File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I got a Sony Alpha a few years ago because my dad gave me a Maxxum for my first photo class and I wanted to get a DSLR that had compatible lenses. But I'm getting more and more annoyed at the lack of Minolta/Sony lenses almost everywhere, and how expensive they are when they do pop up. So I'm thinking about changing systems.

I'm thinking of going Canon (in b4 Canon/Nikon flame war). What's a good camera and some good lenses to start with? I want to at least start out with a semi-wide prime (24-35mm), 50mm prime, and slight telephoto prime (85mm?), with maybe a standard zoom, telephoto zoom, and macro.

Pic unrelated to question, but is related to /p/.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSLR-A100Camera SoftwareDSLR-A100 v1.04Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2007:06:11 22:02:27Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating400Brightness1 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, AutoFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3872Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormal
>> Pentard !pjwjmEQ1RM
Just buy all your lenses on the internet, FFS.
Buying lenses in shops is for old people and douchebags.
>> Anonymous
>>213813
Online is exactly where I can't find the Minolta lenses I want.
>> Anonymous
>>213823


B&H, Adorama, Amazon, and KEH not cutting it for you?


I think the "lack" of lenses you see is cause sony only has ~30ish lenses on the market IIRC. There's more ziess coming at Photokina and always old minolta maxxum glass floating around ebay.
>> Anonymous
>>213828
>sony only has ~30ish lenses on the market

how many lenses do you fucking ppl want?
most ppl only have 2 or 3 maybe five tops
what the fuck???
>> Anonymous
You could go either way, but if you go nikon i would avoid the d40/60 since nikkor primes will not autofocus on those bodies. If you go canon it will be a non-issue since any eos lens made will autofocus on all canons dslr bodies.
>> Anonymous
>>213828
not only that, but ebay has thousands at any given moment. op has created a non-issue and doesn't know how to use the internet.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
bampu cause in the real world, sony and sony compatible lenses are pretty rare.

Most of the 2nd hand minolta gear has been brought back into use now, so the market is just as busy as everyone elses.
>> Anonymous
>>213828
NIGGER SONY USERS ARE BUYING UP ALL THE MINOLTA LENSES.

RAAAAAAAAAAAGEEE
>> Anonymous
>>214123


there are 50/1.7s for $120+ ;_;
>> Anonymous
>>214184
I know some I sell go for $150+

MUST BE A SHORTAGE BY WAY OF ME BUYING THEM ALL NO YOU CAN'T HAVE ANY
>> Anonymous
There's always the a-mount database they have up somewhere. There you can find compatible lenses. Plenty of them, some pretty cheap, but you get what you pay for.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>214189
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp
http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

BOOKMARK IT
>> Anonymous
>>214192

Thanks. I just realized it was already in there, xD
>> Anonymous
>>213828
>>213991
OP here. This is what I'm talking about, the only compatible lenses you find at most places are the new Sony ones, which are just rebranded Minolta ones but for a couple hundred more dollars. Not to mention Sony didn't even remake some staples like the 50/1.7.

I can find Minolta stuff on eBay, but it's either more expensive than it should be (>>214184- I got my 50/1.7 for $50 like 3 years ago) or something that I don't need (cheap zooms that go for more than they should, or high-end telephoto that I can't afford even if I wanted it). It's almost impossible to find what I want (eg. 28/2 or 35/2), and if I do, it's like $500 used, while I can find a Canon 28/1.8 for $420 new, for example. Also, Minolta/Sony doesn't even have a cheap 85mm - I only have the choice of an 85/1.4, which is about $800-1000 for the Minolta version and $1300 for the Sony; what if I just want an 85/1.8 for $350 like the Canon equivalent?

That being said, I do realize Sony is planning to release better and better equipment in the future: better bodies and lenses to fill in the holes I want. But that's the problem, it's going to take years. I want it now.

But now I've gone back to the good ol' Canon vs. Nikon question. After looking through both systems, I don't really know what to chose anymore.
>> $19.99 !OSYhGye6hY
>>214261

You'd be fine either way.
I'm a canonfag though so i'd say go canon. Skip the rebel series and go for a 40d, if money is an issue, grab a 20d or 30d. You can grab a used 20d body for around $400.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>214261
this is one of those rare moments when a photog is moaning that the equipment is too good.

Also beercan > canikon
>> Anonymous
>>214346
What is the Beercan, exactly? I know it's some supposedly divine tele zoom, but I mean what is it? Just a very good 70-200/2.8?
>> Anonymous
>>214348
70-210mm constant f/4 zoom with superior sharpness, build quality, colors, and contrast, and good AF speed, flare and distortion control for ~$200 USD used. What's not to like?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>214348
70-210/4 actually. As far as I know it's "supposedly divine" because of the image quality vs. price.

>>214346moaning that the equipment is too good
I'm just a poor college student who'd rather buy three or four good lenses for the same price as one amazing lens. I can find the lower end and higher end stuff in Minolta mount, but I want the mid end stuff. I'll miss the beercan, but I always preferred wide over tele.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeKONICA MINOLTACamera ModelDYNAX 7DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)105 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2006:01:18 17:19:26Exposure Time1/60 secF-Numberf/8.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating200Brightness2.4 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length70.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height321RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastSoftSaturationNormalSharpnessHard
>> Anonymous
>>214352


the minolta mid end stuff never really existed.

Even with the manual focus stuff you had either MD or MC and within those you had Rokkor and Celtic.

Fast forward to Sony and you have the consumer 3.5-5.6 zooms or the ungodly expensive but kick ass Zeiss/G series.
>> Anonymous
>>214371
There's plenty of mid-end Minolta stuff... 50/1.7 for $100, 28/2.8 for $100, 70-210/4 macro for $200, 35-70/4 macro for $40, 35-105/3.5-4.5 macro and 28-85/3.5-4.5 macro for $75, 100-200/4.5 for $85... the list goes on and on and on. They're all excellent quality and 1st-party. When factoring in lenses from Tamron and Sigma, the list becomes at least 3 times as long. I'm not sure what the hell you guys are talking about.
>> Anonymous
>>214373
where are you getting your prices from? two months ago?

try finding a 50/1.7 for $100 now with all the sony assholes.
>> Anonymous
>>214418
I'm getting my prices from 2 seconds ago. THINGS SELL FOR DIFFERENT PRICES ON EBAY YOU KNOW. It's really not that hard to find a deal. At all. You're also acting like the first Alpha was released in May, lol.