Lens Size
Trev
justa started with a Sony A100 after years of using a compact. I will be
using the camera for taking pics of the lad playing fotball amongst other
things and wondered what would be the best lens for say the other side of a
footy pitch? the camera came with the standard 18/70 lens and a minolta
28/100. Do I need anything else or will these do? I have been looking at a
80/300 do I need it?
Thanx
Trev
Trev
Trev
Trevor
just started with a Sony A100 after years of using a compact. I will be
ray
I have a great idea - why don't you try what you have and see if you need
something else!
Joe Makowiec
I did a website for my daughter's soccer club. As will inevitably
happen, she moved along; in subsequent years, other parents took up the
photographic chores. Three years of pictures, three different
photographers, focal length range followed by count. All three cameras
were DX sensor size:
2006
<100: 189
100 - 135: 212
>135 - 200: 188
>200 - 300: 109
2007
<100: 77
100 - 135: 85
>135 - 200: 153
2008
<100: 26
100 - 135: 46
>135 - 200: 127
>200 - 300: 226
--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Trevor
snip
>
> I have a great idea - why don't you try what you have and see if you
> need something else!
thanks for sharing your knowledge and expertise ray.
Cheers.........
tony cooper
wrote:
His comment was a bit smart-ass, but it was the best advice you were
given, and will remain the best advice no matter what is offered in
the future.
Unless you have to make a decision at the time of purchase because the
lens price is bundled with the camera price, the best thing to do *is*
shoot a game or two and see how the results compare to your
expectations.
Do you expect to take full-body medium-close shots that are
portrait-type photographs of players? That's what a lot of people
want. A 50mm prime lens or a 18/55 (or so) zoom will do that best.
Do you want action shots taken from the sidelines but of players near
that sideline? A 55/200 zoom will do that.
Do you want action shots of plays all over the field? Best go for a
300mm lens, but you'll have to change to a shorter lens for closer
shots or step 'way, 'way back. That 300mm is going to be expensive if
you get one that will shoot fast speeds at a wide-open f/stop.
What else are you going to use the camera for? A 300mm lens is almost
useless for your normal family pix unless you intend to shoot from
your neighbor's roof.
What's your budget?
What you've done is supplied the minimum amount of information and
blown-off the best suggestion of the lot.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
me
What was the 35mm equivalent focal length of your compact Was this
wide enough for you, was this close enough for you? Compare this to
the lenses for your A100. Note that as the A100 does not have a sensor
the same size of 35mm film, it's field of view will be smaller than as
would be seen if it were the same. Effectively you lenses will give
you the same field as view as a longer lens on a true 35mm camera. The
sensor size ration can be used to think of the equivalent view. For a
crop factor of 1.5 which I'm guessing is correct for your A100, your
100mm lens will give you the same field of view as a 150mm lens on a
35mm camera. This is what you would compare to the euivalent 35mm
focal length of your compact.
Robert Coe
wrote:
: On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 18:41:32 +0000 (UTC), Trevor <tre...@home.co.uk>
I totally agree with Tony. The first lens I bought was a mistake. It was a
good, inexpensive lens, but in the long run I didn't really need it. It now
functions as a placeholder on my spare camera. As I got more familiar with my
cameras, I made more intelligent and cost-effective decisions.
You won't know until you get the feel of your camera what lens you'll want
next. Better to wish you had a given lens than wonder why the hell you ever
bought it.
If you think you might want a really expensive lens, consider renting it first
to be sure.
Bob
MikeWhy
news:3330q599st6h48ljo...@4ax.com...
> You won't know until you get the feel of your camera what lens you'll want
> next. Better to wish you had a given lens than wonder why the hell you
> ever
> bought it.
Life has blessed me that way. The only lens I wish I hadn't bought was the
Tokina Pro-atx 80-200. If you buy cheap, you'll buy twice. (I suppose you
could be right. If you don't replace the cheap POS, you didn't need it in
the first place.)
Floyd L. Davidson
Seems to me you can even, on occasion, take pictures
with a lens you know you shouldn't ever have bought. So
it isn't a total waste.
Try taking a picture with a lens you wish you had!
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl...@apaflo.com
Robert Coe
wrote:
: "MikeWhy" <boat042...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: >"Robert Coe" <b...@1776.COM> wrote in message
: >news:3330q599st6h48ljo...@4ax.com...
: >> You won't know until you get the feel of your camera what lens you'll want
: >> next. Better to wish you had a given lens than wonder
: >> why the hell you ever
: >> bought it.
: >
: >Life has blessed me that way. The only lens I wish I hadn't bought was the
: >Tokina Pro-atx 80-200. If you buy cheap, you'll buy twice. (I suppose you
: >could be right. If you don't replace the cheap POS, you didn't need it in
: >the first place.)
:
: Seems to me you can even, on occasion, take pictures
: with a lens you know you shouldn't ever have bought. So
: it isn't a total waste.
Nor was it in my case. One occasion I used it to very good advantage was on a
windy day at the beach in Ocean City last summer, when I brought out my spare
camera rather than subject my better one to the elements.
: Try taking a picture with a lens you wish you had!
Touché! But my point was that you can always go buy the lens; it's not as easy
to un-buy it. ;^)
Bob