Need advice on "THE" lens for a new a6300

[Ricchiutip]

I am upgrading from an a6000 to an a6300 and want something better than the kit lens.  My shooting is mostly kids, where they can spring into action at any time, and I want to capture the moment without time to change settings (hence the AF features of the new 6300); also travel, holidays, and street photography.  I've narrowed to the following lenses and am asking for your vote - if I were to have only one lens, money not an object, which of these 5 lenses should I choose?

 

Zeiss 1670Z (totally mixed reviews)

 

 

Sony SEL18200 (often recommended as the one lens, but mixed reviews regarding it's auto focus speed, size, and the possibility of a required flash extender

 

 

Sony SEL2418Z

 

 

Sony SEL35F18

 

 

Sony SEL50F18

 

 

Thank you so much!

[chrisqphoto]

there is no such thing as "the lens" like there is no such thing as "the camera". ALL lenses have flaws, as do all camera bodies. there is only the right lens for the right situation. each lens you listed has a different purpose it was made to fulfill.

for example: I would never use only a GoPro to film an entire wedding, as it was not made for that purpose. it was made for sports photography. I would not use a drone as my only tool to take portraits for a senior portrait session. it was not made for that purpose. it might be that I would use the GoPro at that wedding as one of many tools, perhaps I could get an interesting perspective. but my wedding video would be dull really quick if every shot was from a single GoPro. also, I COULD use that drone for SOME of the pictures at a senior portrait session, but I wouldn't want it to be my only camera. maybe one or 2 shots from the drone max just for a unique perspective.

 

also, it is possible to hammer a nail with a wrench but it would be better if I used the tool intended for that purpose.

 

so ask yourself, what purpose do I need fulfilled first, or what type of shooting will I be doing the most, then find the lens that fulfills that purpose best.

[ethierbach]

Since you already told us what type of shooting you do the most, here's my two cents.

 

On the A6000, I like the Zeiss 16-70 but I think it would be a little too slow for the "mostly kids" part of your shooting.  BUT ... on the A6300, where you can probably go with higher ISO, I think that lens would meet your needs well.  It also gives you a lot of flexibility in focal length.

 

A second-place vote would go to the SEL2418Z, due to wide aperture and focal length. I think the other primes you listed would not be wide enough.  

 

-Ed-

[chrisqphoto]

Zeiss 1670Z (totally mixed reviews)

Sony SEL18200 (often recommended as the one lens, but mixed reviews regarding it's auto focus speed, size, and the possibility of a required flash extender

Sony SEL2418Z

Sony SEL35F18

Sony SEL50F18

Thank you so much!

the 16-70mm f/4 is either an all purpose lens or a video lens.

the 18-200mm f/3.6-6.3 is trying to be too many things as once. I can say from personal experience it's not very sharp and doesn't give the best images.

 

the 24mm is more a landscape lens or street lens

the 50mm f/1.8 is a portrait lens,

and the 35mm is somewhere in between, street photography would be good with this.

 

it's my recommendation if you must pick an all purpose lens you get the 16-70mm. but if not, pick the lens that will fulfill the purpose you need

[Austerror]

Sony SEL2418Z is THE lens to get.

 

Sure it has limitations, for example it is not a zoom.  Other than that, it is near perfect for APS-C cameras.

 

EDIT:

 

I forgot to add that the SEL2418Z has a very short minimal focal distance.  Very handy for photographing kids in doors.

[Wesley]

Sony E 16-70.

[Lioneye]

I don't have the technical and real world experience the other guys have, but I have some, and I know what I do with my photography. So, after lots or reading, asking dozens of questions, and doing YouTube research, for my a6300 I got the Zeiss 16-70 f/4 for all around shooting. It has a good reputation for sharpness and covers a full range of possible actions.  For my fun shooting, like at the zoo, I got the 70-200 f/4 G, likewise it has a good reputation. And, because back in the days when I was shooting kodachrome I always had a 50 mm normal lens, and it saved me many times, I also got a 35 f/1.8, because in FF terms it translates to close to 50 mm and for the price it is fast, especially compared to f/4. If my kids were young enough to run around the house, I think I would keep that 35 f/1.8 on my camera and grab it and just start shooting. With the a6300 sensor, 24 megapixels, OSS, if the shot weren't perfect you could crop it into a great photo of your kids. That's what "I" would do. But if I had to choose just one and only one lens, I'd go with the 16-70 f/4.

[Mihai M]

I use Sony SEL2418Z with a6000 to photograph my kid (which is moving very fast now), mostly indoors.

The lens is awesome and the pictures are great.

I never use the flash indoors, even at night.

I also have

* Sony 16mm f/2.8 pancake (which creates very blurry images)

* Sony 18-55 which creates sharper images than the pancake but is very slow (indoors) at f/3.5

* Sigma 19mm f/2.8 which is very sharp but it refocuses on every single shot even if the scene hasn't changed at all so it's slow at focusing. Still, for the money, the Sigma 19mm is a very good lens (I recommend it as a kit lens instead of the all the lens that Sony uses for kits).

 

The 24mm is generally very fast and very good at focusing and specifically when the scene doesn't change much.

 

The pictures shot with the 24mm are far better than all of those other 3 lenses.

 

One other option I'm considering is the newly announced Sigma 30mm f/1.4 E-mount.

The E-mount lens hasn't been tested yet, but the Nikon equivalent seems even better (15 P-Mpix vs 13 P-Mpix) than the E-mount 24mm which is awesome anyway.

Take a look here http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sigma-30mm-F14-DC-HSM-A-Nikon-on-Nikon-D7100-versus-Sony-E-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-24mm-F18-ZA-on-Sony-A6000-versus-Sigma-19mm-F28-EX-DN-Sony-E-on-Sony-A6000__1099_865_1155_942_826_942

I sincerely hope that this new Sigma 30mm will be better at focusing than Sigma 19mm.

Sigma 30mm will be 3 times cheaper than Sony 24mm so the price difference has to come from some lack of ability somewhere.

 

Sony SEL18200 is slow indoors and Very not-sharp (only 7P-Mpix) http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-E-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-24mm-F18-ZA-on-Sony-A6000-versus-Sigma-19mm-F28-EX-DN-Sony-E-on-Sony-A6000-versus-E18-200mm-F3-5-6-3__1155_942_826_942_274_0

 

Sony SEL50F18 is very sharp (13 P-Mpix) but very narrow (50mm) indoors http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-E-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-24mm-F18-ZA-on-Sony-A6000-versus-Sony-E-50mm-F18-OSS-on-Sony-A6000__1155_942_745_942

 

Sony SEL35F18 is a little too narrow (35 mm) indoors. When you'll want to take a photo of the family (maybe 4-6 people), you will move so far back you'll hit the wall on the other side of the room (and still not be able to frame them all in the picture).


 

[Gilgenberg]

I am upgrading from an a6000 to an a6300 and want something better than the kit lens.  My shooting is mostly kids, where they can spring into action at any time, and I want to capture the moment without time to change settings (hence the AF features of the new 6300); also travel, holidays, and street photography.  I've narrowed to the following lenses and am asking for your vote - if I were to have only one lens, money not an object, which of these 5 lenses should I choose?

 

Zeiss 1670Z (totally mixed reviews)

 

 

 

Sony SEL18200 (often recommended as the one lens, but mixed reviews regarding it's auto focus speed, size, and the possibility of a required flash extender

 

 

 

Sony SEL2418Z

 

 

 

Sony SEL35F18

 

 

 

Sony SEL50F18

 

 

 

Thank you so much!

 

all fine lenses except the SEL35F18

 

i would recommend the Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

[Mihai M]

i would recommend the Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS

 

In which situations would this f/4 lens be useful?

 

When photographing the kids outside at play, you would need a shutter speed of 1/400 s or shorter for good results.

As soon as there is a cloud on the sky and the evening is approaching, you would need a f/2.8 or even f/2.0 to keep that shutter speed.

When photographing inside, 99% of my photos are between f/2.0 and f/2.8 while keeping a decent 1/160 s shutter speed.

 

So this f/4 lens is only useful outside when it's sunny or if (blurry) images at 1/60 s are acceptable to you. The OSS will handle your hand shake at 1/60 s, but won't handle the movement of the subject. You can try taking some photos at 1/160 (Scene Mode Portrait or Intelligent Auto) vs 1/60 (default P mode). You will see a big difference in sharpness when taking a photo of a person (facial features and the details of the clothing) when using 1/160 s.

 

Also, it's important when having such a fast lens (f/2.0), that you need to use it properly (where Scene Mode Portrait seems the best mode the camera has for care free photographing with great results because it puts great care of keeping a fast shutter at all times). If you're using a 1/60 s shutter speed (P mode), the camera will use narrower f-stops (f/3.5, f/4.0 etc) which will get you blurry pictures like you would get with zoom lens.

 

All this assumes difficult lighting conditions or moving subjects.

In perfect lighting conditions with still subjects, all lenses get good pictures.

[molan]

I am upgrading from an a6000 to an a6300 and want something better than the kit lens.  My shooting is mostly kids, where they can spring into action at any time, and I want to capture the moment without time to change settings (hence the AF features of the new 6300); also travel, holidays, and street photography.  I've narrowed to the following lenses and am asking for your vote - if I were to have only one lens, money not an object, which of these 5 lenses should I choose?

 

Zeiss 1670Z (totally mixed reviews)

 

 

 

Sony SEL18200 (often recommended as the one lens, but mixed reviews regarding it's auto focus speed, size, and the possibility of a required flash extender

 

 

 

Sony SEL2418Z

 

 

 

Sony SEL35F18

 

 

 

Sony SEL50F18

 

 

 

Thank you so much!

 

Primes are not flexible enough for all round, they are specialised lenses.

 

I'll go for the 16-70, the 16mm is very useful on ASP-C and 70mm will cover most situations. For travel I'll go for the 18-200mm, but if only one lens, I'll go for the 16-70 because of the 16mm (noticeable wider than 18mm).

[Sotto Voce]

I was a A6000 user, I can only recommend you to get sel24f18z, get a used one to save money, it is the only native lens you'll ever need.

 

I have used the

 

24mm

16-70mm

35mm

55-210mm

and numerous other non native lenses

 

 

the 24mm focus the fastest, and really quiet

the 24mm allow fast shutter speed to freeze motion (OSS is not there, but it doesn't really matter for 24mm)

the depth of field is deep enough even at f1.8, which doesn't require extremely precise focus to get things in the picture

wide enough for indoor

the pictures are nicer subjectively speaking, but that is usually your least concern as most lenses are nice

nice macro ability

solid build quality, the focus ring feels soooo smooth and nice

Zeiss badge on the side makes you cooler

 

 

the 24mm is the one easiest to get results, and that is the point of getting a camera like A6300 right?

[Austerror]

Zoom lenses are great for people that can't move, or the subject can't be moved closer.

 

For taking photos of children indoors with a prime (24 zeiss for example) it is faster to use your arm to 'zoom'.  That is also what the flippy tilty screen is for.  So when the kids are doing something photo worthy, you stand up and move around with your feet and your arms to get the photo.

 

Out doors, the kids might be 100m away, in which case a zoom would be more useful.  But if you are shooting telephoto stuff, then that is getting a bit more specialized.  Also in some cases, at a Zoo for example, your arm only zooms so much. So here a telephoto zoom would be useful.

 

My partner uses the 24mm Zeiss with the E-mount 55-210 zoom.  The Zeiss does everything except the Zoo stuff.  

 

But we are both able to walk.  So walking somewhere to get a better perspective is easy for us.  Some people are not so lucky.  Perhaps they are not as mobile. Or maybe stuck in a train looking out a window. In which case a zoom would be much more useful.

[DirkB]

I was on APS-C last with the NEX7, and have experience with almost all Sony lenses.

 

As many guys are pointing out here, it is also my experience that the 24Z18 is the best lens for the APS-C range, from technical and IQ point of view.

The 35F18 is far better than the Touit 32Z18 from almost every aspect. The 50F18 is also a very decent lens.

With the 1670Z4 i had mixed experience, nice colors, excellent center sharpness, but the borders are kind of ridiculous soft even stopped down to f8. However it was my favorite travel lens. I heard that Sony planned to improve it, but I don't know if it is just for the kit 1670Z4.

The G18105/4 is a quite usable lens except for the ridiculous distortions.

My experience of the 55210 is not good, slow (around 135mm already f6.3), pale colors, high vignetting and CA- same goes for the 18200 or 18200LE (equally to the Tamron 18200Di).

 

In the end it depends a lot on your shooting style and your preferences.

My favorite focal length on FF are 35mm and 85mm, and I use them for 80% of the time. So the equivalents for the A6300 would then be the 24Z18 and the 50F18 or the FE55Z18.

On the tele range now I would choose the G70200/4, but that's a matter of budget.

[danredwing]

I've used the original 18-55 kit, the 16-50 kit, the 35 f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8, and the 24mm f/1.8 as well as a handful of FE lenses. 

 

In my opinion, the 24mm f/1.8 is hands-down the best all around lens you can buy for the APSC sized sensor cameras. It is incredibly sharp, with great micro contrast and color and it has a really useable focal length for all around shooting.  On your a6300, it will feel like a fast 35mm and it is really great in low light.  Once I bought it, I very rarely took it off.  In fact, the only reasons I did were to shoot Portraits with a blurrier background with the 50 or to shoot really wide landscapes with a wider lens. 

 

I noticed another commenter mentioned the very close minimum focus distance and I didn't realize how useful it was until I didn't have it anymore. The only reason I sold mine was because it doesn't quite cover the sensor on the A7. 

 

Though the zooms seem more versatile, they can't even come close to the versatility and image quality of the 24. Also, if there's any question about which one you'll want to use and own, go to a camera  store and handle one.  It's a beautiful piece of hardware and makes all the other APSC lenses feel cheap- perhaps even the Zeiss zoom. 

 

When I was shooting the NEX 7, I settled in on the 24 and the 50.  I could do almost anything with that 2 lens kit. 

 

[joshinthecity]

"The" lens, in my humble.

Should always be a fast 50 (equiv) prime.

So the answer for you should be really easy.. :-)

[free_tibett]

@DirkB

You're exaggerating a little with your touit / sony statement.

I read several reviews and all stated the same cons:

 

It is more expensive

AF is loud and not usable for video

No OSS

 

Image quality wise it beats the sony (if only by a little).

Kurt Munger even compared the optical quality with the 24mm...

http://kurtmunger.com/zeiss_touit_32mm_f_1_8id352.html

But anyway....

 

I would not buy both, 32/35 and 24mm

I would try which focal length I like more an only buy the preferred one.

The 50mm is a absolutely great lens, but the AF seems a lot slower to me compared to my touit.

Unfortunately I have no idea of the 35 and 24mm AF speed.

 

 

However... To meet all your demands a 100 per cent, I'm afraid you will have to go for the GMaster.

All those f4 zooms won't help you indoor to catch your kits or in low light street environments.

 

 

Bes regards

[Golem]

@Ricchiutip:

 

For the type of use indicated in your OP, read

all the replies, and watch for outstanding AF

response, and only in a lens that offers OSS.

 

That much I can verrrrry strongly suggest, but

I can't suggest a specific lens. When I'm faced

with conditions such as yours, I'll use the old

version of the kit lens [18-55 OSS], and I find

no problems. But I have no "better" AF lenses

for comparison .... myself not being a believer

in "better lenses".

 

For the uses indicated in your OP I also would

encourage you to experiment with Back Button

AF. It may be a great solution for you ... or not.

Whether or not it works for YOU depends not

only on the working conditions but also on the

personality of the user. A collision of variables.

But do give it a thorough trial.

[paulmoodyvt]

With my a6300 I've been mostly using the Sony 18-105pz - it's quick, but not fast. The kit's not bad either. And I love my Touit 2.8 50macro the best so far. But the lens I'm excited about is the sigma 30 1.4 contemporary. Early reviews say good things about it's sharpness and it's AF - though it has strong CA on the edges at 1.4 and has no OSS. At $339 worth a look. I've ordered It.

[wedge]

I'll vote for the 16-70Z.  That is my goto lens on the a6000.  It's on my camera almost all the time.  I'll also be upgrading to the a6300 at some point this year.

 

I switch to the 50 1.8 when I need more speed.  And I'll rent the 70-200 F4 when doing sports.

But except for those two situations, I never feel like I'm being limited by the 1670Z.  It's a great lens, well suited for any purpose.  

 

Sometimes I wish it was a 2.8.  But then I know it would be bigger/heavier/more expensive, also, no such lens exists anyway.  So I happily take the F4 for general everyday use.

 

 

Like so many before me, the other lens I considered before getting the 1670 is the 18-105.  The major deciding factors for me were the extra 2mm at the wide end for landscapes.  And the power zoom was a big turn-off for me (after having tried it on the 1650).  Although the extra zoom reach, and the fixed length were tempting.

[Trytten]

What about the 24-70/4? Any thoughts on this one.

[Kynetic]

The 24f18z is expensive. At f/1.8 it's easy to get the subject out of focus. It might be worth to try the sel 20f28. I find f/2.8 much easier to work with, especially if you need to shoot quickly, as with kids. Just slightly wider, costs just a third of the 24f18, and you also don't have to worry about setting the right zoom position. If you're near your kids when shooting, this lens should work.

[rccasgar]

+1 for the Zeiss 16-70... from my point of view, it is the lens which fits better with your needs (current ones, and maybe future ones due to its flexibility).

[Username]

It seems reasonable to surmise that, in the 15 months  

following the demise of this thread, its author has since

found himself a suitable lens .... loooong ago. 

[cymmgarcia]

As old as this thread is, I feel it deserved a revival due to the wisdom imparted by all participants.

As I've grown older and wiser I've settled on a 2 camera solution.

My "Image Quality" setup is the Sony a6500 (IBIS) + 24f18z + sel10-18f4 for the wide stuff.

My "Versatility setup" Sony RX10IV whose 24-600mm lens reach + auto focus / tracking / fps speeds never  ceases to amaze me.

*I've also kept the 18105G for darker indoor videos when things get to grainy on the RX10.

With the A6500 + Play Memories Apps and the RX10M4 there isn't much that will escape you!

Edited July 3, 2019 by cymmgarcia
Forgot to add 1 lens