16mm 2.8 with NEX6 with 16-50mm and 55-210mm?
Definitely not interested in reason #3, but #1 and #2 make it sound worth it.
Saw a couple of sellers are now offering the 16mm 2.8 lens with certain NEX models at no charge.
If getting the NEX6 with 16-50mm and 55-210mm, is there any need for the 16mm 2.8 lens or is the 16-50mm still a better lens?
It would be fairly redundant if you have the 16-50mm lens...however there might still be a few reasons some folks might want to get the 16mm lens too, especially if it can be obtained very cheap or even free. The three main reasons I can think of are:
The 16mm F2.8 pancake is smaller - so if wanting to turn the NEX into the most pocketable form factor possible, this would be the lens of choice.
The 16mm F2.8 is a wee bit faster at max aperture, but only by 1/2 stop - could come in handy for some.
The 16mm F2.8 can be paired with the ECU1 and turned into a 12mm lens - in which case it becomes much more useful as it gives a true ultrawide angle. The ECU1 can be found for $90-150, used to new, so it's a cheap way to get a 12mm F2.8 prime lens.-- hide signature --
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Jan 8, 2013|
|Jan 8, 2013||1|
|Jan 8, 2013|
|Jan 9, 2013|
|_F0A5334-Edit_small by Dester Wallaboo|
from Open Air Fashion Photography
|Old Harry's Rocks by John93Robertson|
from View from the top - Sea