Better glass: I’ve switched from Nikon gear to Sony a couple years ago. I have a couple of “G” zooms that work fairly well for what I do. I work with a dog rescue called labs and more...

newvy

I’ve switched from Nikon gear to Sony a couple years ago. I have a couple of “G” zooms that work fairly well for what I do. I work with a dog rescue called labs and more (valley center ca, non profit plug). Yesterday I went to an adoption event and saw one of the other photogs. She does some awesome work with a fe50 1.8. Her images are pin sharp and the bokeh is fantastic compared to my 18-105 f4 (a great walk around and general purpose lens alas it is soft). My dilemma is getting an 85 prime for similar work and in my new studio. I don’t have the budget for a GMaster 1.4. And I am considering the Viltrox 85 f1.8. Does anyone have experience, I hate the poor man spends twice syndrome but have to stay in a budget.
In my past I had a favorite Nikkor 80-200 F2.8 incredible and thought I would never have another bad without this zoom range. Again the new Sony 70-200 is on the bucket list but $2500 is a bridge too far.

MDI Mainer

You might check out these blogs for a good, reasonably priced, lens suggestion. The author is Belgian, but the pages are in both French and English. Covers both full frame and APS-C cameras.

https://sonyalpha.blog/2017/06/26/la-gamme-dobjectifs-pour-la-monture-sony-fe-the-lenses-line-up-for-sony-fe-mount/

https://sonyalpha.blog/2018/07/15/aps-c-lenses-for-sony-e-objectifs-aps-c-pour-sony-e/

wiz302pa Loc: Henderson, NV

Sigma?

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

My suggestion: Don't obsess over lens sharpness. It's one of the least important things in photography. Well composed, meaningful, expressive images are what really matters. Those are the images that stand out, that viewers remember and can connect with. Sharpness only matters if you are using photography for scientific-based work which requires capturing as much detail as possible.

UTMike Loc: South Jordan, UT

I have a Zeiss 85mm f1.8 that does good work with my Sonys.

User ID

newvy wrote:

I’ve switched from Nikon gear to Sony a couple yea... (show quote)

If you’re not getting great images from the 18-105/4.0 don’t blame the lens. And yes I do use one.

As to your peer with the 50/1.8 there is something effective about such a lens that is lacking from your zoom. But that thing is not optical superiority. She holds a real advantage over you simply by the specifications of her lens. It’s just more user friendly, “easier to drive”, and more goof proof. CYA, get real and get one.

There could be some differences in your working habits that also advantage her, things that can be named but cannot be objectively observed or quantified. If she is younger and shorter than you she is probably steadier. Her approach to her subjects may be less challenging to the AF system, or less demanding of DoF.

Your opening post dwells quite a bit on quality lenses. Thaz at least half of your problem right there, just barking up the wrong tree :-(

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Her prime is likely sharper than your zoom and the wider aperture allows better subject isolation. The Sony 50 mm f1.8 can be had used for $200 or less, and the 85 f1.8 is around 2x that.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

wiz302pa wrote:

Sigma?

Yes, try a Sigma 60mm f2.8 used for about $165 .....

User ID

TriX wrote:

Her prime is likely sharper than your zoom and the wider aperture allows better subject isolation. The Sony 50 mm f1.8 can be had used for $200 or less, and the 85 f1.8 is around 2x that.

Nice facts. Facts don’t take pictures.

Nevertheless I agree that he really ought to get a fast 50, but for reasons toadally divorced from matters of optical quality. His thread title reveals the real issue.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

User ID wrote:

Nice facts. Facts don’t take pictures.

Nevertheless I agree that he really ought to get a fast 50, but for reasons toadally divorced from matters of optical quality. His thread title reveals the real issue.

I am waiting for the day that one of your responses (to anyone on any subject) is not negative, pedantic or arrogant. He wants “better glass” and the example he gave for the attributes he admires are: “Her images are pin sharp and the bokeh is fantastic”, and yes, both of these are optical issues, and yes, a fast good quality prime in the FLs in question and that I recommended is the answer.

newvy

TriX wrote:

I am waiting for the day that one of your responses (to anyone on any subject) is not negative, pedantic or arrogant. He wants “better glass” and the example he gave for the attributes he admires are: “Her images are pin sharp and the bokeh is fantastic”, and yes, both of these are optical issues, and yes, a fast good quality prime in the FLs in question and that I recommended is the answer.

I rented the lens she shoots with and found it to be exactly as I described hers to be (pin sharp, great bokeh) I was looking for some positive feedback on equipment rather than questions about my "steadyness" or ability. Ive been shooting for 44 years and counting... Just looking for some positive feedback. May be time to go to another forum as I see so much "Crap" spewed... Im over it! Ill look elsewhere! Cheers Big ears!

wiz302pa Loc: Henderson, NV

TriX wrote:

Her prime is likely sharper than your zoom and the wider aperture allows better subject isolation. The Sony 50 mm f1.8 can be had used for $200 or less, and the 85 f1.8 is around 2x that.

A word of caution (with respect :). -- there are several Sony 50mm lenses ranging in price from $248 to $1300 for the G Master

newvy

Sorry TriX I didnt mean to unload on you. I appreciated your comments! It is the constant Trolling and bickering.

newvy

Im referring specifically to the FE 50mm 1.8 its a great lens and I dont think it makes sense to budget for a more expensive one.

Haydon

I agree with TriX. Look at purchasing a 50 1.8. There are plenty of used copies available if you can't afford a new one. The 50 1.8 was my first prime lens and I still use it frequently because of its versatility.