Save An Extra 15% On All Regatta Clearance Jackets & Coats use code: JACKET15
Which is better? Fightttt!!!
I have been using a Sony Alpha 75-300 lens but lucky enough to have been given a Minolta 100-300mm zoom that just oozes quality to the point where I am thinking of ditching the Sony lens. Is this wise?
First off - I am darn jealous of your wolfshots lovely animals and shots - was it a wild encounter or an enclosure?
As to the lenses if you find the 100-300mm is giving you higher quality image results than your 75-300mm and the 100-300mm works in all regards on your camera then by all means ditch the worse lens and use the other.
As to the lenses if you find the 100-300mm is giving you higher quality image results than your 75-300mm and the 100-300mm works in all regards on your camera then by all means ditch the worse lens and use the other.
You're in a perfect position to find out for yourself. Stick a newspaper on the wall...set the lens up parallel to the wall and photograph it at wide middle and long end of the zoom range shooting at all apertures and compare each...the better lens will have more detail in the edges and the white of the paper will be the same tone right into the edges.
Also try pointing into the sun to see which is best for flare.
Also try pointing into the sun to see which is best for flare.
As well as carrying out your own test, you might find that the lens reviews to be found at www.dyxum.com are helpful to your decision making process.
Quote:set the lens up parallel to the wall
???
Methinks you mean 90 Degrees to the wall
Quote:that just oozes quality to the point
To the point of what exactly...?
Are we talking optical quality, Or the build quality?
Surely the answer is keep the lens, That produces the best images.
Simples....
Quote:I am darn jealous of your wolfshots
Nice for sure, But none of them have been produced with the Minolta lens.
A couple from a Sigma 600mm, Quite nice but a tad over sharpened perhaps, And a couple from the Sony lens with a convertor, Also quite nice...!!!
Quote:Quote:
A couple from a Sigma 600mm, Quite nice but a tad over sharpened perhaps
I forgot to mention I had the iso setting at 1600 giving a slightly grainy effect. Not a result of over-sharpening
When in doubt I always search for truly impartial judgement
Ha Ha love it!!
Obviously ought to take into account size and weight too, maximum aperture and how well it actually performs when wide open.
I have a lot of the older Minolta lenses which are often superb for basic quality and IQ, but they're unlikely to have modern digital coatings which means more colour abberations (and extensively at wide apertures), they tend to have longer minimum focus distances and they're unlikely to have the 'D' functionality to register focus distance and help with flash use.
And be careful when you check dyxum.com; from memory they made several 100-300mm lenses, and one of them was considerably better than the others.
Tim
I have a lot of the older Minolta lenses which are often superb for basic quality and IQ, but they're unlikely to have modern digital coatings which means more colour abberations (and extensively at wide apertures), they tend to have longer minimum focus distances and they're unlikely to have the 'D' functionality to register focus distance and help with flash use.
And be careful when you check dyxum.com; from memory they made several 100-300mm lenses, and one of them was considerably better than the others.
Tim
