A NEX conundrum...

[Paratom]

I have been following everything to do with the Nex 5n and 7 for a few weeks now . There seems to be a preference for a 35mm lens in everyones choice of lenses . Are there no fast/sharp wide open 28mm lenses that are worth considering rather than a 35mm lens ? The next common choice is a 50mm lens which is not too far from a 35mm lens . Hence the question . My ideal would be 12-16 as a wide (not sure which one ), 28mm,58mm and a 90 would be great .

There are quite some 28mm from CV and Leica nd Zeiss.
I took some images with the 28/2.0asph Leica but so few that I really can not comment other than those few images looked quite good.

 

[Simon M.]

Yeah, the toughest thing would be the wide angle, in regards to speed, but maybe you don't need super shallow DOF with the widest angle? The ZM 35/2 is pretty sharp wide open, but a razor around f2.8-4. The ZM 50/1.5 has a great look, but isn't technically sharp wide open. If you want sharp wide open, I'd go Voigtlander 50/1.5. Granted, the ZM 50/1.5 is a little sharper at the edges starting around f2.8 or so.

I've owned and tried around 11 rangefinder lenses on the NEX (5 of them being 35mm lenses,) and I've finally come to a point to where I've ALMOST got everything narrowed down to my go to system. I've just got to test the differences between the Sony 16 and the Voigtlander 15 that I just received. So, my setup on the 5N will be:

CV 15/4.5 (or maybe Sony 16,) ZM 35/2, ZM 50/1.5, and occasionally the Contax G 90.

I used to shoot the Sony 20/2.8, Sony 50/1.4, ZA 85/1.4 and occasionally a Zeiss Jena 135/3.5 on the A900, and my whole approach hasn't changed much, and prints look great with NEX. The ZMs have nice pop and subject separation, and I'm not really noticing a huge difference from one stop more equivalent depth of field. If you really need the shallower DOF, you could always go CV 35/1.2 and CV 50/1.1, if the size doesn't bother you.

I don't often do the shallow DOF with wide angles - just not my thing. Looking at my images from the a850 I would say 80% of my shots with the 20mm are cropped to about 24mm-28mm equivalent and shot around f8 to f11. About 70% 50mm shots are rarely cropped and shot between f1.7 and f3.5, the others are shot at f5.6 to f11 and not cropped. My 90mm shots are often shot either at f3.5 or f8.

I'll have to play around with what options in RF lenses will work for me and how I shoot - but first to get a handle on the camera with just a kit lens...

 

[nostatic]

My conundrum - I'm liking this for a "just take it and shoot whatever" camera. I think the 50/1.8 will be a must-have due to the OSS and speed. I'm not crazy about the 16 (it may go back), and I want something with a longer reach. So the question is add the 55-210, or splurge and get the 18-200 and just use two lenses (18-210 and 50).

 

[jonoslack]

My conundrum - I'm liking this for a "just take it and shoot whatever" camera. I think the 50/1.8 will be a must-have due to the OSS and speed. I'm not crazy about the 16 (it may go back), and I want something with a longer reach. So the question is add the 55-210, or splurge and get the 18-200 and just use two lenses (18-210 and 50).

you could always buy a Leica R 28-90 like I just seem to have done :ROTFL:

I have the 18-200 - it's fine (more than fine, it's better than any 18-200 deserves to be) , but it's quite big - if you mind that.

 

[nostatic]

Umm...you don't want to know how much I've spent on bass guitars in the past year

I bit the bullet and went to the local shop to fondle, I mean handle the candidates. Perhaps a bit Goldilocksian, but I found the 18-200 to be a bit big for my tastes. The 55-210 however was nice and I was suprised by the build quality - really nice. I figured I'd save the extra money and just carry a second lens for those times I need to go wider. I just shot some tests in the house and backyard and color me impressed. I think it is a bit sharper and I like the rendering better than the 18-55 kit. I'm going to go walk down to the beach and snap away and see if the first blush continues.

At this point I'm really looking forward to the 50/1.8 w/OSS.

 

[Paratom]

Umm...you don't want to know how much I've spent on bass guitars in the past year

I bit the bullet and went to the local shop to fondle, I mean handle the candidates. Perhaps a bit Goldilocksian, but I found the 18-200 to be a bit big for my tastes. The 55-210 however was nice and I was suprised by the build quality - really nice. I figured I'd save the extra money and just carry a second lens for those times I need to go wider. I just shot some tests in the house and backyard and color me impressed. I think it is a bit sharper and I like the rendering better than the 18-55 kit. I'm going to go walk down to the beach and snap away and see if the first blush continues.

At this point I'm really looking forward to the 50/1.8 w/OSS.

I thought about the 18-200 and think I could like it for curtain situations (lets say going to sport event, or at the zoo or at vacation a the cost.
For allday walkround the kit is as big as I would want a lens on the Nex.