GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

Thank you for your advice. I've also heard that the 50/1.8 is a great lens to have. I will use the 2 lenses I have for a while, and IF I feel the need for something else, I will try out a few in the store or rent a lens (if these are rentable).

le boecere

As I mentioned earlier, I've been shooting a recently acquired 50/1.8 this winter (more indoors w/o flash, than outdoors) and, for me, it truly is a bargain lens (but, that's only if one wants/needs a 75mm field of view).

On this last Friday evening, I used it at a gathering in a large home, and I cannot think of any lens that would have worked better on that camera. So non-intrusive. And, when I sent the hostess a couple of candid portraits of her kids, she was highly appreciative. My little camera is always welcome there.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

One of my considerations in getting a camera is the availability of long zoom lenses for it, as very often up here, shots of wildlife require a long lens to bring them in. While the superzoom bridge cameras have unusually long zoom ranges, sometimes the image quality suffers. I would prefer a more moderate length, such as 300mm, then crop it to bring the far away subject of the picture in close. Obviously this requires a very good sensor/processor combination and a lens that is very sharp to do that.

Unfortunately, the availability of lenses that long, for the A6000, is slim to nonexistent, so I then turn to other kinds of lenses, such as the Alpha series from Sony, or the Minolta lenses. However, these require the use of a lens adapter. The Sony adapter that lets you use those other lenses is pretty expensive at well over $300.00, but it just might be cheaper than other high end long lenses. I really like what the A6000 does and can do, but there are some limitations as to long lenses.

I wonder if anyone else reading this thread has some experience with longer lenses or other lenses using a lens adapter that allows for the full auto functions of the camera, such as autofocusing, aperture, etc. I don't often use the longer lens, but when there is the occasion to need one, it's nice to have it, which is why I am also looking at the D7200/18--300 lens combination.

spphoto Loc: Long Island,N.Y.

Attached are some pictures I took with the Sony 6000 and a Tamron 100-600,mounted on a tripod.I manual focus because I used a $10.00 adapter.

sparrow at feeder


sparrow at feeder 2


sparrow at feeder 3

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Those sparrows are hard to get pictures of. The flit around so quickly and never seem to sit still long enough. But it looks like long lenses can be used effectively with the A6000 with an adapter.

BIG ROB Loc: Princeton, NJ 08540

I have the 16-50 mm, and the 55-210 mm lenses, and I'm very happy with both of them! The 16-50 is almost universally downgraded on many of these Hog posts. Yet, I've found that it provides me, with consistently, nice crisp, sharp, color rich, saturated images; having only some expected distortion at the 16 mm end of its zoom range!

I looked up this lens, on the DXOMARK.COM Website, and it had been tested, and was rated, fairly decently, (actually,) one rating point higher, than my (favorite Canon DSLR Carry Lens,) the Canon EF-S 18-135 mm, Kit lens; Which I realize, is a lens, that is also, not one "to to write home about," (by the very picky user,) but for the general photographer, both of these lenses, are superlative, in their everyday performance!

When you move into the realm of the more expensive, optional lenses, they are, very nice, and are much better, in their optical performance! .... Yet, these Basic Kit Lenses, still do deliver, very nice photos, in their own right! If, you are, being realistic, in your evaluation of the IQ.

I have Canon "L" lenses, and they do, deliver, much higher quality images, sharper and with higher saturation, yet, than that Canon EF-S 18-135 mm Kit lens, or the 16-50 mm Sony OSS, and yet still, those kit lenses, each do, turn out decent, quality images, in there own right! Sure, you can get even better, for an additional thousand dollars! Yet, these basic, high quality kit lenses, still do, provide, great images themselves, in the hands of a knowledgeable and skilled photographer! They are NOT "BAD LENSES" as many people, on here, often, so blindly mouth, and infer. Rather, it is that the thousand dollar, optional lenses, are so much better!

Drala2k Loc: Vermont

Rob, I just got my a6000 kit from Costco, why Costco-the 90 day return policy with no questions asked. It came with the 18-55mm instead of the 16-50 so I am wondering it the 16-50 would be better for its smaller size.

But with a lot of the poo-pooing of the lens there are also a lot of youtube photo denizens saying that the lens is good as long as you are not a pixel peeper whichseems to be the trend now-a-days. There are some excellent photos out there with this lens. If you look at some of the great BW photos of the 60s, they are all very soft yet convey tremendous story though the image. So it all depends on what you intend to shoot in the end.

As I do not have a lot of money, I am going to give the old college try as I have a 90 day return window.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I have read that the 16--50 lens is a better lens than the 18--55. I can't provide a website or thread post or anything. Just something I read along the way. Just how much better it is, I can't say. The A6000 I had came with the 16--50 and the 55--210 lenses. I got it from Best Buy.

le boecere

I, too, am on a budget. I have the two current kit lenses for the a6000. The 16-50 was given to me. The 55-210 cost me $200 and it is a BARGAIN at that price ~ very underrated in my opinion.

The two "budget" lenses I've added are the FE 28-70mm (ff kit zoom) & the Chinese 50mm f1.8, both for under $200. For me, these two lenses are even better bargains at that price.

This camera and these lenses are more fun than I'd thought an old man could possibly have.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Does anyone know anything about the Hasselblad lenses for Sony E-mount? I was perusing B&H for lenses for the A6000 and noticed that Hasselblad has lenses for it. They seem to be competitive, price wise with the Sony lenses.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I just ordered this book for my Kindle. I also found it useful to watch some videos on YouTube by Gary Fong and others. I also ordered the hard copy of David Busch's book.

le boecere

You found the right camera, the right zoom, the right prime, the right books and the right youtube video, GG. You've got all the cylinders of your new adventure engine firing on queue. MUCH fun up ahead, for you.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

That's because they are just re-badged Sony lenses. SERIOUSLY.

Same lenses. Hassy buys them then puts THEIR name on them... but there aren't any different from their Sony counterparts. ;)

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Well, that's interesting. I wondered if that was the case, because from the picture of the lenses, they looked pretty similar. Wow! You get a great name on your gear, but not the great stuff that comes with that name.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I am already having fun with it. Can't wait to learn more about this amazing little camera. :thumbup: