mjm6
Member
I was going to recommend this as well... seems that people are getting good results with this lens.
There's a beater condition one at KEH for $139... if it has good optics, whould be hard to beat that.
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I need an A7R WA solution NOW
- Thread starter dwood
- Start date
There's a beater condition one at KEH for $139... if it has good optics, whould be hard to beat that.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Yeah I have the Rokinon 14 but as more native lenses come out I'm switching over where they are "good enough." I thought the 16-35 was supposed to come out this summer. and I image that I would use the 16-35 more outdoors than anything. I'm really more of a 21 guy as of late when it comes to wides so if 18-25 works well enough on the 16-35 I'll be good. I prefer primes in the 35-90 range though and a 16-35/4, 35/2.8, 55/1.8, and 70-200/4 would be a great all around kit for me. I'm hoping for a faster 35 eventually but 2.8 is good enough for now.
Lightroom does good enough job with lens profiles (even with the 24-70) so that's another difference that works for me Guy as you're a C1 user. I think I just rather go with primesin my most used focal lengths (35/50-ish.)
Lightroom does good enough job with lens profiles (even with the 24-70) so that's another difference that works for me Guy as you're a C1 user. I think I just rather go with primesin my most used focal lengths (35/50-ish.)
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Problem with a wide lens is that when you software correct your lens suddenly it isn't all that wide any more. If they design the 16-35 like they did the 24-70 we will see this and probably rather significantly.
iiiNelson
Well-known member
I have a feeling that the 24-70 is actually 24 when corrected. It seems pretty close in FOV to my 24 Elmar corrected so maybe it's like a 21 or 22 uncorrected on the wide end.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
I listed my 25mm . I must be nuts
iiiNelson
Well-known member
I'm about to list my 70-200/2.8 in A-mount... I'm not nuts... Just getting rid of excess but it's a great lens (the few times I've used it.)
I too am anxiously waiting for a WA in FE lenses.
In the meantime, I am quite happy with a used Nikon 20mm F3.5 purchased for BH. The color rendition is quite good with no vignetting when used with a polarizing filter -OR- lens hood. It is not quite as sharp at the extreme edges as my Nikon 16-35, but the color/contrast is MUCH better. And of course, it's a LOT smaller. Best yet - there are some very good LR lens profiles for this lens which eliminate light falloff and distortion.
Best of all, legacy lenses hold their values quite well. You can often buy one, use it for a few months, then sell it for little or no loss.
In the meantime, I am quite happy with a used Nikon 20mm F3.5 purchased for BH. The color rendition is quite good with no vignetting when used with a polarizing filter -OR- lens hood. It is not quite as sharp at the extreme edges as my Nikon 16-35, but the color/contrast is MUCH better. And of course, it's a LOT smaller. Best yet - there are some very good LR lens profiles for this lens which eliminate light falloff and distortion.
Best of all, legacy lenses hold their values quite well. You can often buy one, use it for a few months, then sell it for little or no loss.
Bill Caulfeild-Browne
Well-known member
FWIW I find my Sony/Zeiss A mount 24-70 with the LEA4 is better at 24 mm than the FE 24-70. Of course it does not have OSS and it's heavy beast.
At full aperture both lenses are soft at 24 mm, but the A mount version improves quickly with stopping down whereas the FE never really gets good - tho' its "OK".
At full aperture both lenses are soft at 24 mm, but the A mount version improves quickly with stopping down whereas the FE never really gets good - tho' its "OK".
And that's why so many claim: What's the rush to mirrorless? What's wrong with dslr's?
Eduardo
Eduardo
iiiNelson
Well-known member
Size. Flexibility to use just about any lens from forgotten systems. Relatively inexpensive or at least competitively priced compared to other system cameras.
Doug, If I am right, you need a stop gap of high quality which you can maybe move along later when better native FE lenses arrive. It will depend on what you shoot and your personal preferences: tripod/ street vs landscapes, etc. (I cannot see your site at present).
Most of the candidates are costly and need adapters, making them very large and most are heavyweights - heavier than the FE 24-70 for example. My guess is the WA FE zoom is in stealth mode, but no longer being talked up - it is very likely to be out within a few months time. Apart from dual A/E mount users walking with one leg on either side of Sony's barbed wire fence, most FE users will, in 6-12 months time, be using FE lenses except for special beloved lenses from which they get the best from the a7/r sensors, that are worth the hassle of adapters.
Most of the candidates are costly and need adapters, making them very large and most are heavyweights - heavier than the FE 24-70 for example. My guess is the WA FE zoom is in stealth mode, but no longer being talked up - it is very likely to be out within a few months time. Apart from dual A/E mount users walking with one leg on either side of Sony's barbed wire fence, most FE users will, in 6-12 months time, be using FE lenses except for special beloved lenses from which they get the best from the a7/r sensors, that are worth the hassle of adapters.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
One reason I am hanging on to A glass. I will switch out when a FE lens actually beats the snot out of them. Only 1 so far is the 55mm. A glass is faster too
The rush to mirrorless = what is wrong with DSLRs in my book, but it is horribly personal and hard to put yourself in other people's shoes.
WRT Sony a7/r vs 5D3/D800:
size, weight, conspicuousness (stealth, candid photography), payload when shooting, flexibility (two mirrorless FFs with different FL lenses on them weigh about one Nikon pro zoom) so camera swapping is easy and fast; easier/faster lens changes (smaller gear takes less space on car seats or rocks); payload when travelling (carry on everything for aircraft); gear protection (easier to protect small light cameras in crowds); easier to place in/get out of small bags; smaller/lighter everything (batteries/chargers/bags/cards/tripod); easier carry for walking/trekking; readier access due to small shoulder bag not giant camera backpack; EVF for histo/low light focusing and metering (compared to C/N); possible to shoot ultra low light (EVF focus aids) (compared to C/N); more energy after a long day to keep doing high quality work, more shots per hour; unrivalled manual lens range capability and usability.
That is a non-exhaustive list. I think perhaps 35-45% of my current work cannot be done with say, a D800 or a900. Camera size is a big factor in how human beings react to your attempts to photograph them candidly. cheers.
WRT Sony a7/r vs 5D3/D800:
size, weight, conspicuousness (stealth, candid photography), payload when shooting, flexibility (two mirrorless FFs with different FL lenses on them weigh about one Nikon pro zoom) so camera swapping is easy and fast; easier/faster lens changes (smaller gear takes less space on car seats or rocks); payload when travelling (carry on everything for aircraft); gear protection (easier to protect small light cameras in crowds); easier to place in/get out of small bags; smaller/lighter everything (batteries/chargers/bags/cards/tripod); easier carry for walking/trekking; readier access due to small shoulder bag not giant camera backpack; EVF for histo/low light focusing and metering (compared to C/N); possible to shoot ultra low light (EVF focus aids) (compared to C/N); more energy after a long day to keep doing high quality work, more shots per hour; unrivalled manual lens range capability and usability.
That is a non-exhaustive list. I think perhaps 35-45% of my current work cannot be done with say, a D800 or a900. Camera size is a big factor in how human beings react to your attempts to photograph them candidly. cheers.
biglouis
Well-known member
I have both the CV Ultron 21/1.8 and the CV Heliar 15/4.5 and use them regularly on the A7.
Edge smearing is worse on the 15 (as you'd expect) but is unnoticeable on the 21 when stopped down. The 21 is (as you would expect) soft wide open at 1.8 but then the compositional opportunities compensate for that, imho. Ergonomically, I love using these lenses as they are beautifully built and you feel a real connection when using them.
If you look at my Flickr stream or my posts here you can see the results of both lenses.
Like you, I am disappointed not to find more about the 16-35 (which would probably be my preferred solution as and when it arrives). There are also the FE 21/2.8 and FE 25/2 on the Sony lens roadmap but who knows when they will arrive. Clearly, Sony need to prioritise WA lenses because the medium WA, normal and medium telephoto are now covered.
LouisB
Edge smearing is worse on the 15 (as you'd expect) but is unnoticeable on the 21 when stopped down. The 21 is (as you would expect) soft wide open at 1.8 but then the compositional opportunities compensate for that, imho. Ergonomically, I love using these lenses as they are beautifully built and you feel a real connection when using them.
If you look at my Flickr stream or my posts here you can see the results of both lenses.
Like you, I am disappointed not to find more about the 16-35 (which would probably be my preferred solution as and when it arrives). There are also the FE 21/2.8 and FE 25/2 on the Sony lens roadmap but who knows when they will arrive. Clearly, Sony need to prioritise WA lenses because the medium WA, normal and medium telephoto are now covered.
LouisB
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Just lost a big job today because I don't have a useable wide. Wish Sony would get their act together. Pro's need a good wide zoom. It's a workhorse lens.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
That's not good at all
saintsteve
Member
All the more reason for pros to have more than one system. Not getting rid of my Nikons yet. That being said, I will do 3 shoots this week with an EM-1 but it's not for everything.
Ben Rubinstein
Active member
Fair enough, I sold my Canon system when I retired from event work, just would have been nice to have the gear to take the occasional job.