Do you like the Tamron 17/3.5? I found the flare and glare control pretty aweful... but if you keep it out of those conditions I imagine it's very nice (very compact/light).
ricardovaste wrote:
Do you like the Tamron 17/3.5? I found the flare and glare control pretty aweful... but if you keep it out of those conditions I imagine it's very nice (very compact/light).
No advise with the 35/1.8...?
I have not owned it so far, but all the images I have seen with it seem amazing to me (ref: the 17/3.5 thread). I might buy one today or tomorrow from a forum member actually!
I don't know if there are any other easily avilable small, light ultrawides for sony alpha mount?
ricardovaste wrote:
Do you like the Tamron 17/3.5? I found the flare and glare control pretty aweful... but if you keep it out of those conditions I imagine it's very nice (very compact/light).
No advise with the 35/1.8...?
Sorry, ricardovaste. I didn't see your first post. I like my tamron very, very much. I don't recall having much problem with flare. Perhaps I used the hood all the time or I haven't used it much under extreme conditions. A shot with the A900: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2577/4203820078_5bbde49b25_b.jpg
About the 35/1.8, are you looking into converting to EOS? One way is
1) Remove move the mount base.
2) Remove all of the apeture mechanism from the inside of the mount base. Take note of where they are since you need to put them back together.
3) With all of the aperture mechanism removed, you will see 4 screws holding the mount from the base. Remove the mount from the base (you won't need the mount anymore).
4) Sand the base to make it flat. Now put the aperture controls back to the mount base and then the mount base to the lens.
5) Use epoxy to attach the new mount to the mount base. You can also attach the new mount the same way as the old one (4 screws going from the inside).
6) Adjust infinity focus from the front after removing the name ring.
Converting to alpha mount is almost the same but with a few tweaks since the alpha register is ~.5mm more.
ulrikft2 wrote:
Any idea on adaptibility and quality of the 17 F4 MD? (minolta)
I have never used one since I have a tamron 17mm but I think it's similar to the 21 and 35/1.8. It's quite expensive perhaps due to its rareness. Some rank the tamron 17 3.5 higher than the rokkor. The adaptall2 site has a test posted between the two: http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/51B.html
Karma Police wrote:
I wish you could try the minolta 135mm F2. I have one and want a little more info on it. samples and etc.
the 35-70mm is a slow prime its excellent. try the 20mm its better IMO than the 21mm
I've been wanting to try the 24-50mm.
I gave up on the 135/2 and 100/2 a long time ago. I tried to bid a few times but never won. You are welcome to send it to me though .
Seriously, if you are interested in converting it, you can send it to me. I'll do the conversion, take samples, and send it back to you. No charge!
About the 20mm, I am surprise you like the 20mm better. I've preferred the 21mm since the film days. My 21mm was sharper than the 20mm.
Wow! I'd like to convert my MC Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 to m42 mount for my Sony Alpha but don't feel comfortable trying to do it myself. Is there anyone who can do a good conversion for me for a fee?
debuggerus wrote:
I gave up on the 135/2 and 100/2 a long time ago. I tried to bid a few times but never won. You are welcome to send it to me though .
Seriously, if you are interested in converting it, you can send it to me. I'll do the conversion, take samples, and send it back to you. No charge!
About the 20mm, I am surprise you like the 20mm better. I've preferred the 21mm since the film days. My 21mm was sharper than the 20mm.
I'm keeping the 135mm md mount since I have one in perfect condition.
I have the newst 20mm "plain" MD 49mm filter. controls flare well good contrast compared to the the older gen 20s.
debuggerus wrote:
the 24mm is an excellent lens. Make sure you get the 55mm filter thread, not the MD 49mm.
I'm wondering if the 24 is the same design as the AF version (which is relatively cheap and has a reputation as quite a good lens, if not quite up to the ZA16-35's performance). I'm slowly moving my film kit over to Minolta and the 24's on my list.
(ref: the 17/3.5 thread). I might buy one today or tomorrow from a forum member actually!
