Sony a3000 newbie

[photo trucker]

Well I just dumped a bunch of green on a camera a macro lens from Sony and a tamron 18-270 f/3.5-6.3 lens which apparently is an A mount so now I need an adapter.my question is will the lens work fine with an adapter and will it still work fine with a Sony or other teleconverter attached with the adapter?

[William W]

I cannot advise about the mounts' question either for the lens or for the Tele-Converter: however it will very likely be a fruitless exercise attaching any Tele-Converter to that lens.

Obviously if you want to use a Tele-Converter, you want to (most of the time?) use longer than FL = 270mm. That Tamron lens will be at a Maximum Available Aperture of F/6.3 at about FL = 150mm~180mm, so even if you limit yourself to using a x1.4 Tele- Converter and thus limiting the lose of Aperture Speed to only one stop: you will be at F/9 as your Maximum Available Aperture from about the equivalent of FL = 210mm. And F/9 is getting quite dark in the viewfinder and possibly beyond the scope of the Camera's Auto Focussing capacity. . . not to mention the necessity to increase ISO or drop Shutter Speed to accommodate.


WW

[RobertsMx]

Well I just dumped a bunch of green on a camera a macro lens from Sony and a tamron 18-270 f/3.5-6.3 lens which apparently is an A mount so now I need an adapter.my question is will the lens work fine with an adapter and will it still work fine with a Sony or other teleconverter attached with the adapter?

Is the macro lens E-mount, or A?

The travel zoom will make most sense with LA-EA2 which will give you fast AF. As for teleconverter, simply attach the A-mount TC to the lens, and mount the combination on the LA-EA2.

You do have the choice of using LA-EA1 adapter, but unlike LA-EA2, it will rely on native AF system (Contrast Detect), and does not support screw drive AF system (if your macro lens has that).

[jcuknz]

Since your camera has contrast detection the problems of low light I would hope will not affect you .... my CD works as usual at f/10 snapping into focus good as gold. The problem seems to come with phase detection which most DSLRs have. So if you can get an adaptor/converter with electrical connections as Robertmx has listed you should be good to go.
One drawback is the camera relies upon OIS [etc] in its lens and for hand held work stabilisation is a definite boon at 560 or 840mm eqivalent angle of view ... from my looking it appears the 18-270 does not have stabilisation so a good tripod will be needed with the rig balanced* for best performance.... my choice would be a Pan and Tilt head unless you get a really big and strong ballhead. * You should not mount a camera on the tripod with a heavy lens on front ... it may not be a serious factor with your rig but something you should be aware of.

[jcuknz]

Either my computer or CiC is playing up as I have tried to add my final note without success

anmyway .... Tamron only make converters for Canon or Nikon.

[Inkanyezi]

I cannot advise about the mounts' question either for the lens or for the Tele-Converter: however it will very likely be a fruitless exercise attaching any Tele-Converter to that lens.

Obviously if you want to use a Tele-Converter, you want to (most of the time?) use longer than FL = 270mm. That Tamron lens will be at a Maximum Available Aperture of F/6.3 at about FL = 150mm~180mm, so even if you limit yourself to using a x1.4 Tele- Converter and thus limiting the lose of Aperture Speed to only one stop: you will be at F/9 as your Maximum Available Aperture from about the equivalent of FL = 210mm. And F/9 is getting quite dark in the viewfinder and possibly beyond the scope of the Camera's Auto Focussing capacity. . . not to mention the necessity to increase ISO or drop Shutter Speed to accommodate.


WW

Although some of the above is rather reasonable, it is not valid in this particular case. There will be no darkening of the viewfinder or problem with AF when mounting an f/9 lens on an EVIL camera, although the AF of the lens might probably not be optimal for the type of AF that this body has. The Sony adapter LA-EA1 provides contrast detection AF, and will probably work (as designed) with the combo of the Tamron lens, also with tele converter. The LA-EA2 AF system however, will only work well without the tele converter, as it is PDAF ("phase detection" AF). I don't know however whether it will also be able to use the in-camera AF. Anyway, manual focusing will always work rather well on this type of camera.

[photo trucker]

I cannot advise about the mounts' question either for the lens or for the Tele-Converter: however it will very likely be a fruitless exercise attaching any Tele-Converter to that lens.

Obviously if you want to use a Tele-Converter, you want to (most of the time?) use longer than FL = 270mm. That Tamron lens will be at a Maximum Available Aperture of F/6.3 at about FL = 150mm~180mm, so even if you limit yourself to using a x1.4 Tele- Converter and thus limiting the lose of Aperture Speed to only one stop: you will be at F/9 as your Maximum Available Aperture from about the equivalent of FL = 210mm. And F/9 is getting quite dark in the viewfinder and possibly beyond the scope of the Camera's Auto Focussing capacity. . . not to mention the necessity to increase ISO or drop Shutter Speed to accommodate.


WW

You lose me in all those numbers and such, I think I understand some of it but please clarify I was a point and shoot guy lol.

[photo trucker]

Is the macro lens E-mount, or A?

The travel zoom will make most sense with LA-EA2 which will give you fast AF. As for teleconverter, simply attach the A-mount TC to the lens, and mount the combination on the LA-EA2.
You do have the choice of using LA-EA1 adapter, but unlike LA-EA2, it will rely on native AF system (Contrast Detect), and does not support screw drive AF system (if your macro lens has that).

It's a 18-270mm how is that macro and body is E lens is A.

[photo trucker]

I cannot advise about the mounts' question either for the lens or for the Tele-Converter: however it will very likely be a fruitless exercise attaching any Tele-Converter to that lens.

Obviously if you want to use a Tele-Converter, you want to (most of the time?) use longer than FL = 270mm. That Tamron lens will be at a Maximum Available Aperture of F/6.3 at about FL = 150mm~180mm, so even if you limit yourself to using a x1.4 Tele- Converter and thus limiting the lose of Aperture Speed to only one stop: you will be at F/9 as your Maximum Available Aperture from about the equivalent of FL = 210mm. And F/9 is getting quite dark in the viewfinder and possibly beyond the scope of the Camera's Auto Focussing capacity. . . not to mention the necessity to increase ISO or drop Shutter Speed to accommodate.


WW

Should I return the 18-270 for the 70-300 I think f goes it 5.6 on that one though

[photo trucker]

Since your camera has contrast detection the problems of low light I would hope will not affect you .... my CD works as usual at f/10 snapping into focus good as gold. The problem seems to come with phase detection which most DSLRs have. So if you can get an adaptor/converter with electrical connections as Robertmx has listed you should be good to go.
One drawback is the camera relies upon OIS [etc] in its lens and for hand held work stabilisation is a definite boon at 560 or 840mm eqivalent angle of view ... from my looking it appears the 18-270 does not have stabilisation so a good tripod will be needed with the rig balanced* for best performance.... my choice would be a Pan and Tilt head unless you get a really big and strong ballhead. * You should not mount a camera on the tripod with a heavy lens on front ... it may not be a serious factor with your rig but something you should be aware of.

Glad I got a good tripod then lol

[photo trucker]

Although some of the above is rather reasonable, it is not valid in this particular case. There will be no darkening of the viewfinder or problem with AF when mounting an f/9 lens on an EVIL camera, although the AF of the lens might probably not be optimal for the type of AF that this body has. The Sony adapter LA-EA1 provides contrast detection AF, and will probably work (as designed) with the combo of the Tamron lens, also with tele converter. The LA-EA2 AF system however, will only work well without the tele converter, as it is PDAF ("phase detection" AF). I don't know however whether it will also be able to use the in-camera AF. Anyway, manual focusing will always work rather well on this type of camera.

so if I'm understanding you correctly the lens plus adapter plus teleconverter should work fine but it would be manual right? Would I be better off getting the 70-300 tamron lens instead of the 18-270 I have? With or without the tc?

[Inkanyezi]

so if I'm understanding you correctly the lens plus adapter plus teleconverter should work fine but it would be manual right? Would I be better off getting the 70-300 tamron lens instead of the 18-270 I have? With or without the tc?

I don't know whether there is such a superzoom available for that camera, but personally I would not take any of those two. I would prefer one that's made for the camera, and it's the same price whether it is Sony or Tamron. I wouldn't invest in a teleconverter, but try to work with just that zoom and find out whether it suits the needs.

The "macro" capability of such a superzoom may or may not be what you need for closeup work, but adding an achromatic +3 diopters closeup lens would make it a very versatile outfit.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...op+Nav-Search=

[photo trucker]

I don't know whether there is such a superzoom available for that camera, but personally I would not take any of those two. I would prefer one that's made for the camera, and it's the same price whether it is Sony or Tamron. I wouldn't invest in a teleconverter, but try to work with just that zoom and find out whether it suits the needs.

The "macro" capability of such a superzoom may or may not be what you need for closeup work, but adding an achromatic +3 diopters closeup lens would make it a very versatile outfit.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...op+Nav-Search=

Unfortunately there aren't any that I'm aware of that are e mount even the Sony 55-300 f/4.5-5.6 is an a mount so I'd still need the adapter but it's not recommended for full frame cameras so that lens is out too, grrr, guys I should've got an a mount camera or a Canon, crap maybe I made a mistake, looking to do moon shots, planets, deep space, nature, family and small stuff like water droplets, I also have a Sony 30mm macro lens. And whatever came with it too.

[inkista]

Unfortunately there aren't any that I'm aware of that are e mount even the Sony 55-300 f/4.5-5.6 is an a mount so I'd still need the adapter but it's not recommended for full frame cameras so that lens is out too, grrr, ...

Uh... the A3000 is an APS-C crop body, not sure why a lens being crop should be an issue with it. And if you wanted to go full frame, then why bother with a $400 e-mount dSLR-lookalike? [sorry].

... guys I should've got an a mount camera or a Canon, crap maybe I made a mistake, looking to do moon shots, planets, deep space, nature, family and small stuff like water droplets, I also have a Sony 30mm macro lens. And whatever came with it too.

Maybe you did make a mistake. While the A3000 looks like a dSLR, it isn't one, and lenses are the other half of your camera, so when you make the leap from a fixed-lens camera to an interchangeable lens camera system, the selection of lenses is going to be the main sticking point for the smaller systems. While it's been steadily growing, the NEX/e-mount system is still relatively small.

However. For the astronomy images, if you were planning on using a telescope, not a camera lens, chances are good the A3000 won't be getting in your way, since you just have to adapt it to the telescope, not find a supertele. And for wide-to-normal shooting (landscapes, bug/flower macros, portraits, street), chances are good the e-mount lens selection and serve your needs pretty well. It's only the fast-action/supertele stuff (sports, wildlife, chasing rugrats indoors) where the system (both A-mount and E-mount) are liable to let you down, and you might wish you'd gone with one of the Big Two instead.

Frankly, I shoot both dSLR and mirrorless because of this divide. I have my Canon gear for birding, lighting, and "serious" [full-frame] shooting, and my micro four-thirds gear for everything else. My prosumer Canon gear handles like a dream. I swear a lot at my consumer mft camera, but I carrry it most of the time, because it's small and light, which makes it convenient; someday I may upgrade to a prosumer body to reduce the swearing. The Canon gear weighs about two to four times as much, depending on what I'm loading up for, and even loaded up with five different lenses, my mft bag comes in under 5 lbs.

Both types of systems have their advantages and disadvantages. How much do you have to have really long lenses? How fast-moving is the subject matter you're shooting? And are you sure a $200 55-200 can't serve your needs?

[photo trucker]

Uh... the A3000 is an APS-C crop body, not sure why a lens being crop should be an issue with it. And if you wanted to go full frame, then why bother with a $400 e-mount dSLR-lookalike? [sorry].


Maybe you did make a mistake. While the A3000 looks like a dSLR, it isn't one, and lenses are the other half of your camera, so when you make the leap from a fixed-lens camera to an interchangeable lens camera system, the selection of lenses is going to be the main sticking point for the smaller systems. While it's been steadily growing, the NEX/e-mount system is still relatively small.

However. For the astronomy images, if you were planning on using a telescope, not a camera lens, chances are good the A3000 won't be getting in your way, since you just have to adapt it to the telescope, not find a supertele. And for wide-to-normal shooting (landscapes, bug/flower macros, portraits, street), chances are good the e-mount lens selection and serve your needs pretty well. It's only the fast-action/supertele stuff (sports, wildlife, chasing rugrats indoors) where the system (both A-mount and E-mount) are liable to let you down, and you might wish you'd gone with one of the Big Two instead.

Frankly, I shoot both dSLR and mirrorless because of this divide. I have my Canon gear for birding, lighting, and "serious" [full-frame] shooting, and my micro four-thirds gear for everything else. My prosumer Canon gear handles like a dream. I swear a lot at my consumer mft camera, but I carrry it most of the time, because it's small and light, which makes it convenient; someday I may upgrade to a prosumer body to reduce the swearing. The Canon gear weighs about two to four times as much, depending on what I'm loading up for, and even loaded up with five different lenses, my mft bag comes in under 5 lbs.

Both types of systems have their advantages and disadvantages. How much do you have to have really long lenses? How fast-moving is the subject matter you're shooting? And are you sure a $200 55-200 can't serve your needs?

Well I'm a zoom lover lol I got a 600-1200 on the way which I hope works, comes with teleconverter and adapter....but if I were to send it all back what could you recommended form another line to do what I need?

[photo trucker]

Uh... the A3000 is an APS-C crop body, not sure why a lens being crop should be an issue with it. And if you wanted to go full frame, then why bother with a $400 e-mount dSLR-lookalike? [sorry].


Maybe you did make a mistake. While the A3000 looks like a dSLR, it isn't one, and lenses are the other half of your camera, so when you make the leap from a fixed-lens camera to an interchangeable lens camera system, the selection of lenses is going to be the main sticking point for the smaller systems. While it's been steadily growing, the NEX/e-mount system is still relatively small.

However. For the astronomy images, if you were planning on using a telescope, not a camera lens, chances are good the A3000 won't be getting in your way, since you just have to adapt it to the telescope, not find a supertele. And for wide-to-normal shooting (landscapes, bug/flower macros, portraits, street), chances are good the e-mount lens selection and serve your needs pretty well. It's only the fast-action/supertele stuff (sports, wildlife, chasing rugrats indoors) where the system (both A-mount and E-mount) are liable to let you down, and you might wish you'd gone with one of the Big Two instead.

Frankly, I shoot both dSLR and mirrorless because of this divide. I have my Canon gear for birding, lighting, and "serious" [full-frame] shooting, and my micro four-thirds gear for everything else. My prosumer Canon gear handles like a dream. I swear a lot at my consumer mft camera, but I carrry it most of the time, because it's small and light, which makes it convenient; someday I may upgrade to a prosumer body to reduce the swearing. The Canon gear weighs about two to four times as much, depending on what I'm loading up for, and even loaded up with five different lenses, my mft bag comes in under 5 lbs.

Both types of systems have their advantages and disadvantages. How much do you have to have really long lenses? How fast-moving is the subject matter you're shooting? And are you sure a $200 55-200 can't serve your needs?

I find it amazing we spend lots of money in this stuff and the p520 appears to have a great zoom in that little package. Given my knowledge level about this stuff it just doesn't make any sense. But we can control what's in focus lol. I know there's more to the lenses buy other than that I'm boggled lol.

[William W]

Since your camera has contrast detection the problems of low light I would hope will not affect you ...

and

Although some of the above is rather reasonable, it is not valid in this particular case. There will be no darkening of the viewfinder or problem with AF when mounting an f/9 lens on an EVIL camera, although the AF of the lens might probably not be optimal for the type of AF that this body has.

I was in error and I withdraw the comment about the viewfinder going dark and the AF performance of the camera.

Thank you both for drawing those errors to my attention.

***

It occurred to me that the OP was about to make a mistake by purchasing a tele-converter for such a slow super zoom.

I also believed that the OP possibly had already made a poor buying choice purchasing a lens which required adapters for the camera he had bought anyway.

I was keen to slow him down on any further purchases. In my haste and as I was not familiar with the model number of the camera and I looked it up on the internet and a few of the hits on the first page mentioned “DSLR” in the commentary: I did no further investigation and my error was assuming that the camera was a typical, DSLR.

***

You lose me in all those numbers and such, I think I understand some of it but please clarify I was a point and shoot guy lol.

The point about using a F/9 and the resultant necessity for slowing the shutter speed and/or increasing the ISO remain valid and I shall attempt to explain the numbers:

The exposure of an image comprises three elements
– the Aperture of the Lens
- the Shutter Speed
- the ISO (sensitivity)

If you put a x1.4 tele-converter on your lens, then for many of the shots you will make using the longer half of the lens, the BIGGEST aperture you have will be F/9.

For a typical daylight scene where the Subject is lit by frontal, full sun you would need to use an exposure of about: F/9 @ 1/1250s @ ISO400.

That exposure would be fine to (for one example) make a good picture of a child running and NOT have Motion Blur of the child.

However, the concern to which I was alerting you, was, for another example; let’s say you wanted to use that rig for shots on a day which is quite overcast – that can easily drop the light by four stops – so if you needed to keep the shutter speed fast at around 1/1000s, your ISO would need to go to around ISO 6400 – and even more as the light drops lower. As you increase the ISO the noise also increases.

However, I note that the camera has a top end of ISO 16,000 and of course, you might not need shutter speeds around 1/800s~1/1000s for the photographs that you want to make.

WW

[inkista]

Well I'm a zoom lover lol

Evidently.

I got a 600-1200 on the way which I hope works, comes with teleconverter and adapter....

I don't know which lens you're talking about, but I'm willing to bet it's a mirror lens. One that's 600mm f/8 and then they add a 2x tc to make it a 1200 f/16? You're not likely to be happy with it, although you might get some moon photos you like out of it. But generally, you get what you pay for, and a $200 1600mm lens that you can't control the aperture on and that doesn't autofocus probably wouldn't seem like a bargain to most of us. Unfortunately, with optics, you do get what you pay for.

but if I were to send it all back what could you recommended form another line to do what I need?

Well, you've mentioned what you'd like to do, but what do you NEED to do? I only know Canon gear, but if you really wanted to devote about 90% of your shooting to astronomy shots, I'd say maybe a 60Da body. But that's about three times the cost of your A3000. And we haven't even started looking at lenses yet.

I may be wrong, but if one of the reasons you were attracted to the A3000 was the price, chances are good that what you want to do isn't going to be compatible with your budget. I generally tell people they'll need $2k-3k to outfit themselves with a body and three or four lenses. Having additional interests like macro and supertelephoto just add to the cost. You can do things for cheaper, but you're going to lose functionality and handling capability. Probably not image quality, though. The difference between lower end and higher end bodies are typically those of usability features. A lot of camera bodies in a lineup will share the same processor and sensor, so they tend to share the same image quality.

I find it amazing we spend lots of money in this stuff and the p520 appears to have a great zoom in that little package.

Key word "appears". While it's touted as a 24-1000 equivalent lens, it only manages that because the 1/2.3" sensor has a 5x crop factor. The actual focal length of the lens is 4.3-180mm.

Also you probably want to stop using "zoom" as a term that means a lot of magnification. Zoom in interchangeable lens terms typically only means a lens that can vary its focal length. The Tokina 11-16mm, for example is an ultrawide zoom.

Given my knowledge level about this stuff it just doesn't make any sense.

Yup. It takes a while to wrap your head around all of this stuff. But you may want to start before you make any other purchases that aren't going to fit what you want to do. My advice would be to figure out what your A3000 can do, and then work to its strengths, and do some research on the lenses it can use, and how they'll work. You may not have a supertelephoto wildlife camera, but it's probably very good at landscapes, macro, and portrait.

... But we can control what's in focus lol.

Actually, you kind of can't. With a very small lens and sensor, as with most P&S cameras, you have a very very deep depth of field, and everything's in focus. It's very difficult to blur the background and to select only one thing in an image to be in focus. While you have a lot more in focus, you actually have less control than with a larger-sensored camera. Very tough to do something like this, where you can choose exactly what's in focus and what isn't:


Canon XT/350D. EF 135mm f/2L USM.

Whether being able to get things out of focus is a feature or a bug is up to you and the type of images you want to make.

I know there's more to the lenses buy other than that I'm boggled lol.

Then don't buy just yet. Learn about lenses. Learn about things other than mere focal length. A lens's max. aperture, whether it's a prime or a zoom, what kind of focus motor it has, what other shooting features it encompasses, whether or not it's stabilized, etc. all make a difference in terms of character, cost, and usefulness. Buying a lens is kind of like buying clothes: there are no "bests" that fit everyone. It all comes down to budget and what/how you want to shoot.

[photo trucker]

and


I was in error and I withdraw the comment about the viewfinder going dark and the AF performance of the camera.

Thank you both for drawing those errors to my attention.

***

It occurred to me that the OP was about to make a mistake by purchasing a tele-converter for such a slow super zoom.

I also believed that the OP possibly had already made a poor buying choice purchasing a lens which required adapters for the camera he had bought anyway.

I was keen to slow him down on any further purchases. In my haste and as I was not familiar with the model number of the camera and I looked it up on the internet and a few of the hits on the first page mentioned “DSLR” in the commentary: I did no further investigation and my error was assuming that the camera was a typical, DSLR.

***



The point about using a F/9 and the resultant necessity for slowing the shutter speed and/or increasing the ISO remain valid and I shall attempt to explain the numbers:

The exposure of an image comprises three elements
– the Aperture of the Lens
- the Shutter Speed
- the ISO (sensitivity)

If you put a x1.4 tele-converter on your lens, then for many of the shots you will make using the longer half of the lens, the BIGGEST aperture you have will be F/9.

For a typical daylight scene where the Subject is lit by frontal, full sun you would need to use an exposure of about: F/9 @ 1/1250s @ ISO400.

That exposure would be fine to (for one example) make a good picture of a child running and NOT have Motion Blur of the child.

However, the concern to which I was alerting you, was, for another example; let’s say you wanted to use that rig for shots on a day which is quite overcast – that can easily drop the light by four stops – so if you needed to keep the shutter speed fast at around 1/1000s, your ISO would need to go to around ISO 6400 – and even more as the light drops lower. As you increase the ISO the noise also increases.

However, I note that the camera has a top end of ISO 16,000 and of course, you might not need shutter speeds around 1/800s~1/1000s for the photographs that you want to make.

WW

So that combination would work with a 1.4x but not a 2x, am I getting that right?

[William W]

So that combination would work with a 1.4x but not a 2x, am I getting that right?

IF you can find either a x1.4 or a x1.5 or x2.0 or x3.0 tele-converter to physically FIT the lens and the camera, then I see no reason why you will not be able to "make it work".

The point I was making was, it won't work very well and it will work less well, the greater the size of the tele-converter.

The reason is that tele-converters are made with the general premise that they will only be used on PRIME LENSES and also FAST LENSES.

When tele-converters are adapted to Zoom Lenses the resultant image is usually compromised to some degree sometimes greatly and more so as the tele-converter's range increases: and I would expect that degradation to be quite noticeable in your situation with that zoom lens.

When tele-converters are used with Slow Lenses (like your F/6.3 Lens) then the slow maximum aperture presents shooting limitations as I have described and although it might "work" what I was drawing your attention to is that you might be dissatisfied with the limitations of what you can effectively shoot, even with a x1.4 Tele-converter.

WW