after that re-calibration. If before, and there was a back focus issue with the camera, then that might explain the softness in my testing. I'll have to try it again sometime.

 MikeNannie's gear list:MikeNannie's gear list
Sony a77 II Sony DT 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow