Prime lenses for Sony A900

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 end

Archive 2008 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

ayler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I'm thinking about switching from canon 5D to A900 but know next to nothing about which prime lenses are good, which are exceptional and which are downright poor, if any, in Sony's current line-up (including previous Minolta primes).

I don't even know if there ever was a Minolta prime line similar to the Canon L, but I guess there must have been.

I've read that, unsurprisingly, the CZ 85mm and 135mm are exceptional.

But I'd like to know how Sony or Minolta lenses perform in the following focal lengths and which is best for each:

1) 100mm or longer macro, preferably one that doubles up well for portraits

2) 85mm fast portrait lens (apart from the CZ 1.4, is there anything out there?)

3) 28 to 35mm wide

I'm not interested in zooms or third-party.

Any help from Sony/Minolta users who know the Sony/Minolta line-ups would be great!

Many thanks!

Nov 11, 2008 at 03:01 PM

edwardkaraa
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

How about looking here:

http://old.photodo.com/prod/lens/minolta.shtml

Nov 11, 2008 at 04:09 PM

douglasf13
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

ayler wrote:
I'm thinking about switching from canon 5D to A900 but know next to nothing about which prime lenses are good, which are exceptional and which are downright poor, if any, in Sony's current line-up (including previous Minolta primes).

I don't even know if there ever was a Minolta prime line similar to the Canon L, but I guess there must have been.

I've read that, unsurprisingly, the CZ 85mm and 135mm are exceptional.

But I'd like to know how Sony or Minolta lenses perform in the following focal lengths and which is best for each:

1) 100mm or longer macro, preferably one that doubles up well for portraits

2) 85mm fast portrait lens (apart from the CZ 1.4, is there anything out there?)

3) 28 to 35mm wide

I'm not interested in zooms or third-party.

Any help from Sony/Minolta users who know the Sony/Minolta line-ups would be great!

Many thanks!

Since Sony has planned on the A900 for a while, they seem to be focusing on the higher end first, in order to take advantage of the A900's resolution. The Sony 100mm 2.8 macro is about as good as it gets, and would fit your macro bill perfectly. Your only new option for 85mm is the ZA 85mm. There is a great Minolta G 85mm (Minolta/Sony G is equivalent to Canon's L) that you can get used for a few hundred cheaper than the ZA 85, but, it isn't quite as sharp...although it has great bokeh. In all honesty, the ZA lenses are really one of the main reasons to go with Sony anyway, so I would just suck it up and go for it!

Nov 11, 2008 at 06:12 PM

jamesdak
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I used to shoot Minolta and can say that some of the primes are really good. I found the Minolta 35/2.0 and 100/2.8 macro to be outstanding. The 24/2.8 was just ok, the 28/2.8 is a poor performer but the 28/2.0 is supposed to be top notch. I also found the 300/4 to be very sharp but it is prone to CA in some situations. I also always liked my Minolta 85/1.4 but feel that my current Contax Zeiss 85/2.8 is sharper and gives better color. As stated above, check at dyxum.com. Oh and people swear by the Minolta 70-210/4 beercan. I was never that inspired by my version.

Nov 11, 2008 at 08:40 PM

debuggerus
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

The Minolta G line is similar to canon L. Just like others say, you should check dyxum.com, their lens reviews section.

I don't have any sony lenses but my favorite Minoltas are:

*100mm:
Maxxum 100mm: 100mm F/2, the sharpest lens I've ever tried with great bokeh.
Maxxum 100mm f/2.8 macro: very sharp, slow focusing (it's a 1:1 macro).
Maxxum 135mm 2.8: very small for this focal, in my bag all the time.
*85mm: Rokkor 85mm 1.7. The Maxxum 85mm 1.4 is very good too.
*50mm: Maxxum 50mm macro 2.8, very sharp, my normal lens until the rokkor 1.2 (A mount converted).
*Maxxum 24mm 2.8: Okay, similar IQ to 17-55IS at 24mm. Now I am using the rokkor 24 2.8mm, 28mm f/2 and 35mm 1.8.

About the zooms, I have both Beercan and big beercan but I use the primes most of the time so you get the idea. They are Okay.

Just be aware that the Minolta auto focus speed is not up to par canon USM.

Edited on Nov 11, 2008 at 09:28 PM · View previous versions

Nov 11, 2008 at 09:17 PM

ayler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

douglasf13 wrote:
ayler wrote:
I'm thinking about switching from canon 5D to A900 but know next to nothing about which prime lenses are good, which are exceptional and which are downright poor, if any, in Sony's current line-up (including previous Minolta primes).

I don't even know if there ever was a Minolta prime line similar to the Canon L, but I guess there must have been.

I've read that, unsurprisingly, the CZ 85mm and 135mm are exceptional.

But I'd like to know how Sony or Minolta lenses perform in the following focal lengths and which is best for each:

1) 100mm or longer macro, preferably one that doubles up well for portraits

2) 85mm fast portrait lens (apart from the CZ 1.4, is there anything out there?)

3) 28 to 35mm wide

I'm not interested in zooms or third-party.

Any help from Sony/Minolta users who know the Sony/Minolta line-ups would be great!

Many thanks!

Since Sony has planned on the A900 for a while, they seem to be focusing on the higher end first, in order to take advantage of the A900's resolution. The Sony 100mm 2.8 macro is about as good as it gets, and would fit your macro bill perfectly. Your only new option for 85mm is the ZA 85mm. There is a great Minolta G 85mm (Minolta/Sony G is equivalent to Canon's L) that you can get used for a few hundred cheaper than the ZA 85, but, it isn't quite as sharp...although it has great bokeh. In all honesty, the ZA lenses are really one of the main reasons to go with Sony anyway, so I would just suck it up and go for it!

At the wider end, there is a Sony 28 2.8 that is so-so, and a Sony 35 1.4 G that doesn't test well for sharpness, but is really an artisan type lens with a beautiful "look." Alternatives to these would be the used Minolta 28mm f2 and 35mm f2, which are both exceptional. There are a few Zeiss wide primes expected soon, but they will be expensive. Go to dyxum.com to read about every Sony/Minolta lens.

Are these Minolta 28mm f2 and 35mm f2 G types? Thanks for all the useful info. Yes, I'll probably 'suck it up' and go for the Zeiss 85mm f1.4 in the future, but it would be nice if there was a cheaper Minolta alternative that offers 80 or 90% of what the Zeiss does. In the Canon line-up there's the 85mm f1.8, which is optically on a par with the 85mm L but costs a mere fraction. Is there a slower Minolta (f2.8 maybe) that performs well? And how does the Sony 100mm macro fare as a portrait lens? I'll get some homework done on dyxum.com. Thanks!

FWIW, I personally use the ZA 24-70 and ZA 85mm for 90% of the shooting I do, and it doesn't get too much better. The rest of the time I use alternative lenses.

Nov 11, 2008 at 09:22 PM

ayler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I'm moving to A900 (not A700) or 5D MKII, but the Sony looks better on paper than the Canon right now as a hi-res, high DR, base ISO option (a poor man's medium format, really). Unless the Canon can pull a trick or two in terms of expanded DR and beats the Sony @ low ISO (which I think it won't). High ISO low noise isn't really that much of a priority, since high ISO is mainly for family pics and those files can be downsampled to 12MP or so if the noise gets overbearing. Video doesn't interest me either, but a bright 100% viewfinder does!

The problem I have is that Canon's lens line-up is quite extensive compared to Sony, with the bonus of a mount that allows for most lenses from almost any system to be attached to the camera. If I go with the Sony, I sure hope that new lenses are released progressively to fill gaps and that niche lenses such as T/S are introduced. A tilt and shift Distagon with similar performance to the CY version would be heaven!

Nov 11, 2008 at 09:40 PM

Tom Abbott
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

ayler wrote:
I'm thinking about switching from canon 5D to A900

Dpreview.com has a samples gallery from the A900. If you download the entire image by clicking on the link, you see that images from the A900 are not as good as those from a 5D. Keep the 5D.

Nov 11, 2008 at 09:51 PM

douglasf13
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

Dpreview's sample gallery of A900 (and, btw, 5Dii) jpeg images is lackluster, and should never be a basis for your buying decision. All you need to do is go to dyxum.com and the dpreview Sony DSLR thread to see amazing shots with the camera. At ISO 100-800, there is no better 35mm DSLR than the A900...period.

p.s. the standard jpeg settings for the A900 high ISO are night and day different than RAW results. for critical work, this camera needs to be shot in RAW until a new firmware comes for jpeg.

Nov 11, 2008 at 11:53 PM

mawz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

Tom Abbott wrote:
ayler wrote:
I'm thinking about switching from canon 5D to A900

Dpreview.com has a samples gallery from the A900. If you download the entire image by clicking on the link, you see that images from the A900 are not as good as those from a 5D. Keep the 5D.

DPReview's processed A900 images are all from either in-camera JPEG (A real weak point on the A900) or Adobe Camera RAW processed RAW's (ACR is known to do a poor job with Sony RAW files, RAW Developer and/or Capture One are significantly better)

Don't make a decision on this camera based on DPReview's images unless you plan on primarily shooting JPEG (a poor choice for this sort of camera anyways)

Nov 12, 2008 at 12:47 AM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

The best non third party, non alternative lenses I have used on the a900 thus far are:

Minolta 100 F2: Hard to find and expensive but worth every penny to me. Simply incredible performance even wide open.

Minolta/Sony 50mm 2.8 Macro: Incredibly sharp in the center, Must stop down to F8 for corners(I'm finding this to be common with most normal to wide lenses on the a900 by the way)

I would stay away from the Minolta 50 1.7. Its simply not sharp enough to take full advantage of the a900 sensor. It looks alright until you compare it to something like the above Macro or 100, then you realize what you could have.

I have not found a truly exceptional, non third party wide lens yet. If you would consider Tamron, the 20-40mm 2.8-3.5 SP Aspherical zoom is a very good performer though I expect the upcoming Zeiss wide zoom will be better. The Tamron, when you can find it, is under $300.

Nov 12, 2008 at 12:52 AM

ayler
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

The trouble with DPreview's reviews, as with any other resource, is that there are limits to what can be done in terms of testing and how much time can be spent on each. Therefore, standard methods have to be incorporated (one stick to measure different pieces of equipment) when sometimes it would be better to try different methodologies for fair comparison. One such case is raw conversion, because different cameras and systems respond differently to different conversion tools. Using ACR as a benchmark when it's well known that it's not always the best tool for a given system compromises the validity of such comparisons. I understand that it's difficult to try all available conversion tools and compare only the best conversions, but this is why user forums and opinions are so important. Because they pick up where DPreview.com and other resources have left things.

On the subject of the A900, I suspect that general opinion that DPreview's raw conversion samples are not the best is true and that Raw Developer outputs much better results. I've tried Raw Developer's trial version on 5D files and was not entirely convinced, so this just shows how ACR could be conceived as the benchmark for Canon (highly debatable, but still...) and RD not nearly as good; but exactly the opposite for the A900.

I've seen horrible examples along with rather outstanding ones coming from the A900 at ISOs between 100 and 800, so I know the quality is there at low ISOs and only needs the best raw workflow to come afloat. And it easily beats the original 5D for overall resolution and DR. Whether it will better the 5D MKII is a different story, and even if it does by how much, so I'm sitting on the fence until some 5D MKII reviews and raw samples come out. But I'm leaning towards the opinion that Canon has paid more attention to high ISO (to compete with Nikon) and less to DR and that the 5D MKII is gadgety whereas the A900 is seriously no-nonsense. But I might change my mind, one never knows...

Nov 12, 2008 at 02:47 PM

JimBuchanan
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

jamesdak wrote:
I used to shoot Minolta and can say that some of the primes are really good. I found the Minolta 35/2.0 and 100/2.8 macro to be outstanding. The 24/2.8 was just ok, the 28/2.8 is a poor performer but the 28/2.0 is supposed to be top notch.

I have to put in a vote for the Minolta 28/2.0. I do not shoot with an A900, so I can't speak for absolute resolution of this lens, but based on my experience using it with a Canon sensor, it is very promising.

My lens is of the new plain Minolta variety, and it does have a floating element design. With the double helicoid design (the filter ring does not rotate) there is extra friction and requires a firm grip to turn, but the full movement is about 90 degrees. It controls lateral CA very well, has the latest coatings being a later produced lens, and compared to the Leica 28/2.8 Elmarit was about equal in corner sharpness/contrast at 2 stops down of f/4, compared to L28 at f/2/8 wide open. This is just one stop smaller than Leica for a very similiar performance. There is a thread here about that comparision.

Nov 12, 2008 at 04:51 PM

senna4ever
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I can't believe no one has mentioned the 200mm f2.8 HS APO G. This is one incredibly amazing lens. Super sharp, creamy smooth bokeh. Rare, but worth every penny.

Nov 14, 2008 at 09:22 AM

moire
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

Here is a new test of the excellent 200mm 2.8 lens on A900

http://artaphot.ch/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=140&Itemid=43

Nov 15, 2008 at 05:35 PM

e_dawg
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

ayler,

Recently added Sony FF to my kit and have been researching the best lenses to get. Some generalizations from what I have found:

- Except for some telephoto primes, the f/2.8 models are not that great. The f/2 versions are the ones to get

- Like other mfrs, it seems that the 28/2.8 is the weakest of the line.

- Minolta seems to have gone for rendering and bokeh instead of maximum sharpness and correction of aberrations

- Slightly higher levels of lateral and longitudinal / bokeh CA and vignetting / corner issues than other brands (see Photozone's tests)

- Not that many great Sony primes available currently... might want to look at Minolta glass if you're after high end performance

- A lot of the most desirable Minolta glass at good prices has already been scooped up. Be prepared to pay $$ for the good stuff now

- A lot of the used Minolta primes on the market do not have the distance encoder built-in, which means it won't tell the ADI flash system how far your subject is, possibly reducing consistency of your flash exposure performance

- If you want a simple, clear recommendation without having to pick and choose: get Zeiss glass. Their ZA primes are generally excellent. 85/1.4 and 135/1.8, and their ZA 24-70/2.8 zoom is at least the equal of most of the f/2.8 A-mount primes

- As far as Sony primes go, their G lenses are the high performance line, but are relatively expensive. Here are the ones I would take a look at:

- The Sony 35/1.4G is, as was described above, a bit of an artisan lens. A bit like a "portrait wide-angle", and not the sharpest most corrected lens for landscape or high res work.

- The Sony 100/2.8 Macro is one of their better primes. With the exception of relatively high longitudinal / bokeh CA, it is an excellent performer.

- The Sony 135/STF is Sony's dedicated portrait lens. Possibly the smoothest bokeh from any 135 portrait lens on the market, although not the most convenient or practical. Manual focus only and slower effective max aperture due to the apodization elements (only f/4.5 or something, effectively). Personally, I'd rather get the Zeiss ZA 135/1.8 as it's easier to use, faster, and has good bokeh as well.

- Can't really speak to the telephoto primes, as I never researched them.

- I would probably get the upcoming Zeiss ZA 16-35/2.8 for wide-angle stuff over existing primes

Edited on Nov 21, 2008 at 11:35 PM · View previous versions

Nov 21, 2008 at 05:35 PM

moire
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I can realyl recommend the 135 STF, if youlike bokeh. There is no other! and with the excellent VF on A900 its not hard to focus manually at all.

I use it on a A700.

Nov 21, 2008 at 08:20 PM

RCicala
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

I've been playing with the A900 and S0ny-Zeiss 135mm f1.8 and am liking it a lot (although I'm still way in the learning curve phase with the A900).

Here's a shot from this morning at 25% with a 100% insert:

Also posted a few 100% jpgs out of the camera HERE

2012 © RCicala

Nov 22, 2008 at 05:35 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

RCicala wrote
Also posted a few 100% jpgs out of the camera HERE

Hi Roger-

These look better trhan some of the a900 images I'd seen earlier.

That wouldn't happen to be a Portuguese Water Dog in the "goodeats" photo? (have I asked you that before?). Great dogs, and yes it's difficult to hold the detail in their black hair. It's of little consequence though. They hardly stand still long enough for you to capture their image. ;-)

Nov 22, 2008 at 09:23 PM

RCicala
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · Prime lenses for Sony A900

Lotusm50 wrote:
That wouldn't happen to be a Portuguese Water Dog in the "goodeats" photo? (have I asked you that before?). Great dogs, and yes it's difficult to hold the detail in their black hair. It's of little consequence though. They hardly stand still long enough for you to capture their image. ;-)

Yep, that would be "Zeiss", our 4 month old Portuguese (please don't tell my wife that Zeiss isn't the name of the King of the Greek Gods, OK?). I find he's a great test of 1) quick autofocus, 2) how well a camera handles dark shadows, and 3) my nerves. I'd heard they were rather energetic, which is like saying Antarctica's rather cold in the winter.

2012 © RCicala

Nov 23, 2008 at 01:03 AM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end