Jump to content

Lens recommendation for night time photography


LSI_CameraGuy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I live in NYC and am interested in taking nighttime photos of cityscapes, bridges, etc. w/ my A6000.  I am a beginner and I've tried with 16-50mm kit lens but pics didn't come out well likely due to small aperture.  I know a lot of people use the Rokinon 12mm for these shots but I'm wondering if that might be too wide and would be better with Sony 35mm f/1.8, for example.

 

I'd be interested in hearing what lenses have been used and what folks like and dislike.  Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

The 16-50 has distortion and vignetting. Other than that, the pictures depend on the settings. The light metering doesn't work at night, so you'll have to dial in the exposure manually. With a normal camera, you'll be doing long exposures, so you can use a small aperture and a slow shutter speed. If you want light trails and such you can bump ISO a bit but keep it low to avoid noise.

 

Alternative lens depends on where and what you're shooting. You should get a lens with low coma and CA and uniform sharpness across the frame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

`

 

    

Lens speed for nightscapes is no big deal. 

This is the 16-50 f/5.6 .... at f/5.6 . If you're 

having problem, it is NOT due to a "small" 

aperture. ISO 800 in the early, "only" 16mp

ancestor of your a6000 ... the Nex-6. Your 

camera should handle higher ISO than my 

older version. There's definitely more light 

at night in NYC than here in Albany :-)  

   

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!

   

    

  

       

    

  

You should get beyond failing to get results

from the kit lens. When you have frequent 

success at using it, then you will know just 

what you'd like to further improve, which will 

dictate your next choice of new gear !   

    

Somebody's sig line says "The best camera

is the one you have with you". Since I was at 

this location to play music, the camera was 

just an extra piece of gear, thus the compact 

16-50 collapsible lens on APSC body. Shots 

were taken during a set break cuz we were 

playing the penthouse level and the view was 

too good to pass up. Clearly, in such a casual 

circumstance no tripod was available.    

   

  

 

`

Link to post
Share on other sites

Username makes good points. If you aren’t getting satisfactory results with the 16-50 consider posting sample shots with an explanation how you captured them and ask for advice.

The lens does have distortion and vignetting, but the camera corrects for them in jpeg mode. In raw mode they must be corrected for in post. That the price paid to get such a compact lens, but for me it’s worth it. That’s my general purpose lens. I also have a bunch of adapted primes (Minolta and Pentax) but the kit lens gets the most use.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

The 16-50 is under-engineered and can't really be corrected in a meaningful way. If you want a decent kitlens, get the 18-55 instead. Apart from that, I get a feeling that the OP is talking about settings problems not optical problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Username - good to see you got decent pics w/ kit lens and no tripod.  

I'm guessing you used a very slow shutter speed, something I didn't

do initially.  I will try using different shutter speeds.

  

  

Learning how to prop up a camera is an improvisational skill, 

not a technical skill. Anyone can practice at that without pain   

of deciphering Sony's menus or manuals. Finding a vantage 

point, propping up the camera so it's steady, just having the 

damnt thing WITH you ... all that is what makes the pictures.   

   

Is the 16-50 "under-engineered" and "not ... correctable" ? 

Perhaps Jaf's info is quite correct. Correct, yet unimportant 

to most applications of the gear. Use cheap affordable stuff 

and every now and then, some circumstance will how you 

where better gear might have been helpful. With experience 

you'll know how often this occurs within YOUR photography.   

  

Then you can decide if the occasional opportunity for some 

level of improvement is worth gearing up for. Only your own 

accumulated experience with "lesser" gear can show you in 

WHICH situations improvement is needed, and how often is 

this occurring ?  

   

Since I tend to work in challenging conditions, I cannot find 

any value in premium gear designed for great image quality. 

Such gear usually shows its abilities only under nearly ideal 

working conditions ... and I find those conditions too boring. 

So, no IQ champions for me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

We're nearing problem solved, so I'll just pick up the 16-50 thread.

 

The 16-50 is the worst kitlens ever made by any company. The worst problem is that the image circle doesn't fully cover the sensor. That means you get optical flaws that can't be corrected.

 

I always react when someone says the 16-50 is good or good enough. No, it isn't and you don't have to defend your use of the lens by pretending it's good.

 

I strongly feel that everyone who has a 16-50 lens should just send it back to Sony and tell them to keep it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I won’t be returning my 16-50 to Sony, as I’ve been pleased with many shots I’ve taken with it. Its compact size makes it easier to bring along when I want a camera around just in case I see something that interests me. I understand why it gets a lot of criticism, but I find it useful in spit of limitations. For those who haven’t seen it, here’s the good bad and ugly on this lens.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/e-16-50mm-f3.5-5.6-pz-oss-selp1650/review/

Is there any APS-C lens on the market for any mount with a similar focal length range, aperture, and pancake form factor that’s managed to produce a well performing lens without correction? Here’s the Olympus 14-42, but that’s micro 4/3.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/olympus/14-42mm-f3.5-5.6-ez-ed-m.zuiko-digital/review/

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

×
×
  • Create New...