A6300 w/15-50 2.8 = Too big?!

Hi

I have the 16-50 lens and thought it (with the adapter, of course) would be rather sweet but...I compared the A6300 with my Fuji X30 at camerasize.com and they are almost identical which surprised the hell outta me!! I have never seen the A6000 in real life but I was expecting something, well...larger I guess. I am thinking that the 16-50 would be really off-balance and awkward on this camera.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

Tim

I use my A6000 with a 150-500mm and 70-200mm f2.8 lens. "Balance" isn't an issue- anything that large you support via the lens anyway. The overall weight is the only handling issue.

I also assumethis is the lens you're talking about? It's actually very similar in weight (and smaller in dimensions) to theSELP18105G.

Docrum said:

I use my A6000 with a 150-500mm and 70-200mm f2.8 lens. "Balance" isn't an issue- anything that large you support via the lens anyway. The overall weight is the only handling issue.

I also assumethis is the lens you're talking about? It's actually very similar in weight (and smaller in dimensions) to theSELP18105G.

Click to expand...

I don't think the Tamron (Nikon) 17-50 f/2.8 is the lens being referred to, but I don't know what is - the OP will need to clarify. But yes, the Tamron is pretty much identical weight to the 18-105G. Mirrorless APS-C lenses are not that light though.

There are currently four mirrorless f/2.8 zoom lenses:

$1,000 Olympus 12-40mm (m4/3) 400 grams

$1,000 Panasonic 12-35mm (m4/3) 300 grams

$1,200 Fuji 16-55mm (APS-C) 650 grams

$1,300 Samsung 16-50mm (APS-C) 600 grams

I would expect a similar Sony APS-C lens to be similarly priced to the Fuji and Samsung, and have a similar weight (i.e. similarly sized to the current 18-105mm f/4 lens but a bit shorter and a bit fatter and quite a bit heavier).

I doubt that there will ever be a mirrorless f/2.8 APS-C zoom which weighs under 500 grams. They are relatively heavy lenses. And it will never cost less than $1,000.

That said, the larger lenses are not that 'unbalanced' on the a6000. I have tried the 90mm FE macro (650 grams) and it actually feels really well weighted on the camera. Lots of people have no issue with the 70-200mm FE (840 grams) on the a6000 either.

TAGRIFFIN said:

Hi

I have the 16-50 lens and thought it (with the adapter, of course) would be rather sweet but...I compared the A6300 with my Fuji X30 at camerasize.com and they are almost identical which surprised the hell outta me!! I have never seen the A6000 in real life but I was expecting something, well...larger I guess. I am thinking that the 16-50 would be really off-balance and awkward on this camera.

Any thoughts?

Thanks

Tim

Click to expand...

This is a sweet lens to have on A6300, I can just imagine capabilities of F2.8 standard zoom on new copper wired sensor that promises even cleaner higher ISO than a6000 (which was already one of the best in class).

However, as you pointed out - with adapter DT 16-50 f2.8 will be on a bigger side and you will have no stabilization. I could live with a little heavy and larger zoom and adapter combo, but absence of stabilization will tip the scales against this combo for me. Your priorities may vary, so it's up to you.

IMHO I would look for 18-105 f4 or 16-70 f4 in that case. You will lose 1 stop in lens, but you will gain reach and lighter/smaller setup in both cases. I think A6300 will have clean ISO3200 and 6400 that will basically be enough to shoot with f4 zooms indoors in poor light in most conditions (except very low light). IMHO this level of performance was not available before (indeed before A6300 f2.8 zooms were sometimes only option in poor lighting). Not anymore - good times ahead for f4 zooms!

Might look at getting a battery grip to give you more balance. Most of them are junk, so just get a cheap one and use it as an extension of the body instead of attempting full functionality.

Docrum said:

I use my A6000 with a 150-500mm and 70-200mm f2.8 lens. "Balance" isn't an issue- anything that large you support via the lens anyway. The overall weight is the only handling issue.

I also assumethis is the lens you're talking about? It's actually very similar in weight (and smaller in dimensions) to theSELP18105G.

Click to expand...

Hi

I have the Sony 16-50 2.8. Very nice and quite large.

Tim