• Log In
  • Sign Up
    • While I am traveling South America, carrying too much photography gear I know when I return to the States I'll be picking up a Sony a6500 or A7Rii depending on how many new releases Sony makes in the mean time and drop the prices of their range.

      ...but for lenses obviously the choice is wide open, right now i'm checking prime lenses, so here's the question, and lets not keep it Sony as there are so many converters out there.

      You can pick one prime lens f2.0 or faster for street, portrait, low light, your legs are your zoom. Your budget is maxed at $1000...what would you pick?

    • I have the a6000 and the a6300. I never bought the package deals with the kit lens. I shoot mostly with a the Rokinon manual 8mm on one body and the Sony 18-200mm (3.5) on the other. I had the Sony nifty-fifty 1.8 and it was a pretty damn good lens for $250. Not waterproofs and so I got water in it and it dried as a drip right on the center focal point. I took it apart....but, not a good guy to put things back together again. lol So, I am pretty sure I am going to get the Sigma 30mm because it is only $350 but mostly it gives me a little more flexibilty than the 50. I have a trigger finger water housing and I think the 30mm will allow me to get in the water and shoot surfing in medium to smaller surf.....where I can be outside the barrel and still capture any overheads.

    • Ugh this is a tough one.... how's the 45mm Tamron F1.8 VC? I love the 35 so that could be a real option. I'm thinking something close to my Sigma 50mm F1.4 because it can do good work with portraits but the problem is that it isn't too great when it comes to AF and I haven't had the best of luck with that even with their ART lenses. And for cityscapes it would be interesting to go back to something ~50mm since most of my Photo I & II projects involved them and at that focal length but I really haven't gone back to it.

    • I might havea few. These days, I'm recovering from having lost most of my library to a corrupted NAS. Damn near a terabyte of files... Gone. 😒. So if I've got any, it'd be coming from post production libraries I've saved to the cloud.

    • i think the problem with reassembly is getting it dialed in correctly, the slightest difference and you just got yourself a paperweight. I have never had a lens rebuilt I'm guessing its expensive to get it to the right person

    • Oh my God, Driveshaft. this is every photographer's worst nightmare. I am so sorry. I can imagine because I had a NAS fail too, but I was able to recover 80% of it to get into the cloud. I thought I had lost it all. Every time I search for a photo that is no longer there I ache. Damn.

    • The authorized Sony repair facility would have charged $145. The lens is $275. I was not emotionally involved in the lens. LOL I probably could have pulled it off, but didn't. LOL I did get it reassembled minus a couple of screws but I did not get the layering correct of the copper filament. The $145 would have been worth it.

    • The Sony E 50 mm F1.8 OSS | SEL50F18 is one lense that I would cry about losing. My copy has reasonably fast and very accurate AF and the OSS works perfectly even on my a6000.

      It also optically couples reasonably well with an Olympus TCON-17, 1.7x Teleconverter accessory lens (mounts on front). I do stop down to around f2.2 but the combination lets me shoot indoors in theatrical lighting, and when flash is not allowed like in a museum.

      There is some strong vignetting in the corners and edges, but a moderate crop still allows a reasonable result. (Great for social posts and 4"x6" print.) This was 50-60 feet away.

    • thats an interesting combination, I had to do some looking around to see the differences you were talking about, a good chepaer option that seems to not lose too much quality. Actually one review i found the reviewer said it make the 55-210 better.

      Intersting your way with a prime, thanks for bringing it up

    • That was tasty stuff...

      The lens...I love the coatings used in the lens...I've compared it against some nice legacy f/1.4 lenses, that were also considered really great back in their day, and the treatment on the more modern lenses really brings out great colors. Of course, color, these days, is something that can be handled in post. But it's nice when it looks rich straight out of the camera too. One less thing to futz with. The Oly f/1.2 is even more exceptionally meticulous design.

    • Nah, this is just the Leica D Summilux. It's not Leica's rangefinder Summilux M. :) Definitely less than a grand. But I doubt anyone sells them anymore. The Oly f/1.2 was my pic for a modern sub f/2 prime. But I don't *have* that one yet...because I do have the Summilux, and haven't yet convinced myself to switch over to the f/1.2 yet. But Eventually I's got a real short 30cm minimum focus distance so it's a decent macro tool too. That too falls under the $1k cap.

    • I should have cried but, even as good as it was I guess I just did not use it that often. The 18-200 is only 3.5 but it does such a good job that is my primary. But, here is a decent example of the sony nifty fifty I think.

    • The Sony 55mm f/1.8 FE lens is remarkably sharp on my A7RII. Its sharpness warrants shooting at 42.4 megapixels, unlike many other ~50mm primes. And it's pretty small. The 55mm is slightly too long for group shots and landscapes. You get a 1.5x crop on the A6500 because it's a full frame lens, so it'll be extra tight.

      I am looking for a 35mm prime. I feel like it's the most versatile prime. It's just long enough to photograph people without distortion. But at 35mm on a full frame, it's wide enough for landscapes, group shots, etc. I really want the Sony 35mm f/1.4 FE ZA. It's also out of my price range at $1600.

      I have the Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8 mm M mount with an FE adapter. You can find it for just under $1000 used or rarely on a sale. It's my favorite wide I've ever owned because it produces beautiful bokeh and is tack sharp. Downsides are that there's significant vignetting when put on a full frame Sony mirrorless and it's manual focus. Shot on the 21mm 👇

    • I've got a Sigma 35mm F1.4 that I like. It's had quite a few posters published in Heavy Duty Magazine pass through its glass.
      It has some magenta aberration in extreme light but easily fixable post production.
      I also like the way it's quite light and easily transported on a bike.

    • Please forgive my n00b ignorance, but I wonder why wouldn't something such as an Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO Lens suffice and how much of a quality downgrade is that over a prime lens... The reason I bring this up, is because last year after a consultation with few more seasoned amateur photographer friends, I got an Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II and I am still exploring options for this camera, while trying to learn as much as possible how to get better camera skills. The camera came with the kit 14-42mm EZ & 40-150mm Lenses.
      To my mind, these seem to do a decent job but I really am wondering if it's my knowledge or the lens that need upgraded and where & when does one draw that line.