i think L lenses should be compared with G lenses.. not normal lenses.. not sure about that 28-75 range canon and minolta price comparison.. but minolta 17-35 3.5 G compared to canon 17-40 would be damn ex even if compared to canon 16-35 2.8 L still the minolta more ex..
Moving to Alpha system?
- Thread starter gremlin
- Start date
- Status
i think L lenses should be compared with G lenses.. not normal lenses.. not sure about that 28-75 range canon and minolta price comparison.. but minolta 17-35 3.5 G compared to canon 17-40 would be damn ex even if compared to canon 16-35 2.8 L still the minolta more ex..
yup. if you can even find the minolta G...
Canon is fine and I am not sure why you want to change.
A-Mount has smaller user group and good lenses are harder to come by.
However, having said that, most minolta lenses even with the cheaper one, the image quality is pretty good.
As a 7D user, I personally don't see the point of upgrading to A-700 unless there is a need for it, let alone changing from Canon to A-Mount system.
Canon has one of the most complete range of lenses and DSLR bodies to satisfy almost anyone.
Of course if money is not an issue, get A-mount as your second system and use it and see how the 2 compare. Other's opinion is just their opinion, so it is totally up to you.
Regards,
Hart
A-Mount has smaller user group and good lenses are harder to come by.
However, having said that, most minolta lenses even with the cheaper one, the image quality is pretty good.
As a 7D user, I personally don't see the point of upgrading to A-700 unless there is a need for it, let alone changing from Canon to A-Mount system.
Canon has one of the most complete range of lenses and DSLR bodies to satisfy almost anyone.
Of course if money is not an issue, get A-mount as your second system and use it and see how the 2 compare. Other's opinion is just their opinion, so it is totally up to you.
Regards,
Hart
DewaKarma
Senior Member
just wanna share my humble point of view..
i am a minolta 7d user, although its an old cam, has lesser features than a700 but i wouldnt want change it to a700.. i dun think features offered by a700 like fast auto focus (for what? its just one over smth second different :sweatlesser noise (just to remove the small2 little dots i have to pay a few hundred bucks? no way) really worth the 2 thousand buck ill need to spent for an a700..
after all its your choice to jump to sony, but i suggest you to think first if jumping to sony really worth it.. :angel:
Dearest Tirza.. have u actually tried the A700? just mount a beercan on it and u will drool :devil: ..the slowest AF lens has become HSM ..ahaks..the DRO functions till +5 is awesome.. and with the multi focussing pts..no comments...and of coz...the damn big lcd screen...its a far worth upgrade from the 7D... try it personally...im sure the BBB virus will hit u .. :devil:
YES the DRO fuction rocks!! Will post an example later...
Taken at the same manual settings for both shots, except one is DRO off, one if DRO +5
Bro, my company's Websense filter always blocks photos from most galleries except maybe SmugMug and Fotki.
Can you email them to me at andrew.lee@goodrich.com?
Will greatly appreciate it as I'm very interested in the DRO feature (still waiting for my A700 - now on order)...
thanks
heckcare.der
Senior Member
oh yes! i forgot abt our G lenses and compared with L. sorrry.
i never tried a700.. i believe its good cam like what u say.. but for some people, like me, dun really need those features in a700.. high speed af, in my opinion thats not necessary for me, i am not into action phtgraphy and 7d af is enough for me.. dro also can be done in pp :bsmilie:
its the matter of people thoughts and needs (and budget) i suppose..
DRO is a JPEG post-processing technique used by the Bionz processor. On RAW, the A700 will tag that DRO was selected; when you then open the RAW file in the Sony software, it can try to apply the same DRO.
no need to lug around with the jinbei strobe in future....:bsmilie:Taken at the same manual settings for both shots, except one is DRO off, one if DRO +5
can get the subject 'properly exposed together with the sky'
the dro is ma chaim a built in hdr:bsmilie:
my_photography
New Member
For the time being Sony seems to be offering something better (a700), as compared to Canon (40D), at least this is what I perceived. But if you have invested a lot in Canon, there is little reason to shift. Lens wise, Canon has a more complete range and price are generally less expensive compare to Sony counterpart; body wise, Sony only have 2 so far (4 if included 2 from Konica Minolta). So far no fullframe from Sony, and Canon already have 4 or 5, I think.
As pointed out by other members, both systems have their merits. Depending on what you are looking for, Sony might or might not the answer.
As pointed out by other members, both systems have their merits. Depending on what you are looking for, Sony might or might not the answer.
wah, so much diff. DRO is useful. Is it ok to use every pic or people in the shade?Taken at the same manual settings for both shots, except one is DRO off, one if DRO +5
thks
Taken at the same manual settings for both shots, except one is DRO off, one if DRO +5
Did the exposure change when using DRO+5?
The difference is really incredible, not only did the brightness increase but the colors were brought out as well.
- Status
Similar threads
