Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Now we are talking 🙂
I would be able to give you more reliable advise with the lenses for E mount. e.g. If you would buy Sony A6000 instead, I would suggest:
1. Sony SEL 10-18 f/4 OSS /landscape and underwater wide angle.
2. Sigma 19, 30 and 60, all f/2.8 (from street to portrait with very good price/performance ratio)
3. Sony SEL 55-210 as a tele option for wildlife and sexy neighbor across the street.Set like this (SEL 1018 is rather expensive, but you can buy camera with kit pancake 16-50 and SEL 55-210 in the bundle and then slowly put some peanuts aside for better glass) should cover most of your needs at a very good IQ level.
For Nikon DX
1. Your best bet will be to start with kit zoom bundle 18-55 and 55-200. This is by far most economical solution. If you are not sure about preferred focal lengths, you can either:
a) Check exifs after a year or so to see which focal lengths you used most
b) use duct tape to fix your zooms at certain FL and test them for a week or two.
Both ways should help you to discover your preferred focal lengths and give you a clue for the future lens choices.Medium budget higher quality solution will be:
1. Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX II or Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM – landscape, WA and under water.
2. Nikon 35/1.8 G AF-S great standard lens.
3. Nikon 85/1.8 G AF-S – superb portrait lens
4. Nikon AF 80-200 f/2.8 (two rings) used. Very good old tele zoom, but not easy to find in a good shape.Sony A77 M ii
I think that this camera doesn’t come with lens bundles, at least I haven’t seen them. This makes things slightly more complicated…1. Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX – also here I will search for this Tokina. I am nit sure it was made in version II for Sony A, but even the first version was very good. You should look for used one (because of the price), but if possible – try before buy. De-centering of the optics was a common issue with this lens.
2. Sony DT 18-70mm F3.5-5.6 is nice standard zoom for affordable price. There are better zooms, but much more expensive. You can also look at third party offers – Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical [IF] or Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM but both are way more expensive.
3. Sony SAL 85F28 is nice small portrait lens.
4. With tele options it’s not that easy. I can recommend Minolta 100-300 f/4.5-.6 APO (D) zoom. It is quite underestimated performer.Please understand, that my recommendation above is not about best optics or optical performance. I tried to give you kind of best bang for the buck options, good starter lenses and sets that should cover most of your needs.
I hope it helps a bit.
Cheers,
Viktor-
This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by
viktor pavlovic.
-
This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by viktor pavlovic.
The largest store in Europe with photo equipment (at least AFAIK) is Fotoskoda – http://www.fotoskoda.cz, another large store is http://www.megapixel.cz. You can also use – heureka search – http://www.heureka.cz for your item to find best available price from on line stores.
Good luck,
ViktorI haven’t tried either camera so I can’t give you any personnel experience. Good thing is, that you can’t make wrong choice, both are top of the line in the DSLR APS-Cworld. 12 f/s with Sony is impressive, but at that speed, you don’t have control of the image between the captures and AF will be very unpredictable. Where you might need 12 f/s? Extreme sport, extreme wildlife etc. otherwise, I believe that 6 f/s is more than enough for most situations.
I didn’t understand your note about size of the sensor. AFAIK they are supposed to be same (23.5 x 15.6 mm) 24 mpx. While I think it’s same sensor (base) in both cameras, I can’t say for sure. Nikon is designing its own A/D converters and processing pipe and they are also supposed to design sensor topings including micro lenses. In a result, I believe that IQ will be very similar between the two, but because of the transluscent technology used in Sony, Nikon should have somewhat better low light performance.
Articulating screen feature is nice to have. I have been using it on my Sony E mount cameras mainly for landscape, because I am lazy to bend, but at the end I usually have to look in the viewfinder anyway, in order to prevent parasite light and reflections from the LCD screen. If you are planning to shot lot of video, articulating screen is certainly beneficial.
As I said, you can’t make wrong choice here. Moral lifetime of such a camera is probably only few years, and both cameras might be soon replaced with newer models. Real life time of those cameras is much longer and if you take good care of it, I am sure they will be able to make competitive IQ images another 5-7 years.
Photo industry is very turbulent recently. There are new breakthrough solutions in lens design, including Fresnel type of optics and other diffractive special glasses. In parallel, computational approaches in image quality improvement are very dynamic and we can already see gap between great and cheap optical correction being drastically reduced by different software solutions.
Light field technology is still waiting to show its full potential and younger generation is asking for more interactive idea presentation (360°video, Lythro etc.)
I am saying this in order to put in perspective your concerns about future of the Sony A mount. In fact, everything in traditional photography equipment is under big question mark recently. I wouldn’t be surprised if Nikon collapse (they are heavily over-invested according some economical sources), but they might also show unexpected growth if rumors about Samsung acquisition, shows to be truth.
Choose the camera that impress you more. Beside all those fancy functions, there is always little emotional relation to the gear, just like in marriage (first few months are great).
Regarding your lens question – you can use any third party lens made for Minolta/Sony A (there are also lot of older Minolta AF lenses that will work on Sony A77 MII), my point is that most of third party producers, and even Sony themselves didn’t release new A mount lens for a while now. And proper choice of the lens, will have greater influence on the final image, than camera body. From that perspective, Nikon is still alive, while Sony is living from the old glory. (There are some magnificent lenses in Sony A mount, such Minolta/Sony 135/2.8 STF is one of its kind portrait lens with incredibly smooth bokeh e.g.)
All the best mate,
Viktor-
This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by viktor pavlovic.
Hi SeaDog011,
I thought that you are considering A7 MII and not A77 MII. If that is the case, I would push my preferences very slightly toward Nikon, simply because it is not clear what will happen with the Sony A system. Sony A77 M II is great camera, and while you can expect similar image quality like with Nikon D7200, it has transluscent mirror technology that is taking some light (1/2-2/3rd of EV in my experience). Lens offer is more limited han in case of Nikon. I beilieve that you should find more accessories, such as underwater housing for Nikon and while I didn’t investigate, I think that you might find also some underwater flashes which will communicate with Nikon iTTl.
For all those reasons, Nikon will be better option IMHO.Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony, FD 20-35 f/3.5 is sharper in the covering range and it is very nice landscape lens at apertures arround f/8-f/11. But it is usually more expensive. (if in really good condition).
Shuter shock on A7r is a tricky issue, hard to predict when and where it will occur.
I am keeping my fingers crossed for your search of Canon FD 300/4L for a reasonable price.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
FD 24-35L is not a replacement to FE 16-35, especially not in the corners. But in the mid frame, lens is quite sharp with excellent contrast, well controlled CA and good sharpness. It represent IMHO great value for an WA all rounder, considering above mentioned IQ aspects, very good build quality and affordable price.
I don’t have experience with FD 300/2.8 L but it would be hard to believe that is on par or even better than EF version which was simply outstanding. I replaced it with EF 200/2 L IS and 400/2.8 L IS II, which combined with Canon EF TC’s are covering all the range that I might ever need. But if I wouldn’t get stunning deal on both of those lenses, I would keep 300 and be happy as well.
£450 might be slightly over, but it will depend on the lens condition… It is indeed very good lens.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
I am on my tablet now, so it’s a but harder to type the answer and add links etc. but you should be able to find one of my articles where I tested Canon FD 300/4 L against Minolta 300/2.8 and Canon EF 300/2.8 L IS. Canon FD did very well in that comparison and IMHO it is very good lens overall. I have two copies of it and both are very similar, so I won’t be afraid of sample variation issues.
I bought mine at about 500 USD each, which is not cheap but not bad for the premium quality product. I have no idea for how much they are going now, but I have seen some of the Canon FD gems such as 24-35 f/3.5 L going dirty cheap (200-250 USD), so maybe if you wait a bit, you might catch one of those 300/4Ls for a good price.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
lens looks absolutely OK to me if the sharpness is your concern. If you want to test lens for the sharpness in the field, you basically have two options…
a) testing it for lab like results (in the mid frame only) to see its full potential.
b) testing it similar to the way, you intend to use it.While in the first case, you’ll might be able to comment on the lens sharpness in general, you’ll have to build very strict testing routine, excluding all possible variables (sturdy tripod, good light, good focus target with high contrast, good weather conditions (humidity, haze, heat etc.) different focus distances, several shots per aperture with slight shifting of focus plane, base ISO only, flare prevention and most importantly, sturdy tripod with remote triggering.
You went with second option, trying to figure out how the lens will work for you. I can’t thus comment on the particular lens and its resolution rendering capabilities, but looking at your gallery, I don’t see any major flaws, such as blooming, explicit CA etc., things that will reduce native resolution.
In order to find out if lens is capable of rendering full sensor resolution, you’ll need studio lab conditions and lot of experience. Maybe you can find somewhere MTF figures for your lens, which should give you an idea.
In a normal life, there are too many aspects (slightly missed focus by 0,5-1mm e.g.) that will affect resulting image resolution, which will come before you hit lens resolving limit.In your case, you should also think about shutter shake being a serious threat for critical sharpness. This lens, used on monopod as you suggested is among most affected combinations for reveling this phenomenon.
In summary, I don’t find anything wrong with the lens from your images, slight blurriness in some of the images might have many other reasons before resolving limit, shutter shake (on A7R) can be one of the main reasons why you have inconsistent results.
Hope it helps,
ViktorHi Anthony,
I am glad if my experience helped. In reality, prices on the used combo of A6000 and SEL1018 are so attractive that you certainly consider it. In some situations you might hit limits of APS-C dynamic range but that’s very rare.I am still using Nikon and Nikkor 14-24 from time to time, but mainly bcause of filters (I have only two XX large LEE) combo gets less use that it desrves.
I am using A7 and A7R with Canon lenses and A6000 with SEL 1018 for my clients.
Beer sounds good.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
if you go with some of those Hi-tech filters, let me know how are you satisfied. My experience with Cokin-Z who claimed to use nano coatings were really bad…
To serve the purpose of reverse grade using method I described, you can’t use soft grades, as they are loosing density toward area of overlaping. I am not sure I xplained it well, so let me try again:
You take 1 0.9 (3 stops) and 1 0.6 (2 stops). Hard grades should have similar dnsity in its full coverage. Rotate (180* rotation) one of the filters and put it in the second slot of the holder (0.6) than put another filter from above in the first slot. When they start to overlap they will create 1.5 (5 stops) in that area. What we have now is -2 EV bellow, -3 EV on the sky and -5. EV in the overlap area which we can move above or bellow to match the horizon. Basically we are getting -3 EV compesention toward foreground and -2 EV toward sky, and 5EV on the brightest horizon, which in my experience works best.
Cheers,
ViktorHi Anthony,
you probably have good reasons to go with Heliar 15, but I wouldn’t rely on those comparison images solely.
When you want to compare lenses, you should consider many things before you proceed.
First – you should always compare apples to apples – 1mm on the wide side means quite a lot. Commenting on corner sharpness on tree leaves (favorite testing target of Mr. Rockwell, if I am not mistaken) and in general on any 3D scene (like they used to have, and actually still have on DPreview) is laughable at best. (But I am doing the same from time to time, because people likes it :-))
On such a complex scene, you compare center zone, mabe even midzones, but corners could be heavily affected by even light difference in focus plane, by DOF differences between two lenses (when you compare 15 to 16 e.g.) and also by different field curvature characteristics (at f/8 you should know your lens and how to focus it properly).
In my testing of Sony FE 16-35/4 G OSS, I never experienced that kind of corner smearing at 16mm as he is showing on his crops.
Could it be bad sample? I don’t know… User fault is certainly more probable IMHO…BTW, last time when I spoked to Mr. Nasse from Zeiss, he showed me his lab testing of possible focus plane misalignment. In a result, if the test target was improperly focused by only 0,5mm!!! MTF of tested lens dropped over 10%, (even more in the corners). What does that tell us – it is far more important to properly focus the lens, than to pick the sharpest lens on the world. (If critical sharpness is important to you).
On the other hand, on the links you provided I have noticed much more pronounced purple fringing on Voigtlander. Could be that Sony is software corrected in the camera, but I think it’s rather optical correction in this case.
Most important however, is how you feel about it. If possible, I would suggest to rent both lenses and see how they work for you.
In my case, any of those would be more than perfect (except for that filter modification stuff), but flexibility of the zoom range, built in AF when needed, additional stabilization and partial weather sealing, will certainly shift me toward Sony.
However, I have SEL 1018/4 and A6000 and this is great system for most of my landscape needs. When I shot wide for my clients, I usually rely on Canon TS-E17, 24 and EF 14/2.8II.
Few “landscape samples of my A6000 + SEL 1018 combo:
cheers,
ViktorAnthony, thanks for the links.
I am aware of many “new” manufacturers and there are also many “old” proven ones such as Heliopan or Singh Ray. With those new kids on the block, we would need to have some time passing, in order to evaluate their true quality. Color consistence among the range, color persistence at different temperatures of atmosphere and light, and their steady performance over years of intensive use.
I do believe that new filters and technologies will come, but I will be much more cautious before I replace my LEE set.
Cheers,
ViktorGood point Anthony, but I am afraid that Leica doesn’t have such a strong position. Zeiss a.g. is huge company, lens division is just a small part, and almost whole company belongs to same owners.
Leica camera and lens division is owned by Andreas Kaufmann and while he owns rights for Leica brand (I mean Leica Camera AG), its sister companies have different owners and they just use brand Leica under license (Leica Geo and Microsystems). That is entirely different starting point…
However, if they abandon cameras, and keep making lenses, I am sure that you are 100% right. They will find many more users across platforms…
Cheers,
ViktorHi and sorry for the late reply.
Yes I guess I know who you are, thank you for moving discussion here.
Regarding your question – I can only give some general advise, coming from my own experience.
1. I tend to shot street with lenses wider than 50mm.
When I started to shot street, I opted for tele lenses and was trying to capture people at a distance, not letting them to know that they have been captured. This approach was close to certain kind of voyeurism, and I had similar feeling as being a hunter who is targeting deer at a distance. It was fun shooting, but results were… dull. Faces, without context, people without name or reason to be captured.
2. I have many friends which are way better street photographers that I’ll ever be. Most of them practice shooting from the hip, and very few of them are using AF. They are usually using lenses of around 35mm and even wider. One of those guys I believe never used anything tighter than its Ultron 21. Instead of AF, most of them still relies on hyperfocal distance calculations or they simply estimate distance matching the scale on the lens. Huge practice and experience is the only way to be successful with guesstimation, but I am sometimes shocked how sharp they can be, using that method. However, none of them consider sharpness as the key factor of successful image. Street is very much about capturing the moment, and slight motion or subject blur, usually ads dynamics and realism in the image.
3. My favorite daily street lens is Sony FE 35/2.8. Used on Sony A7 MII, I have stabilization to help if needed and the whole setup is very light and compact. FE 35/2.8 vignettes a lot and is far from perfect lens, but it has very good contrast and nice color interpretation and it behave quite well in back-light. I use it mostly with single shot AF settings on Zone AF area.
My favorite night street lens is Voigtlander 35/1.2 II. While DOF is ridiculously thin, I usually have more time in night to compose and focus, because people tend to ignore me.
4. If you are planning to use 2 lenses, I would suggest to consider using same lens line. Zeiss is keeping their colors within one line usually very consistent and that makes final result more harmonic (when you present shots from 2 or more lenses). If you go for Batis 85/1.8, maybe you want to consider Batis 25/2. I don’t have much experience with FE 35/1.4, there have been several reports complaining about QC, but if you manage to get good sample, I guess it will be stunning performer. However, it is very big and heavy and I am sure that very few street photographers will choose it because of that.At the end, you might consider first to find, which focal length works best for you. For that purpose, it is ideal to use kit lens (or other cheap zoom) preset (and fixed by tape e.g.) at some focal setting for a day, two or a week. This should give you very good idea, which focal lengths your mind prefer, as there is quite some difference between 25,28,35 or/and 50mm.
I tried to cover street photography here, but your question was much broader. For landscape you might need something wider from time to time Loxia 21/2.8 comes to mind. (Or even longer. One of my friends, great landscape photographer is shooting exclusively with 300 + mm lenses.) For architecture, you would definitely need something wider. Architecture works very well with UWA lenses, such as 14-18mm (but you need time to learn how to use that FOV), for travel you might want most compact but powerful zoom that you can find, something like 24-200.
Reviewing lenses for some time now, I can only say, that good lens can certainly improve technical quality of the images, but none of those lenses, including Otus, ever helped me to make better image content wise. Learning about composition, lighting, talking more to people subjects, investing in workshops and traveling, were way much useful in that regard.
Cheers,
ViktorHi komorebi
I was born in Belgrade, Serbia, and I am living in Prague for over 30 years now.
Cheers,
Viktor -
This reply was modified 8 years, 11 months ago by
