Jump to content

XKAES

Members
  • Posts

    252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Everything posted by XKAES

  1. Thanks for that tip. Screen brightness is something to consider -- especially since most of my lenses are not "fast". As to the special tool, I don't need it. The screen is pretty easy to remove with a small screwdriver and a pair of tweezers -- I've done it before. It's much easier than with the older Minolta screens, but it is important to be careful, of course.
  2. Thanks very much. I have not heard of Gary's book, but I will definitely check it out. As to the screen, you have confirmed my suspicion. Since the screens are not difficult to remove, I'll just take it out and check it visually. It sounds like the M screen is the better screen even if you don't have "fast" lenses. I had assumed it should only be used if your have fast lenses.
  3. Thanks, but I'm not trying to figure out how to set the screen type in the menu. The G screen is the standard screen. The M screen makes it easier to check "peak focus" (whatever that means) with faster f-stop lenses (ex. f1.4, f2.8) according to the manual. I'm trying to figure out what screen I have without having to take out the screen. I know I don't have the L screen because that has a visible grid. If the G and M screens look exactly the same in the viewfinder, them I'll have to take out the screen to see. I'm hoping that there is some minor difference that can be seen in the viewfinder, but I have no idea what that is??????
  4. Does anyone know of a way to determine if an a850 or a900 camera has a G or an M focusing screen without removing the focusing screen from the camera? With the L screen it is easy because you can see the grid.
  5. Do you have an owner's manual? If not, you might be able to find on on-line. That should have instructions on what to try -- which usually consists of leaving the camera plugged into an AC adapter or with a fully charged battery for 24 hours with the camera OFF. That should recharge the internal battery -- assuming it can still hold a charge.
  6. Since I have no idea what "well-defined", "decent", "sharpness", "bad", "best", etc. mean to you, so it's difficult to respond in any meaningful way -- other than to say, a prime lens will normally outperform a zoom lens under any condition. Zoom lenses were created for convenience, not optimum results.
  7. Suggesting that someone actually run a test themselves using their own equipment? What heresy!
  8. Try a Minolta 35-70mm f3.5. Leica liked so much they sold it as the Leitz Vario-Elmar R 35-70 f3.5.
  9. You are correct. The Maxxum 5 is the smallest and lightest film SLR ever made -- and PACKED with features. But I didn't have a need to keep the Maxxum 5 -- I already have one, with a data back. I only bought the other one for the 24-200mm lens. I kept the the like-new lens, and sold the like-new Maxxum 5. So I got the 24-200mm lens for free -- with an extra $10 in my pocket -- and use the lens on my Maxxum 5!!! The 24-200mm is definitely the perfect ALL-IN-ONE lens -- on my light Maxxum or my heavy Sony!
  10. You might be surprised when you compare an f1.8/1.7 lens to an f1.4 lens. Plenty of times the slower lens comes out on top. Why? The faster lens has more glass elements in it to correct for aberrations created by having a wider aperture. I get better results from my Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f2.0 than I do with my Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f1.4 at f8 -- but not by much. It's the same with my Minolta Rokkor-X 28mm f2.8 versus my Minolta Rokkor-X 28mm f2.0 at f8. And in your above comparison, you were comprring two zooms to a prime. If the prime were to lose, it's probably defective.
  11. This could be due to several factors. Is the camera on a tripod or hand-held? If not, use a tripod. What shutter speed are you using? Try using a faster one. Are you using auto-focus or manual. Whichever, try the other. What f-stop are you using? Wide open? Stop down. Try taking a picture during the day of a distant object like a building a mile away. Is it in focus? What camera and lens are you using -- and at what settings?
  12. Lots of shutterbugs don't use AF all the time. Lots of the time you can't, or you want to set the focus differently from what the camera indicates. And if you prefer to use a hand-held meter instead of the TTL camera meter, focusing the lens manually is nothing at all.
  13. I've with you 100%. I can't remember how many times UV filters (Hoya HMC is my standard) have saved my lenses in all my wilderness backpacking adventures. I'm talking about expensive 35mm and large format optics that are no longer made and cannot be repaired. Without a UV filter, you will eventually end up with a damaged front element -- even if just from cleaning. Interested in quality? It only takes a few minutes to actually test the supposed damage done by a UV filter. I did. If you just believe what someone says or posts, I've got a wonderful bridge I can sell you in Brooklyn.
  14. One issue with digital prints is longevity -- and that depends on the "ink". I've had digital prints start to fade after a few months in bright light due to poor quality ink. And, of course, even silver-emulsions can fade/dis-color in a couple of months/years if not properly processed/fully fixed, etc.
  15. This question needs to be more specific because "printing" photos means different things depending on the camera being used. Kodak, Ilford, Kentmere, Fuji, and others sell lots of paper for prints made from negatives in enlargers. Then there are makers of paper for computer-based prints -- Epson, HP, etc.. Completely different. I use both. My smallest prints are 8x10". My most common are 16x20"-20x30". My largest are 5x8'.
  16. FYI, Some of the countries on this Earth, today, were created as an "afterthought". I won't bother to go into all the amazing inventions and solutions to problems that were dismissed as "afterthoughts".
  17. It seems foolhardy to spend hundred of dollars -- sometimes thousands -- on a lens and not protect the front glass.
  18. You are quite right. Minolta made their auto-focusing MAXXUM lenses for 20 years before Sony bought them. And the MAXXUM lenses were largely Minolta ROKKOR lenses (which Minolta had been making for over 20 years before that) with auto-focusing added. The optical formulas of the lenses usually did not change at all -- so you get the same quality results whether you use ROKKOR, MAXXUM, or SONY lenses. Some convenience features, such as ADI flash, Image stabilization, etc. will change, but the ability of the lens to create an image is the same -- at substantial savings. The optical formula for Minolta's ROKKOR MACRO 50mm f3.5 was created in the 1950's -- and has never changed. Sony is still using it today. It's easy to find a Minolta CELTIC MACRO 50mm f3.5 -- which uses the same optical formula -- for around $10. This is a great deal for any Sony macro/micro user since you won't need auto-focusing or image stabilization, or ADI flash control, etc. in a macro setting. Still, lots of people will yell, "You get what you pay for!!!"
  19. I'm glad you like your E-mount cameras and lenses. A look back through history reveals that Minolta/Sony made significant changes to their cameras and lenses every five years -- on average. Very similar to Canon (which makes about half of all the digital cameras), Nikon, Pentax, etc. Good luck if you think change will stop with the current crop of Sony cameras and lenses -- Sony only makes about 20% of all the digital cameras.
  20. I wouldn't even try to photograph a hummingbird or a flycatcher in motion. One approach is to focus on a point where the bird frequents -- a nest, a perch, feeder, a fishing spot on the lake. Focus on that and wait for the bird to "do the work" when they are flying by.
  21. As Pieter said, your computations are OK, but you won't get a higher resolution by simply switching to a full-frame lens -- since the sensor size stays the same. If you are using a full-frame lens on an APS sensor, it's a good idea to determine what changes and by how much -- such as focal length, perspective, DOF, etc.
  22. If you are asking if you can put full-frame lenses on APS cameras -- SURE, but you don't get a full-frame image. You get an APS-sized image. The image will appear magnified because the APS sensor is only using a portion of the full-frame image created by the full-frame lens. The APS sensor size is fixed and does not change by changing the lens. If you have a quart of water, you don't end up with a gallon of water by pouring it into a gallon bucket.
  23. And good luck to anyone trying to capture an erratically flying bird in the viewfinder with a long lens at a close distance -- regardless of the focusing system.
  24. Samuell, I'm not sure what your goal is -- fast lenses, DOF control, more ISO, less weight/smaller size, less expense, better quality, or what. What do you currently have, and what do you want to achieve that you current can't?
×
×
  • Create New...