Alive and kicking

It's been 6 months since I last posted on this blog! Why so long?

Well, as my last post described I had a bit of gear trouble, which took a couple of months to work through. My Sony a57's sensor was out of alignment, resulting in blurry images no matter what I did (unless the camera was focused to infinity). The camera store was really good about working this out with me (thanks Greg and the team at Photo & Video in Christchurch). They tried to find me another a57 (or equivalent) to replace the faulty camera - since it wasn't really worth repairing the sensor alignment issue.

Anyhoo - long story short - they couldn't find me a replacement, so I took my Olympus E-M1 back (with two Panasonic kit lenses). I dived back into micro four thirds, and even started a new Wordpress blog about it. So I may not have been writing about photography on this blog, but I have been writing on another.

So why this new post here? What gives?

Greymouth Street Races 2022. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

A few reasons spring to mind -

A) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

B) the Wordpress experiment didn't go all that well. I didn't really enjoy Wordpress as a platform.

C) things are starting to happen again in my photography sphere, and I want to write about them.

and D) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

First things first, you'll notice that the above image, of last weekends (as I write this) street races, wasn't taken on my Olympus E-M1. I still have the Sony a99. And I still enjoy using it. And I still have access to some fantastic lenses for it. So no - I still haven't given up on using the Sony A-mount system. Things have, in fact, got even more muddy in those waters recently. Let me explain....

No.74. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1250th, ISO 200

Stewart - my photographer friend who I can borrow all this Sony gear from (hi Stew), called me recently and asked if I was still interested in using the Sony A-Mount gear. He has moved over fully to Sony E-Mount now, and was wondering whether I wanted his A-Mount gear!

That would be a YES!

We left it at that, but with the Greymouth Street Races coming up, I had an excuse to spend a full day on photography (a rarity). I got back in touch with Stewart and asked if he might have any telephoto lenses I could borrow for the a99. A couple of days before the event Stew turned up at my house with a bag full of lenses and proceeded to hand them to me. Two stood out as useful - a Minolta 100-400mm APO f4.5/6.7 and a Sigma 180mm f3.5 macro. But he also 'gave' me a Minolta 100mm macro (fungi photography here I come!), a Minolta 28-75mm f2.8D (gorgeous), and a beautiful Minolta 85mm f1.4.

See what I mean about being able to get good glass for the Sony A-Mount system! There's no way I could afford to get the equivalent lenses for my Olympus - or any other system, for that matter. I feel very blessed, and very spoilt. But I can't lie, I'm also now a little confused.

No.99. Sony a99 with Minolta 100-400mm APO. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 640

I've written before on this blog about how much I enjoy using the Sony a99. It's a full-frame beast of a camera, with a tonne of great features, and is a joy to use. But, (there's that but) I've also said that it isn't a camera body that I could base a system around, given that it's had a lot of professional use and is certainly nearing the end of its rated lifespan. So I would need to get another, lighter used a99, or similar, to seriously consider it as my new system going forward.

And there in lies the rub.

For some reason, Sony users here in New Zealand who have mint condition a99's, expect ridiculous prices for them. Far more (and I mean FAR more) than I would expect to have to pay for one. I know they are a good camera, but come on people...

And it doesn't stop their either. I would also consider getting an a77 - their top A-mount APSC body, if not for the fact that it too tends to fetch crazy-stupid prices on the secondhand market. What is it with these Sony users?

No.54. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200 

I guess I'll just have to bide my time and wait for something to come along at the right price? I'm sure it will? 

And even though the Sony A-Mount is a 'dead-end' (discontinued a year ago by Sony), for me it's practically the ideal camera system. I love the weight and feel of a traditional DSLR, but I also really love the 'new' technology that includes electronic viewfinders. The Sony SLT (single lens translucent) technology has both.

I think at this point I'd be crazy not to be thinking about going down the Sony A-Mount route. With my Olympus E-M1, I have the camera body and two Panasonic kit lenses. That's it. With the Sony A-Mount, I have the full-frame a99 (admittedly on its last legs), a Minolta 28-75mm f/2.8D, Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5D, Minolta 16mm f/2.8 fisheye, Minolta 50mm f/2.8 macro, Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro, Minolta 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 Apo, and last, but by no means least, a Minolta 85mm f1.4. See what I mean.

If I sell my Olympus E-M1 kit, I still won't have enough for a used a77 or a99. Not without selling some other gear, or subsidising the purchase some other way. Like getting money from doing some photography. Which I will be doing shortly 😄

BTW - my next post will be about my day spent using the a99 and various lenses to actually take the street race images that accompany this post. It was an enlightening experience. But that's a story for next time...

Testing the Sony SAL75300 and Sony SAL18250 lenses

a57 with 75-300. f/8 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

I have continued to persevere with bird photography now that I have the Sony a57 and SAL75300 lens. On an APS-C sensor that equates to a 450mm equivalent fov (field of view), so I can get reasonably close to the wildlife.

But I can't say that I have been blown away by the performance of the Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lens. It's certainly not 'tack' sharp (or even close) at the 300mm end - which is exactly where you want to be if you buy a telephoto lens. 

Case-in-point - the other evening I went back down to my local lagoon and followed a Grey Heron around for about an hour. He slowly became used to my presence, and so I got reasonably close. I managed to get some decent poses, fairly close up, but the light was low, so I had to crank the ISO up (again). I've had to do this on both occasions now and I'm beginning to think that the high ISO's are contributing to the overall 'softness' I'm experiencing with this lens?

Of the 250-ish images I shot of the grey heron, I kept just four. All the rest were just too soft. And the four I kept only just snuck through.

So I decided that on the next sunny day, I was going to go out in the middle of the afternoon, in bright conditions, and test the lens at ISO 100. On a tripod. With a 2 second delay on the shutter. At all focal lengths and apertures. Just to see what this lens is really capable of in a 'best case' scenario. So that's what I did this weekend.

And while I was at it, I thought I'd test the SAL18250 at the same time. Just - ya know - because. So sit back, relax, get a beverage, and lets find out how good(?) these two lenses are...

Greymouth Wharf from Cobden. Sony a57 with SAL75300. f/8 @ 1/250th, ISO 100 (at 135mm)

Looking across to the Greymouth Wharf area from Cobden Lagoon is a great place to do these kinds of telephoto lens tests. First because there's plenty of space to set up your tripod, second because it provides lots of details and contrast to lock in on, and third because it's only five minutes from my house 😆

I set up as outlined above; on a tripod, with 2 second timer, central focus point (yes, I auto-focused because that's what I do 99% of the time in real-world shooting conditions), steady shot off (because I'm on a tripod) and aperture priority mode so I could speed up the process, since I would be working through all the apertures at every focal point marked on the lens barrel. Easy...

After I had all the images, I opened them in Lightroom, looked through each set of f/stops for each focal length I shot at, and chose the sharpest of the set. The lenses 'sweet spot' at that focal length, if you will. Below, are the results.

The selections above are all central crops at 100%, made in Photoshop, with my 'normal' sharpening applied (Unsharp Mask Filter applied at 125%, Raduis 1, Threshold 0). It might be difficult to make out what's happening from a low-res internet image, so I'll just tell you what I found....

The Sony SAL75300 lens (at least my copy of it), is soft at 75mm across the aperture range - with f/16 being somewhat presentable. But this isn't a lens I will be shooting at the 75mm end. Period 

From 100mm through to about 250mm, the lens is what I would call 'acceptably' sharp from f/5.6 to f/11 - with f/8 more than likely being the sweet spot. Images within this aperture and focal range are sharp, without being 'tack' sharp. This lens never really manages tack sharp.

At 300mm there is a fall-off in overall sharpness again, although not as bad as at the 75mm end (where it really is horrendous). At the 300mm focal length, f/5.6 to f/8 is 'reasonably' sharp, but I would stick to the 100 - 250mm range for better performance if I could. The lens has other issues at 300mm as well, exhibiting high levels of purple fringing. This is very evident at f/5.6, becoming better (although not completely gone) at f/8. Even with 'Remove Chromatic Aberrations' ticked in Lightroom's lens correction tab.

I thought that maybe the 16MP sensor of the a57 wasn't doing the SAL75300 any favours, and it may perform better on the full-frame 24MP sensor of the a99? So, of course, I tested this theory as well.

Once again, I'll decipher the low-res findings for you...

Basically, nothing changes. Apart for the fact that the a57 crop sensor is producing a slightly bigger fov for equivalent focal lengths - the actual sharpness remains relatively the same. Yes, the a99 is ever so slightly 'cleaner' (ISO 50 compared to ISO 100), and maybe a hair sharper? Maybe. But nothing that makes it shockingly different.

So bottom line with the Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (SAL75300); don't shoot at 75mm (at all), stick between 100-250mm and between f/5.6 to f/11 (let's just call it f/8 shall we?), and you should get 'acceptably' sharp results. Depending, of course, on your idea of 'sharpness'.

Cobden Lagoon. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/8 @ 1/400th, ISO 100 (at 18mm)

Ok. So having established that the SAL75300 is really a 100-250mm, lets tackle the 18-250mm super zoom shall we!?

The SAL18250 is another one of those lenses that gets a bad rap from some reviewers. Actual users, on the other hand, often have some good things to say about this lens. Let's find out for ourselves.

Same process as above for the 75-300mm lens, although I changed position slightly so that there would be some interesting foreground in the image. Going through the apertures and focal lengths on this lens, what did I find?

Deciphering the above from what I see full-screen on my desktop computer at home, there's some good news if you want to use this lens as a pseudo landscape lens (as I do).

From 18mm up to 70mm, the lens performs very well in terms of sharpness - from f/5.6 to f/11. I wouldn't hesitate to use any combinations of the above. 18mm up to 35mm is even sharp through to f/16, which is a great result for us landscape photographers. Lens correction at the extreme 18mm end works well in Lightroom, and the corners are also nice and sharp. So at the 'wide' end of the lens, I'm very happy.

From 100mm up things change slightly. At 100mm sharpness is good from f/5.6 to f/8, and at 200mm from f/6.3 to f/8. At the extreme telephoto end of 250mm, only f/8 is what I would call 'acceptably' sharp.

So again, the good news for this lens, as a walk-around/travel/do-it-all superzoom, is that if you lock the aperture down at f/8, then practically all your images will be sharp. And if you want to use it as a landscape lens at the wider ends, then you have a great range of f/stops and focal lengths to choose from (up to about 100mm).

All-in-all I think this is a great result, and I'm well pleased with the SAL18250. 

I'm less pleased with the SAL75300, due to the less than impressive performance at 300mm (and 75mm). So does that mean I should just use the SAL18250 for everything and leave the 75-300mm at home?

Actually - no. Because again, based on my testing, the SAL75300 is a decent performer from 100mm to about 250mm. And the SAL18250 is an excellent performer from 18mm to about 100mm. Can you see the synergy here? The 75-300mm picks up where the 18-250mm leaves off. So effectively, with both lenses, I have decent (to sometimes excellent) performance from 18 to 250mm using both lenses. I did, of course test this theory out as well...

Hopefully you can clearly see that the SAL75300 is sharper from 100mm to 250mm than the SAL18250. Which means that it is still worth keeping both lenses, and taking both with me when I go out. If the 75-300mm lens was a big, heavy beast, then I'd think twice about bringing it. But it's not (it's only 460grams).

Am I disappointed with the lenses performance at 300mm? Yes, I am. And if I had the money, I would be changing it for either the Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 or the Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM lens - both of which would, I believe, be infinitely better.

But I don't (have the money), so the Sony SAL75300, confined to shooting between 100 to 250mm, and from f/5.6 to f/8, will have to do during the meanwhile...

Sorry for the long post - and thanks for sticking with me this far (if you have). But it's a good, and important, exercise to do for yourself if you want to get the best out of your lenses. No matter what they might be. Lens testing doesn't have to be about boring test charts and brick walls. Get out in your natural environment and do some 'real-world' testing. I find this is always the best kind of testing. And the results may surprise, delight, or upset you!? 😄

__________________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE: 15/04/22

Take all of the above with a grain of salt... 

I have recently discovered that my a57 isn't focusing properly - the sensor is probably out of alignment. So my overall impression of 'softness' is not surprising - and therefore all of the above is probably somewhat invalid!

It's official - the Sony a57 is on its way

The deal is done...

I am now the proud owner of a Sony a57 SLT (single lens translucent) digital camera.

I sent my Olympus gear over to Christchurch this weekend past (thanks Levi for taking it for me), to be assessed for trade-in. Initially I was excited by a Fuji X-T20 body (see previous post here), but quickly realised I would get much more bang-for-my-buck if I went the Sony route (and I'm all for bang-for-my-buck!). You can read more about that here.

Late last evening (as I write this) I was contacted by the camera store owner who gave me a very good price for my Olympus gear (thanks Greg), and who also said the Fuji X-T20 was still waiting there for me! In the interim, I had been discussing other options with another member of his staff (hi Adam), and had come to the conclusion that the a57 was the one for me. This conversation obviously hadn't been passed on to the boss - who had even refused a sale for the X-T20 because he believed I wanted it. A quick email later, and I had outlined to Greg what I actually wanted as a trade-in for my micro four thirds gear. But how was I going to make it all happen?

My son is currently studying at the University of Canterbury (starting his second year in Computer Engineering), and Levi (who had picked up my camera gear in Greymouth) is one of his flatmates. So now Josh had my camera gear, and took it in today (as I write) to do the deal. I had outlined to him exactly what I had told Greg in my email of the previous evening, and had already received a reply from the store indicating that all would be ready when Josh got there. The stars were aligning.

Early this afternoon, I got a text from Josh saying he had the gear, and then about 10 minutes later I received an email from Greg at the store indicating the same. He also said that he had thrown in a spare battery (thanks Greg), and that I even had money left over that they would be happy to put into my bank account if I supplied them with a number. Which I immediately did. Wow! All this and money left over! How cool is that!?

So what am I actually getting, you may ask? What did I manage to score for my trade-in?

Well of course for a start there's the Sony SLT a57 body, with charger and batteries (x2). But it also came as a kit, together with the Sony DT 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 super-zoom lens (see above). This will be an absolutely perfect walk-around lens that will probably be on the camera 80% of the time. At least whenever I'm capturing 'daily' life. Yes, I know that the f/3.5-6.3 variable aperture is fairly slow. But it was on my Olympus 12-50mm kit lens as well, and I loved that lens for its versatility. And optically it wasn't bad either.

The Sony DT 18-250mm (SAL18250) is an incredibly versatile lens - ranging as it does from 27-375mm in focal length (35mm full-frame equivalent). I will, of course, test it out once it is my hot little hands. It may not be a 'stellar' performer, but it also might not be that bad? I've tested the Canon 18-55mm kit lens before against an 'L' lens, and the 18-55 held its own admirably. So we shall see.

Add to this the Sony 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 - another 'kit' lens that was cheap, but fills a niche that I like to have filled in my bag. I've written a few times before that I'm not a big telephoto shooter, but when I need it, I need it (if you get what I mean). I already know that this lens will be 'soft' wide open at 300mm. So guess what. I won't shoot it wide open at 300m 😆

With a 112-450mm focal length (in 35mm terms), as with the 18-250mm, it has a pretty impressive range. I'm sure that the 75-300mm will perform better than the 18-250 at the 200-250mm end (although that remains to be seen), so I've got it for two reasons. First because it was cheap 😂 And Second, because it will be the lens that I reach for when I want/need that extreme 450mm focal length (birds,sports,wildlife etc). I could be wrong, but I'm betting that the Sony 75-300mm will be 'good enough' for what I need it to do? Again, testing will be done.

Finally, it will all come in a Tenba 10L Solstice Sling backpack - in black. The Solstice is also second hand, but from what I can tell from the listing on their site, the only thing wrong is that it's missing its rain cover. Which I never use. So no big deal...

I wanted a sling-style backpack for the Sony gear, especially if I decide to carry most (or all) of it with me on a trip. The sling style backpacks are hugely versatile - offering the carrying convenience of a backpack, with the ease and accessibility of a messenger bag. When you get to somewhere you want to take a photo, simply 'sling' the bag around to the front for easy access to your camera. Ingenious! I used to have a Lowepro Sling backpack and loved it. So I'm looking forward to using the Tenba.

So there you have it. A camera, two lenses, and a backpack - plus change... Not a bad trade-in deal if you ask me.

The final stroke of luck... Macey's parents (my son Joshua's other flatmate) are going to Christchurch this coming weekend, and can bring the Sony gear back with them. So I haven't had to pay courier fees to get the gear there, or back again! Brilliant. It will mean that I don't get the gear until after this coming weekend - but never mind. Until then at least I've still got the Sony a99 to get along with. Not a bad fill-in option...

Sony a57. Does the 'head' finally win?

I wrote in a previous post (here) about my desire to change systems and shake things up a bit in my photography. In that post, I concluded that my 'head' said I should go with a Sony a57, while my 'heart' really wanted the Fujifilm X-T20. And usually in these scenarios, my heart wins...

But not, I think, this time. This time, I might actually do the 'right' thing? I might actually go with the wiser option, and get the Sony a57. It's looking very likely...

Why is the a57 the wiser option? For a few reasons actually. First, if I did opt for the Fujifilm X-T20, then I would be purchasing the body only, and then having to source a lens elsewhere. For the money I would have left over after purchasing the more expensive X-T20 body, I could probably only afford the basic 16-50mm XC kit lens. So, in essence, I'd be trading in an Olympus E-M1 + grip, with 12-35mm f2.8, 40-150mm 4/4-5.6 and external flash - and getting an X-T20 with cheap kit lens as a replacement. Not very wise...

If, however, I opt for the Sony a57, then it already comes with a Sony 18-250mm super-zoom (not a stellar lens, but hey, better than nothing) for less than the price of the X-T20 body-only! I can probably also squeeze in a Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 as well, depending on how much they offer me for my Olympus gear. So that's an a57 body, with two lenses, for not much more than the X-T20 body on its own.

And it gets even better! Because, as I think I've previously mentioned, I already have a few stellar Minolta lenses just sitting here waiting to be used on a Sony a-mount body. Exotic lenses like a 16mm fisheye and 50mm macro. The 17-35mm f3.5 'landscape' lens. And a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 Minolta power zoom. Add to these the aforementioned Sony 18-250mm and Tamron 70-300mm, and that's a pretty impressive line-up of glass! As opposed to the 16-50mm XC kit lens for the Fuji (sorry Fuji, no offence intended). 

So really the answer, in the end, is fairly obvious. I just have to go with the Sony a57. Especially if you also add in the fact that I still have a full-frame a99 on-loan, and can probably borrow even more glass to use with the Sony if and when I want.

The more I thought about it, the more my 'head' took over from my 'heart', the more complete and utter sense it made to go with the a57 over the X-T20. I was enamored by the Fuji because it has the 'newer' processor than was in my X-E2 - which means I could use grain settings and the Acros film simulation in-camera. Something I really wanted to be able to do on the X-E2 but couldn't.

But even then, the more I thought about that, the more nervous I became. Do I really want to go down the 'what film simulation will I use today' rabbit-hole!? It's fun - don't get me wrong. But I also found it a huge time-waster when I was using my Fuji's. It tied me up in knots more than once. My life is much simpler without film recipes to be programming.

And then there's the form-factor of the X-T20. It's small. Very small. Similar to the X-T1, but even smaller. And I really didn't like the X-T1. It was too small, too cramped, and I much prefer a more solid (larger) DLSR style camera. A lot like the a57...

The Sony a57, with its translucent mirror technology, also offers the best-of-both-worlds (as far as I'm concerned). DSLR-like handling, yet with mirrorless tech included - like the Tru-Finder evf. OK, so it's not the highest resolution evf you'll ever find, but it's an evf. And I like evf's. I love the ability to see changes in exposure through the viewfinder, in real time, with histogram overlays, levels, focus peaking - the whole works.

Yes, I've changed my mind. Or should I say, I've listened to my mind - and not my heart. If there is one thing that all photographers who have been doing this for a while agree on, it's that glass is king! Camera bodies come and go, but the glass is what makes the photo. Going 'cheaper' with the Sony a57 body makes perfect sense when you consider the lens lineup I already have access to. So it would seem that this time - finally - the 'head' has won.

1000 steps Lockdown Challenge

Like a good portion of the world's population, here in New Zealand we are currently in Lockdown (as I write this) due to the Delta variant of COVID-19. It may be a few weeks more until regulations are relaxed enough for the general population to start mixing and mingling again. Until then, we stay in our 'bubbles', work from home, and go out only to get groceries, or exercise in our own local area.

Shipwreck at Sunset. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 3secs, ISO 400 with ND64

Under the guise of 'exercise', I decided that this time around I would complete a challenge that was circulating a year ago, during the first COVID worldwide Lockdown. Called the '1000 Steps Challenge', it's pretty self-explanatory. Take 1000 steps from your front door, and wherever you end up at the end of those 1000 steps is where you take a photo from. Simple.

At the end of 1000 steps. Photo: Joanna Lorimer, iPhone SE

My wife and I walk around our neighborhood almost daily, so I had a pretty good idea where I might end up after 1000 steps. There is an old shipwreck that emerges on our local beach depending on the weather, tides and time of year. I've seen it from a distance the last few weeks, so I knew that enough of it had emerged to make a good photo. And, if my calculations were right (they were), it would take me about 1000 steps to get there. All I needed were the right weather conditions (outgoing tide and a clear evening) and the challenge was on!

In my last post I wrote about getting my OM-D E-M1 back from repair. I was very excited, and very keen to start shooting with it, using my newly acquired Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 Power OIS. So that's what I took along with me on the photo walk challenge, right?

Nope. I decided, instead, to use the Sony a99 that I still have 'on-loan' from a friend (thanks Stew). I took this for a couple of reasons. First, I loaned it with the intended purpose of trying it out, and I haven't yet done so. I've only really used it a couple of times. So I thought it was time to actually start getting to grips with the a99 in a real 'out-in-the-field' type landscape test.

And second, I thought that I might like to go quite wide (turns out I was wrong), and use the Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 G lens on the a99, at the wider 17mm end. Since the a99 uses a full frame digital sensor, I was going to be able to utilise the full 17mm ultra-wide focal length of the lens. It's also considered a very sharp, premium landscape lens for the Sony/Minolta system. What landscape photographer in their right mind wouldn't want to try that kind of combination out?

So that's what I decided to take with me to complete the 1000 Steps Lockdown Challenge. And I'm glad that I did, although I didn't end up shooting at the ultra-wide 17mm end of the lens. In fact, due to the level of the outgoing tide, I shot almost exclusively at the 35mm end of the lens - something I could have easily done with my E-M1. Oh well, nevermind....

Abandoned Ship. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 G. f/11 @ 1.3secs, ISO 400. ND64

How did the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f3.5G combination perform? In a word, outstandingly. It is, as I've already suggested, a fantastic landscape photography kit. I'd be more than happy to lug it around with me to capture all of my landscape photography. It's a superbly capable system, that captures detailed images, with some features that I really appreciate.

First the lens. The Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G was one of Minolta's premium pro-level 'G' lenses. Something I guess Sony continued with their 'G' master range of premium lenses.

As a pro level lens, the 17-35mm has; a constant aperture of f/3.5, uses internal focusing, has aspherical lenses and uses anomalous dispersion (AD) glass elements to control distortion (somewhat), comes with a large (plastic) petal lens hood, and is solidly constructed. Autofocus on the a99 is decently fast - certainly more than fast enough for an ultra-wide landscape lens, and seems very accurate from the images I have taken with it so far. The lens also has a focus hold button, which can be re-programmed to a depth of field button if you would prefer. Filter size is 77mm - fairly large, but fortunately a filter size that I have a decent selection of filters for. The front element does not rotate when focusing, making it ideal for using polarisers or filter systems. All very positive.

Are there things I don't like about the lens? Well, for a start, it's definitely a full-frame lens. Not that it won't work in APS-C camera bodies, because it certainly will. But why would you, when on an APS-C camera it has a fairly limited 25.5 to 52.5mm focal range (in full frame terms)? I would never consider using this on an APS-C camera as a general carry-around lens. Because of the limited focal range just mentioned, and because of the other negative factor of this lens - its weight.

At 600grams the 17-35mm is a bit of a chunky-monkey. Which is not really surprising considering it's large front element, metal construction and solid build. It's also not weather sealed, which is a bit of a glaring omission for a lens that was most likely targeted at landscape photographers. For an extra few dollars in manufacturing costs, I can't for the life of me understand why Minolta didn't weather-seal this lens? Especially since it was rather pricey when it was first released (over $2200US in today's dollars).

It is also said to have very soft corners at all focal lengths wide-open at f3.5. I say 'said to have', because I haven't tested this myself. As a landscape lens, I don't imagine I'll ever shoot it wide open. And at f/8 to f/11, where I would most often likely to be with this lens, the corners look plenty sharp enough for me.

The other area where the lens is often reported to have a few 'issues' is in flaring and ghosting. With a 77mm filter thread, there's a lot of real estate on that front element, so it may not be surprising that flare can be an issue with the lens.

Having said that, the image opposite (and several others on the night) was obviously taken directly into the sun (something I really don't do all that often) and stopped down to f/22 to produce the starburst. I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the results. And these were taken with no lens hood attached. Yes, there is a little ghosting in the image - but this is a pretty extreme example, and I think it actually handled ghosting extremely well. And as for flaring? Again, not so much. I'm more than happy with the results, shooting directly into the sun - again, not something I do often.

These results may, or may not have anything to do with Minolta apparently updating the front element coatings on later models of this lens. Earlier models are said to have an orange tint, while later coatings were more bluish? My copy of the lens actually looks more orange than blue, but it's also difficult to tell. But be that as it may, I'm not unhappy with either flare or ghosting from the results I've seen using this lens thus far. On the whole, I'd give the lens 4 out of 5 stars (on full frame).

Skeletal remains. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 2.5 secs. ISO 200 ND64

And finally, thoughts on the Sony a99.

I've talked a little about it before here, but basically it's a beast of a camera, with a beautiful 24.3MP full-frame sensor housed in a very rugged (and weather-sealed) magnesium alloy body. It is part of Sony's SLT line, which stands for Single Lens Transparent. Unlike traditional SLR digital cameras that use a prism mirror and optical viewfinder for viewing, the Sony SLT system has a semi-transparent pellicle mirror and electronic viewfinder. The semi-transparent fixed mirror diverts a portion of the incoming light to a phase-detection autofocus sensor, with the remaining light passing through to strike the digital image sensor placed directly behind. The image sensor then feeds a signal to the electronic viewfinder, so that changes in exposure can be seen 'real time' through the viewfinder.

Unlike many 'traditionalists', I actually prefer an electronic viewfinder. The amount of information it can relay, and the benefits of seeing the exposure change while composing the image, more than outweigh any perceived negative viewing experience from an optical viewfinder.

The other visual aid that I love (and I mean LOVE) on the a99 is its amazingly flexible articulating screen. There's almost no angle that this thing can't put itself in, and is certainly the most adjustable rear LCD screen I've ever used. I wish the rear screen on my OM-D E-M1 was this adjustable.

I also appreciate the ISO range of the a99, from ISO 50 all the way up to 25600. Again, I wish the E-M1 sensor was as sensitive, instead of the lowest native ISO 200.

Button placement is excellent on the a99, with a plethora of switches, dials and navigational aids placed in very convenient places. Minolta placed a lot of control of their cameras on the outside, at the photographer's fingertips, and Sony have carried this tradition on in their SLT range. I prefer this approach to camera design. Nikon also has this design philosophy with their DSLR's. Canon not so much... 

Battery life is decent, although with any modern digital camera, I'd carry a couple of spares with me as a matter of course. And, as befitting a flagship model, the a99 has dual card slots (SD), shoots at 10fps, a top shutter speed of 1/8000th (and down to bulb), 1200 zone evaluative metering (as well as spot), and a host of other features. Oh, and yeah, it shoots Full HD video (don't care).

What lurks beneath? Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1.3secs, ISO 400. ND64 

So what's not to like? Well a few 'niggly' things stop me from falling completely head-over-heals for the Sony a99. First is the size and weight. At 733 grams, body-only, it might not be the heaviest camera ever made, but it's far from the lightest either. Add the Minolta 17-35mm lens and you are looking at 1,333 grams. Add a battery, lens hood and filter and you're probably looking at 1.5kgs. Not the end of the world, I admit. But when compared to micro four thirds there is a noticeable weight difference.

Second is the autofocus spread of the a99. It's not that great. There are 19 focus points, and even though Sony calls it a 'wide' focusing area, in reality they are all very centrally located. It's certainly nowhere near as impressive as the latest mirrorless focus offerings, where almost 100% of the viewing area is selectable. Place your subject roughly central and it won't be an issue. But forget selecting focus at the edges of the frame.

And finally, the system as a whole just feels a little bit 'clunky'. Turn the camera on, and the lens clicks, whirs and bangs into life. The same thing happens with older Minolta autofocus film cameras, since the focus motor is built into the body of the camera and comes to life every time you turn the camera on. Focus isn't what you would call deadly quick either, and it certainly isn't silent. It just feels a little 'old-school'. Which I guess, since it was simply ported across from the Minolta camera technology, is exactly what it is.

Would anything that I've mentioned above stop me from using, and enjoying the Sony a99? Of course not! At the end of the day, when you get home and download the RAW images on the computer, what you really should care about are the images it can produce. And as I hope you can see from the photos above, the images it can produce are just beautiful.

It may be a bit 'old-school', it may be a bit clunky, and it may be a bit on the 'heavy' side (please, no fat-shaming here). But everytime I use the Sony a99, I enjoy the experience immensely. In fact, I may have to stop using it. Because I think I might almost be at the point of seriously questioning my choice of camera system!