Konica Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 - Thoughts?
Hello everyone,
luckily my dealer was kind enough to change from my Sony A100 Kit for $370 to a Sony A100 w/out lense for $290 :barb (see thread in main forum).
Now he also offers lenses. I am thinking about purchasing a Konica Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5. The price is $205.
Since I am a newbie, I would like to ask you whether that one might be good for me, before I buy it.
a) I will mainly be doing landscape, architecture and nature photos, but will also do pictures of people from time to time (though not portraits, but rather people within a landscape). As far as I understood, the lense which I plan to buy is a wide angle lense, which would make it suitable for that.
b) In addition, is the price of this lense good? Could I get it way cheaper if I bought it used?
c) How much slower is the speed of such a lense compared to a 24-85 mm lens? Is it heavy like half a second, or more sth. like .1 sec?
The dealer also has a similar Tamron lense on offer for less than half the price... but I read really bad reviews, so I guess I will better go with the Minolta, right?
Or would you rather recommend another lense?
Thank you very much for your help!
Scoox
PS: Sorry, wanted to post this in the gear forum... could sbd move it?
luckily my dealer was kind enough to change from my Sony A100 Kit for $370 to a Sony A100 w/out lense for $290 :barb (see thread in main forum).
Now he also offers lenses. I am thinking about purchasing a Konica Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5. The price is $205.
Since I am a newbie, I would like to ask you whether that one might be good for me, before I buy it.
a) I will mainly be doing landscape, architecture and nature photos, but will also do pictures of people from time to time (though not portraits, but rather people within a landscape). As far as I understood, the lense which I plan to buy is a wide angle lense, which would make it suitable for that.
b) In addition, is the price of this lense good? Could I get it way cheaper if I bought it used?
c) How much slower is the speed of such a lense compared to a 24-85 mm lens? Is it heavy like half a second, or more sth. like .1 sec?
The dealer also has a similar Tamron lense on offer for less than half the price... but I read really bad reviews, so I guess I will better go with the Minolta, right?
Or would you rather recommend another lense?
Thank you very much for your help!
Scoox
PS: Sorry, wanted to post this in the gear forum... could sbd move it?
0
Comments
You may want to look here for more reviews from Sony/Konica-Minolta users.
www.smitchellphotography.com
Munising, Michigan
Having no experiece with the 24-105 but I do have with 24-70 and 70-210 both f2.8........I alot of the times feel my 24-70 is too long especially when doing landscapes and until this past couple of weeks my PC would not handle the newest of software for stitching landscapes or doing HDR work ......which would have been mostly landscape......for portriats the 24-70 is a great single or couples lens but not a group lens like it would be on a full frame camera.......
So my syggestion is for you to save just a touch more and get the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 .......and you may even find later on you really want the 10-20 sigma for landscapeing......for architecture start saving your pennies for a manual focus m49 screw mount like a Hartblei Tilt and shift to keep perspectives correct.......Hartblei, kiev, jupiter and some others from the Ukraine are built on exacting specifications from the Carl Zeiss lens company.....their is a history of the Germans having to move a complete Zeiss lens and Hasselblad Mfg'ing ops to Kiev Ukraine after the War to help rebuildjobs and the economy..........anyway these are ver good lenses but totally manual.......you move a lever on some to set the aperture before pressing shutter release.....that is how manual.....but the results are fantastic........and m49 screw mount adapters are dirt cheap on ebay.......I have some Kiev teles that I will be gettingadapters for when I decide on what camp I will be moving from KM 7D's to....................
thx for the links - with these and the other reviews I read, I belive the lens is a good choice for me.
>> So my syggestion is for you to save just a touch more and get the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4
The cheapest offer I could find for that lense was $350 from a random ebay seller. That is almost double the price of the Minolta - but I believe the Minolta is also good for my purposes.
Thx again guys... now I will only have to wait until tuesday or wednesday until the cam *finally* arrives :ivar
Again, it's a good walkaround lens with okay portrait ability (not really tack sharp like the beercan is). It's too long, for my taste, for landscapes. Remember that your camera has a crop sensor, so that 24mm is really like 36mm.
Still, if you're wanting a good walkaround lens at a good price this is probably as well as you can do for Sony/Minolta mount. I much prefer my new combination of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 + Sony 70-300 G SSM, but that's a lot more weight and a lot more money.
The price isn't bad. KEH sells used ones for $225 when they're in EX condition.
I've just got the cam
One question for people that have the cam (or A200): As far as I understood, I can only set the aperture relative to the automatic setting which the cam came up with. Is that true?
Another question for all of you: The cam has an option to shoot a pic at 3 different appertures. Do I understand right, that this is for HDR photos? Is there any freeware that can render them?
And last but not least: There is noticable dust on the mirror of the cam. Is that usual, or is it an issue (the cam was a demo model in a store)? Should I remove it with a dust blower (or someway else), or not bother with it since it is (hopefully - i will check that tomorrow) only on the mirror, not the ccd? I am a little scared that blowing it of might actually transfer it from mirror to ccd.
Regards
Scoox
PS:
PPS: I really should have taken off my DHL badge before I went to UPS to get the package