Sony (Camera)-Model-SLT-a77 DSLR & 16mm-50mm f:2.8 camera lens (Page 2): I have both, the A77 and the 16-50 f2.8 "kit" lens that I keep on that body for my wife to shoot. It's the...

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Wayne'spictures wrote:

Anyone have the Sony SLT- A77 DSLR? With 16-50mm-f:2.8 lens ? Like it? Why or why not? I intend to buy it today.

I have both, the A77 and the 16-50 f2.8 "kit" lens that I keep on that body for my wife to shoot. It's the absolute best body and lens combo value (price to quality) that I've seen out there. That lens is tack sharp, gives great colors, and is very well built. The A77 is a masterpiece, and the prices now are down to $798 for a new body only! Some people are saying to wait because an updated model is soon coming out, but the prices have already been discounted to reflect that. The camera and lens combo is highly recommended, and I'd buy it again, for sure. For the money, you can't do better. :thumbup: :thumbup:

Toddzzilla Loc: Modesto california

I have had my a77 for about a year now and really enjoy it. Every time i get a chance to seriously play with it i learn something new about it. Good price right now as well, i did here a rumor that sony was going to release an a79 model but thought it would be out by now, haven't seen anything yet , but anywho. I think you'll enjoy the a77. Can't comment on the lens but the lower fstop will be a nice choice. I bought the karl ziess 16-80mm as my walk around lens for mine, plus had some nice glass from minolta days which all work great on the sony too. Good luck and enjoy the camera!

ptcanon3ti Loc: NJ

jamm wrote:

i have a sony A77 and cant complain i get better pics using man focus and i feel the picture viewing through the view finder is very helpful ..jimmy ( the only moan i have is its not good in low light compared with my daughters cannon ) all pics shown taken with sony A77

Jamm

What canon camera does your daughter have that is better in low light? And what do you mean by that exactly?

ebbote Loc: Hockley, Texas

Great pictures Jimmy.

jamm wrote:

i have a sony A77 and cant complain i get better pics using man focus and i feel the picture viewing through the view finder is very helpful ..jimmy ( the only moan i have is its not good in low light compared with my daughters cannon ) all pics shown taken with sony A77

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

Many good comments here, Wayne. I, too have the a77 with the 16-50 and I love it. I also picked up the 18-135 for a walkaround lens and several Minolta Maxxum or Maxxum-era (Sigma) lenses for almost nothing.

The camera does not handle ISO as well as some others, the only deficiency in an otherwise superb machine. With the fast lens you're talking about it's not a major issue, but be aware. Also know that its built-in image stabilization is outstanding. I recently shot hand-held at 1/8 to 1/20 with my 18-135 pushed all the way out with tack-sharp results.

In-camera HDR, even hand-held, is really something, but not always necessary as this camera's dynamic range is second only to a couple competitors (it's even notably better than my buddy's ff Canon 5d Miii). And it's so adaptable that if you can imagine doing something with a camera, this one probably does it.

Good choice on an outstanding camera with a plethora of quality lenses available for a song.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

ptcanon3ti wrote:

Jamm

What canon camera does your daughter have that is better in low light? And what do you mean by that exactly?

Also, what lens is she shooting? If she has a 1.8 or a 1.4 it will do better in low light. I think there is a nice 35 1.4 for the a77, but it is a bit pricey.

Jim 100 Loc: Everett, Washington

I have the SLT-77 with the lens you mentioned, I love it. It is a lot heaver than my old Konica-Minolta, that is mainly because of the lens, it is a huge piece of glass (compared to the 5.6 on the K-m). It has so many features, get a book. I have one by David Busch which goes into great detail.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Jim 100 wrote:

I have the SLT-77 with the lens you mentioned, I love it. It is a lot heaver than my old Konica-Minolta, that is mainly because of the lens, it is a huge piece of glass (compared to the 5.6 on the K-m). It has so many features, get a book. I have one by David Busch which goes into great detail.

Busch's is very good; Gary Friedman's is excellent. You'll realize after reading these that you have a top-notch piece of sophisticated equipment in your hands.

MDI Mainer

I have to agree. Friedman's book is exceptionally well organized, which makes referring back to it to check on something quick and easy.

lukan wrote:

Busch's is very good; Gary Friedman's is excellent. You'll realize after reading these that you have a top-notch piece of sophisticated equipment in your hands.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Jim 100 wrote:

I have the SLT-77 with the lens you mentioned, I love it. It is a lot heaver than my old Konica-Minolta, that is mainly because of the lens, it is a huge piece of glass (compared to the 5.6 on the K-m). It has so many features, get a book. I have one by David Busch which goes into great detail.

That 16-50 f2.8 is really a very fine lens, and not to be underestimated. At first I thought it was good, then I saw the images it makes, and I was immediately struck by how good it was in low light (it's a big, bright lens) and the colors it yields. Also, that baby is very sharp. I think it's an exceptional value for the $$$.

Carter Power Loc: Vancouver Island, B.C., Canada

I've had an A-77 for 16 months and purchased the David Busch book to make the most of the camera as quickly as possible. I am very happy with the quality of the shots...my aviatar is an example taken at a 1/8000th shutter speed. The rumours of an upcoming release gives you some options around the timing of your purchase, but you won't ever regret buying a Sony A-77.

Carl 383 Loc: Southampton UK

Wayne'spictures wrote:

Anyone have the Sony SLT- A77 DSLR? With 16-50mm-f:2.8 lens ? Like it? Why or why not? I intend to buy it today.

Yes, I switched from Canon to Sony and I have not regretted it one bit. The Alpha 77 was the only camera in the past ten years which has blown me away, I bought mine with the SAL 16-50mm f2.8 (kit) lens. It is a great lens mated to a phenomenal camera, it puts the other kit lenses from the likes of Canon and Nikon to shame.
The lens is on almost all the time (I bought the SAL 70-300 G lens last month and have just ordered the SAL 100 M (macro) f2.8 lens, next on the list will be the SAL 50 f1.4) The 16-50 f2.8 can be "converted" to a 150mm 2.8 zoom (albeit going from 24M to 6M) at the touch of a button - yes you can crop and zoom in post production but the A77 gives you this option "in camera" giving you a 24mm to 150mm zoom all at f2.8 and it, along with the camera are weather sealed :-D :-D
You have read the glowing reviews concerning the Alpha 77 so I won't bore you with my glowing review.
It is a brilliant combination and I trust you will be delighted with your choice as much as I am

Wayne'spictures Loc: Souderton, Pa. 18964

Peekayoh,
Yes!
It's on the way. Special sale ended 3/6/14. Saved $$$$.
I would still like to hear from others who have been using it for some time.
Thanks

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

Carl 383 wrote:

Yes, I switched from Canon to Sony and I have not ... (show quote)

Gotta say, while I love my Canon, if I were starting out fresh, I would be looking at the Sony very seriously along with some of the mirrorless cameras.

Wayne, thanks for starting this thread! :thumbup:

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Carl 383 wrote:

Yes, I switched from Canon to Sony and I have not ... (show quote)

Every lens you mentioned is really a stellar piece of glass, especially the 16-50 f2.8. The A77 is a truly awesome camera, with a great sensor and great features, and this lens is far superior to other offerings.