E-Mount Cameras & Lenses - Landscapes & Wildlife

[StuartJLeigh]

Hello, 

 

I have had my NEX-5 for the past 6 years and have loved but I am now looking to upgrade to either the 6000, 6300 and 6500. 

 

With the recent release of the 6500 there is a huge price gap from the 6000 to the 6500. Has anyone had hands on experience with both of these cameras and can let me know pro's and con's?

 

With that there seem to be a lot of newer lenses which are only compatible with the 6500 (though I am not exactly sure how accurate the Sony website is on this front as some lenses seem none compatible to any camera!). 

 

Which lenses would people recommend for the someone who loves being out and about taking shots of landscapes and nature (both from afar and as close as one can get/dares!)? 

 

Thanks, 

 

Stuart.

[wedge]

The best wildlife lens you can current get for E-mount are the 70-200 or the 70-300.   

I took these shots with an A6000 + 70-200 F4

[Zé De Boni]

Coming from the NEX-5, any of the three cameras you mention will be a great step. You will enjoy the EVF, which will allow you a better way to follow your subject with normal to long lenses. The two zooms mentioned by Wedge are really the best options, mainly to keep the balance with the light body.

For camera bodies, the A6000 is great and now it is a bargain. I own two and love them. You can do a lot with it, basically the same quality still images as the newest models.

The A6300 offers improvements in video capture (4K) and better EVF. Just for that, I was not compelled to buy it.

The greatest advantage of the A6500 is the 5 axis stabilization, which I really enjoy in the A7RII (specially with A-mount and third party lenses). I think the A6500 is really worth the price (more than the 6300). I will get one as soon as it is regularly available.

Now, it depends on your budget. You may get 3 A6000's with what will cost just one A6500 (or 2 with the same for one A6300!). Two bodies is a great idea, depending on how frequently you shoot. The idealistic pair of one A6500 and one A6000 is enough for all kind of situations in the field. 

About lenses, you should have mentioned what you have for your old camera. Anyway, this is my recommendation on the wide to mid-tele range for landscape(to complement any of the long zoom suggested):

• Don't get the kit zoom, nor the pancake wides (16mm and 20mm). They are terrible.
• You may choose a mid-range zoom (wide to tele). The 16-70mm may be a nice one-lens complement to the long zooms suggested. I never used it, so I just follow what I've read about it in this forum and reviews.
• The 18-105mm is another good complement or even as a solo lens (for a solo body) if you don't need long teles. I own one. It doesn't perform as a prime (though better than the pancakes!!), but the results are nice for all around use. It is cheap (actually a bargain for its features) and that may allow you to invest on some primes for specific purposes. It is a great HD video lens, I can assure.

All the zooms mentioned are OSS (optically stabilized), so the A6000 is still a good option if you don't want to spend too much.

The primes that I suggest and use:

• One ultra wide-angle: Rokinon  12mm f/2 - manual focus, great results and low price
• Sony Sonnar 24mm f/1.8 - good results but expensive
• Sony 35mm f/1.8 - good results, good price
• Sigma 19mm f/2.8 - really cheap, fair to good results (the best prime for Sony APSC on its FL range); get it just if you want to build a prime lens set; at just one stop more than the wide-tele zooms mentioned, it is almost useless as IQ is not quite different than what you get with those zooms

A good suggestion to get "as close as one can get" is the just released Sony 50mm f/2.8 Macro.

 

A final tip: save money for a good and light tripod, remote (or cable) release and first quality (nano coated) polarizing filters.

[Zé De Boni]

Hi!

I've just read Phillip Reevew, I mean Phillip Reeve's review on the new 50mm f/2.8 macro. Excelent review!

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-sony-fe-2-850-macro

From what I've read I can no longer recommend this lens because of the too short distance at 1:1, the slow autofocus, the mechanics of manual focus at macro distances and the not-rounded diafragm blades.

So, please disregard that suggestion.