schristie11 wrote:
Oh, but that's not all the Canon EF glass, that's just the last 10 years worth.
Check your facts, I certainly see lenses older than 10 years there. schristie11 wrote:
I cant find a photo like this for modern minolta lenses, canyou provide one?
schristie11 wrote:
I can't find a photo like this for modern minolta lenses, canyou provide one?
RZetter wrote:
No thanks, I have no interest in doing so.
I think that none exists, does Minolta make new lenses anymore?
I can't find a official web page for Minolta lenses, searched google to page 3 of results.
Do they make lenses now?
It looks like Minolta officially stopped in 2006, and sold the Camera and optics patents to Sony.
I would suggest that you guys stop feeding this troll. This started otherwise as a very interesting thread, but it's amazing how one mentally sick guy can manipulate you into responding to his provocations and degenerate into these childish exchanges.
Are you seriously not read up on the subject of Konica/Minolta>Sony? That is oooold news by now.
I don't know what you are aiming to get here, really. Aiming to prove that Canon is superior to Sony for having more lenses? Or did I miss a point? As an ex professional Nikon shooter and an after the fact Canon abuser I can say that Canon works well, but not for me.
Sony lens selection is not as large as Canon or Nikon, we all know that. Minolta have some really nice glass that can be used to great effect, Sony has carried over quite a few of them and that new 500/4 Sony lens will probably be a great piece of **ass. With a 1.4X TC it will reach out and touch the stars for you with less CA than my contact lenses.
Now matter how you put it I can sum up my view of it in a few sentences:
It is not important nor interesting to me how many lenses a company makes. Especially when most of them fail to meet my criteria.
If a company makes three/nine/fifteen lenses only, and they cover my needs - I'd be happy with that selection and would not bitch about it. Even if those lenses belonged to a system I would not invest in.
If another company makes a viable alternative to fill out the gaps in a lens line up I am happy to go that route.
If I can adapt my old favorite coke bottles and have in body stabilization I am grateful - but not dependent on it.
If Canon comes out with a new camera I am not interested.
kosmoskatten,
Cute sentiment, but it sounds like your view is like saying,
"I love my Model T car and will never replace it even if it can not get me past the local supermarket reliably or safely." lol
schristie11 wrote:
Please name the one you see?
You get extra credit if you can name two.
Pretty much the entire front row (some examples were already given). Some Canon favorites older than 10 years: 135L(old FD design), 35L, 85/1.8,100/2, 135/2.8, 50/2.5 CM, 20/2.8,24/2.8,28/1.8, the list goes on.
schristie11 wrote:
Please name the one you see?
You get extra credit if you can name two.
RZetter wrote:
Pretty much the entire front row (some examples were already given).
Now get back under your bridge.
I guess it stung a little bit to realize nearly the entire Minolta line is more than 20 years old and Sony only makes a dozen lenses
all of which overlap the same 21mm-300mm range without good reason.
Not even Zeiss makes a Sony lens beyond that focal length range.
What point is having 25 lenses that do exactly the same thing?
Canon has over 200 lenses in the same EF mount, ranging from 8mm - 1200mm.
Canon has a modern version of the entire Focal range from 8mm-1200mm less than 15 years old and all with sonic AF motors.
Not only that, they work as well or better and cost less, and you didn’t have to wait years for them to be released.
Wow I guess I would be irrationally name calling if I were you too.
I wonder which Zeiss or Sony brand Tilt and Shift lens could be used with a Sony a900?
oh yea, none. lol
So, if you want to use a Sony a900, be prepared to give up 1-20m and 320-1200mm focal ranges.
..until a promised lens hits the market at 500mm for +$6000.
...no Tilt Shift, and only a few Macro lenses too.
.. and no multi x macro either.
I guess you could invest in teleconverters and extension tubes to compensate?
Let me see if I can bring the discussion away from cost or how big a lens group a particular manufacturer makes.
2 of those owners that I am aware of that owns th EF 1200mm are the Sultan (King) of Brunei (a major oil producing nation in Asia) and steve Balmer of Microsoft. Both of these individual has all the money in the world and still they do not go out to buy the whole collection as shown in the advertisement. They only buy those they think they like or need.
Next, in the same advertisement there are also lots of junk and redundant lenses.
OK! Now lets divert the issue to No Live View on the Sony bodies that has IBIS. My opinion is that they will never be able to come out with one anytime soon.
Look at it this way: with OIS/IS/VR the element group shift in the opposite direction of the movement and so one is still able to see the subject in Live View.
Now with IBIS, the sensor move in the opposite direction as the motion, so what do you think you will see? Yes! Blury picture unless your brain is able to decipher it fast enough.
Oops! Almost forgot before another war start going.
Good pictures does not necessary requires OIS/IS/VR/IBIS as seen in price winning photos since the beginning of photography.
Ahh so tell me wise one.
Which Sony / Zeiss prime lens exists to for 400mm 500mm 600mm or 800mm etc?
I got to page 3 of google and the only one I find is an ancient Minolta.
Chris48 wrote:
It's funny that many of us here actually know more about Canon than this gentleman.
Oh, what is it you know more about?
When did you reveal the great truth?
Don't tell me it was identifying a few lenses from a photo?
Of course anyone know thae few lenses in front are a little bit older, esp since most of them have no USM.
Still the last 15 years of Canon lenses doubles or tripples what Sony has available for the a900.
More importantly, is the limited focal length options for Sony / Zeiss lenses.
Where's the 8-20mm lens? or the 400-800mm primes?
