Best WA for NEX-F3 in Antarctica/Patagonia?

ShinyFace said:

ShinyFace wrote:

I've never used wide angle before, but going to Patagonia and Antarctica want to get one for my new NEX-F3

Some options include the 16F28 + VCLECU1 conversion

or get adapter mount + Sigma 10-20 or Sigma 8-16

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I get nice results with my Sony 16mm+ultrawide adapter. Possibly better than the lens on its own.

But I've never been in the Antarctic, unfortunately.

Niall Rankin wrote an excellent book about wildlife on South Georgia, called "Antarctic Isle" (published 1951). He got some fine black-and-white photos using big glass plates - probably the last photographer to use plates on an outdoor project. The point being that you can get good results with almost any equipment if you take care.

I have just go both the wide-angle and fisheye converter lenses to use with the 16mm Lens on my Nex-C3. They work very well and I have been having fun with the fisheye lens. You can get straight horizons if you frame accordingly but also some great angles and interesting compositions. Here are a couple of examples.......


La Graciosa


Mirador Del Rio

It sound like you have a wonderful trip coming up


--

super cool thank you

No Problem. I have been quite pleased with the combination and although I have the Sigma 10-20mm for my Canon I have been taking out the Sony Nex with the 16mm and fisheye converter more recently. Another example......









--

Here's a few options:

1. Try the new Sony SEL1018 lens ($$$)

2. Try a good fisheye lens or Sony converter - I use the Rokinon (Samyang) 8mm

The fisheye image can be "de-fished" with software like DxO, PTGui, Fisheye-hemi (www.imagetrendsinc.com/products/prodpage_hemi.asp)


3. Try the F3's "sweep panorama" mode -(best in portrait position) - Works with fisheyes too!


4. Or better yet - get a Panosaurus tripod head (http://gregwired.com/pano/Pano.htm) and PTgui or other panoramic stitching program.

Have fun on your trip. Perhaps you will need some anti-fogging lens solution?

ShinyFace said:

ShinyFace wrote:

I've never used wide angle before, but going to Patagonia and Antarctica want to get one for my new NEX-F3

Some options include the 16F28 + VCLECU1 conversion

or get adapter mount + Sigma 10-20 or Sigma 8-16

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

What about the need for filters? From what I have read about taking photographs in the Antarctic summer, the light can be intense. But there are a lot of filter types out there...which one goes best with the 16F28 in bright light?

I use a 49mm polariser filter sometimes. I also use a set of ND Grad filters to help whilst exposing my landscape shots. I´m not sure which ones you would need for the Antarctica having never been there but if you Google it I am sure you´ll get some good information.

You might try a "graduated" ND (neutral density) filter, like the Tiffen one shown here: http://www.amazon.com/Tiffen-Graduated-Neutral-Density-Filter/dp/B00005061B

or look on ebay for graduated filter 49mm

The top half of the filter attenuates the light by 2 F-stops (ND 0.6) - maybe use two


I have the Tiffen one and a polarizing filter too. Maybe use both types. Watch out on fisheye lenses - none I know of accept attachable filters.

ShinyFace said:

ShinyFace wrote:

What about the need for filters? From what I have read about taking photographs in the Antarctic summer, the light can be intense. But there are a lot of filter types out there...which one goes best with the 16F28 in bright light?

Click to expand...

The panoramic mode is very good on the nex.

Regarding ultra wide angles: You will be putting a large "lens signature" on each photo and while it may work for a few it can get tiring after a while.

I wouldn't go wider than a 24mm equiv. (16) on a regular basis. The nex 16 doesn't look good. If you get a zoom get one that starts at 10 or 12 because at the extremes of focal length they're usually at their worst. (The canon 10 - 22 is good at every focal length - a wonderful lens).

I'd suggest that a 35mm equiv (24 on the aps) would be a good general purpose angle of view. It's wide but without the overt distortion on the edges.

I use a olympus zuiko om 24mm f2.8. It's tiny and considered one of the best 24mm ever made. A multi coated in good shape shouldn't be more than $150 on ebay. It readily uses 49mm filters.

probert500 said:

probert500 wrote:

The panoramic mode is very good on the nex.

Regarding ultra wide angles: You will be putting a large "lens signature" on each photo and while it may work for a few it can get tiring after a while.

I wouldn't go wider than a 24mm equiv. (16) on a regular basis. The nex 16 doesn't look good. If you get a zoom get one that starts at 10 or 12 because at the extremes of focal length they're usually at their worst. (The canon 10 - 22 is good at every focal length - a wonderful lens).

I'd suggest that a 35mm equiv (24 on the aps) would be a good general purpose angle of view. It's wide but without the overt distortion on the edges.

I use a olympus zuiko om 24mm f2.8. It's tiny and considered one of the best 24mm ever made. A multi coated in good shape shouldn't be more than $150 on ebay. It readily uses 49mm filters.

Click to expand...

I have these things you are saying--I don't use WA very much normally, which is why I want something inexpensive just for play. Or I would be open to a more all-purpose prime--but one that doesn't give me too much redundancy with the 18-55.

I have not been impressed with my panoramas! They stich fine, but there is something about them I don't like--maybe I haven't been practicing enough to get a good technique.

"The NEX 16 doesn't look good."

Oh really? Any evidence for that cloned statement? Its prints look damned good to me. And I think I'm fussy, as in, "I may never be here again for this shot".

And what about the 16mm plus the UWA converter? Even better.

I strongly suggest you visit Fred Miranda's site (the NEX thread, about 480 pages!) and look at some of the 16mm shots. You'll be highly surprised. It changed my view.

OP, get on evilBay and purchase both before the wheel has turned 180 degrees and prices climb. I did. And if they fall overboard it won't be a financial disaster.

(Summilux, various Nikkors, 2 Elmars etc provide me with comparisons. And I usually shoot at f8 for landscapes with the 16. It can't beat the Leicas, but have fun fooling with, "pick the Elmar v. SEL 16mm". And no, Big Sony has unfortunately not given me a miserable red cent. )

Cullings said:

Cullings wrote:
You might try a "graduated" ND (neutral density) filter, like the Tiffen one shown here: http://www.amazon.com/Tiffen-Graduated-Neutral-Density-Filter/dp/B00005061B

or look on ebay for graduated filter 49mm

The top half of the filter attenuates the light by 2 F-stops (ND 0.6) - maybe use two

I have the Tiffen one and a polarizing filter too. Maybe use both types. Watch out on fisheye lenses - none I know of accept attachable filters.

Cullings said:

ShinyFace wrote:

What about the need for filters? From what I have read about taking photographs in the Antarctic summer, the light can be intense. But there are a lot of filter types out there...which one goes best with the 16F28 in bright light?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Never been there, but I THINK the ground is as light as the sky out there, so a "graduated" filter seems not needed to me.

UV and (circulair) polirizing filters seem usefull to me.