Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon

My photographic interest is shooting landscapes, and that is what I am trying to optimize my equipment for. I do shoot a few incidental family photos, but noting else.

I prefer to shoot with prime lenses instead of zooms because of the greater resolution and lighter weight.

I have a beef: All the camera and lens manufacturers today are offering fast prime lenses of all focal lengths. All manufacturers are bragging on their “bokeh”. I have since learned that “bokeh” is a Japanese term which translates into “A lot more money”.

For my needs, at any focal length, f/3.5 is a great plenty. I typically shoot at f/5.6 or f/8, and aperture preferred. If the resulting shutter speed is not high enough for a hand-held exposure, I either raise the ISO or use a tripod.

The choices of lenses offered to day are in my opinion ridiculous, at least for my needs. I have several options:

1) I can pay well over US $500 for a shorter focal length lens that is very fast and is very sharp indeed at my shooting apertures. The lens will weigh significantly more than my camera. The lens will have auto-focus and may well have built in OSS - Optical SteadyShot. Longer lenses are also available - with astronomical prices. Take the focal length in mm, add one more digit and you have the low end of the US dollar price.

Or

2) I can go on eBay or other sites and find legacy lenses that are inexpensive, light weight, and will fit my A-6000 with a cheap adapter. Many of these lenses offer fairly good resolution and contrast, but, sadly, nothing like today’s designs.

Why can’t the lens manufacturers offer slower lenses of modern design, light weight, auto-focus and OSS?

Answer: They can! One of the best lenses I have is the Sigma 60 mm f/2.8 with auto-focus for e-mount cameras, and I believe offered for other mounts as well. The e-mount version is offered on Amazon for US $209. It is everything I want - it is light in weight, nicely priced and extremely sharp. It is a perfect lens to carry out into th field for landscape phtography.

So why can’t Sigma or other manufacturers offer s similar lens, for example a 135 mm f/3.5, say for under US $300? Sigma does not presently offer a 135 mm lens for e-mount, though I am sure one is coming, but they do offer a 135 mm lens for Nikon and for Canon - f/1.8 and US $1400! And the Nikon version weighs 8.8 pounds!!! That’s 4 kg. An all metal 135 mm f/3.5 manual lens from the olden days weights 14 ounces, If I take a couple of those into the field it is questionable whether I can make it back unless I hire a bearer.

But that lens is said to have wonderful bokeh.

Mind you, I have nothing against these lenses. They obviously fit a need for people doing portraits, or low light street or stage photography. They must sell or the manufacturers would not keep bringing out more lenses like them.

But they certainly do NOT meet my needs.

I am sincerely hoping that there are enough people that agree with me and that will comment to the point that some manufacturer - say Sigma, Tamron or the camera makers will take note and offer a new series of lenses such as I describe.

Cheers

Bill_de Loc: US

Even if they could manufacture it for $300, there is a lot spent on designing each lens. That has to be recouped. Oh, I almost forgot, they have to make a profit. But I'll bet you actually want a quality lens ... they cost more!

----

drklrd Loc: Cincinnati Ohio

Actually any lens can be used for landscape shots. Just depends on what you want to include in the shot or not to include in a shot.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

What focal length are you interested in? Granted, some primes may not be within the price range you're talking about, but I have to wonder just how far off they are. The Nikon 50mm f1.8D is $134.

Here's a 20mm f1.8 on eBay that you might be interested in.

https://www.ebay.com/p/Nikon-NIKKOR-20mm-f-1-8-ED-AF-S-Lens/219487465?iid=323344206355

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

I think you are asking for a cheap prime lens which probably isn't going to happen.
Great Bokeh depends upon the number of aperture blades, so involves a better build quality. Prime lenses have always been expensive.
As you say, you need a 3.5 - 5.6 range for most of your landscapes, perhaps looking at 'kit' lenses are an option - just because they are genearally a zoom lens, doesn't mean they have not got a 'sweetspot'. Some of the cheaper lenses are 'plastic'... again, they get bad press ....but they still work. But not doing 'everything' in comparisons.
As a Landscape photographer you are probably able to take your time with your shots. Getting 'tack sharp' hand held isn't always your prime objective either. So your choice of lens will not meet supposed 'market needs'. You don't need to follow the latest trends.
I would seriously look at legacy lenses and have a selection of adapter rings for Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. The cheap plastic ones will make you shoot in manual, but a starting point for A S & ISO can be made by using 'one of your A6000' lenses first at the aperture of your choice..

Like most specialisms....camera and lens specific to what your main subject needs is Key. Perhaps Canon 5 mk111 / or Nikon equivalent (as used by landscape photographers ) would allow you to get the legacy primes at a reasonable price - and they would still work!!!!

I wish you well in your quest.....I am too poor now to follow my own advice! I should have researched more over my first camera.

Have fun

AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

This is a great line, probably the best Japanese translation since "Karaoke" = "Drunk people try to sing".


I think the problem is volume - you have a very specific need, which is far from the proverbial average user's. The enormous quality improvements in both reach and quality of zoom lenses in the past three decades have made them acceptable to many demanding amateurs and professionals. The larger the variety of photo opportunities you encounter, the more likely you are to favor a zoom over a prime fixed. The R&D, tooling, and production setup costs of the new lens you describe could only be paid off with a big production run or a bokeh-lacious pricetage.


I would buy one, so would you, and I'll bet there are a dozen or so hoggers who would think seriously about it. But that's just not enough in today's world.


Andy

ken_stern Loc: Yorba Linda, Ca

If this is all just about VENTING -- well then have a good day
BUT
If you're actually in the market for at least 3 damn good "rather low-cost" good primes here are some of my initial suggestions ---
All Canon --- EF 24mm 2.8 & EF 35mm 2.0 Both listed @ $549.88 & one that I use - actually one of my all-time favorites the EF85mm 1.8 = $329.00

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

I'm not even sure what your question is. If you had a mainstream Nikon, Canon, or Pentax camera or system, you could find especially for Pentax and Nikon a multitude of older used Prime lenses relatively inexpensively for their intended mounts. I have over 30 Pentax lenses mostly vintage of different series that can be used with most of my 5 K-mount cameras. Ranging from M-42 Screw Mounts to FA and DA* lenses. Most are primes. The answer to high prices, used!

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

You don't mention what lens you prefer for landscapes. Nothing but good things on the IQ of the Sigma 60/2.8, but for me it would be a bit long for landscape work (90mm FOV on the Sony), but darn near perfect for family shots. I am not much of a landscape shooter. I do like my manual focus Samyang 12mm f/2 on my a6000. Same lens as the Rokinon, just re-badged. Lens was under $300. It has been out a few years but would not classify the technology as old. It is available in Sony e-mount. "Bokeh" is a variable term depending on lens design and usually mentioned more in lenses with faster apertures and does not always translate into "a lot more money" although it certainly can.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8 to 4 {27-80mm equiv.}; Fujifilm 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 {27-202mm equiv with stabilization} would be great choices, tho they are not prime lenses.

Bob Locher Loc: Southwest Oregon

Some comments in response:
My original message was a vent of course, but I believe it to be an accurate one, and I am trying to promote discussion.
For me, the majority of my scenic shots are done with what most people would classify as longer lenses - 60, 85 and 135 mm lenses.

I tried using a Nikon 135 mm f/3.5 lens, but found my modern technology 85 mm lens, a Sony 85 mm f/1.8, is distinctly sharper when blown up to equal the field of view of the Nikon. But the Sony was expensive and is heavy.

I did buy a zoom a few months ago - the Sony 18-135mm APS-C lens with OSS. It is a remarkable lens; and also sharper than ANY of my legacy prime lenses. But it is not as sharp as my two modern primes. I want sharp lenses.

Yes, it does cost money to develop a lens. But a quality relatively slow prime lens with modern glasses is a piece of cake compared to ANY decent zoom lens. Same goes for tooling.

Oh well. As the Japanese and Korean lens manufacturers already know very well, the Chinese are coming, and I am optimistic they will discover a market being underserved.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

Sorry, but I just can not agree with you. There are plenty of lenses out there, that would fit what you're looking for. I have a 150mm/3.5 Pentax lens, that is wonderfully sharp (has geat bokeh to boot), is very light weight , but I had to pay an insanely amount of money for it, I had to lay down a back braking $48 for that lens, and I have many more like that. I'm more the opposite of you, I find it wonderful, that one has that many choices today, of an almost endless array of lenses to choose from and to be had for just a few "pennies" so to say!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

This may help you better understand bokeh.

https://neilvn.com/tangents/bokeh-quality-of-lens-blur/

I use a 45mm F2.8 PC-E and an 85mm F2.8 PC-E for the majority of my landscapes. Both are primes, both are tilt/shift, fully manual, and both are fairly light, but they are not cheap. When I don't have them with me and I come across a landscape opportunity I will usually rely on my 24-70 F2.8 zoom or my 80-200 F2.8 - both of which are usually in my bag when I am not sure what I am going to shoot. I do use a full frame camera.

Camera and lens mfgrs will produce what they believe will sell. A lens like you describe is not likely to be very marketable, so I wouldn't hold my breath.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

Right On!

Jeffcs Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina

I kind of knew your thoughts would spark great discussion! Your Sony is capable of producing nice quality images why would you want to put something in front of the sensor that won’t give the sensor all the best, that’s not saying inexpensive glass can’t be found every manufacturer has “sleepers” but in general nothing in photography is cheep! And than you said a legacy lens with a cheep adapter again why do you want to compromise your bodies image quality?