Sony DSC-F828

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Too of a kind, Oct 24, 2003.

  1. What telephoto lenses will be suitable for this camera. I am hoping I can
    find one that is at least 6x.

    TIA
     
    Too of a kind, Oct 24, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "Too of a kind" <> wrote:
    >
    > What telephoto lenses will be suitable for this camera. I am hoping I can
    > find one that is at least 6x.


    The F828 does not take interchangeable lenses, and will not even be able to
    take accessory lenses. It's 28mm to 200mm f/2.0 to f/2.8, no more, no less,
    that's all, folks!

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 24, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Hi David,

    I think you are wrong to state that the F828 can't take additional lenses,
    as just like its sibling the F717 the end of the barrel has a 58mm filter
    thread, so it can take telephoto/wide-angle lenses just like a camcorder and
    most other digital cameras (via adapter rings).

    It should be fairly straight forward to get hold of 2x convertors (Raynox do
    them), but there is one company that does a 5x model which is called the
    Eagle-eye and is around £165 according to the March issue of Digital Photo.
    Their website is: www.eagleeyeuk,com

    I am not aware of anything making one that is larger.
    Cheers,
    Stephen
    "David J. Littleboy" <> wrote in message
    news:bnajo7$r4r$...
    >
    > "Too of a kind" <> wrote:
    > >
    > > What telephoto lenses will be suitable for this camera. I am hoping I

    can
    > > find one that is at least 6x.

    >
    > The F828 does not take interchangeable lenses, and will not even be able

    to
    > take accessory lenses. It's 28mm to 200mm f/2.0 to f/2.8, no more, no

    less,
    > that's all, folks!
    >
    > David J. Littleboy
    > Tokyo, Japan
    >
    >
     
    Stephen Leslie, Oct 24, 2003
    #3
  4. "Stephen Leslie" <> wrote in message
    news:fV4mb.3446$...
    > Hi David,
    >
    > I think you are wrong to state that the F828 can't take additional lenses,
    > as just like its sibling the F717 the end of the barrel has a 58mm filter
    > thread, so it can take telephoto/wide-angle lenses just like a camcorder

    and
    > most other digital cameras (via adapter rings).


    I recall reading something from Sony that implied that they recommend _not_
    using wide/tele converters. The zoom is _not_ an internal zooming zoom like
    the F717, and may not have the mechanical strength to support the extremely
    heavy Sony wide converter. I may have been reading too closely (and too
    paranoidly), Sony may have changed their tune, or perhaps not.

    > It should be fairly straight forward to get hold of 2x convertors (Raynox

    do
    > them), but there is one company that does a 5x model which is called the
    > Eagle-eye and is around £165 according to the March issue of Digital

    Photo.
    > Their website is: www.eagleeyeuk,com


    I'm sure that the various converters will work. Your camera may not if you
    don't support them adequately. (Also, if the 8MP sensor really does fly, one
    may be seriously bummed out by the loss in quality associated with
    converters.)

    I've not looked into putting consumer dcams in front of binoculars and
    telescopes for extreme telephoto effects, but understand that there are a
    lot of people who have, and suspect that they have recommendations as to
    which consumer dcams are best for that. I also suspect that the Sony cameras
    may not be on the list of cameras recommended for that. But that's just a
    suspicion<g>.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 24, 2003
    #4
  5. Hi David,

    Many apologies, you are quite correct that the F828 should'nt be used with
    additional lenses screwed onto the filter thread (though it is possible), as
    it will no doubt put a strain on the internal lens barrel mount and you do
    not really want to damage a great camera.

    Again, I am not worthy and bow to your knowledge. What's worse is that I
    work in a camera store, but then I'm in the UK and we're always 4 months
    behind the US/Canada/rest of the world. (The F828 has not arrived yet but
    checked www.dpreview.com ) .

    Mind you if I had the choice I would go for the Canon 300D as it is much
    more flexible and you look through a proper pentaprism rather than a lcd
    screen.

    Cheers,
    Stephen
     
    Stephen Leslie, Oct 24, 2003
    #5
  6. Too of a kind

    Gavyn Aaron Guest

    "Stephen Leslie" <> wrote in message
    news:xj6mb.4093$...
    : Hi David,
    :
    : Many apologies, you are quite correct that the F828 should'nt be used with
    : additional lenses screwed onto the filter thread (though it is possible),
    as
    : it will no doubt put a strain on the internal lens barrel mount and you do
    : not really want to damage a great camera.
    :
    : Again, I am not worthy and bow to your knowledge. What's worse is that I
    : work in a camera store, but then I'm in the UK and we're always 4 months
    : behind the US/Canada/rest of the world. (The F828 has not arrived yet but
    : checked www.dpreview.com ) .
    :
    : Mind you if I had the choice I would go for the Canon 300D as it is much
    : more flexible and you look through a proper pentaprism rather than a lcd
    : screen.
    :
    : Cheers,
    : Stephen
    :
    :

    I use wide/tele converters for my F717, and no problems at all so far.
    Don't know about the 828, but I can't imagine that it would really be all
    that different. Then again, who knows.

    ~G~
     
    Gavyn Aaron, Oct 24, 2003
    #6
  7. Hi Gavyn,

    I pressumed the same as yourself that the F828 would be of the same design
    as the F717, but its not as David rightly points out. It is a whole redesign
    which basically copies the principles of the Minolta Dimage 5/7/7i/7Hi and
    operates as a lens like the ones for traditional SLR's. The barrel extends
    as you zoom (by hand I think) and is no longer within its own housing as
    with the F717, so the camera body will not support the weight of any
    additional lenses.

    For confirmation check out the photos from www.dpreview.com or even Sony's
    own sight.

    Cheers,
    Stephen
     
    Stephen Leslie, Oct 24, 2003
    #7
  8. Too of a kind

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <xj6mb.4093$>,
    says...
    > you do
    > not really want to damage a great camera.
    >


    How can you call the 828 a great camera when nobody has even touched one
    yet? Are you just assuming it's gonna be great because it's 8mp and ugly
    as moldy bread? ;-)

    --
    ________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    _________________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Oct 24, 2003
    #8
  9. Too of a kind

    Bob Niland Guest

    > Too of a kind <> wrote:

    > What telephoto lenses will be suitable
    > for this camera.


    So far, none.

    The only accessory lens that Sony presently
    lists for it is a filter-size close-up.

    They are not "supporting" the multi-element
    heavyweights, apparently because the front
    element of the camera lens moves. The
    structure, the servos and/or the servo
    algorithms may not be up to the job.

    I'm wondering if this is part of the slippage
    in the release. Sony may have discovered too
    late that 'F717 and 'F707 customers upgrading
    to the 'F828 *WILL* attempt to use their
    lens investments. If the result is damage,
    that's a huge problem.

    Canon has the reverse problem with the new
    18-55 EF-S lens for the EOS-300D. Mounting it
    on any other EF camera may result in camera
    damage, lens damage, or both. Canon's "solution"
    is to not sell that lens separately. This will
    accomplish only minimal damage control.

    --
    Regards, PO Box 248
    Bob Niland Enterprise
    mailto: Kansas USA
    which, due to spam, is: 67441-0248
    email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
    http://www.access-one.com/rjn

    Unless otherwise specifically stated, expressing
    personal opinions and NOT speaking for any
    employer, client or Internet Service Provider.
     
    Bob Niland, Oct 24, 2003
    #9
  10. Too of a kind

    FOR7b Guest

    >How can you call the 828 a great camera when nobody has even touched one
    >yet? Are you just assuming it's gonna be great because it's 8mp and ugly
    >as moldy bread? ;-)
    >
    >--
    >________________________________
    >Todd Walker



    I would take pictures with an ugly moldy piece of bread or crumb any time if it
    yield great results. We'll see.



     
    FOR7b, Oct 24, 2003
    #10
  11. Too of a kind

    Ron Hunter Guest

    FOR7b wrote:

    >>How can you call the 828 a great camera when nobody has even touched one
    >>yet? Are you just assuming it's gonna be great because it's 8mp and ugly
    >>as moldy bread? ;-)
    >>
    >>--
    >>________________________________
    >>Todd Walker

    >
    >
    >
    > I would take pictures with an ugly moldy piece of bread or crumb any time if it
    > yield great results. We'll see.
    >
    >
    >
    >


    The appearance of the camera isn't as important to me as the function,
    but the feel and balance are VERY important. I will NOT use an
    unbalanced camera.
     
    Ron Hunter, Oct 24, 2003
    #11
  12. Too of a kind

    FOR7b Guest

    >The appearance of the camera isn't as important to me as the function,
    >but the feel and balance are VERY important. I will NOT use an
    >unbalanced camera.
    >


    Take a fish line weight and glue it to the part of the camera that will give
    you the balance you want. :)


     
    FOR7b, Oct 24, 2003
    #12
  13. Hi Todd,

    Okay, so I have'nt tried the camera out and nor have many others, but Sony
    make pretty good products generally and the F717 is regarded as one of the
    best 5Mp models around with its Carl Zeiss lens, its main downfall being the
    Sony memory stick and not CF, but they have now seen the light and the F828
    does.

    I am not saying that all Sony products are great, nor are they the only
    great digital camera manufacturer, and as I've previously mentioned, if I
    had the choice I'd go for the Canon 300D as its around the same price but
    offers more diversity with interchangable lenses, (yes, an obvious one),
    more flash options (okay, you need a basic pc adapter for studio), and the
    main one for me being that you look through the taking lens via the
    pentaprism.

    I see you have a 10D, so you know all the advantages of the SLR and prefer
    it, but a neat thing about the Sony swivel lens is that it makes it good for
    candid shots, or looking over crowds, but there other makes with this
    ability as well.

    Finally, each person has there own taste and I like people to try at least 3
    cameras of similar spec before deciding on a purchase as it may not feel
    right when its in their hands.

    Cheers,
    Stephen
    "Todd Walker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <xj6mb.4093$>,
    > says...
    > > you do
    > > not really want to damage a great camera.
    > >

    >
    > How can you call the 828 a great camera when nobody has even touched one
    > yet? Are you just assuming it's gonna be great because it's 8mp and ugly
    > as moldy bread? ;-)
    >
    > --
    > ________________________________
    > Todd Walker
    > http://www.toddwalker.net
    > Canon 10D:
    > http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    > My Digital Photography Weblog:
    > http://www.toddwalker.net/dpblog.htm
    > _________________________________
     
    Stephen Leslie, Oct 24, 2003
    #13
  14. Too of a kind

    Gavyn Aaron Guest

    "Stephen Leslie" <> wrote in message
    news:rn9mb.6156$...
    : Hi Gavyn,
    :
    : I pressumed the same as yourself that the F828 would be of the same design
    : as the F717, but its not as David rightly points out. It is a whole
    redesign
    : which basically copies the principles of the Minolta Dimage 5/7/7i/7Hi and
    : operates as a lens like the ones for traditional SLR's. The barrel extends
    : as you zoom (by hand I think) and is no longer within its own housing as
    : with the F717, so the camera body will not support the weight of any
    : additional lenses.
    :
    : For confirmation check out the photos from www.dpreview.com or even Sony's
    : own sight.
    :
    : Cheers,
    : Stephen
    :
    :

    Well that just bites. I'm glad I have the 717 then. That and my Nikon F5
    do me just fine. Just seems really screwy that they would implement such a
    limiting design.

    ~G~
     
    Gavyn Aaron, Oct 24, 2003
    #14
  15. Too of a kind

    Todd Walker Guest

    On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:12:51 +0100, "Stephen Leslie"
    <> wrote:

    >I see you have a 10D, so you know all the advantages of the SLR and prefer
    >it, but a neat thing about the Sony swivel lens is that it makes it good for
    >candid shots, or looking over crowds, but there other makes with this
    >ability as well.


    The design of the 828 is interesting, as was the design of the 505,
    707, and 717. The big flash bulge on top of the 828 completely ruins
    the look of the camera but appearance isn't the important thing -- I
    was really just making my "moldy bread" comment tongue in cheek. Yes
    the swivel lens design does come in handy at times. I have had a Nikon
    950, Canon G2 (and G1, both with the swivel LCD,) and Sony 717 in the
    past. I returned the Sony because my G2 made better pictures. But
    there is definitely something to be said for the swivel lens design.

    ________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    ________________________
     
    Todd Walker, Oct 24, 2003
    #15
  16. Too of a kind

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Alfred Molon, Oct 24, 2003
    #16
  17. Too of a kind

    Alan Browne Guest

    Alfred Molon wrote:

    > In article <xj6mb.4093$
    >
    >
    >>Mind you if I had the choice I would go for the Canon 300D as it is much
    >>more flexible and you look through a proper pentaprism rather than a lcd
    >>screen.

    >
    >
    > Pentamirror - not pentaprism.


    Be that as it may, still better than an LCD screen. Although in low
    light, the LCD might have advantages over the pentamiror (and prism for
    that matter)
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 24, 2003
    #17
  18. Too of a kind

    Alfred Molon Guest

    In article <04gmb.38613$>, "Alan Browne"
    <"Alan Browne"@videotron.canospam> says...

    > Be that as it may, still better than an LCD screen. Although in low
    > light, the LCD might have advantages over the pentamiror (and prism for
    > that matter)


    Actually the viewfinder is the only reason why DSLRs exist. If the LCD
    screen gave you the same quality of view of an SLR viewfinder you
    wouldn't need the complex system of transparent mirror and pentaprism
    (exchangeable lenses could also be implemented on non-SLR camera).
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus4040_5050/
    Olympus 5050 resource - http://www.molon.de/5050.html
    Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Oct 24, 2003
    #18
  19. "Alan Browne" <"Alan Browne"@videotron.canospam> wrote:
    > Alfred Molon wrote:
    > >>Mind you if I had the choice I would go for the Canon 300D as it is much
    > >>more flexible and you look through a proper pentaprism rather than a lcd
    > >>screen.

    > >
    > > Pentamirror - not pentaprism.

    >
    > Be that as it may, still better than an LCD screen. Although in low
    > light, the LCD might have advantages over the pentamiror (and prism for
    > that matter)


    The EVF works pretty well, and the ability to do WLF things and to frame
    with the camera over your head is real nice too. The Sony F717 is also one
    of the most glasses-friendly viewfinders in camera history.

    Toss in the problem that the 1.5x/1.6x dSLR viewfinders are really crappy
    compared to F100/1v class viewfinders, and it's nowhere near the slam dunk
    you make it out to be. (And the EVF is 100% coverage, unlike the partial
    coverage obnoxiousness of almost every SLR viewfinder ever made. (IMHO, 100%
    coverage is extremely important in these subminiature format cameras, where
    cropping 10% can have a major impact on image quality.))

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Oct 25, 2003
    #19
  20. Too of a kind

    Leonard Guest

    David J. Littleboy wrote:

    > Toss in the problem that the 1.5x/1.6x dSLR viewfinders are really crappy
    > compared to F100/1v class viewfinders, and it's nowhere near the slam dunk
    > you make it out to be.


    How would you rate the cheap dSLR finders versus the cheap film SLR
    finders? I know the viewfinder in my film Rebel is rather poor but
    it would have to be a lot worse for me to prefer any EVF that I've
    yet seen.

    - Len
     
    Leonard, Oct 25, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BUNTOVNIK
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    593
  2. Gerard McGovern
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    936
    Todd Walker
    Aug 29, 2003
  3. -Gene-

    Sony DSC F828 vs. DSC F848

    -Gene-, Oct 26, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    2,242
    Bob Niland
    Oct 28, 2003
  4. digcam

    Sony DSC-V1 vs Sony DSC-F717

    digcam, Oct 30, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    574
    Unclaimed Mysteries
    Oct 31, 2003
  5. luke

    Sony DSC P10 (or the DSC P5, DSC P9 or DSC P12)

    luke, Dec 24, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    596
Loading...

Share This Page