Tricky lens question?

[voffla]

I am a proud owner of an a6000 and am about to buy a new lens. (I am also pretty new to this world, but i am a fast learner). Could u come with suggestions because its a jungle out there, the names of the lenses doesnt give me much help.. I am after a wideangle with zoom and AF and it should not be that big. Price range €3-400. Anyone having a lens u could recommend?

Thanx alot.

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[McQ]

If you're looking for a wide angle zoom for the A6000, the Sony SEL 10-18 f4 OSS is pretty much the only lens in the game. The retail price in Europe is about €750, but you can find it on ebay for about €600. Buying directly second hand, you might be able to get it for around €500.

 

Keep in mind, that is a verrrry wide angle lens. Google SEL1018 and look at the images for some examples.

As an alternative, you could get the Sony 16mm f2.8 and the wide angle adapter together for around €200. Or, if you're mainly interested in landscapes, you could use the panorama setting on the camera... for free!

 

[voffla]

Mcq, thanx for helping out. Maybe i should put it like this, I am mostly interested in taking photos indoor, without needing to take a few steps back to grasp the motive of many people at our dinner table.. (Thinking Wide angle should help) And sometimes i want to zoom in into a happening in the room. But still having the oppurtunity with a focal lenght (1,4-3) to get those blury backrounds and sharpness of the motive.

 

Is there just the one u propose i am happy with that, just wanted to update of my need incase it was blury before.

 

Thanks alot!

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[SpaceManSpiff]

Hej Voffla!

 

Are you looking for something wider than the 16-50 kit lens?   The 16-70 f/4 is no wider than the kit lens but is brighter for most of its focal range.  As McQ mentioned, the only other zoom lens is the 10-18 which is dang wide (15-28mm full frame equivalent focal length).  

 

At the really really wide angles you are not going to get very blurred backgrounds --it is just the nature of the beast.

For indoor use, I use the 16-50 with my NEX-6 for the wide angle stuff and either the FE28 f/2 or the 50 f/1.8 for the longer focal lengths where the better light gathering ability of the prime lenses is useful (The 24mm f/1.8 or the 35mm f/1.8 would also be useful but I don't have those). 

 

Cheers,

[Golem]

The situation is that a 16-50 kit zoom already

covers the equivalent of 24mm wide angle on

a FF camera, which is not only pretty wide but

is also the "gatekeeper" [or threshold] FL that

represents the widest FOV before you find you

need significant skill and experience to handle

the odd aspects of using an ultra-wide lens.

  

You might find a non-Sony lens with a brighter

maximum aperture to help improve your indoor

exposures, and the brighter lens might not go

down to 10mm because of design limitations in

building the bigger diameter optic for a brighter  

lens. If you find a lens of 12 or 14mm to about

40 or 60mm, with an f/2.8 aperture, that could

be ideal but you won't find that for 400 euro :-( 

  

Basically, if you wanna stay within your budget

you need to maximize your ability to use your

kit zoom. Your budget will buy useful low light

help on the software side of photography, such

as noise cleaning software so you can shoot at

higher ISO than your current personal limit. But  

you stated budget will not buy much lens-wise. 

 

  

`

  

`

[voffla]

Thanks guys!, It really messes me up talking about the mm:) But in a couple of weeks I will handle that talk as well. I know it has something to do with the distance between the camera sensor and the lens. But Not what the effect is. Anyway, two questions? Spaceman, when u say u use nex-6 16-50 AND either x or y, to get wide effect, is x or y something you add to the lens? It sounded good:) Secondly Golem, "learn to use the kit zoom" what does that mean?

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[voffla]

Maybe this one can cover my needs? http://www.amazon.com/Sony-SELP1650-16-50mm-Power-Zoom/dp/B0096W1PG6/ref=sr_1_1?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1431898291&sr=1-1#customerReviews

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[LeButler]

The mm relates to the field of view: how wide or narrow your photo's view is.

 

Your link goes to the lens that almost always comes with the camera, the "Kit" lens. We've all been assuming you already have that one and wanted something even wider, in which case McQ's reply is very comprehensive. If that isn't the case, the 16-50mm is likely to be suitable.

 

However. To buy this "Kit" lens separately is a complete rip off. It's a basic, very cheap lens which adds barely e50 to the cost of buying a new camera, yet when sold separately is priced at 5x that amount.

 

If you don't already have it, buy second hand. If you must have new, buy an A5000 kit that includes the lens (total cost e20 more than the lens alone) then sell the camera for e150-200. Crazy!

 

 

[if you really did want something even wider than 16mm, there is no solution that meets all your requirements. The Sony 10-18mm meets all except price. The Canon 10-18mm + cheap adaptor meets all except no autofocus. And the 16mm + 12mm converter meets all except it’s not a zoom].

[voffla]

Le Butler, thank you for the summary and suggestions with money savings and explainations. Very kind and tolerant people here u guys, hope to give back some day soon! The kit i Recieved with my camera was a 30mm sigma f2.8, thanx to your explaination of mm it gives me insight about what I need. Strange though that less mm gives wider scope.

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[McQ]

The "kit lens" for the A6000 is the 16-50mm powerzoom. This is the lens that Sony packages with the camera. The Sigma 30mm is a prime (non-zoom/fixed focal length). I'm guessing the dealer packaged this with a body, perhaps as a way to move inventory.

Many people dismiss the 16-50mm kit lens as being substandard. However, in blind tests between that lens and the more expensive Sony/Zeiss 16-70mm f4, most cannot tell the difference. While it may be a "rip off" to buy it at the full retail price of $349, used and refurbished copies are available for about $120, more or less what you would pay for it if you bought it with the camera. That's a very reasonable price for that versatile and compact lens.

 

For indoor shots and the blurred background resulting from shallow depth of field, you really need a 'fast' lens, one with a large aperture of f2 or larger. (The f-stop number refers to the ratio between the diameter of the lens and the size of the aperture. Google "f-stop chart" for reference.) Typically, this will be an f1.8 or f1.4 lens. Logistically, it isn't possible to engineer an f1.8 or faster zoom. It would be too large for practical use. The zoom lenses you see most professionals using are generally f2.8. Sony is sticking with f4 as a maximum aperture for the high end zooms it is designing for the mirrorless cameras.

In short, you're looking for something that doesn't exist. No shame in that. Many of us went through this when starting out, hoping for the Holy Grail of lenses.

 

If you are going to do a lot of shooting indoors, you might consider a faster prime lens. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is an excellent lens for this. You could also consider using a manual focus lens with an adapter. My favorite lens to use is a Minolta 50mm f1.4, which I use with a focal reducer or simple adapter. The A6000 has 'focus peaking', which highlights in focus areas, and magnification to make manual focus much easier and more reliable. Another benefit of focus peaking is that it will show you what is not in focus, giving you a better idea of what will be blurred. In short time, this has become my preferred way to shoot. For 'zooming' with that lens, I do it the old-fashioned way, with my feet and arms. More than a few teachers recommend beginners work this way to become more engaged and in tune with the act and art of photography.

Soooo... in closing, my recommendations are as follows:

Sony 16-50mm for outdoors and use with flash: used or refurbished $120

 

and, if you're feeling adventurous...

Old school manual focus 50mm f1.4 or f1.2 (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, etc.) $60

Appropriate focal reducer for old school lens $100

Simple adapter for old school lens $20

 

or, to keep autofocus and aperture control

 

Sony 35mm f1.8 $400 (This really is an excellent option. If I were to start over, that might be the only lens I'd get. The Sigma is something of a poor man's version of this lens, not as big of an aperture but excellent optics.)

 

Oh, yes, and that comment about "learning to use the kit lens first", this is a pretty common reply from veterans when they spot someone hoping to solve perceived problems with a new lens. There's a lot to learn in mastering that camera, different lenses, photo processing software, use of flash, etc. So sometimes it's best to put on the brakes and use what you have. Be patient and have fun experimenting.

[Golem]

......... Golem, "learn to use the kit zoom" what does that mean?

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

  

Actually, I thought you already had the "kit zoom". But

then you posted a link, and asked about the 16-50mm

compact zoom ... which IS the kit zoom.

  

What did I mean by "learn to use it" ? Well, you will find

that the kit zoom does not do well in forum postings. It

gets no respect from those who like to look down on any

optic that is not the optic that THEY chose after so much

"expert research".

 

Well, it doesn't do well in forums, but it does much better

on the camera. It's only "average" in it's abilities. But it's

not very expensive either. It has it's limitations, but learn

to use it anyway, and you get great pictures. "Average"

is not a bad score. It's just not "premier league". So who

cares about that ? It works. OK, we DO know who cares

about that, but the question is, do want the admiration of

those complainers, or do you just want to get going and

learn photography ?

  

Altho SOME of the complainers might exaggerate more

or less than others, the actual shortcomings that they're

pointing out [in various products] really do exist. It's just

that they have an overblown opinion of the importance

of owning gear having reduced shortcomings .... such as

whatever gear THEY have chosen. No product is perfect,

so it's a question of what degree of imperfection is OK.

 

Here's the important thing: The degree that is OK is not

some absolute. It's a very subjective question. There is

truly nothing on the market that cannot deliver excellent

photographs under a variety of conditions. But it is true

that more versatile gear will deliver that under a greater

variety of conditions.

 

With lesser gear you have to put greater attention into:

 

1. Focusing carefully

2. Holding the camera level and steady 

3. Predicting the subject's motion or actions

4. Utilizing as much sensor area as possible

5. Awareness of internal reflections in lenses

 

The list could be longer if I think about it longer. But

all of those tasks are normal to photography. It's just

that lesser gear demands more attention to the task. 

It's not that better gear automates any of those tasks,

but better helps YOU to do them. Example: A lesser

sensor forces you to a lower ISO, so you must shoot  

at lower shutter speeds, which causes tasks 2 and 3 

[above] to require more careful operation. Another

example is task 5. The best optics have the fewest

problems about internal reflections.

  

 

  

`

[voffla]

I guess I know in a couple of days what I really think of the zoom kit.. But clearly in theory it has all the functions I need, and a low price. Strange though that no manufacture can manage a lens in the next price segment with better quality, not just average. I promise to get back to u guys with my verdict, above or below my now average expectations. I bought it for €150 used but new.

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

[Snowfun]

If you enjoy the experience of taking the pictures and then enjoy sharing them with friends & family the kit lens will meet your requirements. It's more than capable of facilitating superb images.

 

If you avoid looking at the corners of the file at 100% on a monitor (pixel peeping) and spending hours googling sites which "scientifically" analyse resolution etc. you'll find that life is good!

 

Have fun!