Sony A6000

[pierces]

If you're looking for a sports/wildlife lens, then the 70-300 may be the better choice. If you're looking for more of a long portrait lens, then the 70-200/4.

 

For my purposes, the 70-300 may be a better fit, but I need to decide if it's worth the trouble of selling my current 70-200 and changing.

 

Travel, wildlife, landscape...

 

The Decision Wheel may start slowing with the arrow pointing towards the 70-300.

 

I guess we just have to wait and see what our resident comparison tester comes up with.

 

Are you listening, Justin?

 

 

Dave

[havoc315]

Travel, wildlife, landscape...

 

The Decision Wheel may start slowing with the arrow pointing towards the 70-300.

 

I guess we just have to wait and see what our resident comparison tester comes up with.

 

Are you listening, Justin?

 

 

Dave

 

I'd go 70-300 for those things, but reserving decision until we see some of the reviews and testing. If the resolution and IQ can match the 70-200, then I'd go with the 70-300. On the other hand, if the 70-200 has better IQ (which is generally the case), then it's a harder decision.

[pierces]

I'd go 70-300 for those things, but reserving decision until we see some of the reviews and testing. If the resolution and IQ can match the 70-200, then I'd go with the 70-300. On the other hand, if the 70-200 has better IQ (which is generally the case), then it's a harder decision.

 

Exactly where I am right now.

 

Dave

[tommui987]

DECISIONS, DECISIONS, DECISIONS!

 

The 70-300mm has a greater reach - the 200mm is a tad faster.

 

Most -if not all - of my photos probably are not worthy to go beyond 4x6 in any case!

Look forward to seeing Justin's photos in the coming weeks and whether Dave takes the plunge.

 

And Dave, thanks for posting that mini-review on the 70-300mm.

[zackiedawg]

I wish I could speed up the process - as I'm about to enter another weekend with little or no rain predicted, this would have been the perfect time to receive the new 70-300mm. But I'm still having to wait until next week - and hope everything releases and ships on time with no delays - then I should have it NEXT Friday.

 

For me, I know I need the reach above all else - so I just hope the IQ at 300mm wide open is better than the 70-200mm F4 lens is at F5.6 and uprezzed to 300mm. It doesn't have to be EXACTLY as good as the 70-200mm lens pixel for pixel at the 200mm mark - it's the 300mm that draws me in. And being able to get 24MP on a subject at a 450mm equivalent reach is key!

[havoc315]

DECISIONS, DECISIONS, DECISIONS!

 

The 70-300mm has a greater reach - the 200mm is a tad faster.

 

Most -if not all - of my photos probably are not worthy to go beyond 4x6 in any case!

Look forward to seeing Justin's photos in the coming weeks and whether Dave takes the plunge.

 

And Dave, thanks for posting that mini-review on the 70-300mm.

 

The 70-300 looks like a winner to me...

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-70-300mm-f4.5-5.6g-oss-sel70300g/review/

[pierces]

The 70-300 looks like a winner to me...

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-70-300mm-f4.5-5.6g-oss-sel70300g/review/

 

 

Damn...

 

I always wanted a white lens. Looks like it may have to wait for a while longer.

 

 

Dave

[tommui987]

the 70-300 looks like a winner to me...

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-70-300mm-f4.5-5.6g-oss-sel70300g/review/

 

wow!

[c230k]

Just put my Sony 18-200mm on eBay, then will get the FE 70-300mm, need the range.

 

Tom :cool:

[zackiedawg]

My order still seems to be indicating delivery on May 6...so my fingers remain crossed there are no last-minute surprise delays. 5 days counting down till Saturday - which if the lens comes as expected will be my first chance to get out and shoot with it.

[pierces]

My order still seems to be indicating delivery on May 6...so my fingers remain crossed there are no last-minute surprise delays. 5 days counting down till Saturday - which if the lens comes as expected will be my first chance to get out and shoot with it.

 

Don't forget to leave cookies and milk out for the UPS guy...

 

 

Dave

[zackiedawg]

I long ago learned that the UPS guy is MUCH more exciting and brings lots more stuff than Santa does...since my UPS delivery person is the same year-round, we give a Christmas bonus check...keeps service tip-top!

[c230k]

My son is a UPS driver and really appreciated people like you. Think he would prefer cookies and a beer after work. lol

 

Tom :cool:

[pierces]

 

 

May have to add this to the when-I-have-a-few-extra-bucks list.

 

http://lensbaby.com/product/twist-60/

 

Wedding glass? Might ultimately be limited to a small segment of shots, sort of like the fisheye. But for that segment, it looks very interesting.

 

Dave

[c230k]

Buying a new expensive lens, who would recommend a UV filter for lens protection, or do without,

 

 

Tom :cool:

[havoc315]

Buying a new expensive lens, who would recommend a UV filter for lens protection, or do without,

 

 

Tom :cool:

 

I'll usually get the UV filter as a bit of insurance. But there is a school of thought that UV filters degrade the image, even if slightly. And therefore, you should avoid them.

[pierces]

The awesome little 8mm Rokinon fisheye is available at B&H for $269 in silver. Not sure for how long.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1080297-REG/rokinon_rk8ms_e_8mm_f2_8_2_fisheye.html

 

Sharp, even at f/2.8. Not your typical walkaround lens but it has earned a place in my travel kit.

 

 

Dave

[pierces]

Two years in and guess who is still Best Overall?

 

2016 DPReview Roundup: Interchangeable Lens Cameras $500-$800

 

Dave

Edited May 9, 2016 by pierces

[c230k]

Sharp, even at f/2.8. Not your typical walkaround lens but it has earned a place in my travel kit.

 

Took your advice and bought the lens, great call. Here a picture I tok with I on our last cruise in April. It sure a fun lens and easy to use.

 

 

Tom :cool:

[pierces]

I had a bit of luck in the financial department, so I ordered a new lens. Sadly, the luck was in my couch cushions and the Fujian 35mm f/1.7 CCTV lens was only about $30, including e-mount adapter.

 

On the bright side, it's a fun little thing and produces an odd bokeh similar to the "soap bubble" effect of the Petzval view camera lenses that are being resurrected in modern form. The center is surprisingly sharp wide open but falls off quickly towards the edges. Stopping down improves the sharpness but the corners never really get sharp. The aperture ring is clickless and pretty approximate since there is no registration mark on the lens. You sort of line it up with the adapter knurling wide open and eyeball it to the numbers on the aperture ring.

 

I am going to try this out as a special-effect portrait lens and see if it acts like the Lensbaby Twister. If I can get a similar effect, I will have saved $250! If not, it's only $30 and I'll have fun with it.

 

Photos and comments:

 

It's a beast! Or, not....

 

All images are straight out of the camera with no sharpening ot other adjustments. The comparison illustrations were re-size only.

 

Center sharpness is actually pretty good at f/2.8.

 

f/5.6(ish) and f/1.7

 

Bokeh samples. Shot at f/1.7 or slightly stopped down.

 

 

This one was cropped for rule-of-thirds. All subjects should be dead center with crop in post-process.

 

I did notice that a bright subject causes a reflection flare off of the sensor and my first accessory hunt will be for a hood since there are apparently no anti-flare coatings at all.

 

So far, it's worth every penny! All 3,000 of them!

 

Dave

Edited May 14, 2016 by pierces

[pierces]

Another shot with my new $30 lens and the A6000. The bang-for-the-buck on this thing is off the chart!

 

Princess Cookie

 

Dave

[rae8836]

Dave;

 

Noted a previous entry where you indicated you are a heavy user of the PZ 18-105 G Sony zoom. I have an a6000 with the 10-18 and the 18-105. I am a big zoom fan and like the range covered by these two native APS-C lens. I tend to do a lot of available/low light work which means running the 18-105 at f4 or f5.6 most of the time. I don't really have a standard for comparison but I feel this lens is a bit soft at these apertures. What's your opinion?

 

RAE

[pierces]

Dave;

 

Noted a previous entry where you indicated you are a heavy user of the PZ 18-105 G Sony zoom. I have an a6000 with the 10-18 and the 18-105. I am a big zoom fan and like the range covered by these two native APS-C lens. I tend to do a lot of available/low light work which means running the 18-105 at f4 or f5.6 most of the time. I don't really have a standard for comparison but I feel this lens is a bit soft at these apertures. What's your opinion?

 

RAE

 

I went through my photos from the last cruise where I used the 18-105 for the majority of the shots and filtered for the lens and f/4 in the metadata. Most of the softness that I saw while pixel-peeping was due to detail loss at extreme ISO, motion blur with very low handheld shutter speeds or having the subject fractionally out of the focal plane. In conditions that weren't on the edge of what was impossible a few years ago, I'm rather pleased with the sharpness wide open. We all have our internal ruler to measure "good enough" and the 18-105 measures up for me. My opinion, of course.

 

Examples:

28mm - f/4 - ISO160 - 1/30s

 

105mm - f/4 - ISO100 - 1/30s

 

24mm - f/4 - ISO1600 - 1/30s

 

105mm - f/4 - ISO100 - 1/640s

 

70mm - f/4 - ISO320 - 1/30s

 

18mm - f/4 - ISO1000 - 1/30s

 

Note: I have my auto -ISO set to a 1/30s minimum which is why most of the darker venues are shot at 1/30s.

 

The 18-105 has become my go-to lens for general use. I still travel on business with the 16-50 PZ because of it's generally good performance and small size and I will use other lenses as need or whim demands but the 18-105 has given me no reason to regret buying it.

 

Dave

[rae8836]

Dave;

 

Thanks for the examples. They look good to me.

 

I don't force my ISO, but I do think that I could have an issue with steadiness at slow shutter speeds. I'm not sure just how much help I should expect from SteadyShot. Perhaps some testing with slow shutter speeds and SteadyShot on and off is indicated.

 

The less likely possibility is errors in focus. I'm using Auto and I make pretty certain that the key subject area is in a green box - is there a possibility that the green box lies? I guess I could try some tests with manual focus and focus peaking as my indicator.

 

RAE

Edited May 21, 2016 by rae8836

[JessandLevi]

Has anyone bought (and used) an underwater housing case? I just bought the Meikon case for the A6000 and received it today. I am looking forward to trying it out before our cruise in February :)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums