First Lens to Purchase for a6000

[LizM]

I have had my a6000 for about 8 months and have used the 16-50 lens that came in the kit.  It seems to do well in most situations that I have encountered except for maybe low light.  I want to buy my next lens to be a compliment to that but am unsure of what is the best thing to get.  Does anyone have advice of what they would get as their first Sony lens purchase?

[duncanfoxphoto]

There are couple of ways you could approach this. First, there would be getting the 55-210 lens that would expand your range of available focal lengths and let you experiment with other types of photography. I would recommend this if you're new to photography, and also on a budget because you can find this lens quite cheap on ebay. Other than that, a good suggestion would be to go through your photos and see what focal lengths you like to use. If the majority of your favorite pictures are wide-angle, get something that complements that, or goes even wider angle if you want to experiment. Sigma makes an incredible 19mm f/2.8 that's an absolute steal under 200 USD. For normal focal lengths, the Sony 35mm and 50mm aps-c prime lenses are the best of the bunch, with the 50mm being significantly cheaper than the 35mm. These two are also very fast primes (f/1.8), which would perform very well in low light. If you're more into video, there's actually an 18-105 power zoom that's absolutely perfect for smooth focal transitions, and it's also a decent still performer due to the stabilization.

 

One last suggestion, though it might be a bit off-the-wall. If you want to really have some fun with your camera (and aren't using it professionally at all), get a Rokinon 50mm f/1.4. It's a manual-only lens with a very wide aperture and incredible sharpness for the price, and it's a full-frame lens to boot, so you can continue using it if you ever decide to upgrade. For still photography, it's an absolute gem and manual focus is kind of like a manual transmission; requires more skill to use but gives an incredible feeling of satisfaction no autofocus lens could.

[LizM]

Thanks, that is very helpful!

[Golem]

If low light is really the only important shortcoming of

you current outfit, then get some real lens speed and

some noise reduction software. You will need both

cuz you are likely to gain only about 2 stops of lens

speed, which is helpful but not earthshaking.

  

Look at the exif details of your favorite shots so far

and you can see what FL and f/stop was used. Find

the FL range that about 2/3 of your fave shots were

made with. IOW, declare a full 1/3 to be statistically

outliers. Now buy a fast prime just a bit wider than

the mid-FL of that group. If the 20 to 40mm range of

your kit lens handled 2/3 of your fave shots, 30mm

is the center point. You should go a step wider than

the center point so 24 or 25mm is good. 

 

But you're doing this for lens speed, so if you can't

afford a fast 24, but you CAN afford a fast 30mm, as

speed is priority you get the 30 and adjust to that FL.

You learn to visualize in slightly tighter angle of view.   

    

 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

####################################### 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

     

 

Some OPTIONAL further details and elaboration:

  

The reason for wanting a lens slightly wider than the

midpoint of the "2/3 of my fave shots" FL range is

that a recorded image can be cropped but cannot be

stretched to a wider view. Generally, the differences

between the commonly used prime FLs are similar

to the effect of cropping 24MP shots down to 16MP.

That is usually considered the limit for maintaining

the IQ and quality look of the uncropped original. So

if you're shooting with a 24 and crop the image down

to the view of a 35, you are in the "safe" range but at

its [approximate] limit.  

   

You hafta WEIGHT the FLs bunched in your "2/3 of

my faves" survey. Let's say the 2/3 equals 100 pix.

If they were all made between 20 and 40mm then

30 is the mid-point ONLY if the FLs are scattered all

thru that 20-40 range. But if 65 out of 100 faves are

all clustered into the 35-40 range, you want a 30 or

35mm fast prime, not a 24. 

  

If all this analytical mumbo jumbo is helpful then so

be it. But if it's only intimidating, just buy a fast lens

and live with whatever FL you guessed you wanted.

It ALL good :-) 

[Gilgenberg]

sony 50mm 1.8 oss or sigma 60mm 2.8

[SpectrumDisorder]

There are so many great lenses already suggested above. If I could go back to when I first got my a6000 knowing what I do now I'd take a totally different path. I'd buy a cheap adapter and start buying vintage manual focus lenses. You can get a Minolta Rokkor 50mm 1.7 for less than $20 and the adapter is less than $10. Learning to manually focus will make you a better photographer in so many ways. It really helped me to grasp aperture's effect on depth of field. 

 

A lot of photographers like to say that you only need one focal length, and let your feet adjust perspective. Over time I've come to realize just how silly this is. If I take a shot with a 300mm lens of a deer (just at infinity) with mountains in the background, the mountains and the deer will be in perfect focus regardless of aperture, and the mountains will appear very close to the deer. Doing this with say a 50mm lens will separate the deer from the mountains tremendously. I learned these things very quickly manually focusing after years of using very expensive AF lenses oblivious of this rather simple detail.

 

Although, the a6000 is one of the best auto focusing cameras in the world. That being said, my favorite lens for the a6000 is the Sony/ Zeiss AF sel24f1.8 (pricey, but amazing) which is pretty much permanently on that camera. I attached a picture to this post that I took with that lens and the a5100 (same sensor, but lacking a lot of what makes the a6000 great).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[LizM]

Beautiful photo!  I have considered the Zeiss lens but it is too expensive for me right now.

[rclymer]

I second the idea of picking up a fast aperture vintage prime lenses at thrift stores or ebay to find the right adapter. That's a great way to figure out what lengths you really like before investing in a pricey lens.

[JimmyD]

According to the just released DXO Mark tests, the new Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (45mm full frame equivalent) at $399 is the sharpest and overall best prime for the Sony A6000 (and is significantly cheaper that the Zeiss options).  You might want to check out this Sigma . . .

[Jeffzerot]

I just purchased the a6000 with kit and 55-210. Today I purchased the Sigma 19mm f 2.8 which should come next week. Looking forward to using the camera to compliment all my great EOS gear.

[Golem]

FTW ! 

 

And acoarst you will post results !

[Charlie64]

I am not experienced taking photos yet. Last year I purchased a6000 because the very fast autofocus. Because I have red the kit lens SELP 1650 OSS is not good enough, first I bought a SEL18200 OSS lens. I am satisfied with it. After I bought a SIGMA 19mm f/2.8 lens but I am not so happy with it. I feel it not sharp enough and the colours are not nice. Of course it is possible, the bad quality is my mistake. Because this negative eyperience this week I bought a SONY SEL 35mm f/2.0 OSS lens. After very few photos I am happy with it.

Now I am thinking to buy (or not?) a ROKINON 12mm f/2.0 wide lens for bigger buildings and landscapes. What is your opinion about it? I have seen several positive tests, but I would be happy hearing opinion from experienced people.

[damian015]

There are so many great lenses already suggested above. If I could go back to when I first got my a6000 knowing what I do now I'd take a totally different path. I'd buy a cheap adapter and start buying vintage manual focus lenses. You can get a Minolta Rokkor 50mm 1.7 for less than $20 and the adapter is less than $10. Learning to manually focus will make you a better photographer in so many ways. It really helped me to grasp aperture's effect on depth of field. 

 

A lot of photographers like to say that you only need one focal length, and let your feet adjust perspective. Over time I've come to realize just how silly this is. If I take a shot with a 300mm lens of a deer (just at infinity) with mountains in the background, the mountains and the deer will be in perfect focus regardless of aperture, and the mountains will appear very close to the deer. Doing this with say a 50mm lens will separate the deer from the mountains tremendously. I learned these things very quickly manually focusing after years of using very expensive AF lenses oblivious of this rather simple detail.

 

Although, the a6000 is one of the best auto focusing cameras in the world. That being said, my favorite lens for the a6000 is the Sony/ Zeiss AF sel24f1.8 (pricey, but amazing) which is pretty much permanently on that camera. I attached a picture to this post that I took with that lens and the a5100 (same sensor, but lacking a lot of what makes the a6000 great).

DSC00769 6 (1).jpg

 

 

Trying to find the Minolta Rokkor 50mm 1.7 for that price but everything seems to be above $40. has this gone up in price?

[Username]

I am not experienced taking photos yet. Last year I purchased a6000

because the very fast autofocus. Because I have red the kit lens SELP

1650 OSS is not good enough, first I bought a SEL18200 OSS lens. I

am satisfied with it. After I bought a SIGMA 19mm f/2.8 lens but I am not

so happy with it. I feel it not sharp enough and the colours are not nice.

Of course it is possible, the bad quality is my mistake. Because this

negative eyperience this week I bought a SONY SEL 35mm f/2.0 OSS

lens. After very few photos I am happy with it.  

 

Now I am thinking to buy (or not?) a ROKINON 12mm f/2.0 wide lens

for bigger buildings and landscapes. What is your opinion about it? I

have seen several positive tests, but I would be happy hearing opinion

from experienced people.

    

In light of your reported "adventures in lens land" so far, you 

should absolutely purchase that lens. The journey is at least 

as important as the ultimate destination. 

[Username]

Trying to find the Minolta Rokkor 50mm 1.7 for that price but

everything seems to be above $40. has this gone up in price?

  

It's worth the $45 so get it. You coulda save $20 by

purchasing earlier, but you also coulda been hit by 

a bus. Just do it.