Dennis833 Loc: Australia

Samyang 12mm f2 E-Mount, Sigma 19, 30 and 60mm 2.8 are all great prime lenses for your A6000.

gessman Loc: Colorado

I got an a6000 and a Viltrox adapter for my somewhat sizable Canon lens collection lens had to manually focus most of the time. My main wildlife lens is 400mm f/5.6, non-IS, so when the a6500 came out with "in-body-image-stabilization" (IBIS), I got one to give my 400mm IS and then following the advice of Imagemeister I got a Sigma MC-11 adapter and it autofocuses all my Canon lens very well and pretty fast, the key being the MC-11 adapter which came from Cameta Camera at well under the price of a Metabones by about half. The only thing I hear it won't do, which I haven't tried, is autofocus Canon lens when videoing which is not a problem because I have the 16-50, 18-55, and 55-210 kit lens plus the 16mm f/2.8, all of which I find to be pretty stinkin' good as long as I shoot them at around f/8 and don't push the zoom to either end.

I am completely happy with the setup I have and definitely agree with the idea of multiple shot panos rather than an ultra wide angle lens and I have an ultra-wide I rarely use. If you're really serious about panos, look into the Fotodiox RhinoCam at https://www.fotodioxpro.com/search?q=rhinocam (look for Sony e mount version down the page.) You put your a6000 on the back, a Hassleblad or Mamiya medium format lens, inexpensive on ebay, on the front and shoot multiple shots around inside the front lens, hence never moving your front lens and therefore never creating paralax issues. You can shoot two rows either landscape mode, 6 shots, or portrait mode, 8 shots and stitch them in-computer. It gives you a precision border-to-border match up so you get maximum coverage with each pano with perfect alignment. If you're REALLY serious about panos and RhinoCam doesn't do it for you, go spend a little time digesting what's at http://www.gigapan.com/ if you haven't already. Good luck with your venture and enjoy whatever you do.

NelsonARowe Loc: North Georgia USA

I want to thank everyone for the insight on what lenses to add and what adapters to choose. I got a lot of replies which mostly agree so that gives me great confidence in what the consensus seems to be.

As far as my landscape photography goes I think I will play with the original kit lens 16-50mm with the oss and taking panoramic shots and stitching together. That means no cost for another lens which is a definite plus. As far as telephoto lens go I got a lot of suggestions and will have to think about that. Either I go with an adapter and get to use some of my older Canon lens or I go with the Sonys. This actually leads to more questions though. If I choose to stick with a Sony lens my choices would be between the 18-200 or the 55 - 210. I would love to hear everyone’s feedback on which of these two lenses you all would suggest. The 55-210 is cheaper but I would only need to carry a single compact lens if I go with the 18-200. Is there any apperant difference in quality of sharpness and color of the 18-200 down in the low range versus the 16-50 lens and does it lose sharpness on the edges at the high end. If it doesn’t perform well at either end of its range then I would be better off using my 16-50 for the landscape photography and going with the 55-210 for wildlife photography or using an adapter and my Canon zooms.

The only other thing I would like some more feedback on is that I didn’t get a lot of responses about adapters. As far as which ones and their performances. I have searched and read a lot of articles and watched a lot of YouTube videos about which adapter is best for Canon to e mount and they are all over the place. Some say you get what you pay for and the metabones version IV while expensive gives you the best performance from the A6000 on both af and it’s ability to take advantage of sony’s other functions in auto. I’m used to manually focusing and really don’t think that is as important to me as the cameras ability to do contrast and phase focusing (focusing may be the wrong term but it gets my point across). As far as adapters go I really am not sure which one allows all the auto abilities of the camera to work with Canon lenses and how long it takes for these things to happen. A lot of the reviews I read or watched seemed to differ in their opinions of the length of time it took different adapters to work if they worked at all using zoom lenses for wildlife photography, I would appreciate your feedback on this and what you have and what you lose or gain with the various adapters out there. I wouldn’t mind paying more if I get more function out of it but if the only thing I’m gaining is simply the cameras ability to autofocus then I would rather go with Sony lenses and keep all the communication skills of their lenses despite having to not use my Canon lenses. Maybe I would sell them to help pay for a better (more expensive) version of the Sony line like the Zeiss versions. As always thanks in advance for your response and thanks again for everyone responding to my previous post.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

From a practical standpoint, since you already have an array of Canon lenses, I think you would money ahead to buy a good adapter that allows the A6000 to use at least most of its auto features with those lenses. And since, as you state, you do a lot of manual focusing anyway, this shouldn’t be a problem for you. That would be my suggestion. And by the way, while it may not be at the top of the heap of zoom lenses, that 55-210 is a pretty decent lens.

gwilliams6

The absolute best Canon to E-mount adapter is the Sigma MC-11. It works much better than the Metabones and costs half as much. I know this because I have used Canon lenses on my A7RII and A6500 with the MC-11 and got quick focus and even Eye-AF on my Sony cameras. Sigma constantly updates the firmware for their MC-11 adapter and it works even better now than before with Canon lenses.

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/mount-converter-mc-11?gclid=Cj0KCQiA2snUBRDfARIsAIGfpqFfBUvCx1EczmP-MFoFnV3H-ZZKfKjGSf7RNlEgyfjw8vGb9fZ1ie4aAkUOEALw_wcB

gessman Loc: Colorado

I'll second the comment about the MC-11 although I don't have any experience with the Metabones. I cannot see the Metabones being any better than the MC-11. I've tested the MC-11 on all my currently used Canon lens and it's equally functional on each lens. You won't go wrong getting the MC-11. While it wasn't written to specifically address the issues you raise here, I recently posted a thread that you might get some useful information from and it can be found at http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-512458-1.html.

My strategy for using the a6000 or a6500 is to put the 55-210 on as a "walk-around" lens and the very small 16-50 or 16mm pancake in my shirt pocket when I am not going out to shoot anything in particular and set the camera on auto-iso in case I run into a lower light situation than the 55-210 is real good with. I have no experience with the 18-200 so I cannot speak to that issue but the 55-210, as stated above, is a pretty fair lens, particularly if you stay away from the extremes of both zoom and aperture and shoot somewhere near the middle of both allowing the iso to compensate when needed. Neither it nor the 16-50 are bad lens even if you get into their weaker sections. They're just not quite as good as others you could spend a lot more money on. If I am going out to shoot something in particular, I normally use my Canon lens, especially when I'm going to be very cranky about the outcome. You should get some fairly useful ideas from that earlier thread I posted.

gwilliams6

Thanks gessman, the Metabones does not focus as well as the MC-11 with Canon glass on Sony. It will kind of work, but not as well, and the Metabones costs nearly twice the price. . Sigma realizes that their MC-11 is a hit with pros and amateurs alike who wish to use their great Canon glass on Sony, so Sigma has updated the firmware on the MC-11 to make it work even better than before for Canon glass. Cheers

gessman Loc: Colorado

NelsonARowe Loc: North Georgia USA

Thanks for the very detailed and useful information. I did read your other article completely and checked out the pictures you added to prove your results. This is exactly what I have been trying to figure out. The only thing I question is that you were using an A6500 that has body stabilization and unfortunately my A6000 doesn’t. It relies on the lens for stabilization and the older Canon lenses do not have that feature. You eluded to that in your second paragraph so I was wondering if you have tried the same type of experiment with the A6000 if you have one. I too am older and unfortunately cannot hold things as steady as I used to and with a combination of the A6000 and an older Canon zoom will have no stabilization. I do have a small tripod that has a great Velcro loop attached that gives me the ability to wrap it around stuff like a tree limb and use that for stabilization (I used it on my old 35mm Canon all the time). The only problem with that is that unfortunately most wildlife opportunities are short lived and you don’t have the time to set up a tripod and get all your settings just right. You have to either use automated focus and hold your breath and hope it comes out nice which I have not had much luck with. I probably throw out 9 out of 10 shots in these types of situations. Any further comments on this would be appreciated. Basically I’m trying to do just what you are. The least amount of equipment I can carry and the most versatility I can get out of what I have the better. On long trips with photography specifically in mind I will carry a backpack full of equipment that I can use to get exactly the shot I’m wanting but for keeping something on hand just in case I run into a beautiful situation I want to capture I’m trying to figure out the best camera/lens combination to have on hand. That’s exactly why I’m thinking of the Sony or Sigma 18-200 with possibly a 2x available for the ideal all around setup. That would give me landscape mode and zoom mode on zero setup time for those things that pop up when you’re just driving around. I do sales work all over the southeast and am on the road a lot and every once in a while I pop over a hill and see the most beautiful sunrise or sunset or something architectural and I don’t want to miss those opportunities and I don’t want to have to fumble around changing lenses or setting up tripod shots unless I have to. Thanks again for your insight.

gwilliams6

Yes both Sony and Sigma have OSS/OS (Optical Steady Shot/Image Stabilization) lenses that would work with your A6000.

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/mc-11-compatible

https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/dc-for-aps-c

https://www.sony.com/electronics/lenses

Look for OS or OSS for lens image stabilization choices.

gessman Loc: Colorado

With the a6000 I cannot hold my 400mm still enough to avoid having to use all the old-time techniques for getting good images, i.e. put it on a tripod or make sure the shutter speed is above the focal length including the crop factor of 1.5 or 600mm = a shutter speed of 1/1000 or 1/500 on a good day, leaning against a tree or whatever. I often try to shoot for peak of the action timing but in critical cases when I don't want to miss a distant shot I will press the shutter button and hold it down to take advantage of the 11 frames per second and hope I get at least one good shot out of a batch, still trying to time the peak of the action to enhance my chances of getting something out of the "spray and pray" method, allowing the auto ISO to go as high as it needs to and hoping to fix the noise in post processing. I do set the 100 to 6400 stops for the auto iso. It reaches a point of what is most important - an unusual shot or a low noise better shot. Stated succinctly, to me, a bad shot of a good subject is better'n a good shot of a bad subject every time. Your mileage may vary. Often, a shot with a lot of subject appeal is more acceptable than a noiseless, perfectly focused shot depending on the nature of the two. If you can always get perfection on both sides, i.e., good action vs. technical perfection, that's great but sometimes you have to choose and personally I usually fall off on the side of capturing the action as opposed to the other considerations. I have no qualms applying some noise control program in post processing to compensate for high iso and you will get some using auto iso.



I cannot quarrel with your urge to have the 18-200 for convenience but the way I look at that is that anything that I suddenly stumble upon that requires a wide angle like a sunset, building, the things you mentioned, is not going away while I slip out of my pocket and put on a 16-50 or 16mm. As far as I know, all the Sony lens will have stabilization(OSS) in the lens so that's a non-issue regarding the IBIS of the a6500 if you have Sony lens and I don't recall you saying what long Canon lens you have without IS but if you got a Sony teleconverter to go with your Sony lens you will still have OSS. If your Canon lens are short enough you likely can raise your shutter speed high enough to control stabilization. I didn't mention it but I also keep a Canon 50mm f/1.8 accessible for low light situations so it isn't so critical whatever Sony zoom lens you have when it comes to low light if you have a an MC-11 adapter and a Canon 50mm f/1.8 nearby. My other Canon lens have IS except the 50mm and 400mm and IS works with the MC-11 on all of them. Not relevant, but I also occasionally use several all manual older FD mount Canon lens, even some Nikon lens from film days, all manual but quite good, macro, etc., whatever's convenient and good. I think I answered all your questions but if there's anything I left out or that I might be able to share further with you, don't hesitate to let me know, and you're most welcome. One thing further, when using CIZ with your non-IS lens, you only have to cover the lens distance with your shutter speed, not the added distance CIZ will give you and to use CIZ you have to be shooting jpg only, no Raw.

gessman Loc: Colorado

Excellent information! Thanks.