Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Folks, I'm just curious as to what is your favorite lens for your Sony and why.

DISCLAIMER AND WARNING: The United States Photographer General has determined that one photographer's favorite lens may be the worst choice for another photographer, and could cause blindness if improperly used to view a solar eclipse. Questions about other photographers' favorite lenses should be used only to satisfy curiousity, not to select a lens.

I figured someone might feel the need to point that out so...

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Cost vs performance is crucial for me. I tested the ($180) 19mm Sigma 2.8 against a few GOOD dslr lenses and the Sigma blew them all away .......

Extrapolating this , I would be looking for the same superb performance from the 30 and 60mm 2.8 Sigmas !

repleo Loc: Boston

Rab-eye , to illustrate your point "...one photographer's favorite lens may be the worst choice for another photographer...", I bought the 19mm Sigma 2.8 that imagemeister mentioned above. It was one of the few things I ever sent back in my whole life. I spent 3 or 4 times as much on the Sony Zeiss E 24mm f1.8 and couldn't have been happier. There was nothing wrong with the Sigma and I didn't do any comparison testing, but I just liked the Zeiss and its pictures from my A6000 much more. It is even better on my recently acquired A7Rii

However, my favorite lens is the Sony 18-105 f4 E OSS G. IQ probably isin't as good as the Zeiss 24mm, but I love the range, the feel, the look and the results from the 18-105 on either camera. I have a used Sony FE 24-70mm f4.0 on its way to me at the moment which hopefully will be a better match for the A7Rii, but I doubt that I will be selling the 18-105.

le boecere

Difficult.

Regardless of the deep philosophy, so often generated in most any conversation about lenses:

Chinese Sony E 50mm f/1.8 ~ for 200 bucks, it's gotten the best shots of grandchildren & nothing works quite as well for me, shooting "candids" across the (large) table from my subject.

Zony 24mm f/1.8 (at $600) is the finest (and most expensive) lens I own. Why? 'cause it just is ~ this lens intimidates me.

Chinese Sony 35mm f/1.8 for another $200, is the lens that resides on the a6000. Why? 'cause it fits the situations I want to photograph, more often than the other two. It's my "street" lens.

A $400 camera and a thousand bucks worth of lenses. This "bag" can out shoot this rookie, and will for a long time to come.

_Van

le boecere

Your words: " I just liked the Zeiss and its pictures from my A6000 much more"

This is so difficult to explain, but this combo is "special" (and a bargain, in my mind).

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I have am A6000 with the "standard" 16-50mm. Then I bought the Sony 55 - 210mm. The 210mm was fine, but I didn't like being limited to 55mm on the wide end. I bought a Tamron 18-200mm and did comparison shots. Since I couldn't see any difference, I sold the 55-210mm. The camera/lens combo was on sale for $550, and the 18-210mm was used, so my expenditures were relatively low, and I got almost what I paid when I sold the Sony lens. Except for its size in relation to the small camera, it's an excellent general purpose lens.

EDIT: I almost forgot - I got a Meike 6.5mm fisheye lens for $149. It's like the original fisheyes - round images.

binsjohn

The Zeiss 16-70 stays on my a6000 for most shots and is the only combo I use for travel. A great range and IQ is as good as it gets on that camera.
On my a7rii I mostly use the Zeiss 24-70, but switch to the Zeiss 16-35 for the wider stuff. All three of these Zeiss lenses are good enough throughout their ranges that they trump my primes unless I'm out on a dedicated photo mission (no travel, wife or poor conditions for changing lenses).

lamontcranston

In order of use, my preferences would be:
Sony 35mm 1.8
Sony 50mm 1.8
Sony 18-105mm f4
Sony 16-50mm kit lens
Sigma 30mm 2.8
Sigma 19mm 2.8
Sony 55-210mm

The Sony 35mm 1.8 is my favorite and would be the one I would keep if I could only have one. With it's 35mm focal range [50mm 35mm equivalency] focal range it is the best all-around lens for my use. It is also one of the sharpest lenses Sony makes and gets pretty good marks on the lens tests and reviews. I have no criticism of any of the lenses mentioned. They have all performed well. The Sigmas are among the sharpest lenses available and are probably the best bargain of them all. They don't have OSS but that would be their only downside.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

DSFDF: FE70-200 F4.0 G. This is a superb lens. But obviously it's my favorite because besides being optically and mechanically excellent, it has some reach (300 mm equivalent) for birds and creatures. Note the sharp hairs and whiskers, absence of color fringe or flare or other distortions. This is unedited and not anywhere near the best I have, just found quickly. Full size included for those who want to see critical details and EXIF. BTW, the Koala is not in a zoo.

I got rid of the 55-210 but kept the short kit lens 16-50 which is OK. I also use my old Nikon 50 mm 1.8 manually which is also optically excellent but, of course, requires an adapter. The Nikkor 200 (old, manual) was inadequate on the a6000 even though I thought it was good in the 80's and 90's. I have a 300 mm Nikkor but it's not as good as I wanted, either.

I note in passing that the 16-50 is OK only because that camera corrects for the flaws in that lens. If you look at the uncorrected raw image you see the differences easily and quickly. Most raw converters don't show that, though and it does not affect the final product.

(Download)

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Great reading! Thanks to all who responded! And I love the koala.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

The 70-300 sets on the camera the most. The 300 allows you to reach out and the close focus (not a macro) makes it a great out and about in nature lens.

wmurnahan Loc: Bloomington IN

I'm using it on a a7ii

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

OK, now I am really embarrassed! In a PM, mrjcall pointed out to me that the picture was neither sharp nor taken with that lens. I looked and found that it was taken with my HX-50 pocket camera which is good for what it is but not in the same ballpark as the a6000 nor the 70-200. Here is another wild koala, same park, same or almost the same day, taken with the 70-200 at ISO 400, F 4.0, 1/320.

(Download)

warrior Loc: Paso Robles CA

Sony 50mmf/1.8 prime lens. Great for Street; can be used for portrait . small. bokah

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

How does one lens blow another away. Specifics might help me (a potentail buyer) understand.