Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

After all , I recently got a new sony
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Rangefinder / Viewfinder Cameras
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:24 pm    Post subject: After all , I recently got a new sony Reply with quote
I was long time debating to get a new camera with god low light performance . I was much leaning towards oly but finally I got an A5000 with 16-50 oss .Mmmmm
Definitely more toyish feeling that my nex3 . The lens is not so bad , seems acceptable for a light smaaaal af stabilised do itall portable package.
I 'll try to use it in my next trip as a compact light af solution. The af sony lenses (primes)seem a bit pricey to me.
Some users here ?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 1:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You can get the Sigma 19 or 30 F2.8.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
You can get the Sigma 19 or 30 F2.8.


Both excellent lenses. There's also a Sigma 60mm.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:
There's also a Sigma 60mm.


and that's a excellent lens too Wink


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would recommend Sony 50mm f/1.8 OSS over the Sigma 60. With a little more, you get more than a stop and the valuable OSS. The Sigma is a bit more sharper than the Sony, though.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
You can get the Sigma 19 or 30 F2.8.


+1 both great lenses for the price


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 12:30 pm    Post subject: Re: After all , I recently got a new sony Reply with quote
Teo wrote:
with 16-50 oss

The lens is not so bad , seems acceptable for a light smaaaal af stabilised do itall portable package.


I was thinking about buying it for my wife but the reviews of the lens were so bad, I didn't dare .. Confused

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=2


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:05 pm    Post subject: Re: After all , I recently got a new sony Reply with quote
kansalliskala wrote:
Teo wrote:
with 16-50 oss

The lens is not so bad , seems acceptable for a light smaaaal af stabilised do itall portable package.


I was thinking about buying it for my wife but the reviews of the lens were so bad, I didn't dare .. Confused

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=2

Yes , I know , I was myself also in that position and had more pluses lens wise for the mft system . I am testing it now and have a bit of mixed feelings. What I can say is that I wasn't tempted to say "crap" from the beginning , and not even now. I went for sony after all because the manual lenses and adapters for nex that I have . This kit is passable if knowing its weakneses and avoid them . I am trying not to shoot at 16 mm because of the distortions . From 19 upwards seems better. But that 16-19 is useful sometimes. I like the twilight handheld mode , this being one of the reasons that I went for sony in the end.
I am looking at the 19 mm from Sigma for the future ...this will bring me one stop more brightness at 19 mm but will lose three stops image stabilisation with clearly better sharpness , it seems .
The 35/1,8 oss could be ideal but a bit pricey...probably I'll pass that for those money... but, Who knows?


PostPosted: Fri Jun 26, 2015 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-E16-50mm-F35-56-on-Sony-A5000-versus-Olympus-MZUIKO-DIGITAL-ED-14-42mm-F35-56-on-Olympus-OM-D-E-M5-versus-EF-S-18-55mm-f-3.5-5.6-IS-II-on-Canon-EOS-100D__1082_929_414_793_367_871
The results don't look so dramatic in this

And if you analize the numbers here you'll see ...canon is better , but the sony , clearly smaller , promises decent results
Even in the photozone review the numbers are relevant.

But indeed the uncorrected distortion is ...unbelievable , but with correction activated ,it' s ok
Good enough for usual snapshots if not pushed in extreme conditions ( speed, focal, light, etc)


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
With the kit lens at 50mm crop



The original one resized




At 16 mm




PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 11:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The kit zoom is quite decent if you don't enlarge too much. I use it a lot on my Nex-7 for not-so-important shots.
I have the Sigma Art trio as well, 19-30-60, and they are significantly better lenses than the kit zoom and surprisingly cheap for the IQ they offer. If you decide to get them you won't regret it, I'm sure.

I'll hopefully soon upgrade to an A7II and the Sigma Art trio lenses are the ones I'll miss the most, I have no doubt. I plan to replace them with the 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/2.8 A-mount lenses from Sony(on my shorter buying list) and with the 50mm f/1.4 Minolta AF (I already have it) via the LA-EA4 adapter.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 12:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dan_ wrote:

I'll hopefully soon upgrade to an A7II and the Sigma Art trio lenses are the ones I'll miss the most, I have no doubt. I plan to replace them with the 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/2.8 A-mount lenses from Sony(on my shorter buying list) and with the 50mm f/1.4 Minolta AF (I already have it) via the LA-EA4 adapter.


be careful!

The SAL-35F18 is a DT (APS-C) lens. You better look for the Minolta AF 2/28mm, 2/35mm or 1.4/35mm G lenses.. or get a Sonnar FE 2.8/35 in E-Mount. The new Sony SEL-28F20 (2/28mm) could be another option.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Jan!
Good to know it before buying. Very Happy
I'll change my list accordingly.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 29, 2015 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Dan , did you planned the SAL or the SEL 35/1,8 ? I don't know about the SEL 35/1,8 oss if it's a ff or aps-c lens ( but probably a super one)
About the sigmas , I am planning at least the 19/2,8 but don't know if the 2,8 is not too restrictive for low light ? What's your experience ?


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sony/Zeiss SAL lenses (A-Mount) with "DT" in their name and SEL (E-Mount) without a "FE" are APS-C only.. means both Sony 1.8/35 aren't for FF


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 6:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
dan_ wrote:
The kit zoom is quite decent if you don't enlarge too much.

Yep, it's great for snapshots and even for keepers it still can be pretty decent.
That extra reach to 16mm often comes quite handy. The distortion is corrected either via the camera itself or in Post so I don't really care about it. And uncorrected you get a 15mm Fisheye... Laughing

Considering price, bulk and weight it's a no-brainer to me.

I dont't own any of the Sony primes because I'm trying to cut down on costs for my hobby. So I mostly use Minolta MD lenses on my nex 3n which I can really recommend. Just got me a Minolta MD 28mm 2.8 - now I have to sell my Vivitar 28mm 2.0 because short of the extra stop the Minolta does absolutely everything better...

I used to own a Minolta AF 50 1.4 (back when I had a A700 and more money and time at hand) and that really is an excellent lens. Loved the bokeh and the colors.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Teo wrote:
About the sigmas , I am planning at least the 19/2,8 but don't know if the 2,8 is not too restrictive for low light ? What's your experience ?

It was the first of the trio I got, too, and it made me buy the other 2 E-mount Art Sigmas.

Well, for me is not restrictive. I use it for landscapes and architecture and usually closed at f/5.6-f/11 (for longer DOF). I'm rarely making landscapes at less than f/4 anyway and I'm not interested in the wide-lens close-up type of photos.

It is a very nice landscape/architecture lens at an irresistible price, perfectly usable wide opened and very good beginning with f/4, comparable with much more expensive lenses. If you don't ask it to do things it was not intended to do then f/2.8 should be enough.
Add to it the fact that it is tiny (fits very well in your pocket). For that price you can't ask for more - the better alternatives would cost much more and will deliver comparable sharpness at f/4 - f/11. The extra money will only pay for the extra f/stops.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
If you don't have it yet I'll recommend the longer Sony zoom, as well. I have the older model 55-210 and it is at least as good as the kit zoom (in fact, IMO, it is a little better). You can have it for ~250-270$ and you get image stabilization and AF in the longer focal lengths territory - the range where AF and IS really matters more.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 30, 2015 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Is There any budget lens like 20 to 28 mm with an aperture 2.8 or lower with OSS? That is something i'm really missing...


PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
AFAIK, no image stabilization in that range...


PostPosted: Wed Jul 01, 2015 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
dan_ wrote:
AFAIK, no image stabilization in that range...


Yep... Unfortunately I'dneed that stabilisation for some shots in low light...even on a lens as fast as f2 , for not moving subjects.Loosing the oss and gaining one stop at 19 mm is not such a good trade for low light. And here we came at the 35/1,8 oss ...wich is a unique combination as far as I know. The old sony alphas had stabilisation in body .Canon and Nikon have both 35/1,8 , 30/1,4 , 35/2, 28/1,8 lenses unstabilised.
I'll try on this body to manual focus my MIR24 or my FD 28/2 SSC
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Digital Rangefinder / Viewfinder Cameras
Page 1 of 1