Red Daylilies.
I think that this lens is quickly becoming my favorite for flower
portraits.

Canon 16-35mm f2.8L @ 19mm; ISO-100; f11; 1/80-sec
JD

John - Pa. wrote:
Red Daylilies.
I think that this lens is quickly becoming my favorite for flower
portraits.

Canon 16-35mm f2.8L @ 19mm; ISO-100; f11; 1/80-sec
JD



Nice series. Enjoyed seeing flowers from your garden.

Dear John, I am wondering now if it would behoove me to get a lens like this
or a macro one?
I have a Sony A100 SLR & also wondering if the lenses are universal or do I
have to
purchase a Sony lens?
Cheers Wendy (who just points & clicks)

"John - Pa." wrote in message
...
Red Daylilies.
I think that this lens is quickly becoming my favorite for flower
portraits.

Canon 16-35mm f2.8L @ 19mm; ISO-100; f11; 1/80-sec
JD

Hi there Wendy.

Lens mounts are proprietary, so you would need either a Sony Alpha
lens, or a 3rd-party lens with a Sony mount. Some major 3rd-party
manufacturers are Tamron and Sigma among others. To be up-front,
lenses can be very expensive, sometimes more than the camera itself,
and this is why they are make-specific. Manufacturers do this to
lock-you-in to their product line by making you invest lots of money
in lots of proprietary glass.

You may also notice large price differences in different lenses that
appear similar in focal length. This is largely due to materials,
design and construction, and cost is not directly related to focal
length (though it often can be related to max aperture). If you are
just after casual snapshots, then a less expensive lens of the
necessary focal length may be fine. OTOH , if you are pursuing the
highest possible quality, or perhaps want to produce large prints,
then IMO the costlier lenses will often make a noticeable difference.

One resource that you might want to check, if you are not familiar
with it, is
www.dpreview.com.
This is a UK-based site well known in the photography world and
dedicated to doing in-depth technical reviews of all kinds of digital
photography equipment. Under the review for the Sony Alpha 100 there
is a section on lenses and accessories that lists many Sony Alpha lens
models that are available for it. This site has also recently started
direct reviews of specific lenses, and there are a couple of Sony's
already out there (though not all). This site also has a set of
Discussion Forums on many topics, including the Sony SLR's & lenses,
that you can browse as a guest, or ask questions in when you sign-up.
These forums are full of people using your same equipment who could
speak to makes and models directly and they are always full of
opinions, if not wisdom.

I will say generically that the reason that I like this new lens of
mine for flower portraits is that it is a rectilinear (versus
"fish-eye") "Ultra Wide Angle", down to 16mm and this does produce a
very different perspective than my previous wide FL of 24mm. When you
get within a few inches of the subject at this wide FL, like these
daylilies, the perspective emphasizes the foreground subject while
still displaying a good angle-of-view of the background. Although this
can distort a human face oddly, I think that it works nicely for
flowers. I am also impressed with the sharpness of this new lens too
as well as it being very "fast" at f2.8 (producing nice background
blur or "bokeh" seen in Jul3-D). Although I think the results are
quite nice, I also paid quite dearly for this little chunk of glass.

John


On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:20:52 -0700, "Wendy7" wrote:

Dear John, I am wondering now if it would behoove me to get a lens like this
or a macro one?
I have a Sony A100 SLR & also wondering if the lenses are universal or do I
have to
purchase a Sony lens?
Cheers Wendy (who just points & clicks)

Thanks a million for this info, will check out the forums & have used
DpReview.
Have just purchased a video for my Sony hoping the visual will help me.
Cheers Wendy
"John - Pa." wrote in message
...
Hi there Wendy.

Lens mounts are proprietary, so you would need either a Sony Alpha
lens, or a 3rd-party lens with a Sony mount. Some major 3rd-party
manufacturers are Tamron and Sigma among others. To be up-front,
lenses can be very expensive, sometimes more than the camera itself,
and this is why they are make-specific. Manufacturers do this to
lock-you-in to their product line by making you invest lots of money
in lots of proprietary glass.

You may also notice large price differences in different lenses that
appear similar in focal length. This is largely due to materials,
design and construction, and cost is not directly related to focal
length (though it often can be related to max aperture). If you are
just after casual snapshots, then a less expensive lens of the
necessary focal length may be fine. OTOH , if you are pursuing the
highest possible quality, or perhaps want to produce large prints,
then IMO the costlier lenses will often make a noticeable difference.

One resource that you might want to check, if you are not familiar
with it, is
www.dpreview.com.
This is a UK-based site well known in the photography world and
dedicated to doing in-depth technical reviews of all kinds of digital
photography equipment. Under the review for the Sony Alpha 100 there
is a section on lenses and accessories that lists many Sony Alpha lens
models that are available for it. This site has also recently started
direct reviews of specific lenses, and there are a couple of Sony's
already out there (though not all). This site also has a set of
Discussion Forums on many topics, including the Sony SLR's & lenses,
that you can browse as a guest, or ask questions in when you sign-up.
These forums are full of people using your same equipment who could
speak to makes and models directly and they are always full of
opinions, if not wisdom.

I will say generically that the reason that I like this new lens of
mine for flower portraits is that it is a rectilinear (versus
"fish-eye") "Ultra Wide Angle", down to 16mm and this does produce a
very different perspective than my previous wide FL of 24mm. When you
get within a few inches of the subject at this wide FL, like these
daylilies, the perspective emphasizes the foreground subject while
still displaying a good angle-of-view of the background. Although this
can distort a human face oddly, I think that it works nicely for
flowers. I am also impressed with the sharpness of this new lens too
as well as it being very "fast" at f2.8 (producing nice background
blur or "bokeh" seen in Jul3-D). Although I think the results are
quite nice, I also paid quite dearly for this little chunk of glass.

John


On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 13:20:52 -0700, "Wendy7" wrote:

Dear John, I am wondering now if it would behoove me to get a lens like
this
or a macro one?
I have a Sony A100 SLR & also wondering if the lenses are universal or do
I
have to
purchase a Sony lens?
Cheers Wendy (who just points & clicks)