|
|
Sony 70-200mm F/2.8 and 300mm F/2.8 far too expensive with the entry level A100.
As I've said in my "about" page, I'm a former Minolta user, with a stock pile of lenses, so I naturally went with Sony when they took over after Konica Minolta bailed out of the Photo Imaging business just a couple of months after the purchase of my Konica Minolta 5D. My gripe is that Sony only offers a 70-200mm F/2.8 tele-zoom, no F/4, and a 300mm F/2.8, no F/4. Adding the F/4 option would lower the price significantly, the F/2.8 lenses are way over priced compared to Canon or Nikon. Plus, they offer only one camera choice. Apparently, reading from the latest PMA show, Sony has some "professional" cameras coming out in the near future. They say they want to take a chunk out of the hides of Canon and Nikon. With the current camera and lens lineup, I'd say Sony is currently sitting at the bottom of the barrel. Olympus has announced the new E-1 replacement and Pentax has a contender for the Canon 30D and Nikon D200 with it's weather sealed prosumer K10D. So let's look at what happened in less than two years after the bail-out to the prices of re-badged Minolta or Konica Minolta High-end Telephoto f/2.8 lenses. About two years ago I could've purchased a new 70-200mm F/2.8 G Minolta lens for around $1800 over the Internet. Today, with a Sony name It costs $2300 over the Internet. Keep in mind there is no image stabilization built in the lens, there's a CCD shift type system in the camera. The only other Telephoto F/2.8 lens is the 300mm or SAL-300F28G as Sony calls it, and it retails for $5999, $ I can only assume these lenses are in the same league quality-wise as the Canon or Nikon, which sell for significantly less. Let's look at the Internet prices below. Sony 70-200mm F/2.8G $ Canon 70-200mm F/2.8L IS $1700 Crop factor 1.6X On APS-C, Image stabilization. Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8G VR $1700 Crop factor 1.5X On APS-C, Vibration reduction. Olympus 35-100 F/2.0 $2200 Crop factor 2.0X F/2 lens, one stop faster, no image stab. Sony 300mm F/2.8G $ Canon 300mm F/2.8L IS $3900 Nikon 300mm F/2.8G VR $4500 Olympus 300mm F/2.8 $5699 Equal to 600mm on the 4/3 system. Pentax 300mm F/2.8 $5100 Sony users have only one practical choice, go with an aftermarket supplier, like Sigma or Tamron. Let's check the prices for the two lenses above. Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 $800 Tamron 70-200mm F/2.8 $N/A Sigma 300mm F/2.8 $2500 Tamron 300mm F/2.8 $2900 Again, I assume the above lenses are respectable in optical quality, being close to the Canon or Nikon, though I wouldn't expect the same in build quality. I don't have any of the lenses listed, but I may bite on a 70-200mm F/2.8 Sigma in the future. Here's something to consider. You can buy a Sony 300mm F/2.8G lens for $6000 at the Sony store, or, you can go out and buy a Canon Image stabilized 300mm F/2.8L for $3900, and a Canon 5D for a budget Internet price of $2100, or a Canon 30D for $1100 and a 70-200mm F/2.8L non-IS lens for $1200. Let that burn in the back of your head for awhile Sony users. I can only assume Sony will eventually gear up and offer a professional level camera of some sort to go along with the overpriced lenses. If you're going to penny-pinch and get an entry-level Sony A100, why would you go out and spend $2300 on a decent tele-zoom? On a final note, I'm not saying the Sony A100 isn't any good, it is, and I'm pretty happy with it. But.......If I had to do it over again, assuming I had no lenses, I'd probably look at the variety and cost of lenses from the major manufacturers, especially if you plan to take your Photography to the next level, then make a decision. Right now it might not be Sony. Canon looks real good. |