New to Forum-Sony Alpha100 question

[Darylann]

Hello! I just recently bought the Sony Alpha100. I bought it with the 18-70 sony lens. My question is what is the best zoom lens to buy for this camera? I mostly shoot pictures of my kids at all their events and love doing portraits. When time allows and we are out hiking I love shooting wildlife shots. Also I noticed when taking indoor shots even in dark conditions my flash is not popping up on its own? Did I forget to set something on the camera? Thank you in advance for your feedback I am very excited about having a space to learn more about my camera! Darylann

[payn817]

Check the other thread you started, I replied to you there before seeing this.

As for the flash, there is a little lip on one side, you have to raise it for the flash to fire. It doesn't do that Canikon pop-up thing.

Come to think of it, the Sony 75-300 is about $140, if you aren't looking for gallery prints, it's a good lens. Here's some examples, in more capable hands it would certainly be better.

http://rpayne.smugmug.com/gallery/2630896#138927731
http://rpayne.smugmug.com/gallery/2630896#138927209
http://rpayne.smugmug.com/gallery/2630896#138927190
http://rpayne.smugmug.com/gallery/2630896#138927183

[Darylann]

Your pictures are beautiful! Thank you I will check the other thread! Darylann

[sakbarzad]

i would think that the 18-200 would be the best all around lens

[payn817]

Well, if you don't want more than 200mm, you would be better off getting the 70-210 f/4. It has image quality far better than the 18-200, and can be had for much less. The advantage of the 18-200 is you wouldn't have to change lenses.

The main reason I suggest the xx-300 zoom was budget and the interest in wildlife. Animals, especially birds are difficult at 200 and still hard at 300 (depending on the subject).

[kkart]

Well, if you don't want more than 200mm, you would be better off getting the 70-210 f/4. It has image quality far better than the 18-200, and can be had for much less. The advantage of the 18-200 is you wouldn't have to change lenses.

The main reason I suggest the xx-300 zoom was budget and the interest in wildlife. Animals, especially birds are difficult at 200 and still hard at 300 (depending on the subject).

Ehhhh debatable if the beercan takes better shots than the DT. Personally, I have much better luck with my DT than my Beercan, and anymore, the prices are about the same between the 2 on the used market, beercans are VERY hot items these days since Sony came to town.

[payn817]

You may be right about the price, I haven't checked in a while. I would love to know there was an 18-200 as fast (or faster) than the 70-210, with equal (or better) IQ. If you have some examples please post some, as I am very serious about my last statement and would buy one immediately if it is equal.


I'm going to check it out some more too, thanks for anything you can provide to help.

[Darylann]

Ehhhh debatable if the beercan takes better shots than the DT. Personally, I have much better luck with my DT than my Beercan, and anymore, the prices are about the same between the 2 on the used market, beercans are VERY hot items these days since Sony came to town.

What does DT stand for and how is it different than the Beercan? Thank you for your feedback.

[payn817]

DT lenses are digital lenses. These lenses offer ADI metering, different coating (helps to reduce flair, ghosting, etc.), and supposedly works better with SSS. The 70-210 (beercan) does not have the newer coating and utilizes TTL metering.

I've never had a flair or ghosting problem with older non-DT lenses. I do not doubt the other poster finds the 18-200 a good solution for his/her needs, different strokes...

Personally, I use the Sony 75-300 unless shooting portrait/candid, concerts (lowlight), or sports. In those cases I use the "beercan", as it is fairly sharp wide open and gives a slight speed advantage over most consumer zooms.