I was looking at a review of the Sigma 30mm f/2.8 

 

 

The guy is giving this lens a huge thumbs up and states that you don't need OSS [as in the SEL35F18] with an a6000 because of the fast burst mode.

 

The ideas is that if you are taking a low light shot at say 1/10 second and you fire off say 10 frames in a second you should get at least one pic without camera shake.

 

To be honest I haven't tried it but it sounds right?

 

It's not something you would want to do all night however......you would end up with a card mostly full of duds.

 

I was planning to buy a Sony 35mm f/1.8 OSS.......[1.8 and OSS seemed irresistible, though expensive].....but now the Sigma is looking good. 

 

So does anybody actually use burst mode like this in low light?

Why you not use remote to make picture or i use free app that shutter when move in front proximity sensor

so it is easy in burst mode at say 1/10 second and you fire off say 10 frames in a second that you have at least 10 blurred pictures.

 

but i can not recommend the Sony 35mm f1.8 OSS...maybe my copy is bad but it has a lot of CA and LA and is not really sharp open and very expensive 

 

the sigma  has a little bit better IQ IMO but the Sony 50mm 1.8 OSS is very good..... if you can live with 50mm take this lens

 

the kit lens is also o.k. and has oss...to find a good 35mm is not easy

 

better than the sigma are the zeiss lenses: the sonnar FE 35mm 2.8 also very good is the Sony E24mm 1.8 or the 32mm touit ........but no OSS

 

if you like manual focus the Minolta 35mm 2.8 is amazing ...you can get it for 35 + 10 for the adapter

 

or the voigtländer 35mm lenses are very good....no OSS

 

I like the FE 28-70 (A7 kitlens) on my NEX7 more than the 35mm 1.8 but it has only 3,5 but OSS

 

see yourself

all with F4 dark room 1/20

 

A7 Kitlens + Nex7 + OSS

 

Sony SEL 50mm F1.8 + OSS

 

 

SEL 35mm f 1.8 + OSS

 

SIGMA 30mm 1 of 5  F4 no OSS 1/20 

All I'm seeing is 5 out of 5 fuzzy pictures.

No wonder you get 10 out of 10 fuzzy pix

in burst mode.

 

For many users the burst mode approach

is very useful. There's plenty of storage on

the card for duds. I found that the 2nd and

3rd frames are usually best but sometimes

it's the 3rd and 4th ... so it's just kinda like

dealing with a long release lag.

 

This is 1/15 @ 210mm with an OSS lens.

What works for you is what to use. Most

of my lenses lack OSS so I'll use the burst

method, as in the second pic below. It's not

1/10, it's 1/40, but it's approaching macro

range so a bit more speed is demanded.

 

I prefer a very graphic image for testing. If

you screw up, it reeeeeally rats you out !

 

 

 

 

 

`

The MFNR (multi-frame noise reduction) ISO mode in the A6000 is very useful and is probably what the reviewer was alluding to. In MFNR mode the camera automatically shoots a burst of images and stitches them together. The amount of images and speed of the burst varies according to available light. This mode works great for non-moving subjects since the camera is then able to stitch images together very accurately. If there are any moving elements in the scene they will be blurred.

Thanks Guys.

Hmmm....I actually tried this with the 1650 with OSS turned off....mainly blurred pics.

I'm still tossing up the Sony 35mm and the Sigma 30mm in my head [Zeiss stuff is out of my $ range]

If it was only day time shooting I'd go for the Sigma without a second thought.

Then I think of all the times I've been in galleries/cathedrals etc.wishing desperately for a fast stabilized lens...   

Thanks Al Pha,

I had completely missed the MFNR function !...Yes very useful....and provides more contrast in an image than with HDR.

I do think though the reviewer was referring to using burst mode to get an unblurred shot  

ok if you don´t see the difference

here some crop´s

 

 

i mean ...yes....there is not much of a difference so why spending so much money for the Sony E35

 

i like the E50 most but the A7 Kitlens is also very good

 

 

it was dark (artificial light) and handheld 1/20 ISO 1250

i choose the best of every series

 

SIGMA E30

 

Sony E35

 

Sony E50

 

Sony FE 28-70

Based on those crops I would say 50 slightly better than 30. Both substantially better than the kit lens which IMO is very slightly nicer, again IMO, than the 35.

 

How does the 16-50 do compared to those 4? Big drop off from the other kit lens and 35?

o.k.

 

more 35mm

 

judged from RAW files on  my computer:

 

1. Canon EF 35,

2. FE 28-70,

3. E18-55 (quite good!),

 

............. 4. PZ 16-50...IMO

 

with 

NEX-7, Iso 100, tripod, OSS off

Canon EF 35mm F2 (at 4.5 !)

Kitlens PZ 16-50 at 5.6

Kitlens E18-55  at 5.6

Kitlens FE28-70  at 5.6

Thanks for that Gilgenberg....yes the badly maligned 1650 seems to be holding it own there!

 

Most reviewers concede that  the 1650 improves significantly after 20mm and from my limited experience its a very handy lens to have with not too bad image quality.

 

I have also, with some good fortune, just purchased a Sigma 30mm 2.8.

 

I'd decided to bite the bullet and go for the Sony 35f18....I ordered it locally on-line where it was advertised as 'in stock'.....yeah...and so it goes.....I got an estimate of 'a couple of weeks' delivery...as I had 'just missed out on the last one in stock'  

 

So I cancelled, got the Sigma, saved $300 AUD...and couldn't be happier...sharp as !!!...and figured I could handle low light situations at F/2.8 and using the a6000's DRO, DHR and MFNR

 

Also, that extra 5mm provides a little more wriggle room...and with my upgrade/size downgrade to the a6000 my intention is to just stick to one, good quality walk around lens as much as possible.

the sigma 30mm is a good choice !

o.k.

 

more 35mm

 

judged from RAW files on my computer:

 

1. Canon EF 35,

2. FE 28-70,

3. E18-55 (quite good!),

 

............. 4. PZ 16-50...IMO

 

with

NEX-7, Iso 100, tripod, OSS off

 

Thank you!

I'm gonna try this technique with my new Zeiss 32mm because it doesn't have stabilization compared to the Sony 35mm