Need affordable prime lens

Hello,

as of recently, I joined the NEX owners club. My choice was NEX-5R and I'm very happy with it. Kit lens (16-50) are also very nice (definitely a space ship comparing to my current P&S). However, one situation not covered well is taking picture inside not very bright apartment (primary target is my baby). One of f/1.8 prime lens Sony offers (SEL-35F18, SEL-50F18) would probably be a great choice for such a situation, but they cost rather much. So, I thought, maybe a something used bought on ebay could be just as good, but more affordable. From what I heard, Canon FD 50mm or Minolta Rokkor MD 50 mm could be a good choice, but I wanted to ask you for confirmation, or some other opinion. Also, I don't have a clue about mount adapters - which one would you recommend? Unfortunately, currently I'm not in a position of spending more than 100$ on both lens and adapter, and would be very happy to spend even less than that. That's not much, but... that's all I can spend now. Please tell me what you think, is it worth trying to get nice lens and adapter with that financial upper limit. Sure, I can wait few months, maybe a year and buy something better and more expensive then, but definitely would not like to miss some important moment in my kids life.

Thanks in advance!

I don't know if we are allowed to post links to online shops (if not, please cancel my post).

From here http://www.rainbowimaging.biz/shop/  you can find very affordable adaptors for full manual lenses.

I guess it's not going to be tough to find a used Minolta or Canon 50mm

Actually, I'm looking forward to try my father's Minolta Rokkor on my Nex-5N!

Thanks. From what I've heard, RainbowImaging adapters should be quite good.

No, it's not. But I wonder if those two are good choice for what I wand (primarily indoor taking picture of my baby)? Both Canon and Minolta has 50mm f/1.8 lens which I can afford. Is one of those two significantly better than another and why? Is there any other option I should look for? And... is that what I need? Will pictures taken by any of those two (or some other lens you can recommend ) really be better in low light situations than ones taken with kit lens (16-50)? Or my purchase is just pointless waste of money.

Another lens you could consider: Konica 40mm f/1.8. It is also an in between 35mm and 50mm focal length, giving you somewhat greater flexibility of 35mm and somewhat closeness of 50mm. It would also allow you to shoot hand held in low light to about 1/60s (about the same as a 35mm lens) whereas 50mm will require a little more light, considering lack of stabilization.

Just another thing to worry about.

Surely NOT a pointless waste of money. Just take care: a 50 mm on a nex is already a bit of a small tele lens (but nice for portraits). There are lots of fantastic lenses for sale : what about a russian helios 55 mm 2.0, or some old canon, fuji, konica or minolta glass...  before buying one: look at flikr and make a search on the lens model you are thinking about. That will help, i hope.

I am new to the REAL photography, so I cannot say certainly anything, but I think that a legacy lens might trigger your creativity and, once used to full manual operation, would let you make nicer shots than a kit lens.

For $100, you should easily be able to get a minolta 50mm 1.4 and an adapter. I have the rainbow imaging one...got it from Amazon for $18. And I scored the minolta 50mm 1.4 for $95 on ebay. They go for around $80-$100.

I was also able to get a minolta 50mm 1.7 for $20, which is about what they sell for regularly.

Hmmm, good thinking. Also, 40mm looks like a better choice in case of taking photo of a group inside apartment... I will take this one into consideration.

I'm a newbie so not very into this lens. At least until now. I know nothing about helios, but it looks promising. Regarding other ones, are there some special model I should look for? Because, looking for something like minolta 50mm on ebay gives me many different models (Minolta MD, Minolta Maxxum, Minolta Rokkor, ...). How can I tell which one is good and which one is not? Or simply all Minolta lens are good :).

Well, 50mm f/1.4 is not really affordable, but f/1.7 can be bought for good price.

Thank you all. Of course, if anyone else has some good advice, or some specific model to recommend - please tell

Uniquephoto has it for $109 and free shipping.

http://www.uniquephoto.com/Lenses-Lenses/sigma-sony-e-mount-for-30mm-f2-8-ex-dn-lens-330965/

Resellerratings.com rating of 9.30/100 on 1,158 reviews

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Unique_Photo_Inc

Thank you
Russell

Well, even if it's good enough for what I'm looking for (and I read some really nice reviews on than lens) it's a bit too pricey, considering shipping fee (I live in Croatia), VAT I would need to pay (25%), ...

CANON 50mm f1.8 FD FIT

Looks to me like a good offer.

I have two 50mm legacy lenses; a Konica Hexanon 50mm 1.4 which produces nice sharp images. The large aperture is very useful in low light and the cost was within your budget. It is noticeably larger and heavier than my other 50 which is a Nikon Series E 50m f/1.8 which is so slim it almost qualifies as a pancake lens (adapter obviously adds more bulk). I have always been impressed with the image quality of this lens and it's very easy to handle.

Both these lenses should be possible to buy for within your budget. If you want a specific lens and are using ebay, don't rule that choice out just because of (often unrealistic) Buy it Now prices. Auctions sometimes yield bargains if you're patient.

Also, money spent on a good lens is never wasted. Buy well and you'll have an asset as good as money in the bank and a whole lot more fun!

Not unreasonable - I sold one recently for about the same money.

It's not a bad lens - it was the kit lens on the Canon A1 film camera so it's very common. Good budget choice and lightweight (plastic).

Hey, Lex! In my humble opinion, just about any legacy lens from a name-brand manufacturer (Pentax, Konica/Minolta, Canon, Nikon, etc.) will serve you well.

Despite the near endless obsession in the forum about the technical aspects of this or that lens compared to that or another lens, unless the lens is an absolute dog, you're never (or rarely) going to be able to discern any significant differences between any of the decent lenses in most shooting situations.

Any number of other factors will generally outweigh/overpower/obscure any optical characteristics of any decent lens—your technique (holding the camera steady, ability to focus precisely, etc.), subject movement, lighting, composition, etc. All these factors will have far more of an effect on your images than any relatively minute differences in lenses.

If you're interested in Minolta in particular, Here is some good information about the Minolta lens pedigree.

I'd go with whatever decent (name brand), fast (f 1.4 or 1.8) lens you can find for a price you want to pay. Minolta f1.4 50mms can be found for under $100, at least in the U.S.

As for adapters, there's been considerable discussion on the forum in recent weeks/months, so if you do a search, you can check those out.

God luck!

I got a Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 lens  and an FD-NEX adapter from ebay for around $70 total.
The lens works great (awesome for low light) however there are downsides...

1) The effective focal length is 1.5*50=75mm which is a lot of magnification. 
2) The crop factor also causes the images to be very  "narrow" as opposed to wide. 
3) No stabilization (Its a 30+ year old lens)

My next lens will be definitely be wider, while trying to remain bright too. (f/2.0 or better)

much agreed!!

I'd see availability and price the most important criteria, for me personally even more so handling and size

If you want very good for small and rel. cheap look into Pentax M f1.7/50 Olympus (MC) Zuiko f1.8/50.

For the f1.4/50 Minoltas, MC and MD with 55mm thread and Canons nFD and SSC possibly still can be bought the cheapest, again Olympus is the smallest, take serial number higher than 1.100.000, Pentax M and S-M-C Takumar are rel. small and great build / handling

my adapters are cheap Chinese from the bay and work fine

--
photost mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

To me, it almost makes more sense to get better lighting in your place (since that sounds like the only place you're having an issue) than to compromise on a lens.

Anyway, just my $0.02.

They're practically giving these away for $10 at flea markets because that's about all they're worth.

Because your shooting will be inside a small apartment, you may want to use a wide manual lens and 28mm f2.8 is most common. Minolta, Vivitar Series 1, Canon FD, Konica, Yashica, come to mind. But you may wish to pick a more common line such as Minolta, so you won't need to get a different adapter in case you ever decide to buy another lens.

Thanks a lot, all of you. I guess I'll take a look a little bit more, and, since I'm not a professional, guess every lens with f/2.0 or bigger aperture will be good.

Now, there's one more thing. I said that my primary object is my kid while indoors, however, lens like this will probably be as good for outdoor picturing. And while taking pictures outside (portraits), some nice bokeh would really be appreciated. Is there any particular lens with especially nice bokeh, or any of mentioned will do good (or not)?

Regarding adapters, I will take a look a bit more. I guess adapter is not nearly as important as lens, but will definitely look for old discussions on that subject.