Sony Alpha 700 Lenses/accessories for a newbie?

[Chicagogirlie]

First a little background as I am new to this site:

I've researched my little brain out the past couple of weeks and have decided on buying the A700 when my tax check arrives. This will be my very first ever SLR camera and I'm very excited!

What will I be using this camera for:

1. A photography class I plan to take in the summer just for fun.

2. Photos of friends and family indoor and out for gatherings.

3. VACATIONS! I love to travel and have taken countless photos already with my point and shoot Sony T10 cam of architecture, wild life, and over water shots as I enjoy cruising on big ships and needless to say the point and shoot just isn't cutting it anymore.

4. I am interested in blowing up shots as well for my own art.

I'm thinking of buying the 18-200mm standard zoom Sony lens as a kit w/the cam as it is has been marked down at sonystyle.com.

The other lens I thought would be good for the photography class as the classes I've read about requires that students have a 50mm non zoom lens is the SAL-50F14. I believe this will be a lens I'll use for shots in more dim lighting such as indoor parties/gatherings as well as it has an aperture of 1.4.

Has anyone here had experience with the Tamron AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Macro Lens? It has good reviews on amazon.com but I'm unsure if I'll need it....any advice?

Any recommendations on a teleconverter lens for any of these lens?

What would be the best lens for capturing whales on film? Is this where one should use a wide angle lens?

Since I'll be taking shots over water often, what filters would you recommend if any? Are they worth it?

THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!!!

[Canuck935]

Hi there!

The a700 is one heck of a camera. You might want to check out the newly announced a300 and a350 camera's which have live view and tilt screens. I don't know of those sort of things appeal to you, but at least you'll be aware of other options.

For travel photography, a lot of people really like the 18-200 or 18-250 lenses since they cover such a large range. These lenses should cover most or your shooting.

A lot of people do go for a fast 50mm for low light shooting. A less costly alternative to the 50 f/1.4 is the ever popular Minolta's 50 f/1.7. You won't find it new, but it can be had for mere chump change (as far as lenses go) on sites such as ebay.

I don't have any experience with the Tamron 70-300, but I've hear overall positive things about it. I've heard even better things about Sigma's 70-300 APO lens. And just to muck it up even further, I'd keep an eye on Sony's new 70-300 G SSM.

Personally, I've only had the Minolta 75-300 (Sony's kit 75-300 is just a re-badged Minolta). It's pretty slow, and it has become nothing more to me than an expensive paperweight. That is thanks to the legendary Minolta 70-210 f/4 (aka Beercan) lens. It's got a constant f/4 through the entire range, great color, and bokeh to die for. Again, only available used. Going price is around $200 last I checked.

No, I would not recommend a teleconverter for any of these lenses. They're all too slow to be used (effectively) with a TC. You may get away with using one with the beercan. The problem is that using a TC will result in the loss of a stop or two of light, and that makes these lenses incapable of allowing faster shutter speeds or even auto-focusing.

Whales? It depends how close you are to them. I don't think I'd try a wide angle lens. Something like the 18-250 would give you both a wide angle and telephoto option. Also, this will mean you don't have to change lenses to go between wide angle and telephoto, so it will save you from exposing the mirror box/sensor to sea spray.

Shooting out over water often means dealing with things such as sea spray. I would definitely use a protective or UV filter on you lenses in these situations. Buy good filters and you won't take a hit on image quality. I personally buy Hoya Pro-1 filters from ebay seller besteastern.

[Chicagogirlie]

I've been studying up on the lenses at dyxum.com since I posted this last entry. What a great site by the way! I wish I would have know about it before trying to search for reviews from multiple places. How time consuming, but I do love doing research

I've decided on buying just the A700 body and to buy theTamron 17-50 f/2.8. I'm going to hold off and buy the Minolta 50mm 1.4 or the 1.7 when I see a good deal on Ebay. I have some time before that photography class this summer which will allow me to shop around. Have any of you tried putting a T mount on your camera and using an Olympus Zuiko lens? I found a Zuiko 50mm 1.8 that my dad had used years ago in great condition. It's manual but I did read on the net somewhere that at least one person has had success w/their A700 and this lens after buying the T mount.

As for the zoom lens I think I'll be going for the "Beercan" 70-210 f/4. I'm curious though still about the the SAL18200 or the SAL 18250 in addition eventually. I know the Sony lenses will be much lighter but I would be sacrificing picture quality because of the aperture. Would this be the case in bright daylight shooting as well? I'm just afraid that on some of my hiking or excursions off the cruise ships the beercan and the Tamron 17-50...well it might be difficult to switch back and forth and to carry around for long periods of time since I am not the strongest female in the record books. That and I don't want to risk getting my equipment dirty while hiking.

I've decided not to go the route of a teleconverter. I'll just feel out whether I need more than 200mm of zoom and see what lenses would be best if so. Anyone have a reccomendation of any lenses that doesn't cost over 800 bux in this zoom range? I did see the Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 lens but it is out of my price range. If it's worth it maybe I'll save up for it. I also took a look at the Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 which is more in my price range at $530. I've read that pics can still be sharp out to about 350mm but with wildlife it can be difficult. The reviews for the Minolta 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 aren't too shabby either.

Canuck935:

Thanks for the info. I did hear about the press release the other day regarding the 300 and 350. Although the tilt live view is tempting I think I'll opt for the higher end 700. I believe it won't be as plasticy as the others and I didn't want to go below 12mp since I plan to blow up pics. Yes the 350 has 14mp but the A700 still has a faster shutter speed so it wins. The CMOS is a big draw for me as well.

I'll check out the new Sony lenses when they are listed on the U.S. sites. Oh, and thanks for the tip on the filters...I'll check out that seller. I'm thinking of going for the circular polarized filters for over water shots.

[Canuck935]

Well I'd say you're doing some pretty good research. It's pretty daunting at first, but it looks like you've come up to speed pretty quickly.

I'm not sure what you mean about losing picture quality with the 18-200/250 lenses because of the aperture. Do you mean because they are pretty slow in the long end? In bright daylight it shouldn't be a problem. With lower light levels you'll probably notice the lens will take longer to focus and maybe some focus hunting (I find it very difficult to make my a700 focus hunt).

Polarizer filters are great, and I never leave home without one. Keep in mind it does cut light by a couple stops, so if shooting hand-held you may need to bump up the ISO or take it off (in which case I use a UV or protective filter). Do not stack filters i.e. screw the polarizer onto the UV filter.

[Chicagogirlie]

Well I'd say you're doing some pretty good research. It's pretty daunting at first, but it looks like you've come up to speed pretty quickly.

I'm not sure what you mean about losing picture quality with the 18-200/250 lenses because of the aperture. Do you mean because they are pretty slow in the long end? In bright daylight it shouldn't be a problem. With lower light levels you'll probably notice the lens will take longer to focus and maybe some focus hunting (I find it very difficult to make my a700 focus hunt).

Polarizer filters are great, and I never leave home without one. Keep in mind it does cut light by a couple stops, so if shooting hand-held you may need to bump up the ISO or take it off (in which case I use a UV or protective filter). Do not stack filters i.e. screw the polarizer onto the UV filter.

Yes, that's what I meant. Thanks. Sounds like I should probably pick up some UV filters too then.

[rongarrett]

Just a word to the wise:

I know it's hard to keep in mind, but put your dollars in the best glass available. The sony A700 will be outdated in two years max, and be worth much less than you paid for it. The Carl Zeiss lenses are another story, they will prolly be worth at least what you paid for them.

I would venture to say that prolly the old Alpha 100 with a Carl Zeiss 24 - 70 F/2.8 lens would blow away the A700 with an economy lens.

Good luck with your new journey.

[Chicagogirlie]

Just a word to the wise:

I know it's hard to keep in mind, but put your dollars in the best glass available. The sony A700 will be outdated in two years max, and be worth much less than you paid for it. The Carl Zeiss lenses are another story, they will prolly be worth at least what you paid for them.

I would venture to say that prolly the old Alpha 100 with a Carl Zeiss 24 - 70 F/2.8 lens would blow away the A700 with an economy lens.

Good luck with your new journey.

Thanks. The a700 is due to arrive today and I'm very excited! I've already purchased the beercan 70-210 f/4, tamron 17-50 f/2.8, and the sony 50 f/1.4. So I think I'm getting some pretty good lenses in this batch.