A pessimist's take on the new Sony lenses

Started Aug 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP ottonis Contributing Member • Posts: 734
Re: A pessimist's take on the new Sony lenses

sean lancaster wrote:

clail wrote:

The SAL1650f2.8 is large, looks bigger than the SEL18200 for the one stop difference. The problem is, f2.8 is still not quite bright enough for low light shots, you'll need OSS. Use the SEL35/50 for low light shots Or you'll have to brace yourself and hold your breath when you shoot. Indoors with the Sigma 19 or SEL20 is not easy without OSS But a breeze with the 35/50.

The Zeiss zoom will be my day use lens but I'll stick to primes once it gets dark. But I think the OSS will help at f4 even in low light. Current zooms are too slow at f5.6 or more.

The conclusion I reached after a year or so of getting more serious about photography is that there isn't a single zoom that satisfies me. I have the 55-210 just because it's hard to use a prime at distances (e.g., I also have the Canon FD 200/2.8) but I rarely shoot at distances. So, I only shoot primes.

Now that I've bumped up to a Canon 6D, I still only shoot primes. The quality of the zooms is better, but I just have a mental block against them.

I do find the new Zeiss Emount zoom intriguing. But I would rather have seem Sony/Zeiss shrink the range and increase the speed. For example, 18-35/2.8 would have appealed to me on the NEX system. I would buy that as my backup camera lens (my 5N is my backup camera). But I won't buy it at f/4 even with OSS. OSS is nice for still life, but not shots that have movement in them. So, my 5N will continue to use a Rokinon fisheye (8/2.8) much of the time (with a few legacy lens primes).

This! If the new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens were availabe for E-mount, it would be on my christmas wish list. I find myself shooting much more often with wide angle (e.g. using the sigma 19mm), so that range would be perfect for me and even allow me to shoot better portraits than e.g. with the Zeiss 24mm, which of splendid quality, but for my taste too short for portraits, even after cropping the images. 35mm is considered too short as well (for portraits) by many, but considering its huge aperture, it should provide sufficient isolation when shooting objects from short distances.

-- hide signature --

www.flicker.com/davidsphotoblog777

 ottonis's gear list:ottonis's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Sony Alpha a7 II Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
bzx
ET2
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow