Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Lens for flowers, gardens, landscapes


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Lynngator

Lynngator

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 28 December 2016 - 07:24 PM

Advertisement (Gone after free registration)

I am a new member of the forum and a new a6000 owner. I am currently trying out the 16-50 kit lens, but wondered what you all with more Sony experience might recommend for me. I mainly take photos of flowers and gardens for my magazine and newspaper articles and blogs. I also like to shoot landscapes. What do you think! Cheers and Happy New Year.



#2 Dollanganger

Dollanganger

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 101 posts

Posted 30 December 2016 - 02:39 PM

I'd use two different lenses.

 

For flowers get a good "macro" lens made for such. 70mm+

 

For landscapes the 16-50 kit lens isn't top of the line but you can still do a lot with it. 16mm on an APSC sensor is pretty wide. Any wider will cause distortions in the landscape photos. If you're OK with this or this is what you want, Sony has several super wide angle prime lenses for very low prices.

 

It's always difficult to answer these questions because it really depends on how much you're looking to spend. The Zeiss lenses are higher quality but you'd mainly notice the difference in the macro lens. 



#3 Lynngator

Lynngator

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 30 December 2016 - 07:04 PM

Thank you so much Dollanganger. I am looking to stay under $500 for the moment. I can save up and splash out on a better lens next Christmas. I have read about the Sony 35 1.8 lens and wonder if that might be a good choice for me. It gets enthusiastic reviews. And the price is right. I'm still doing some research. I will also look into the macro you suggested. Take care and Happy New Year.



#4 KMG

KMG

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 85 posts
  • LocationOttawa, Canada

Posted 30 December 2016 - 11:04 PM

In addition to Dollanganger's suggestions, have you looked at the FE 50 f/2.8? https://www.bhphotov..._2_8_macro.html

It would work out to 75mm on the A6000 APS-C and come in just under your $500 limit.

 

I don't have any experience with it but I've seen some positive reviews. Personally I shoot with the A7II 90mm f/2.8 macro.

 

One benefit of using the 50mm macro on an APS-C camera is that it works out as a nice focal length for portraits if you're into that. I regularly used my 50mm f/2.8 Minolta macro on my A700 with great results.

 

I'm not really a landscape shooter so I'd deffer to Dollanganger's advice.



#5 Lynngator

Lynngator

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 31 December 2016 - 07:39 PM

Thanks so much, KMG. I don't do people portraits, just plant portraits :) I'll definitely check out your suggestion. Happy New Year!



#6 porterbasset

porterbasset

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 02 January 2017 - 09:06 PM

Though it's not a favorite lens of many because of the soft borders, the Sony 30mm macro lens is an amazing lens because of how close you can get to the subject 3.74" (9.5 cm). I do a lot of wildflower photos. Since the wildflowers are smaller than domestic hybrids, the lens does a nice job. I like it better than my Sony 90mm macro lens, even though the 90mm lens is far superior glass. The 30mm center sharpness is pretty good. Since it's 45mm equivalent on the a6000, it can be used for some landscape shots, though the soft borders don't make it the best for that.

Here are a couple of photos using the a6000 and the 30mm macro lens:

s6april-14-15f-22_DxOcv1300.jpg

 

s6mar-27_28-15f-45_DxOcv-1300.jpg



#7 Username

Username

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 598 posts

Posted 05 January 2017 - 02:58 AM

I am a new member of the forum and a new a6000 owner. I am currently

trying out the 16-50 kit lens, but wondered what you all with more Sony

experience might recommend for me. I mainly take photos of flowers and

gardens for my magazine and newspaper articles and blogs. I also like

to shoot landscapes. What do you think! Cheers and Happy New Year.

 

The 16-50 doesn't get a lotta online love, but it's a fine lens,  

and the OSS is helpful for lying on your belly to get shots that 

aren't very tripod-friendly. It's not a superb lens. It's just a very 

good lens, and great as most any at it's best f/stops. Moreover 

since I'm gonna suggest that you simply apply some dioptre 

close up lenses to it, it matters not in the least whether it's a 

prestigious lens or not. CU dioptres are the great levelers ;-) 

 

Despite the [minor] IQ loss with dioptres, the loss is least with 

the least powerful dioptres, and since the 16-50 focuses damnt 

close all on it's own, you don't really need the stronger dioptres 

[+3 or +4]. And if you happen to actually find a use for stronger 

dioptres, you're gonna be at a magnification that demands f/22 

just to get a modest dose of DoF ... so the dioptre isn't really a 

major drag on IQ. Some will tell you the big drag is diffraction 

at f/22. They're correct, but ignore them. They're pixel peepers. 

 

Before you spend REAL Money, spend some pocket change

on my suggestion and see how it goes realworldwise :-) You 

won't tend to find 40.5mm threaded dioptres on the hoof. I'd 

suggest a 40.5 > 52mm stepping ring as regular daily wear for 

for you kit lens. You can easily find old dioptere sets, linear

polarizers, and other fun filters for cheap in the very common 

52mm [classic Nikon] size. Mirrorless Sony live view cameras 

[every E or FE  mount body] do not need circular polarizers :-) 




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
x

New Members Welcome!

Not yet registered? Really?

Registration is free and takes only a few minutes.

After the free registration you can discuss with members from all over the world, put questions and present your images.

We are looking forward to you!

Admin Andreas und Sony Alpha Forum Team

Register now! X