Reading mode: Light Dark

Should I be in the market for a new lens or a new body?

Go to last post
RyoHazuki224

RyoHazuki224

New member
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
NM, US
So, little info on what I got, what I want to do, and asking which direction I should be going...

Since June of 2013, I have a little Sony NEX-F3, which for a newbie photographer like me has done a very good job. It came with it's standard 18-55mm manual zoom lens, and a few pretty crappy third-party wide-angle and telephoto lens adapters in the bundle that I bought (both of which I rarely used). Now, I primarily wanted this camera since it seemed simple to learn on, but flexible enough with it's lens system, and that it's fairly small and lightweight, and I didn't want to go full DSLR, as I was on a budget. I use this on vacation, which its great, but I also started dabbling in some amateur photography (found a cheap backdrop/stand with some cheap lights, and some of my friends wanted some semi-pro looking photoshoots done, which for my first foray seemed to come out fairly well). I also like taking video with it as well, going to conventions and whatnot

Now, as for that last point, I am starting to see this camera's limitation. That or I'm doing something wrong. I like to shoot people in costume, and most of the time it is indoors. Ideally, I would love to have a nice tight focus on the subject, shallow depth of field so the background is out of focus, but I often can't get this right. I try to manually set the F-stop to something as low as possible, but then I run into problems with the amount of light I'm getting, so I adjust the shutter and ISO, but still not finding what I want.

Now, I recently found from my dad's old Canon camera, a 50mm prime lens that I found an NEX adapter for. Playing around with it, I really like this lens, it gives a great depth of field that I want, but my goodness I have to be far away from my subject in order to use if I want to at least capture their torso and head! Which you can imagine isn't so great while in a crowded convention hall with people milling about.

So, here's my situation: I am under the assumption that I would really benefit from a better lens, but one that I could be closer to my subject with, and still retain that shallow depth of field that I want. Ideally, I would LOVE to get a wider angle lens for a bit more cinematic look, but thats not too important. Question is, any E-mount or E-mount compatible lens that I could look at?

My other question goes into a different direction: Maybe I should step up my camera itself? Something with more powerful features and abilities. I've been looking at that Sony a6000 and I am really liking what I am seeing, especially with that very fast auto-focus. I really, really don't feel I am ready for a big-time DSLR like a Canon EOS 6D or something that the professional cosplay photographers that I've talked to use. But I want to mimic that effect of very focused subject, cinematic depth of field, etc. But again I still want portability and affordability. (those Alpha 7R cameras are just a bit out of my league too)

So, just looking for some advice, it would be appreciated. Better lens, or better camera? (Or maybe just do a better job with my manual settings as is?!?! LOL)

Thanks in advance!
 
There is no difference (despite operating speed and IQ) in regard to your problem between the NEX3 and the A6000: They are both APS-C. So if you want more Background de-focus, you will need to go to FF. Personally, I doubt it will be worth it - but it depends on your personal taste and objectives. From what you describe, a move to the a6000 seems to be worth exploring. Both, the Sigma 19 2.8 and the Sony 35 1.8 would be good additions. With the Zeiss 24 I have no experience.
 
What you want is very difficult. A 50mm f1.x lens like your Canon will take beatuifull blurred backgrounds. Why? Well it is a large apperture lens with a FL of 50mm. When you go down to a24mm f1.8 lens, you will get better results, as it is a fast lens and it is a wide lens, but the backlground blurr will be lesss, as it is a 24mm lens (the smaller the FL the more DOF).

So one otion is to go FF. Then you can buy the A7x camera, or a larger DSLR with FF sensor. But will it realy help you? Maybe you need a MF camera, but that is so large and expensive....

My advice is there for:

1. Start looking at the pictures you took with the kit lens. Look in the EXIF data what FL you used most in the situation you talk about.

2. Then buy a prime close to the FL you found in 1. with a large apperture (you can go Sigma for cheap, or you can go legacy or you can go native E-mount. Look at Samyang lenses too.

Try this and who knows...

Don't go for the A6000 for solving the discribed problem, the sensor is as large as the sensor in the camera you are using now... (in the end the A6000 is a better camera and will give better IQ, but no real differences in the kind of pictures you are taking....
 
As mentioned, IQ on all the APSC current camera's is not that much better than what you have. Nex 6, A6000, nikon 3300 etc will all be in the same zipcode.

For a blurred background, go read about depth of field. Also visit http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

For a 50mm lens at f/1.8 at 10 feet away your depth of field is .86 ft. A 35mm lens at f/1.8 10 feet away has a depth of field of 1.77 feet. If you went to a 30mm f/2.8 at 5 feet you have a depth of field of 3.94 feet. At 60mm f/2.8 you have a depth of field of .94 feet. (I picked these numbers since there are lenses in these ranges for sony E.)

So basically your options are the

sony zeiss 24mm f/1.8 1000$

sony 35mm f/1.8 which is about 450$

sony 50mm f/1.8 for 250$

sigma 30mm f/2.8 200$

sigma 60mm f/2.8 200$

Another option as is to move to full frame but realize the cost is much different.
 
I have a different recommendation. You like what you are seeing from the 50mm lens but it requires you to stand too far back. On an APS-C camera with a 1.5 crop factor you are really shooting effectively a 75mm lens.

My suggestion is to buy a focal reducer (I like the Lens Turbo II) that will both bring your field of view down to 54mm and act as your adapter. It's less expensive than either a new camera or even a new lens and it will give you 'full frame' experience that can help you make your ultimate choice.
 
SLN001 said:
I have a different recommendation. You like what you are seeing from the 50mm lens but it requires you to stand too far back. On an APS-C camera with a 1.5 crop factor you are really shooting effectively a 75mm lens.

My suggestion is to buy a focal reducer (I like the Lens Turbo II) that will both bring your field of view down to 54mm and act as your adapter. It's less expensive than either a new camera or even a new lens and it will give you 'full frame' experience that can help you make your ultimate choice.
Click to expand...
A lens Turbo 2 will be my recommendation as well. Pretty much all my recent photos on my Flickr page are with Lens Turbo and Canon FD lenses. I try to add it to the description for all of them if you like to check.
 
Seems the gist is - get a good ahrp fast 35mm lens. I agree. #5 on aps is around 50mm so distortion will be OK for people. Put it on Aperture priority - set your aperture, and shoot.

I'd also use the flip up lcd to shoot waist level and further avoid fore-shortening.
 
.... lensturbo will be about 150-200$. This may be a good or bad idea. Without knowing what lens you currently are using, it is hard to say if this is a good idea. The addition of an optical element can have unexpected effects. For a true novice, this could create image oddities which can be hard to diagnose. Also, focus reducers USUALLY work best when used with a lens that well covers the original image circle.
 
val1 said:
.... lensturbo will be about 150-200$. This may be a good or bad idea. Without knowing what lens you currently are using, it is hard to say if this is a good idea. The addition of an optical element can have unexpected effects. For a true novice, this could create image oddities which can be hard to diagnose. Also, focus reducers USUALLY work best when used with a lens that well covers the original image circle.
Click to expand...
It goes for $168 shipped for the legit lens turbo 2. Is not really much different from using a legacy adapter so not sure why you are not sure is a good idea. Do you have one? What problems have you experienced? I have had 3 copies and all were great

--.


www.flickr.com

Gabriel Gerena

Explore Gabriel Gerena’s 13 photos on Flickr!
www.flickr.com www.flickr.com
 
well I guess you bump into the classic event photographer's dilemma. You need to be somewhat up close but yet you need to catch the subject while trying to isolate the almost always too busy and distracting background and within that close range you still wanting to be able to at least capture the subject as you stated.

Its an age old problem .. and let me recount how we old guys used to do it .. well way way back we use medium format aka 6X6 or 6X4.5 , the larger media give very fine detail definition and the longer focal length give very precise control on DOF. Then came 35mm , and well its 35mm alright as far as real focal length goes as this give somewhat the coverage without too much distortion up close and well to combat the background we have f/2.0 and even f/1.4 lens. Now we have digital and APS-C ( and 4/3 ) and here we start to reach somewhat a limitation.

Some event photographer prefer to use flash setup to highlight the subject and thrown the background to shadows. It can be a solution. Otherwise the environmental constraint simply dictate. With your F3 ( or any APS-C anyway ) that means you need to use a focal length somewhat more like standard or wide standard or even wide if so needed. And to maintain that DOF control you are looking to need a lens that has as wide an aperture as you can afford and muster, But more to that you need to learn to control the DOF by placing the focal plane as well as what aperture to use. And its not always the shallowest the better. And might be its better to start working with that old 50mm also. Its easier to take a few step back than trying to fumble with the combo

Personally I do not think its just a new lens or new body question as even the mightiest of them all will still present that same dilemma no matter what. I would admit the 18-55 perhaps is not the ideal lens for this kind of work. The Sony 35mm with its fast speed and more natural stnadard coverage might help, OK might help but it won't just magically solve the problem you still got to learn the finer point of focus, focal plane placement, composition vs DOF control and this is unique to each and every lens / format combo
 
The OP described using a 50m legacy lens recovered from a Cannon kit, one that worked well on the NEX via a dumb adapter but was too long for indoor use (75mm effective focal length can do that). I think it is fair to assume that the lens is adequate to cover an APS-C sensor. With the focal adapter installed the experience would be closer to a true 50mm (actually 54mm) and it might be a solution to the problem or it might reveal that a 45mm or 35mm lens would be a better option.

As I stated, the cost of a focal reducer is less than the cost of either a new lens or new camera and if it doesn't provide a solution to the problem it might just show the OP which direction would be the better choice.

As it is I wasn't trying to solve the OP's problem as there isn't a simple 'do this and all will be well' solution, too many variables. All I was trying to do was offer a direction the OP could take to find a solution that would work for him.
 
Last edited:
Wow a lot of great tips! I know that as a budding photographer, I would want to expand my collection of lenses just to not only have options, but to get the practice with shooting with different lenses. I think I'll look into what a focal reducer might do for me, and I'll also look into a 35mm lens like some of you suggested.

Let me also post some pics that I shot over this weekend to get you an idea of what results I'm getting now. More advice is always helpful and appreciated!! :)



This was taken with my 18-55mm @ 22mm, f/4 1/50 s. ISO 3200. I cropped it a bit and adjusted the color, exposure and some other things in the RAW file. Something like this I would have really liked the BG to be defocused.

a8bad89b210b47a38fc08668b05f9729.jpg



This one was taken with that old Canon 50mm, shutter at 1/125s, ISO 3200 (probably could have turned that down. Another reason for maybe looking into the a6000 so I have more immediate access to controls like that). This has the DOF look that I want, but again I was standing a good 15ft or so from the subject. I do really like this shot, even if the BG seems very bright.

fe951c3aa0a84c33bca6bb602a6f0365.jpg

This is another that was taken with the Canon 50mm, but it's a screencap from a video shot with it, so its not quite as sharp. The lighting was more indoors of course, under florescent conference room-type lights. I was a good 12ft from the subject, and the video came out looking cool. This is basically what I want but it was tough being so far away from the subject (so many people walked in front of my camera! grrr hehe)

e80e1cd33cce4fdc94e21c059136b97d.jpg

So, I know my camera is capable of some amazing shots, I just need to get better practice with some other lenses, and to work better with the shutter speeds and f-stop settings I suppose. What do you guys think?

Again, thanks for all the advice! I know there's a lot of expertise here, and even though I can get confused with a lot of the photography terminology used its all a learning experience! :)
 
My favorite focal length for conventions is 35mm. Great walkaround length that can do both portraits and wide shots, provided you can "zoom with your feet"!

When I first started last year, I used to use two primes: a rented Zeiss 24mm (35mm-equiv) and my own Sony 50mm (75mm-equiv) but I was missing shots due to the lens changes. Eventually, I moved to a two-body setup, each with a fast prime:
  • Wide shots, a 35mm-equiv: combos I've used in the past are an EOS M with its 22mm f/2 pancake for Otakon 2013, an RX1R for Anime Expo 2014 and most recently an A6000 with the Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 for Otakon 2014.
  • Portraits, a 75mm-equiv: my NEX-3N with my Sony 50mm.
I also rented the Sony 35mm f/1.8 and while beautifully sharp, its equivalent ~52mm length was too tight in a crowded convention setting. After that, I attended an even smaller con and I knew that <30mm was the way to go and I was right renting the Sigma 19mm (~28mm-equiv) for it.

Personally, I think you could benefit from renting both the Zeiss 24mm and the Sigma 19mm to see which one better suits your needs. I know that if I was making money off these shots (and wasn't already moving to FF!), I would definitely get the Zeiss 24mm. Again, if I wasn't moving to FF, I would've bought the Sigma 19mm.

--
http://facebook.com/vato915
 
Last edited:
That 'depth of field' look you are looking for is called bokeh (pronounced like boquet) and there isn't a simple formula to determine how to make it happen.

The quality of the bokeh will depend on the distance between the subject and the background, the distance between the camera and the subject, the business of the background, the optical qualities of the lens, the aperture setting (depth of field) and a lot of other lesser variables.

There are a lot of articles on the internet that will help you gain experience in shooting for bokeh. This is just one intro article to get you started:

Loading…

www.nikonusa.com

I would recommend against buying a number of additional lenses at this point. The fact is every lens is different from all the others and you will confuse yourself. Until you gain enough experience you won't be sure what effect is a quality of the lens you are using (so not generally applicable) and what effect is is a standard optical quality (applicable to all lenses).

Easier to stick with one or two lenses and practice with them until are grounded in the basics. At that point it will be much easier to transfer your basic knowledge to whichever lens you pick up. Go ahead, ask me how I know. ;-)

If you get the basics down it won't be long before you will be able to take a photograph knowing in advance the kind of bokeh effect you can expect. I still remember how thrilled I was the first time a bokeh shot came out the way I was expecting it to when I set up the shot.



Over Glorified Grass Seed
Over Glorified Grass Seed
 
For the OP: why are you shooting at f/4 and 3200? Was it really that dim? Do you have a flash? The larger the aperture the shallower the depth of field.

So a focal reducer is usually a simple adapter with a single relay lens. If then lens has quality issues or is not centered it can cause artifacts. These can include coma, astigmatism, longitudinal, abberation, vignetting may be worse etc. Also, a crappier reducer will probably work worse at larger apertures than the same reducer with a small aperture lens. The effect of the reducer on MTF is going to be all over the place. This just seems way more complicated than for the money buying a sigma 19mm or sigma 30mm.
 
val1 said:
For the OP: why are you shooting at f/4 and 3200? Was it really that dim? Do you have a flash? The larger the aperture the shallower the depth of field.

So a focal reducer is usually a simple adapter with a single relay lens. If then lens has quality issues or is not centered it can cause artifacts. These can include coma, astigmatism, longitudinal, abberation, vignetting may be worse etc. Also, a crappier reducer will probably work worse at larger apertures than the same reducer with a small aperture lens. The effect of the reducer on MTF is going to be all over the place. This just seems way more complicated than for the money buying a sigma 19mm or sigma 30mm.
Click to expand...
What is complicated about it? Get a good reducer, either the Metabones or the Lens Turbo 2 and no complication.

So far all in favor of reducers are actual owners and all against it or commenting on issues are non users...so OP, interpret that yourself ;)

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lgabrielg/
 
Last edited:
OK, let's get past the personal preferences and get down to what a focal reducer will do for you. All it is going to do is to reduce the effective focal length of your 50mm lens on your NEX from 75mm to 54mm. It will give you more space indoors in which to frame your photographs. It will not help you with lighting, composition or focusing. By itself it won't give you anything to make your photographs better than they are now.

Using it you will be able to determine whether the 50mm length is best for you, or whether to go down to 35mm or even 28mm. If you do decide that a smaller focal length is where you want to be then it would be time to consider a lens like the Sigma 19mm with an effective focal length of 28.5mm or a Sigma 30mm that brings an effective length of 45mm.

You need to find out where you are comfortable in your style of photography, wide angle or normal. Then you can make the right decision on what lens to buy. The camera you have is capable enough for you to learn on so I wouldn't be looking in that direction until you are more confident in your photographic skills. At which point you will know that there are things you want to do that your camera can't do. Let that guide you in your search for an updated camera some time in the future.
 
Last edited:
I think it's safe to say that after looking at your images, it's mostly the lens limiting you, F4 with that low shutter speed still requires to go ISO3200 is just not ideal.

Getting a FF won't help that much at all, the difference isn't that THAT big, unless you are talking about A7S which is so very good at dealing with high ISO.
 
SLN001 said:
OK, let's get past the personal preferences and get down to what a focal reducer will do for you. All it is going to do is to reduce the effective focal length of your 50mm lens on your NEX from 75mm to 54mm. It will give you more space indoors in which to frame your photographs. It will not help you with lighting, composition or focusing. By itself it won't give you anything to make your photographs better than they are now.

Using it you will be able to determine whether the 50mm length is best for you, or whether to go down to 35mm or even 28mm. If you do decide that a smaller focal length is where you want to be then it would be time to consider a lens like the Sigma 19mm with an effective focal length of 28.5mm or a Sigma 30mm that brings an effective length of 45mm.

You need to find out where you are comfortable in your style of photography, wide angle or normal. Then you can make the right decision on what lens to buy. The camera you have is capable enough for you to learn on so I wouldn't be looking in that direction until you are more confident in your photographic skills. At which point you will know that there are things you want to do that your camera can't do. Let that guide you in your search for an updated camera some time in the future.
Click to expand...
Just to add one thing, it will also give him one extra stop of light. Not composition related but to be as accurate as possible with the statement.

Regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top