Jump to content

Which lens to get for a5100?


ex351d
 Share

Recommended Posts

My wife has a Sony a5100 with the 16-50 kit lens. I would like to buy her a new lens. Her favorite shots are landscapes but mostly she shoots portraits (of our kid) or macro photos of flowers in our house or in the fields close to where we live. She dislikes street style photography. I have looked around on the internet but I do not know what I should be looking for. The lenses that I believe fit the budget and camera are the following:

 

16f2.8

20f2.8

50f1.8

35f1.8

30f3.5 Macro

18-55

55-210

 

I think that the 18-55 i similar to the lens she has. The 55-210 I read that it is for sport and wildlife - which do not interest her. She mentioned that she would not like a macro at this point. This leaves me with 4 lenses the 16, 20, 35 and 50 prime lenses. I read online but I cannot understand which one would be the best. I mentioned the other lenses as I may be wrong disregarding any of the other lenses. Please, help me decide which lens should I get her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all the focal lengths are already covered by the kit lens exept for

the 55-210, that lens could give a new angle on her landscapes,

not just (or really)for sports.

Agreed, but also the 50/1.8 is not reeeeally covered by the

kit lens. There's a 50/5.6 'inside' it. I'd never never suggest

buying a lens to gain but just one stop of speed, but 50/5.6

vs 50/1.8 ? Thaz three stops, and also makes a really fine

portrait lens for the kid pix.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I was leaning towards the 50f1.8 as I liked the photos I found online. But, I was not going to base my opinion on a few photos that I liked, I would really like the opinion of someone more experienced. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spend some time at Youtube, Lavikka Photography.  He tests all the popular Sony lenses, plus some odd-balls, on his A6000 which is the same guts as the A5100.  I find his reviews very credible and applicable to everyday shooting.  He is a big prime lens guy which is fine but your wife sounds like me where I just want one or two VERY good lenses and not mess with all the lens changing. 

 

ZOOMS

I have the RX10ii with fixed F4 and I have a VERY good copy lens for any zoom and macro.  I love this camera but will also be getting an A6300 for wider landscape work and video.  I am of similar use to your wife not needing much range beyond @100mm equivalent thus I will get two zooms - the 16-70/F4 Zeiss (@$1000) first and then the Sony 10-18/F4 (@$800) for landscapes.  Both are pro-grade and quite small for their performance.  I especially like the fixed F4 which prevents her from jockeying aperture/shutter keeping shots nicely balanced after zooming.  Just make sure you get a recent copy of the 16-70 (2015 or later) since early units had a de-centering problem.  All the 10-18 units have an excellent history so little concern there buying one used.  

 

Yes, the 16-70 is pricey but it really is a pro-grade lens.  Paired with the 10-18, both are SOLID "keeper" lenses as you upgrade bodies.  If you can't spend that amount my buddy has the full frame 28-70 (42-105 equiv, @$400) which is exceptionally good and is very close to his 35 and 50mm primes which he rarely uses now.  As with the early 16-70 these vary a little so you should try a couple at a store if you can.  He confirmed copy variation but it was very small and has been extremely happy for his "walk-around".  The 28-70 is variable aperture though so this is disappointing but the resolution is extremely good. One other "middle" option zoom is the Sony G lens, 18-105/F4 (@$600) which gives a lot of reach but also has fantastic variable power zoom holding F4 nicely over its range.  It certainly is not as good at the 16-70 Zeiss and there is a lot of software correction going on but for "general use" it is outstanding for JPG's and video work.  I have seen several Wedding people use this for video work on A6300, very quiet and fast or slow zoom. 

 

SONY/ZEISS PRIMES

If you are simply convinced you must have primes there are several really good ones.  Yes, the F2 or F1.8 allows some fantastic bokeh so I understand that.  The Sony 50/1.8 is simply unbeatable for the $250 price and is just a default lens for portraits.  The 35 is exceptional as is the 28 but they are pricey.  The 28 allows for a twist-on 21mm wide angle adapter which is pretty good but if you go this route, you are basically falling back near the 10-18 zoom quality in one lens and not much money savings.  The 20 pancake is not bad but I would have trouble recommending it.  I have read nothing but bad on the 16mm and appears a mess.  

 

OTHER PRIME OPTIONS

The Sigma trio of primes (19-30-60) is a great solution for @$200 each.  The 19 and 60 are getting spectacular reviews but the 30 has some resolution weaknesses and copy variation, I am not sure why.  If you really wanted to stay fixed in simple portraits and affordable, you probably could live with just the 19/60 pair for $400 and have a really good yet simple bundle.  Bear in mind though, the Sigmas ONLY center focus and they have an odd 'rattle' like a baby rattle which can be disconcerting for a lot of users.  

 

Hopefully this helps!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

i would recommend the Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS and the sigma 30mm 1.4 contemporary

 

the Sony 50mm 1.8 is a no brainer!

 

awesome lens with OSS and 1.8! great IQ ........wonderful portrait lens

 

the sigma 30mm 1.4 is also awesome very sharp and 1.4!....... a brilliant normal lens

 

i have the sony 35mm 1.8 and i don´t like it, to have the same sharpness in the center like the sigma 30mm 2.8 DN open i have to stop down the 35mm 1.8 to 5.6!

 

i you need a wide angle lens maybe the kit lens is o.k if you crop a little bit, but if needed a prime lens like the sigma 19mm 2.8 will do the job very good

 

for macro you can use a Macro Extension Ring with electronic contacts like:

 

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Macro-Extension-Ring-Mount-Tube-Kit-Lens-Set-for-Sony-NEX-E-Mount-Camera-Photo-/371537835536?hash=item5681617610:g:uKsAAOSwuYVWoSGm

 

together with the sony 50mm 1.8,

 

later you can look for a real macro lens

for macro would be best a 60mm or a 100mm lens, there is a very nice tamron 60mm macro lens but you will need a adapter

 

30mm is to close for macro so i would not go for the 30mm sony macro lens

 

the best macro lens is the FE 90mm but big and expensive, for macro manual focus is best so i would look to the samyang 100mm 2.8 macro

Link to post
Share on other sites

EXID351:  

 

Gilgenberg made very good points and I can certainly agree on most.  As usual it is the balance act of performance, price, convenience.  

 

I cannot say enough good about the Sony 50/1.8 which performs brilliantly, probably the fastest of all Sony APS lenses for autofocus, uses all focus points if desired, and has optical stabilizer as with most of the APS native Sony glass.  The SIgmas are remarkably good (Sigma 19 much better better than 16 or 20 Sony) but the Sigmas can only center focus, have that annoying rattle, and do not have the OSS but OSS is usually not needed that much when you are in the 19mm range.  The tradeoff is obviously price but the Sigma trio really are impressive for all three sizes, 19/30/60 totalling @$600.  If you want to fall back to the cheapest, good two-lens setup for walk-around/portrait plus a good wide angle, I would pair the Sony 50 with Sigma 19 and be done.  You are invested @$450 but get stunning results!  

 

For me, convenience dominates, so I lean towards good zooms if possible.  The 10-18/16-70 is a monster pairing but at a nasty $1800.  You might seek out the 18-105/F4, often on sale @$500!  It is often poo-poo'd by the prime-guys but it is SHOCKINGLY good if you stay in JPG mode most of the time and is only about $100 more than the Sony50/Sigma19 pair.  Obviously the 18-105 will not give resolution or bokeh like the primes but it does offer the wide range, obviously the longer range, the price is very good at @half the price of the OUTSTANDING Zeiss 16-70 which is also fixed F4.  The 18-105 has the very nice silent zoom, very fast focus, and copy variations are very small thus likelihood of a winner for  a surprising $500.  At its center zoom @50mm the performance is surprisingly close to the Sony 50 and not a lot worse than the Sigma 19 at the wide end so again it's the bokeh that is lost, not much else.  In summary, if I was a walk-around-guy (which I am), the 18-105 is a great option where you can fall back to the Sony 50/1.8 if you absolutely must have a staged portrait solution.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask her what her she wishes her current lens could do (go wider, longer, faster). For just seated portraits, the 50 1.8 is a great value, but, IMO, the very fairly priced 55-210 will give her more flexibility, and not just for sports. She'll have 4.8 on the 55 end, not great but better than the 5.6 on the 16-50. She'll be able to get close ups without standing on top of him, nice for quiet, unposed moments or outdoor parties; when he/she is playing at the other end of the yard, she'll be able to get that, too. Plus it doesn't weigh very much. Mine was part of a bundled kit deal; I think I use it in about 30% of my shooting.

 

For the flowers, if she wants close ups but true macro is out of your budget, consider a filter-type close up lens like the Canon 500D. You put this on a telephoto, like the 55-210 and can get in very close to flowers, bugs and other small things. Use a high ISO to get fast shutter speeds, or use a tripod.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked her what she would like. she is still a beginner and not entirely sure what would suit her. She mentioned she would love to be able to take bokeh. I also showed her a number of 50f1.8 images and they look quite nice. So I am leaning towards that lens and then decide on something else another time.

 

She does not take the camera around daily, she goes out during weekends for a couple of hours trying to get 1 good photo. So would you recommend the 50f1.8?

Link to post
Share on other sites

as addition:

 

the sigma 30mm 1.4 contemporary is a brand new lens so it has not the old rattle AF 

 

AF is super fast and silent

 

beside that the AF from the old sigmas does only rattle if camera is off

 

Sony announced a new FE 50mm macro lens

 

but i would go first for the Sony 50mm 1.8 together with the Kit lens and than let your wife decide what is missing

 

the Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS is a really awesome lens and it is a bargain, sharp with great bokeh, she will love the lens!

Link to post
Share on other sites

EX351D - OK, now it is sound like the wife is a much more casual user.  If you have the 16-50 kit lens you have a good feel for field of view so have you looked at the EXIF data to see if most images are at the wide end or narrow?  Does she want to get closer?  FOV might be the decision maker.  

 

As for the new Sigma 30/1.4, it fixes the $200 Art lens issues but this guy is a little pricey @$500.  Now you are now over the Sony 50/Sigma19 pair for $450 and just shy of the Sony 18-105.  If bokeh is the ultimate requirement, and she doesn't demand zoom, then the Sigma 30/1.4 might fit the bill.  I think it really comes down to what field of view you need and how much bokeh is needed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the 50 1.8 and 35 1.8. I love them both. It really depends what she wants to shoot. The 50 is 75mm full frame equivalent so it's great for shooting portraits. The 35 is basically a "nifty fifty" for APS-C sensors and, to me, is a better general purpose lens. It's usually what I have attached to my a6300.

 

I have to mention my other go-to walk around lens, the 16-70 f4 Zeiss, which I absolutely love.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, just looking at the lenses you've spec out, you budget seems to be something under $400. The SEL35F18 is going for around that price. I have to ask, since you only have mentioned Sony lenses. Have you looked at other brands or the used market?

 

The 16-50mm kit lens is a really good range of focal lengths. Where it's not good is the aperture. It is variable from f/3.5 to 5.6. You'll notice this when you zoom in. It will get darker as the image as you do this. I have this lens and it is just frustrating to me. It's annoying as hell if you shoot manual. If she is a beginner and shooting in Program mode, this may not be as much of an issue. I don't use mine, I'm keeping it because it might come in handy if I ever have to shoot video for something. I really wish Sony would make constant aperture 16-50mm f/2.8. 

 

Others have suggest the Sigma lenses. I own 2 of them. I have the 19mm and the 30mm 2.8 lenses. They are both really good lenses. Both can be had for under your $400 budget. If bokeh is of interest, I would have to recommend the $300 50mm f/1.8 from Sony. The 60mm Sigma with f/2.8 would be sharper but would compromise bokeh. My advice is to buy the lens that does what you want, in this case, bokeh. This is a good lens. I bought it over the Sigma because I wanted the faster 1.8 lens.

 

The 35mm will give decent bokeh, but it is also a short focal length. So you will have to get in pretty close to get bokeh. Bokeh will be great on head shots or decent with half body shots, but not really good for compositions for full body shots. Macro shots would be fine for bokeh. You could just add a set of moderately priced extension tubes for macro ($20-80). But for portraiture, I would go with the 50mm as you don't have to stand right in your subjects face to get good bokeh. The nice thing about mirrorless, is that you are looking at live view so you actually see the bokeh during your composition. This is extremely nice, since I learned on film cameras and it took about a week to get the prints back from the lab before I ever saw the results.

 

I did initially mention used lenses. I mention this because this is where you will get your best deals, check Adorama and B&H. They have decent deals, but the best ones go really fast. The same goes for Ebay. Best advice here, is know what a good deal is and pull the trigger if you are in the least bit interested. I just picked up a 32mm Zeiss Touit for under $300 on Ebay. This lens new goes discounted at $500 and normally $600, it used to sell for $1000 when it was first released. I had considered upgrading to the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, but it was too good of a deal to pass up.

 

If you are looking later at wider angle lenses later, I would recommend looking at Samyang lenses. They go by various branding including Rokinon, Bower, Neewer, & Oshiro. These are manual focus lenses, but for landscapes, you pretty much just set them to infinity and they are focused. Look for the Bower and Oshiro on Amazon. They are usually considerably cheaper. I picked up a couple of these, a 16mm and 8mm fisheye, each for about $100. The 19mm Sigma is a very good lens and is very small, and as such is better suited as take along travel lens and is only $200. The Sony wide lenses are even smaller, but costlier and not as sharp, so I would stick with the Sigma.

 

Hope you find something nice for your wife.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

I bought her the SEL50F18 portrait lens. She is quite happy with the lens. Now she would like to get a landscape lens. It seems that the sigma 19mm or the Samyang 12mm are the 2 most recommended lenses over the 16mm and 20mm Sony Lenses. Which lens would you recommend?

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you can't back up, cuz confined area, like 

an interior or in tight quarters of "urban canyon"

architectural work, a 12mm could save the day.   

    

But for most landscape work you'll just wind up 

with tiny images in the distance surrounded by 

bizarre looking overly large foreground objects. 

   

Lotsa peeps are using that effect to "Create a 

Landscape Scene" where actually none exists, 

but that bogus trick that gets old reeeeally fast.     

It just superimposes an extreme "Hey, look at

me !" perspective onto an otherwise "nothing

happening" scene :-(   

      

Soooo .... the 19 will be an excellent choice and 

can also serve you as a fine alternative general  

purpose prime. The 50 has a slightly tight angle 

and the 19 has a slightly wide angle of view. It 

means the 19 is a perfect compliment to the 50. 

Consider how a typical kit zoom is 18-55mm. A 

19 and a 50 covers both ends of such a zoom, 

and who needs the middle anywho :-) 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

When you can't back up, cuz confined area, like 

an interior or in tight quarters of "urban canyon"

architectural work, a 12mm could save the day.   

    

But for most landscape work you'll just wind up 

with tiny images in the distance surrounded by 

bizarre looking overly large foreground objects. 

   

Lotsa peeps are using that effect to "Create a 

Landscape Scene" where actually none exists, 

but that bogus trick that gets old reeeeally fast.     

It just superimposes an extreme "Hey, look at

me !" perspective onto an otherwise "nothing

happening" scene :-(   

      

Soooo .... the 19 will be an excellent choice and 

can also serve you as a fine alternative general  

purpose prime. The 50 has a slightly tight angle 

and the 19 has a slightly wide angle of view. It 

means the 19 is a perfect compliment to the 50. 

Consider how a typical kit zoom is 18-55mm. A 

19 and a 50 covers both ends of such a zoom, 

and who needs the middle anywho :-)

 

So,you would suggest the sigma 19mm?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Posts

    • Hello ! A friend gave me an old Sony SLT A65 that was locked in a suitcase for some years and guess what... It was pretty dirty. The translucent mirror looks strange. I know it's a pellicle mirror, but something is really weird , at least to me who never saw this entity before. It shows a rainbow pattern when lit, like a diffraction grid. And when I point the camera to a strong light source, let´s say streets lights or car lights, a huge halo and a diffuse pattern appears, almost like one of that photographic filters from the '70s. I guess the mirror is damaged. Does enyone have any experience with this ? I managed to remove the mirror and carefully rinse it with water and detergent solution , rinse again and dry, but the rainbow patter persists. My question is basically about the translucent mirror behavior with strong highlights and if the rainbow pattern on its surface is normal.   Thanks!  
    • Sounds like you need a manual, and you are correct different settings can affect what you can do in the drive more.  Did you simple press the DRIVE button and select the THREE rectangles? There are several "burst" modes -- that you set with the Fn button or DRIVE button.  One takes several photos, when you press the button once (CONTINUOUS).  Another requires you to press the shutter button each time (SINGLE).  When you press the DRIVE button, what icon shows up -- a single rectangle or three?
    • If the 18-105 is too bulky, then so is the Tamron 17-70. Quality wise however, definately pick the Tamron over the Sony Zeiss 16-70, which is a compromised and dated design and similar in quality to the 18-105. I was in the same boat as you for a while (also had the 16-50 kit lens and 18-105 f/4), and went with the Sony 16-55 F/2.8 G. Happy with the choice as it's more compact than the Tamron 17-70 and vastly better quality than the Zony 16-70. In your case however, the omission of stabilized optics might be a dealbreaker. Did you consider the tiny but decent Sigma 18-50 f/2.8?
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...