Sony E-mount/mirrorless/aps-c Lens Discussion

[AyoBeng]

Bumping to share my experience with the Sigma 56mm 1.4. I am super impressed, extremely sharp and the auto focus is unreal. It excels in both categories over the native Sony 18-135, which I am also happy with but the Sigma 56 blows it away.

Sigma 56











Sony 18-135 for comparison

[Norseman]

bump!

Just bought an a6600, arriving tomorrow. Hmmd and hawed, kinda wanted the a7iii but have been pleased with the compactness of the NEX-5r that I've been shooting with since 2013, lol... so APS-C it will be again. I just really love how packable that form factor is. More important to me than flat out image quality and full feature set. Maybe if I get another stimulus check I'll get the big dog and change my mind, ha.

Ordered it with the 18-135 and stoked to give that lens a try. Still got the kit lenses from the NEX (18-55, 55-210 which is a pretty decent lens IMO), plus a 35mm F1.8 prime which is fun (and quite compact... the only one I took on last year's trip to Switz).

[NW_SKIER]

Post up some nudes with it


Eta: you take sick photos. Looking forward to seeing what you actually do with it.

[smmokan]

bump!

Just bought an a6600, arriving tomorrow. Hmmd and hawed, kinda wanted the a7iii but have been pleased with the compactness of the NEX-5r that I've been shooting with since 2013, lol... so APS-C it will be again. I just really love how packable that form factor is. More important to me than flat out image quality and full feature set. Maybe if I get another stimulus check I'll get the big dog and change my mind, ha.

Ordered it with the 18-135 and stoked to give that lens a try. Still got the kit lenses from the NEX (18-55, 55-210 which is a pretty decent lens IMO), plus a 35mm F1.8 prime which is fun (and quite compact... the only one I took on last year's trip to Switz).

You'll dig it. I sold my A7iii last year and bought an a6400, and I'm definitely impressed. There is obviously a sacrifice in performance, but I realized that in order to get what I wanted out of the A7iii, I had to buy expensive lenses that were really big and heavy. And I didn't want to do either. Instead, I'd rather "sacrifice" a bit with the a6400 and smaller/cheaper/lighter lenses, but have it with me more often. So now I use that all the time and I barely know it's in my pack. I primarily use the 18-135, but also have the 11-18 which is a great (and small) lens.

[Norseman]

You'll dig it. I sold my A7iii last year and bought an a6400, and I'm definitely impressed. There is obviously a sacrifice in performance, but I realized that in order to get what I wanted out of the A7iii, I had to buy expensive lenses that were really big and heavy. And I didn't want to do either. Instead, I'd rather "sacrifice" a bit with the a6400 and smaller/cheaper/lighter lenses, but have it with me more often. So now I use that all the time and I barely know it's in my pack. I primarily use the 18-135, but also have the 11-18 which is a great (and small) lens.

Word. I recall reading your embrace of the switch. I'm pretty interested in the in-body stabilization of this new one, which I think descends from the full-frame models and should be kickass in a camera this size.

Post up some nudes with it


Eta: you take sick photos. Looking forward to seeing what you actually do with it.

Artful beach sunrise cockshot is headed your way, bro.

[NW_SKIER]

Artful beach sunrise cockshot is headed your way, bro.

Sweet!

[Norseman]

aaaaaand jeezuz h, the first few shots from this thing make it clear that my skill is the weak link, LOL. Got some growing to do!

[Timberridge]

The bee seems to be in focus with a nice blur on the fore and back, and the exposure fine. Just crop the left a bit.

[Norseman]

Ok yeah, agreed. At first I kinda liked the vast void out there but it's distracting.

Well, I'll work on figuring out how to do this shit and will leave the discussion here for awhile. Thanks for the tips and opinions yall, peace.

[Timberridge]

It would be a nice desktop wallpaper as is though. The white space on the left could be the icon area.

[grskier]

It would be a nice desktop wallpaper as is though. The white space on the left could be the icon area.

That was my first thought when I saw the shot.

[smmokan]

I love the focal system on the A6xx Sony cameras, and the touch focus on the A6400 works so well.

[AZskibum]

Hey guys, question from a newbie getting into ski photography. Is it rude to snap some picks of people throwing it at places like beartooth? Should I ask ahead of the jump, or ask after? I don't have any friends throwing stuff, and I usually ski solo. Offer to tag them if it comes out well?

Also, 30 prime or E mount or 55-210? Looking to get some air shots looking up maybe. Thanks!

[smmokan]

If you use a 30mm prime, you're going to have to get really close to skiers in order to get decent shots... it will be especially tough if you don't know them, and they don't know you're taking pics. With a prime that wide, your best bet is to set up a shot ahead of time so you know your field of view and perspective.

A wider or longer zoom is going to be much better for skiing shots: something like the 18-135mm or the 55-210 where you can track the skier and give yourself more room for setting up the image.

[adrenalated]

The 18-135 is the only lens I carry for skiing shots 99.9% of the time. I picked up a 35mm prime, but plan to use that mostly for mountain biking where it's easier to get in the exact right position to frame a shot and the rider is in a more predictable location (the trail).

I could maybe see a prime working for shooting park stuff specifically (where again, you can frame your shots and you know exactly where the skier will be), but for everything else skiing, a zoom is definitely the way to go.

FWIW I own both the 18-135 and the 55-210. The 18-135 is sharper and IMO a better range for most skiing, unless you're on really big lines with long sight lines.

[Norseman]

55-210 is pretty meh, imo

70-350 G preferred for long schlongin w/ crop body

[adrenalated]

55-210 is pretty meh, imo

For $300 (or included in a kit) I think it's fine. It's not amazing, but for the price it's fine. It's not the steaming pile of hot garbage that the 16-50 is.

70-350 G preferred for long schlongin w/ crop body

I'd like to try this guy but feel like I need to be prepared to buy it before I do... but at $900, it damn well better be much better than the 55-210.

[Rhyno]

Has anyone use the Tamron 17-70 F/2.8? It look like a versatile lens and I like the range, but a bit it would be an investment for this amateur. Keep up the great pics. Love coming here for inspiration.