Jump to content

Lens advice for A58 in low light.

Recommended Posts

I am primarily using this camera to shoot pictures of my glass.  For the studio pics I'm set with the kit lens, a Tamron macro, and a Sony 200mm that work for me. For in-use pics I am usually working with very low ambient light, and I'm thinking I need a faster lens. I like the SP90 at F/2.8 but I'm wondering if there's something similar that is faster without getting too outrageous.


I sometimes use exposures as long as 30 seconds, but with a live model in the shot that's a problem.


Complicating factor: There is high voltage AC involved, so I don't want to get the camera too close. :)



Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a Planar 85mm 1.4 and a Sonnar 135mm 1.8 for a-mount but they are really expensive but awesome


there is also a Minolta AF Lens with 85mm 1.4 but i think at 1.4 it is a little bit to soft, also the planar is a little bit soft at 1.4, good for portrait but not for product shot´s i think


the sonnar 135mm is much better open


i would consider a manual lens like the samyang 85mm 1.4 for a-mount, it is cheap and very good


but at 1.4 maybe you don´t have enough DOF for your picture


so to be safe i would step down at least to F2 so your 2.8 lens is not so far from f2 and the SP is very sharp open


also interesting is the Samyang 135mm F2 manual focus lens for a-mount that has awesome reviews


they say it is in the same league than the sonnar 135mm 1.8 and the canon EF 135mm 2.0


and should have open excellent IQ


i would go with a camera that has better ISO like the A99II........(-;


maybe also the A77II has better ISO or the old A99?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure i understand why you mention high AC Voltage ?

Shoot pictures of your glass ???? Is this a typo ?


Not sure either about your need for a specific focal length


Sony makes 2 great affordable fixed lenses with F 1,8 for APS-C bodies ( SAL 35mm F1.8 and SAL 50mm F1.8 ) these should help in available light. Longer would be Minolta's 85mm F 1.4 and 100mm F2 that would also fit but at the expense of a higher price but still much lower than the 2 Zeiss options mentioned above.

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

  • Posts

    • I mostly see posterization artifacts, which are the result of lossy compressed RAW files (or bad jpeg conversion). Unfortunately, the A6400 doesn't offer uncompressed or lossless compressed RAW. The noise might indeed result from the smaller sensor than what you're used to. If you're not shooting at max aperture, you could try shooting at wider aperture and lower ISO. When you're not shooting at max aperture, fullframe versus APS-C shouldn't matter much in terms of ISO-performance combined with depth of field: at the same ISO and aperture value, fullframe offers better noise performance but with a narrower depth of field. This can be offset by choosing a larger aperture and lower ISO on the APS-C camera. If you want a fullframe camera the size of an A6400, try the A7C(ii).
    • ..unfortunately, the lighting was correct. The shot required deeper shadows. The K1 ff didnt have these banding issues [yes, I know the sensor is larger]. The film shots had details in the same light. The sony files, both the jpg and raw, had this banding/noise - with NO retouch or post adjustments [straight out of the camera]. the camera was purchased new a few years ago and I am trying to determine if there is something wrong, or the settings are wrong, or the camera just cant handle this kind of lighting [studio + softbox]. No shadow detail is one thing... banding/noise in the shadows is unacceptable. Does sony have a body this size that is FF ? Im wondering if that would make a difference..  dw
    • The root causes for banding are uneven lighting, incorrect exposure settings, or compression artefacts or certain kinds of artificial lighting, especially LED lights. Also the lens used plays a role, I have noticed it more with my sharpest lenses, looks like they outresolve the sensor when I have a uniform blue sky. There is more than one solution, and ultimately post-processing, but the root cause has to be identified first.
  • Topics

  • Create New...