Not any fast zoom lens for a6000!

Areft · Oct 14, 2015

Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

blue_skies · Oct 14, 2015

Areft said:
Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

Agreed, and debated. Same for a long telezoom and a teleprime.

Areft said:
I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy.

Then, why is a fast prime not preferable? They are smaller and faster (aperture).

Areft said:
The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations.

Neither is f/2.8. Even with the BSI sensor upgrade that the A7rII got.

Areft said:
So, what do you all use then?

f/2.0 (or faster) primes

add ambient light, if possible

use a (bounce) flash

skip the (very dark) scene

and so forth

Areft said:
The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

f/3.5 is nearly f/4 - you may as well opt for the E1670Z or E18105.

Areft said:
I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

That lens is huge, on the adapter it is E18200 like in size and weight.

The adapter (with pellicle mirror and AF mechanism) robs between 1/3rd and 1/2th of a stop. Not two stops.

Areft said:
Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Also needs an adapter.

Areft said:
Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

I have no problems when using the E24, T32, E35, or E50 indoors. The latter two have OSS as well, allowing handheld portraits, videos. The former two are ok at same ss - they have wider FOV.

Looking forward, the A7rII handles pellicle free adapters, such as the LA-EA3 or third party adapters. It also includes fast PDAF, down to -2EV (enough for most indoor scenes), and shows close-to-original DSLR AF speed.

I would expect this technology to make its way into APS-C sensors, e.g. the rumored A6100/A7000.

Areft said:
Thanks

My bigger grip is that the max ISO can now be set, but not the min ss - auto modes keep using 1/60th, and you can shoot slower with OSS.

Personally, a large, bulky, and expensive f/2.0-f/2.8 prime would not be high on my purchase list. It is just not a lens that will be 'fun' to use.

I view lenses mostly as 'daytime' options, to frame properly. When shooting indoors, zooming by 'walking with your feet' is fairly easy, and you'd need at most two FLs to frame most scenes. And at night, outdoors, you are either bound by ss, or you can use a tripod (or bean bags) to drop ISO way down. If you are bound by ss, only a fast prime will do.

Wide open, the modern primes are simply much better than modern zooms. Plus, the 'extra' speed lets you play with DOF more.

I would be more interested in fast teleprimes and a relative fast telezoom. Not a standard zoom. In fact, the kit zoom is sufficient for most (stopped down) daytime work.

Lastly, a BSI sensor in an A6100/A7000 would go a lot for me, I'd pick up either model, surely.

Dennis · Oct 14, 2015

Areft said:
It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

Not so surprising. e-mount was initially a smaller alternative to DSLRs (actually, it was initially a "step up" system for what Sony thought were legions of "point and shoot upgraders"). And for photographers with more money to spend, Sony wants to drive buyers to full frame.

Areft said:
I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

Primes. But then, even with my last two DSLR systems, I've preferred the combination of a couple of fast primes with a slower 5X zoom over an f/2.8 midrange zoom. The f/2.8 zooms still aren't all that fast. One stop faster than f/4, sure, but f/1.8 is another stop faster still. And the 3X range isn't interesting to me, as I'd still be swapping lenses to shoot people.

Assuming quality f/2.8 zooms are limited to 3X, my ideal lens would be a 24-70, but a smaller model designed specifically for APS-C (i.e. 35-105 equivalent).

Areft said:
Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Sure - another system

If the lens is important enough, anyway. The A6000 is a nice camera, but not THAT nice ... mostly, it's a terrific camera for the money, but Fuji, Samsung, Olympus, Panasonic, Sony FE and DSLR systems all offer what you want, so why choose the one system that doesn't ?

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

lumigraphics · Oct 14, 2015

Funny how for a Canon DSLR system, the 24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L are the gold standard. Of course, each costs 4x what an a6000 body costs. Maybe it's a marketing decision? People who would spend that much for lenses aren't buying mirrorless? Or are just now moving to things like the A7 line? Zeiss is certainly able to offer it's excellent A-mount lenses in E-mount if there was a market.

ttan98 · Oct 14, 2015

Areft said:
Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

I use a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8($300-$350 2nd hand) on A6000, this combo gives outstanding images, unfortunately I only use manual focus or slow auto-focus. I use it to take wedding photos(non professional) I just love them.

Dennis · Oct 14, 2015

lumigraphics said:
Funny how for a Canon DSLR system, the 24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L are the gold standard.

True, but then how big is the smallest FF DSLR you can put those on ?

lumigraphics said:
Of course, each costs 4x what an a6000 body costs. Maybe it's a marketing decision? People who would spend that much for lenses aren't buying mirrorless? Or are just now moving to things like the A7 line? Zeiss is certainly able to offer it's excellent A-mount lenses in E-mount if there was a market.

I do think that an APS-C f/2.8 midrange zoom would sell very well in e-mount. I have to imagine there's some politics involved ... would it (a) take resources from other priorities and (b) make the A7 line less attractive ? It could also be that Sony has taken heat for so long for e-mount lenses being "huge" (why would anyone buy a NEX body to put those "monstrous" lenses on it ?) that they're gun shy ... (and those are comments about the KIT lens !) They did respond by developing the 16-50 pancake. Maybe they see the APS-C line as one that demands compactness.

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

Docrum · Oct 14, 2015

lumigraphics said:
Funny how for a Canon DSLR system, the 24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L are the gold standard. Of course, each costs 4x what an a6000 body costs. Maybe it's a marketing decision? People who would spend that much for lenses aren't buying mirrorless? Or are just now moving to things like the A7 line? Zeiss is certainly able to offer it's excellent A-mount lenses in E-mount if there was a market.

--
David M. Converse
Lumigraphics
http://www.lumigraphics.com

I've got a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 A-mount (used via a LA-EA4) and it's a very heavy proposition at 1430gm (not including the LA-EA4.) It does have OS and AF works quickly, but it's not something you'd want to be carrying around a lot.

Compared to the SEL55210 (346gm) and even SEL70200G f4 (840gm) it's substantially heavier and probably not something Sony thinks would be in high demand. (Then there would be the astronomical price they'd be asking for it!)

nin2thevoid · Oct 14, 2015

Areft said:
Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

How does the adapter suck two stops of light? Isn't it just a spacer to bring the sensor-mount distance on par with A mount spec?

And 2.8 to 3.5 isn't two stops. It's two clicks on the aperture dial, which is two thirds of a stop.

Sympa · Oct 14, 2015

lumigraphics said:
Funny how for a Canon DSLR system, the 24-70 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L are the gold standard. Of course, each costs 4x what an a6000 body costs. Maybe it's a marketing decision? People who would spend that much for lenses aren't buying mirrorless?

The 24-70 f/2.8L is 805 grams. The 70-200 f/2.8L is one and a half kilo.

The A7 with kit lens is only 770 grams. The A6000 body is 344 grams.

Mirrorless is also about being smaller and lighter. Mirrorless is about replacing mechanics with electronics.

Mirror, AF sensors, viewfinder: replaced by electronics.

Lens distortion, C/A and vignetting: not solved with a kilo of glass, but with electronics.

Bright lens: replaced by better sensor and noise reduction.

Don't expect one of the above lenses to become tiny if they are manufactured for mirrorless. Unless they are made smaller, which will lead to compromises optically.

Maybe that makes f/2.8 lenses on mirrorless into a niche. OTOH the adaptors have improved a lot recently, so it is very easy to use them.

Dirk W · Oct 14, 2015

For indoor I mostly use my RX100 which has a f1.8 Zeiss lens (at the short end). LOL that Sony offers a fast zoom lens with the RX100 (and RX10) line, but not with APS-C or fx.

nin2thevoid · Oct 15, 2015

True, but the RX100 sensor is significantly smaller than APS-C, making it easier to design a small lens that offers a lot of light transmission.

Dirk W · Oct 15, 2015

Yupp, that is also true.

AlphaPhotography · Oct 15, 2015

With the low price, size, and weight of the A6000, I plan to add an additional (and perhaps two additional) A6000 bodies for use with my prime lenses. While it may not be quite as handy as a zoom, it'll allow me to have the fastest lenses possible (faster than almost any zoom the market) and will also act as backups in case I were to damage any of my bodies while traveling. I often find myself shooting portraits, landscapes, street, and occasionally wildlife all at once. I am constantly switching lenses but am unwilling to sacrifice the IQ and speed for a zoom. The A6000 is compact enough that three bodies with the 12mm f2, 24mm f1.8, and 50mm f1.8 could cover 90% of my shooting and still be carried in a very small bag. Obviously not an ideal setup for everyone, but I think it would work well enough for me and I can pick up two additional bodies for less than the price of one good zoom (the 16-70mm f4). Just food for thought

sergerez · Oct 15, 2015

Nice picture. However, your data shows different lens been used:

Lens: E 50mm F1.8 OSS

I have Tamron 17-50/2.8, which is similar to that Sigma you're referring to, but I doubt such a quality could be achieved with it.

Serge

ttan98 said:
Areft said:

Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

Click to expand...

I use a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8($300-$350 2nd hand) on A6000, this combo gives outstanding images, unfortunately I only use manual focus or slow auto-focus. I use it to take wedding photos(non professional) I just love them.

ttan98 · Oct 15, 2015

this the wrong image, image below is the right one,

above image is taken using Sigma 17-50mm f2.8

Docrum · Oct 15, 2015

SonyArtisan said:
With the low price, size, and weight of the A6000, I plan to add an additional (and perhaps two additional) A6000 bodies for use with my prime lenses. While it may not be quite as handy as a zoom, it'll allow me to have the fastest lenses possible (faster than almost any zoom the market) and will also act as backups in case I were to damage any of my bodies while traveling. I often find myself shooting portraits, landscapes, street, and occasionally wildlife all at once. I am constantly switching lenses but am unwilling to sacrifice the IQ and speed for a zoom. The A6000 is compact enough that three bodies with the 12mm f2, 24mm f1.8, and 50mm f1.8 could cover 90% of my shooting and still be carried in a very small bag. Obviously not an ideal setup for everyone, but I think it would work well enough for me and I can pick up two additional bodies for less than the price of one good zoom (the 16-70mm f4). Just food for thought

Areft · Oct 15, 2015

nin2thevoid said:
nin2thevoid said:

Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

Click to expand...

How does the adapter suck two stops of light? Isn't it just a spacer to bring the sensor-mount distance on par with A mount spec?

And 2.8 to 3.5 isn't two stops. It's two clicks on the aperture dial, which is two thirds of a stop.

You're right about the click/stop terms related to the converter....

I chose a6000 mostly because of being compact and able to do a pro like job when I do documentaries. Although having a small size camera is a big plus in many situation, good lenses (even big) can add a lot to what you do in more convenient locations.

I have some really good primes, but as an amateur, what makes zooms special is the ability to target different subjects in a room without taking their attention. It lets me to capture more natural behavior of my subjects.

I like the sigma 17-50 examples and found the tamron non-vc is a bit sharper competitor in this range.

BlueBomberTurbo · Oct 15, 2015

I switched back to Nikon because of the lack of fast zooms. I started with some primes, but I shoot events for work, where swapping lenses all the time is a no-no. Started using a Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC and Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 II on an LA-EA2, but the AF was pretty bad coming from the A6000's native AF ability, or even any Nikon I've ever used (D90, D7000, D7100). Not to mention the size/weight was approaching a DSLR already.

So, decided to go back to Nikon, big time with a D750 + the same lenses as I used on the A6000. I'm keeping the A6000 around for an every day camera, plus for video since I love the colors and quality. Not a clue why Nikon can't get close to that, even in its best DSLRs...

Areft · Oct 17, 2015

There was something like Tamron 24-105 f2.8, which is discontinued.

The Olympus 35-100 f2 also seems nice.

Loading…

www.digiwowo.com

I'm not sure if we can use the auto focus function of any lens with a converter on a6000, but having this fast range is nice even in manual mode...

I would like to hear more from other a6000 owners. No one needs something similar?

Is it true that having soft edges in videography is not so critical, while capturing a shallow depth of field?

Temporel · Oct 17, 2015

Areft said:
Hey,

It's so surprising that sony haven't made any fast aperture mid-zoom lens for aspc emount YET!

I have many good primes, but zooms are more handy. The best and overpriced options have constant f4, which IMHO is not sufficient for indoor/low light situations. So, what do you all use then?

The best for price I've tried is Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5.

I wish I could use Sony 16-50 f2.8 DT (a-mount) with an adapter, but adapter sucks two stops of light and it won't do better than 3.5.

Another option can be the Sigma 17-50 f2.8.

Do you know any other option? Apparently, Auto-focus or image-stabilizer seems a bit too much to ask!

Thanks

Sony only believe in f4 zoom now, great isnt it ?

Unless you love primes (and switching lenses), get rid of your camera before you start investing a lot of money in this silly system.

Not any fast zoom lens for a6000!

Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Leading Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Well-known member

Keyboard shortcuts