Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:00 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:06 pm
Posts: 25
I found a Minolta AF 50MM 1.7 for cheap. I'm pretty sure that for the $60, I can't go wrong. What I'm wondering is about how the lens works with an APS-C CCD. With the 1.5x of the APS-C, am I to assume that I would get the same magnification as setting my kit lens to 75MM?

In practical use, is this something I would enjoy or should I be looking to get something wider to get me closer to 50MM output? I'm looking for someone to tell me their experience and uses with a setup similar to what I mentioned above. Thanks.

_________________
Sony A300; DT 18-70mm; SAL 75-300mm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 8:36 pm 
Any lens through your sensor is multiplied be a focal factor of 1.5 to see what the equivalent lens would see on a full frame camera. So this lens at 50mm sees what your kit lens sees at 50mm.

If you were to need this same focal length on a full frame camera, say the a900, this is then you would need a 50mm x 1.5 = 75mm lens, for the same angle of view.

Many people swear by a 50mm on this kind of camera. It for me is too long for general use and I use it as a portrait lens and instead a 35mm lens for walking around.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 8:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:06 pm
Posts: 25
Thanks, Jeremy. I should have figured that out on my own, but for some reason I was thinking that there was a possibility that my kit lens already took the 1.5x factor into the settings.

What you say makes sense about the 50mm ending up being a bit long for general use, and that's what I was afraid of. I guess the best thing for me to do is to set my kit lens at 50mm and see how often I'd use it. Portraits seems like a no-brainer. Thanks for the reply.[/quote]

_________________
Sony A300; DT 18-70mm; SAL 75-300mm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 8:53 pm 
Good plan on setting your kit lens to 50mm to see how it feels.

Also forget about the crop factor and what it means. Get used to how 18mm, or 50mm etc feels on your camera. You only need to start to use the crop factor if you keep switching between this camera and a full frame one, which im guessing your not doing


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 8:55 pm 
Ps for a walk around lens, the sigma 30mm f1.4 may be your best bet :)


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 9:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:06 pm
Posts: 25
You're right. I'm definitely not going between APS-C and full frame. I'm just a consumer with a desire for more versatility. That's why I bought an entry level DSLR.

That Sigma lens looks really cool, but I'm not too wild about the price. I'm going to keep my eyeballs open for a used one. One thing I've quickly found out is that photography can get as costly as collecting cars!! It takes discipline to avoid being tempted into spending a fortune.

_________________
Sony A300; DT 18-70mm; SAL 75-300mm


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed May 19, 2010 9:16 pm 
Ah sorry, didnt think the sigma would be that much. The nikon equivalent is only £150 and sigma lenses are normally about half the price. Thats weird :?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 20, 2010 10:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:59 pm
Posts: 6009
Location: The Netherlands
Mind you, the sigma has a LOT of glass inside of it compared to the nikon 35mm F/1.8. Plus the 5mm wider makes it tough to to produce a fast lens. And did I mention the F/1.4 aperture? ;)

_________________
I take pictures so quickly, my highschool was "Continuous High".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:23 pm
Posts: 825
Location: Boca Raton, FL, USA
I've got the 50mm F1.7 and the Sigma 30mm F1.4. I agree that the Sigma 30 is more what the Minolta 50mm was originally designed to be as a prime lens - that 50mm focal length without a crop factor is fairly good for overall walkaround photography, but at 75mm it does become more of a specialized lens for portrait, closeup, or low light work. The Sigma 30mm I can use more as a walkaround lens.

However, for the money I'd definitely recommend picking up the 50mm F1.7. It is quite sharp and usable wide open, which really for me speaks to its primary use - for low light/high ISO shooting. And stopped down, it is razor sharp. It focuses fast, isn't really prone to any CA, and is a pretty decent portrait lens with nice bokeh. At $60-100, it's an easy purchase to justify, even if eventually you end up picking up the Sigma 30mm or something similar.

_________________
Justin Miller
Sony DSLR-A580 / Sony 18-250mm / Minolta 50mm F1.7 / Sigma 30mm F1.4 / Tamron 10-24mm / Tamron 150-600mm / Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro / Minolta 300mm F4 APO
Sony A6000 / 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 / 55-210mm F4-6.3 / 10-18mm F4 / 35mm F1.8 / 16mm F2.8 / via manual adapter, lots of Pentax K mount, Konica K/AR mount, and Leica M mount manual lenses

Galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 21, 2010 6:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:06 pm
Posts: 25
Quote:
I've got the 50mm F1.7 and the Sigma 30mm F1.4. I agree that the Sigma 30 is more what the Minolta 50mm was originally designed to be as a prime lens - that 50mm focal length without a crop factor is fairly good for overall walkaround photography, but at 75mm it does become more of a specialized lens for portrait, closeup, or low light work. The Sigma 30mm I can use more as a walkaround lens.

However, for the money I'd definitely recommend picking up the 50mm F1.7. It is quite sharp and usable wide open, which really for me speaks to its primary use - for low light/high ISO shooting. And stopped down, it is razor sharp. It focuses fast, isn't really prone to any CA, and is a pretty decent portrait lens with nice bokeh. At $60-100, it's an easy purchase to justify, even if eventually you end up picking up the Sigma 30mm or something similar.


I have to agree. For the money it's very hard to go wrong. Not sure I'm willing to spend over $400 for the Sigma just yet, but it sounds like with the Minolta, you can't really go wrong. Worst case scenario - you don't use it and you sell it for what you paid for it.

_________________
Sony A300; DT 18-70mm; SAL 75-300mm


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group