Maxxum A-Mount on A7-IV

[spudhead]

Cheers for that, yes the 600 is a want but won't buy. I am most likely to go for the 300, it will be perfect for Zoo stuff, as you know, but that 400 is cheap for a really nice lens. Also tempted by the 300 f4, CEX are selling them cheap.

Sorry to keep saying it, I have had the 300 f4 and wish I never sold it mine was good all the way from wide open! My self and my son bought every a-mount minolta we could find when I got back into photography and tested them, non of the primes were disappointing. I will say we also bought the tokina 300 2.8 and the focus speed was so slow, we had the sigma 300 2.8 the white early version and the later version not a patch on the sony and I would bet the minolta ssm 300 would be the same as the sony g1 300 I have and love, that extra light is a massive plus. I have kept the sigma 500 4.5 ex and that is good for reach but for what ever reason sigma never did the sony version with the hsm motor as they did on every other mount I am aware of so great image quality but a bit slower focus. also not that it matters to you the sigma 500 will take the 1.4 and 2x sigma converters on a-mount but weirdly does not read f numbers correctly but the reach even on full frame is crazy.

 

[Brownie]

If you haven't already, I would absolutely poke around Dyxum's lens database if looking at an unknown. The Minolta primes are legendary, so those aren't an issue, but there were a ton of manufacturer's spread across both the Minolta and Sony periods. Who know what you might run into? I'd still like to get the Minolta 500mm mirror, it's one of the higher rated part of the handful of AF mirror lenses. Small and compact, it'd be nice for long reach when traveling.

 

[spudhead]

If you haven't already, I would absolutely poke around Dyxum's lens database if looking at an unknown. The Minolta primes are legendary, so those aren't an issue, but there were a ton of manufacturer's spread across both the Minolta and Sony periods. Who know what you might run into? I'd still like to get the Minolta 500mm mirror, it's one of the higher rated part of the handful of AF mirror lenses. Small and compact, it'd be nice for long reach when traveling.

yep you are right some gems out there, just remember the mirror lens is f8 and there are reports of it not working on the sony non hacked adaptors. take a look at gary freedman on you tube, also brain smith lists loads of adaptors on his site and do and do nots

 

[Brownie]

yep you are right some gems out there, just remember the mirror lens is f8 and there are reports of it not working on the sony non hacked adaptors. take a look at gary freedman on you tube, also brain smith lists loads of adaptors on his site and do and do nots

The older adapters had the mirrors which robbed light while focusing. The 5 doesn't, it focuses like your E mounts straight back to the sensor. According to Sony the 7IV will AF down to f/22. If that's true f/8 wouldn't be a big deal. Odds are it'd only get used on sunny days anyway.

 

[spudhead]

The older adapters had the mirrors which robbed light while focusing. The 5 doesn't, it focuses like your E mounts straight back to the sensor. According to Sony the 7IV will AF down to f/22. If that's true f/8 wouldn't be a big deal. Odds are it'd only get used on sunny days anyway.

yep the reports stopped me buying and trying and we do not get that many sunny days in the uk

 

[Brownie]

This is thinking out loud, would love your opinions.

I'm thinking about thinning the A-Mount heard by several lenses. I have a Tamron 200-500 that will likely never get used and a Tamron 17-50 (I think, I haven't had it out in a while) APS-C lens that are going for sure.

With the Maxxums lenses I have quite a bit of overlap. The first is the 28-135/4-4.5 V 35-105/3.5-4.5. Both nice lenses and both seem about the same in IQ. The 28-135 covers a greater FL but is large and heavy for a lens from that era. The 35-105 is very compact and light by comparison, but of course with a narrower range.

Then the longer zooms. 100-200/4.5 is a great small lens. Lightweight and compact, it would make an excellent companion to the 35-105. The 70-210/4 Beer Can, which is a highly rated lens but not one of my favorite FLs. And last the 75-300/4.5-5.6. The longest of the bunch. Again, IQ on all of these is close enough that I can't discount one over the other. I'm not sure how much I'd use either of these lenses. Either would be a nice companion to the 28-135.

Last is the 50/1.7. The only E-mount prime I currently have is the Samyang 35/1.4, so it gives me a 50 if I need it and stomps all over Sony's E-Mount plastic fantastic, so it stays.

I'm torn between different kits. Since I have everything covered from 17-600 in E-Mount, I don't really NEED any of them for the Sony. But, I have a couple of Maxxum 7000 bodies so I need to keep something around for them too as I still shoot film from time to time.

When the Maxxum was first released in 1985 I bought one with a 50 kit, and eventually added the 35-70 and 100-200. It was a pretty compact setup. I'm kind of thinking along the same lines, sell the larger lenses and keep the 35-105 and 100-200. Then there's part of me that can see me out with a film camera wishing to hell I had something wider than 35. Another option is the 28-135 coupled with the 75-300 for the widest range.

None of these are worth much. I'd likely get $50-60 trade value out of any 3. If I sell outright the Beer Can would bring $45-60 on it's own with the original caps and hood. The thing is, I MUST thin out. I have so many cameras it's ridiculous and I'm running out of room. I have 8 SLR's, 4 Digital SLR/Mirrorless, and about 60 or 70 various cameras in a collection of rangefinders, TLRs, Brownies, Box, P-n-S, etc., all film and most in a showcase. Two camera bodies that will definitely be going are a Minolta SRT-101 since I have 2 and one was inherited from my dad, and the Sony SLT-65A. More than likely one of the Maxxum bodies too.

So, if you were going to narrow down the Maxxum A-Mounts to a small kit that would include the 50, which others would you keep, and why?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Sorry to keep saying it, I have had the 300 f4 and wish I never sold it mine was good all the way from wide open! My self and my son bought every a-mount minolta we could find when I got back into photography and tested them, non of the primes were disappointing. I will say we also bought the tokina 300 2.8 and the focus speed was so slow, we had the sigma 300 2.8 the white early version and the later version not a patch on the sony and I would bet the minolta ssm 300 would be the same as the sony g1 300 I have and love, that extra light is a massive plus. I have kept the sigma 500 4.5 ex and that is good for reach but for what ever reason sigma never did the sony version with the hsm motor as they did on every other mount I am aware of so great image quality but a bit slower focus. also not that it matters to you the sigma 500 will take the 1.4 and 2x sigma converters on a-mount but weirdly does not read f numbers correctly but the reach even on full frame is crazy.

No, this is good info, given that CEX seem to be unaware of what they have and are selling them at £300 or so, which is extremely tempting. Yes I need an LEA4 too, but that's not so bad and puts me in line for other lenses later.

 

[spudhead]

No, this is good info, given that CEX seem to be unaware of what they have and are selling them at £300 or so, which is extremely tempting. Yes I need an LEA4 too, but that's not so bad and puts me in line for other lenses later.

no not lea4 I am sure with the a74r the lea5 gives auto focus with minolta lenses and there are way more focus points on that adaptor the lea 4 has a motor and focus system from one of the old a mount cameras I cannot recall which, its the a9 that the lea5 will not drive the minolta lenses on. just check sony uk or brain smith site I am sure your body is good with both ssm and screw drive on lea5 and a74r

 

[Brownie]

Correct! The RIV is one of the few cameras that can use the LA-EA5. I did the research and posted it twice in this thread.

Which is good for you, it's cheaper and better!

 

[spudhead]

Correct! The RIV is one of the few cameras that can use the LA-EA5. I did the research and posted it twice in this thread.

Which is good for you, it's cheaper and better!

I confirm a lot better

 

[spudhead]

This is thinking out loud, would love your opinions.

I'm thinking about thinning the A-Mount heard by several lenses. I have a Tamron 200-500 that will likely never get used and a Tamron 17-50 (I think, I haven't had it out in a while) APS-C lens that are going for sure.

With the Maxxums lenses I have quite a bit of overlap. The first is the 28-135/4-4.5 V 35-105/3.5-4.5. Both nice lenses and both seem about the same in IQ. The 28-135 covers a greater FL but is large and heavy for a lens from that era. The 35-105 is very compact and light by comparison, but of course with a narrower range.

Then the longer zooms. 100-200/4.5 is a great small lens. Lightweight and compact, it would make an excellent companion to the 35-105. The 70-210/4 Beer Can, which is a highly rated lens but not one of my favorite FLs. And last the 75-300/4.5-5.6. The longest of the bunch. Again, IQ on all of these is close enough that I can't discount one over the other. I'm not sure how much I'd use either of these lenses. Either would be a nice companion to the 28-135.

Last is the 50/1.7. The only E-mount prime I currently have is the Samyang 35/1.4, so it gives me a 50 if I need it and stomps all over Sony's E-Mount plastic fantastic, so it stays.

I'm torn between different kits. Since I have everything covered from 17-600 in E-Mount, I don't really NEED any of them for the Sony. But, I have a couple of Maxxum 7000 bodies so I need to keep something around for them too as I still shoot film from time to time.

When the Maxxum was first released in 1985 I bought one with a 50 kit, and eventually added the 35-70 and 100-200. It was a pretty compact setup. I'm kind of thinking along the same lines, sell the larger lenses and keep the 35-105 and 100-200. Then there's part of me that can see me out with a film camera wishing to hell I had something wider than 35. Another option is the 28-135 coupled with the 75-300 for the widest range.

None of these are worth much. I'd likely get $50-60 trade value out of any 3. If I sell outright the Beer Can would bring $45-60 on it's own with the original caps and hood. The thing is, I MUST thin out. I have so many cameras it's ridiculous and I'm running out of room. I have 8 SLR's, 4 Digital SLR/Mirrorless, and about 60 or 70 various cameras in a collection of rangefinders, TLRs, Brownies, Box, P-n-S, etc., all film and most in a showcase. Two camera bodies that will definitely be going are a Minolta SRT-101 since I have 2 and one was inherited from my dad, and the Sony SLT-65A. More than likely one of the Maxxum bodies too.

So, if you were going to narrow down the Maxxum A-Mounts to a small kit that would include the 50, which others would you keep, and why?

I need to cull my collection as its out of hand and I can not use all the kit I have, I guess we start to by understanding what we pick up and use and that helps with the process. As far as your collection I dont know much about zooms as I have always used primes heavily as my interests are wildlife and birds and that is an expensive road, I guess same applies to you you know what gets the use sorry I can not help much

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Cheers for that, result then. Now, what can I sell to fund my desires? Anyone want a wife?

 

[Brownie]

Cheers for that, result then. Now, what can I sell to fund my desires? Anyone want a wife?

Trade for some A-mounts?

 

[spudhead]

Cheers for that, result then. Now, what can I sell to fund my desires? Anyone want a wife?

I need to sell more than the wife because I want a sony a1 400 2.8 and a600 f4

 

[Brownie]

I think we should stop now, this conversation has the very real possibility of becoming offensive(er).

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I need to sell more than the wife because I want a sony a1 400 2.8 and a600 f4

Well yes, so do I, my wifes not worth 22k Hang on, life insurance is 30k... Hmmm

 

[AlphaWorld]

What's crazy is the amount of workmanship and labor that went into lenses back then, regardless of manufacturer. The design alone would take multiple design engineers months, nowadays a computer does it in fairly short order. Same with grinding the glass, now computers control everything. It's unfortunate for photography as a whole that the very same thing that's making amazing lenses and bodies is killing the industry.

It may be pushing out the craftsmanship, but I wouldn't say it's killing the industry. Some of the new lenses are superb, producing better images than were possible previously (the new tech that Sony has developed for polishing aspheric elements, for example). And getting a consistently high level of quality, as opposed to whether your lens was made by the best person on their best day, or the worst on their worst - I like being able to rely on the quality.

 

[Brownie]

It may be pushing out the craftsmanship, but I wouldn't say it's killing the industry. Some of the new lenses are superb, producing better images than were possible previously (the new tech that Sony has developed for polishing aspheric elements, for example). And getting a consistently high level of quality, as opposed to whether your lens was made by the best person on their best day, or the worst on their worst - I like being able to rely on the quality.

I think you missed the bigger picture. Not just talking about lenses.

Technology is bringing us better/faster products, and at the same time killing the industry through computational photography, cellphones, etc. As technology improves our gear so too does it create obsolescence...sometimes simultaneously.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I think you missed the bigger picture. Not just talking about lenses.

Technology is bringing us better/faster products, and at the same time killing the industry through computational photography, cellphones, etc. As technology improves our gear so too does it create obsolescence...sometimes simultaneously.

Agreed, because to be honest, some of the phone cameras and the software they are using, are frankly astounding really. Yes, for long range wildlife photography or sports they can't compete, but for Macro, Landscape, Street, Architecture, they are often the equal or better of people using traditional equipment, and no need for loads of processing

 

[Cαscαdian]

So I've picked up an EA3 and 100-300apo, hoping for auto aperture but manual focus on an A7.ii body. That's okay, I shoot BiP (ponds).

But what about OS, HSM and other 3rd party A-mount lens automations? Are they SAM enough to focus?

 

[spudhead]

So I've picked up an EA3 and 100-300apo, hoping for auto aperture but manual focus on an A7.ii body. That's okay, I shoot BiP (ponds).

But what about OS, HSM and other 3rd party A-mount lens automations? Are they SAM enough to focus?

Hi I have a large number of a-mount glass and can tell you hsm lenses work if that what you are asking, I am not sure if the a7ii has in body stability but if it has you can set up in body each time you mount a different lens in the camera menu. The lea-4 would give you auto focus with some trade offs

 

[Cαscαdian]

Thanks spud! The 7ii does have IS within, so if the EA3 sends focal length we're set. I have a button for fl assigned, just in case.