LHR101 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2010, 5 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 1 month 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3981 times:
I was thinking about buying a Tamron 70-300mm but wile browsing i found a Sony 75-300 with a 50 pound cash back from sony, both lenses are the same price (excluding the cash back) so is much of a differances between them?
dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1773 posts, RR: 10
Reply 1, posted (5 years 1 month 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3936 times:
What camera do you have? A300?
I'd suggest skipping both of those lenses and instead try to find an old Minolta 70-210 f/4 Beercan or Minolta 75-300 "Big Beercan." Both are from the same first era of AF glass and are quite good. Though they are used, you will be happy with their quality of build and optical quality too. Going prices for a used beercan are around $175 USD and a big beercan about $250. Not sure how that'd translate into pounds on eBay.
The el cheapo Sony 75-300 is actually the same lens as the Tamron 75-300. I'd avoid both.
karel From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2008, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 1 month 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3765 times:
I have a Minolta 75-300, had it for years but even though I found it ok for slides it seemed to produce very soft digital images at 300mm. Even at f7-8. Ihave just replaced it with a 150-500. It was better at around 150-250mm.
Best wishes Charlie
MHO From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 210 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3074 times:
I have a Sigma 75-300, and had the Sony SAL75300. I was very disappointed with the Sony lens, by the way. It had worse CA than the Sigma lens, especially at the high end of zoom. The Sigma has a problem with the focus gear stripping when used with the Sony alpha cameras. It's happened to me, and the photo forums have several similar stories.
I just found a Minolta APO lens, 100-300 on EBAY for $177. By the way, thanks for the lens advice, DVINCENT. Now I am testing it out.