FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

lens recommendations?

Page  <12345 6>
Author
beccles View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 17 May 2012
Country: United Kingdom
Location: windsor
Status: Offline
Posts: 219
Post Options Post Options   Quote beccles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 15:31
ok.. it seems like a little bit off a lottery but (I think!) i've narrowed it down to these 2

Sony DT 1650mm F2.8 SSM (SAL1650) AF f2.8 Lens SSM

Sony - Carl Zeiss 16-80mm f3,5-4,5 Vario Sonnar SAL1680Z

any more comments?
 



Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9425
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 15:38
There are two Tamron 17-50/2.8 lenses, apperantly the older one is better then the newer one. But seeing the prices the Sony 16-50/2.8 is going for, I would not bother with the Tamron as the Sony has all the benefits of a OEM lens.

Ffordes has a 28-105/3.5-4.5 for 39 GBP, can't go wrong for that price.

And if you want something special, they have a Minolta 28-70/2.8G for 259 GBP - but make sure it fits your photographing style! It is not for everyone.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 17:16
The DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM kit zoom is very good especially at wide angles around 24 mm--the Distagon 24mm F2 SSM isn't even as good. My main gripe about it is its size and weight. I mainly use it as an event lens.

There is only one Tamron 17-50 for A-mount. I once compared a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 to a 16-80 at the same focal lengths and apertures and found the Tamron much sharper. And that Tamron wasn't very sharp wide-open compared to the Sony DT 16-50. I've sold the Tamron and bought another 16-80 since then. The 16-80 is smaller and much lighter than the 16-50mm F2.8. It is much nicer to carry around.

For general use though I miss the 18-135. It was much nicer than the 16-105, 24-85, 28-100, 28-105s and 28-135 for that. I really appreciated the long range. The 16-80 is shorter in focal length than the 24-85 or 28-80 zooms.

Edited by QuietOC - 23 April 2019 at 19:53
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
beccles View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 17 May 2012
Country: United Kingdom
Location: windsor
Status: Offline
Posts: 219
Post Options Post Options   Quote beccles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 17:21
is that the sony CZ 16-80?
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9425
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 17:37
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

There is only one Tamron 17-50 for A-mount.
No, there are two. The original screw driven one that is 16 elements in 13 groups and the newer HSM one that is 17 elements in 13 groups. As they have different optical formulas they are not the same lens.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 19:52
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

There is only one Tamron 17-50 for A-mount.
No, there are two. The original screw driven one that is 16 elements in 13 groups and the newer HSM one that is 17 elements in 13 groups. As they have different optical formulas they are not the same lens.

There are two Sigma 17-50 F2.8's for A-mount. There is a OS one and a non-OS one. Both are HSM. I tried the OS version. The copy I tried wasn't updated to focus with current bodies.

There is a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC for other mounts that is different from the non-VC version, but that lens is not available for A-mount.
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
 



Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 19:56
Originally posted by beccles beccles wrote:

is that the sony CZ 16-80?

Yes, that's the only 16-80 I've owned. I've had three copies.
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Maxxuman View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1461
Post Options Post Options   Quote Maxxuman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 19:57
Originally posted by beccles beccles wrote:

ok.. it seems like a little bit off a lottery but (I think!) i've narrowed it down to these 2

Sony DT 1650mm F2.8 SSM (SAL1650) AF f2.8 Lens SSM

Sony - Carl Zeiss 16-80mm f3,5-4,5 Vario Sonnar SAL1680Z

any more comments?


The 16-50 2.8 is an excellent lens. It's the only one I miss now that I'm using A99's, and I look forward to using it when I get an A99ii and don't want 42 megapixels for all my shots (on the A99ii it gives 18MP, compared to only 10 on the original A99).
Barry
Back to Top
LAbernethy View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 25 November 2015
Country: Canada
Location: Ajax, Ontario
Status: Offline
Posts: 1241
Post Options Post Options   Quote LAbernethy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 20:37
Originally posted by beccles beccles wrote:

most (if not all?) recommendations are for manufacturer lenses, i.e. sony. Is there not a lens from tamron/sigma/tokina or other that's worth a look?

The Tamron AF 17-50mm 1:2.8 (IF) XR Di II A16 is Meh; Ok if stopped down like the Sigma you're disappointed with. The Sony DT 16-105mm f/3.5-5.6 SAL is still my favorite travel lens over the Sony DT 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 SAM for the 2mm at the wide end (I find it more useful).
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Posts: 9425
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 21:05
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

There is only one Tamron 17-50 for A-mount.
No, there are two. The original screw driven one that is 16 elements in 13 groups and the newer HSM one that is 17 elements in 13 groups. As they have different optical formulas they are not the same lens.

There are two Sigma 17-50 F2.8's for A-mount. There is a OS one and a non-OS one. Both are HSM. I tried the OS version. The copy I tried wasn't updated to focus with current bodies.

There is a Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC for other mounts that is different from the non-VC version, but that lens is not available for A-mount.
Yes, I was mistaken. Sorry for the confusion.
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
Back to Top
C_N_RED_AGAIN View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 05 July 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 992
Post Options Post Options   Quote C_N_RED_AGAIN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2019 at 21:14
Id get the 16-50 f2.8. I had a copy of the 16-80 Zeiss and I thought it sucked. One of two lenses Zeiss pumped out that were subpar in my opinion.
Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3250
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 April 2019 at 14:54
Originally posted by beccles beccles wrote:

most (if not all?) recommendations are for manufacturer lenses, i.e. sony. Is there not a lens from tamron/sigma/tokina or other that's worth a look?

I prefer the Sony lenses because I get auto lens corrections and I don't use LR or profiles in PP. Other lenses need to be good in CA and geometry and some aren't. Plus more recent lenses (Sony-era) have much better flare performance than older ones (check Kurt Munger's reviews for these - he tests every lens for flare.)
My own experience is that Sigma's film-era zoom lenses are all horrid, especially anything with 'aspheric' in the title, but the few digital APS-C lenses I've tried have been excellent. But I guess it depends how fussy you are, to some extent ...

FWIW I was pleasantly surprised by my copy of the 18-250mm Sony (especially at the long end) but as Neilt3 says, there is a lot of variation between copies on zoom lenses and none of them are going to be perfect everywhere.

Edited by Miranda F - 24 April 2019 at 14:59
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .
Back to Top
Roger Rex View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 30 September 2005
Country: United States
Location: North Florida
Status: Offline
Posts: 7126
Post Options Post Options   Quote Roger Rex Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 April 2019 at 15:42
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

My own experience is that Sigma's film-era zoom lenses are all horrid, especially anything with 'aspheric' in the title, ...


Perhaps a bit too broad of a statement (i.e., "... are ALL horrid ..." - emphasis added)? I find the Sigma 12-24 a truly exceptional lens, particularly given its very wide nature. Admittedly I am not a pixel peeper but I still use this lens regularly and find it more than satisfactory. I realize it does not, however, meet the OP's requirements for a longer zoom range.

Edit - Sorry, I can't seem to get the "12-24" link to work but it is to Dyxum's lens reviews.
Hatred corrodes the container it is carried in. http://rogerrex.zenfolio.com/
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 April 2019 at 16:30
The Sigma 12-24mm is a DG lens, so not "film era." I have one with a fungus infection that I would like to clean since it is a very nice lens.

Their 28-105mm F2.8-4 Aspherical is certainly fine.
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  <12345 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.