Is the Sony 55mm f/1.8 REALLY worth more than THREE times the cost of the Sony 50mm f/1.8?
Sep 21, 2018 20:11:38 #
imagemeister wrote:
You do know that you can use the 1.1-2X Sony Clear Image Zoom and make the 24-70 go to 140mm FOV ! ? ( NO pixel loss) You must forgo raw and shoot JPEG to do this - works for ME !- a game changer !
Same goes for any 50mm prime you get - turns it into a 50-100mm zoom.
Actually, for what you want I would get the 35mm f2.8 prime and use the CIZ .
..
Same goes for any 50mm prime you get - turns it into a 50-100mm zoom.
Actually, for what you want I would get the 35mm f2.8 prime and use the CIZ .
..
I did know that, but I do not shoot JPEG. I guess I could start. Isn't that defeating the purpose of having a full-frame camera?
Sep 21, 2018 20:20:28 #
GrandmaG wrote:
I did know that, but I do not shoot JPEG. I guess I could start. Isn't that defeating the purpose of having a full-frame camera?
No, You still have more pixels to play with, with a FF camera. And your are starting out (FF) with a better image to convert to JPEG. Plus, you can put that setup in your custom or the FN line and go out of RAW or Raw+JPEG to JPEG in just a few pushes of a button. piece of cake.
Sep 21, 2018 20:24:23 #
ORpilot wrote:
No, You still have more pixels to play with, with a FF camera. And your are starting out (FF) with a better image to convert to JPEG.
Yes, and your dynamic range and low light noise is so much better. The older your camera and the smaller the sensor, the more advantageous raw becomes...
Sep 21, 2018 20:29:33 #
sirlensalot wrote:
I would not want to use a lens that has a known defect for the obvious reasons, especially for travel at any price IMO.
That makes me leery, too!
Sep 21, 2018 20:31:10 #
ORpilot wrote:
No, You still have more pixels to play with, with a FF camera. And your are starting out (FF) with a better image to convert to JPEG. Plus, you can put that setup in your custom or the FN line and go out of RAW or Raw+JPEG to JPEG in just a few pushes of a button. piece of cake.
I'll put the option on the Fn menu
Sep 21, 2018 22:37:48 #
Tomcat5133
Loc: Gladwyne PA
The 55mm Sony is amazing. The Zeiss color of pictures is very beautiful.
The lens is very sharp. But my question is what are you shooting and would you like the zoom you mentioned. I did not here of any issues with the 55. Good luck
The lens is very sharp. But my question is what are you shooting and would you like the zoom you mentioned. I did not here of any issues with the 55. Good luck
Sep 22, 2018 03:38:48 #
GrandmaG wrote:
I did know that, but I do not shoot JPEG. I guess I could start. Isn't that defeating the purpose of having a full-frame camera?
Why? a FF is bigger with a larger sensor which, in the right hands, may increase detail which, unless you print to A3 and/or crop dramatically, you would not see - which would defeat the purpose. I guess that is the difference to APSc or M43.
Of course, a FF also helps to build muscle and requires a heavier tripod - and bigger, heavier, more expensive lenses and a big, big bag and a big, big wallet.
There are more and more celebrated Pro photographers (including NG photographers) changing from FF - not to APS-c, but to M43.
We live in a world of technical miniaturisation - e.g. cell phones, lap tops etc. Big is no longer beautiful. Small can do it better.
Sep 22, 2018 10:49:50 #
imagemeister wrote:
You do know that you can use the 1.1-2X Sony Clear Image Zoom and make the 24-70 go to 140mm FOV ! ? ( NO pixel loss) You must forgo raw and shoot JPEG to do this - works for ME !- a game changer !
Same goes for any 50mm prime you get - turns it into a 50-100mm zoom.
Actually, for what you want I would get the 35mm f2.8 prime and use the CIZ .
..
Same goes for any 50mm prime you get - turns it into a 50-100mm zoom.
Actually, for what you want I would get the 35mm f2.8 prime and use the CIZ .
..
The 35 2.8 is incredibly SMALL and light weight ! - https://kenrockwell.com/sony/zeiss/35mm-f28.htm
..
Sep 22, 2018 19:28:07 #
stevefrankel wrote:
I'm going to a Sony meeting at the Peterson Auto M... (show quote)
I’m seriously considering the 28mm f/2 lens, too. When is your meeting? I would be VERY interested in your thoughts on this lens. From some of the YouTube videos I have seen, 30mm is the perfect size for travel. I noticed that with my 24-70 lens, I shoot most in the 25-35 range.
Sep 22, 2018 20:23:25 #
stevefrankel wrote:
I'm going to a Sony meeting at the Peterson Auto M... (show quote)
The Sony 'Kit' Zoom is the FE 28-70 F3.5-5.6 at $400 and 10 oz not a 24-70. There are two 24-70's The (SEL2470Z) Sony Zeiss FE 24-70 F4 ZA OSS at $900 and 15 oz and the 24-70 2.8 GM. The Sony Zeiss fits your criteria and is no 'average' quality. It is a wonderful lens with all of the qualities you would expect from a Zeiss. However, I think the FE 24-105 F4 G OSS eclipses the ZA in both quality and useability. However it is more expensive and heavier than your criteria would allow. The FE 28mm / F2 is a really nice, light, compact, sharp, reasonably priced prime lens, but I don't think the IQ will be any better than the 24-105 G except for its low light capability. In fact I think you will get better bokeh / separation with the long zoom at F4 than the 28 at F2.
Maybe after you have tried the 24-105 you will re-evaluate your criteria.
Sep 23, 2018 00:19:35 #
repleo wrote:
The Sony 'Kit' Zoom is the FE 28-70 F3.5-5.6 at $4... (show quote)
Yes, of course you are right that the kit lens is 28-70 and that I do not have the GM 24-70. I wanted a smaller, lighter prime as a travel lens and the low light capability is a plus. If not the 28/2 (IQ is no better) nor the 55/1.8 (not much lighter although really sharp as long as it does not malfunction) others have suggested the 35/2.8 or the 50/1.8.
So, if I were to trade up to the 24-105/4, I would have an even bigger lens weighing 1/2 lb more and still wanting a prime for lighter travel. I had my mind set on a 50 or 55 because they are a normal lens. I don’t want to buy cheap, then buy twice!
I guess I will just have to go to the store and try them all out!!! Maybe rent the one I like best! Thank you for your advice. I really appreciate it!
Sep 23, 2018 00:33:05 #
Delderby wrote:
Why? a FF is bigger with a larger sensor which, in... (show quote)
I crop every picture I keep, sometimes heavily. I deliberately have extra room when I take a picture so that I will have options in framing later. My full frame set-up is actually lighter BECAUSE it is a mirrorless system and I will not have a room full of bigger, heavier expensive lenses BECAUSE this is not my main camera...it is my lighter setup; which is one reason WHY I want a prime for it. I loved the 35/1.8 on my Sony a6000 and it makes sense that I will love a 50 or (55) on my Sony a7iii.
What I REALLY wanted to know is if the 55 is worth the extra money BECAUSE I don’t have a big, big wallet. Also, I’m very concerned about that possible mechanical flaw that I quoted.
Sep 23, 2018 03:42:55 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.