Lens recommendations for NEX-5?

[Mike Hatam]

Just picked up an NEX-5, and I'm new to the system. I'm getting the two-lens kit (16 & 18-55).

What I'd like to add now are some fast manual-focus primes, but not sure what lenses work best on the NEX-5 with adapters.

Are there issues with wide-angle M mount lenses (such as on the mFT systems), where the edges get very soft?

I'm on a budget, so looking for good "value" picks. Would like some recommendations for the following:

- wide-angle landscape lens (something wider than the Sony 16mm lens)
- fast "normal" prime in the 30-50 range (effective 45-75mm range)
- fast portrait lens in the 50-70mm range (effective 75-100mm range)

If possible, would like all my "alternative" lenses to be of the same mount, to simplify packing a light kit that shares adapters.

Thanks,
Mike

 

[iiiNelson]

I haven't gotten my NEX--> Adapter yet but I still have a CV 28/2 Ultron and 50/1.5 Nokton that I used on Micro 4/3. There's a thread with image examples from adapted lenses on the NEX. A lot of people seem to like the Contax G series lenses as well as Olympus PEN lenses from faster primes. You should check out that thread too.

 

[meilicke]

Mike, while I do not have a NEX (so ignore the rest if you like ), in my obsessive looking at the NEX/SLT with various options, the minolta primes look good. Inexpensive, and seemingly very good performance. Reportedly they have A control with the sony E to A adaptor, and will of course auto-focus with any alpha mount if you decide to go that route in the future.

Alas, I have not found a suitable wide angle alternative to the 16mm that would be smaller and cheaper than the body!

-Scott

 

[iiiNelson]

For your quick viewing pleasure... http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18549

 

[Mike Hatam]

Excellent thread - thanks for the link!

 

[iiiNelson]

No prob. I'm hoping to get an adapter soon myself but priority one is this Leica M9 bug I've managed to fight for 15 months now...

 

[douglasf13]

Pen F lenses are good and have better minimum focus distances compared to rangefinder lenses. I use a few Voigtlander M and S mount rangefinder lenses, and the 35/1.4 is my main walk around lens. For a wide, I don't think you're gonna do much better than the Sony 16mm.

I personally find using the Sony adapter with Sony lenses less desirable, because, like with a DSLR, the adapter keeps the lens at full aperture while focusing, so you don't get real time depth of field preview.

 

[docmaas]

I've been thinking about the samyang 14mm. It sure looks better than the sony on paper. Of course it will be quite a bit bigger but I am trying to maintain slt use with my lenses as well. There are a couple of zooms from tokina and sigma that also look good, both dx and fullframe.

I suspect we may see nex lenses from the aftermarket soon. Depends on whether the market goes big in the advanced am segment or is more restricted to the p&s/kitlens segments.

I'm really anxiously awaiting the Sigma SD1 though.

Mike

Pen F lenses are good and have better minimum focus distances compared to rangefinder lenses. I use a few Voigtlander M and S mount rangefinder lenses, and the 35/1.4 is my main walk around lens. For a wide, I don't think you're gonna do much better than the Sony 16mm.

I personally find using the Sony adapter with Sony lenses less desirable, because, like with a DSLR, the adapter keeps the lens at full aperture while focusing, so you don't get real time depth of field preview.

 

[Mike Hatam]

Pen F lenses are good and have better minimum focus distances compared to rangefinder lenses. I use a few Voigtlander M and S mount rangefinder lenses, and the 35/1.4 is my main walk around lens. For a wide, I don't think you're gonna do much better than the Sony 16mm.

I personally find using the Sony adapter with Sony lenses less desirable, because, like with a DSLR, the adapter keeps the lens at full aperture while focusing, so you don't get real time depth of field preview.

I'm not familiar with the Pen F lenses. Any recomendations on good choices within this line?

Mike

 

[sebboh]

I'm not familiar with the Pen F lenses. Any recomendations on good choices within this line?

Mike

i only have the 42mm f/1.2 and 38mm f/1.8. the 42mm is fantastic (with the issues you'd expect from a 50 year old f/1.2) though quite expensive. i'm undecided about 38mm yet - it has a rather harsh swirly bokeh wide open but is quite contrasty and sharp in the center, haven't taken many stopped down shots with it yet.

there aren't any pen f lenses wider than 16mm that i know of thought there are 20mm and 25mm lenses that i don't know anything about the performance of. if you are looking for something wider than 16mm the only real option i can think of is the voigltander 12mm f/5.6. it is quite compact and sharp (for a 12mm lens) without any smearing on the NEX though it does have quite severe vignetting. you can see a review of it on the NEX here

there are two pen f portrait lens, 60/1.5 and 70/2, both are quite expensive and i don't know much about them. for portrait i would probably look at one of the many f/2 or faster rangefinder lenses out there. if you like the sonnar look you could pick up a jupiter-3 cheap or a more expensive nikkor s 50/1.4. another more budget option might be the voigtlander 50/1.5 or any fast ~50mm slr lens if you don't mind the size.

 

[turtleinsea]

OP: You could wait until the E-mount Zeiss lens comes out? It's rumored to be a 35/1.4 (and may have AF, for the occasions where that is useful).

 

[Vivek]

Mike.

I use the following pen F lenses:

1. Pancake 38/2.8 (similar lens design as the Sony 16/2.8 but a better performer and smaller). Possibly the smallest decent lens you could get for the NEX.

2. 38/1.8. Only slightly bigger than the pancake.

3. 40/1.4. Slightly bigger than the 38/1.8.

4. 42/1.2. Look for an optically flawless (lens element separation, "haze", common) copy, otherwise you would get fuzzy results.

5. 65/1.5. Better contrast wide open than the 42/1.2. There is CA wide open in the OOF area but I suspect it outresolves the NEX sensor at f/1.5.

6. 70/2. Cheaper and more common than the 70/2.

and up to 250/5 which are outside your FL range. I also have a 25/2.8 and 25/4. The 25/2.8 is decent but does show simple barrel distortion.

All are excellent even wide open and perform fantastically when stopped down one or at the most two stops. They are all cheaper and more versatile than the corresponding RF lenses.

Oh, I forgot the 38/3.5 macro. Superb lens!

 

[Terry]

Mike,
I know you were redirected to the other thread. I have the Contax G 35 and 45mm. I also have the Sony 50mm f1.4 which I had from my A900. The 35mm is superb and a good focal length for the NEX.

 

[e_dawg]

OP: You could wait until the E-mount Zeiss lens comes out? It's rumored to be a 35/1.4 (and may have AF, for the occasions where that is useful).

I don't think that is correct. It is supposed to be a wide-angle lens, and is likely a 24/2 Zeiss like they have for the A-mount. It couldn't be a 35/1.4 because 35 mm is not a wide-angle lens on E-mount.

 

[docmaas]

I don't think that is correct. It is supposed to be a wide-angle lens, and is likely a 24/2 Zeiss like they have for the A-mount. It couldn't be a 35/1.4 because 35 mm is not a wide-angle lens on E-mount.

Let us not forget that someone from Sony did say that the Nex mount was designed with ff in mind.

 

[monza]

35/2 Planar, Contax G. My favorite adapted lens by far...great color and sharpness, wonderful bokeh, and much closer focusing than the usual RF lenses, to me, a much preferred trade-off to having a focusing scale.

 

[douglasf13]

i only have the 42mm f/1.2 and 38mm f/1.8. the 42mm is fantastic (with the issues you'd expect from a 50 year old f/1.2) though quite expensive. i'm undecided about 38mm yet - it has a rather harsh swirly bokeh wide open but is quite contrasty and sharp in the center, haven't taken many stopped down shots with it yet....

This is why I haven't jumped on board. I'm not a fan of what I've seen of the 38mm's bokeh, and I don't want to go any longer than that (42mm.)

domaas, I wouldn't get your hopes up about fullframe and NEX anytime soon. Sony said that they would have to change some elements of the mount design for fullframe, and, and from what I understand is common Japanese fashion, they simply won't deny that they'll do fullframe in the future.

 

[barjohn]

I like the 40/2 Sumicron (any variation of it). Here is a pair of my wife's shoes that she recently wore to our daughter's wedding shot with the lens at ISO 400 1/30 sec.

 

[roweraay]

....they simply won't deny that they'll do fullframe in the future.

...Or admit that they have FF plans in the offing.

 

[Vivek]

This is why I haven't jumped on board. I'm not a fan of what I've seen of the 38mm's bokeh, and I don't want to go any longer than that (42mm.)

The 42/1.2 has the swirliest bokih I know of. 38/1.8 and 40/1.4 are much better in that respect.

BTW, I have no idea why the 35/2 Planar from Contax is touted as the "best". From what I could see from the MTF charts of Zeiss, it is not the best in the Contax G line up.