Sony A7x lounge

I did a comparison of the 35mm, 55mm, and 85mm FOV a couple weeks back. Here it is again in case you guys missed it:

https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=18205573

Long story made short....55 is more similar to 85 than 35 is to 55. The benefit I've found in my weeks with the FE 55 is working distance. 85mm is hard to work with when you don't have a lot of space. 35mm is a very good FOV when you want to pull a lot of the environment into the frame, but it doesn't work so well when you have a lot of distracting stuff in the background. 55, while often viewed as a boring focal length, at times is a good middle of the road when 35 and 85 wont work.

I'm borrowing the FE 55 from a friend and will bring it with me to disney in two weeks this time for that very reason....last time I went 35mm and 85mm....and 85mm was hard to work with and compressed the background a tad too much when I wanted the environment in the frame....35 was so wide that it was hard to keep crowds out of the frame.

A case can be made for for owning all three focal lengths....bad for GAS...

^Yeah, that's a great study Carlo. I mainly think in terms of static FOV because often I can't do any foot-zooming. On my KC cityscapes it came down to finding my best POVs and then framing with the FOV that worked best for my vision (what I wanted to include in the frame). In some instances I found sucess in stitching B85mm frames to widen the view, but it's not practical for long exposures (especially when I take large numbers of car trail exposures to blend later in PS). In that case, if 85mm isn't wide enough, and 25 or 35mm is too wide (wanting to optimize resolution and not crop too much), a 50mm fits the bill.

OTOH, this year I have a new resolution: photography for fun only!! Resolving to do no more paid jobs. And that means if I can't get the shot because of not having the perfect focal length in my bag, I don't have to care.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18233969
^Yeah, that's a great study Carlo. I mainly think in terms of static FOV because often I can't do any foot-zooming. On my KC cityscapes it just came down to finding my best POVs and then framing with the FOV that worked best for my vision (what I wanted to include in the frame). In some instances I found sucess in stitching B85mm frames to widen the view, but it's not practical for long exposures (especially when I take large numbers of car trail exposures to blend later in PS). In that case, if 85mm isn't wide enough, and 25 or 35mm is too wide (wanting to optimize resolution and not crop too much), a 50mm fits the bill.

OTOH, this year I have a new resolution: photography for fun only!! Resolving to do no more paid jobs. And that means if I can't get the shot because of not having the perfect focal length in my bag, I don't have to care.

Any reason your zooms couldn't handle the job though?

I think for portraits the answer is pretty simple...the max aperture of zooms is limiting when you're going for a certain aesthetic, but if stopping down for landscapes a zoom should work well...and the Canon 24-70 F4IS is a very good one (provided you hang onto it).

The thing about zooms is that no matter how much I mentally tell myself not to, I get super sloppy with composing with a certain FOV in mind vs zooming in or out because its easier and more convenient to do so. I always kick myself later when something is shot with an awkward 66mm FOV lol.

my 5 cents - I never was a 50mm guy, I love 85-100mm, these are the mm I work most for portraiture also wedding. also waiting for B35, need 2nd lens for wedding work. 28mm feels to wide and that distortion, but in the same time loved B25 when tested in the shop 1st 85mm, 2nd 25/28/35mm and now looking for special purpose wide angle lens for landscapes etc.
for now will live with 28mm till wedding season and then think what to do
p.s. and definitely not looking in zoom direction - one of the most reasons I moved to to Sony was size & weight

mystik610 wrote in post #18233976
Any reason your zooms couldn't handle the job though?

I think for portraits the answer is pretty simple...the max aperture of zooms is limiting when you're going for a certain aesthetic, but if stopping down for landscapes a zoom should work well...and the Canon 24-70 F4IS is a very good one (provided you hang onto it).

The thing about zooms is that no matter how much I mentally tell myself not to, I get super sloppy with composing with a certain FOV in mind vs zooming in or out because its easier and more convenient to do so. I always kick myself later when something is shot with an awkward 66mm FOV lol.

That's why I was expressing a reluctance and hesitation about selling my zooms yesterday. They're instant gap-fillers.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18233871
Thanks Eddie. It gives me another idea to consider. Once I get every Canon-mount lens sold I need to force myself to be patient and see what develops this year.

Surely we'll see another Batis or two. Maybe we'll see a Batis 35 and 50/55, which would complete my all-Batis kit. A Batis 15mm would be really cool too!

We need a 135mm, but I'm thinking that might be a Sony Zeiss Apo Sonnar 1.8 or 2/135mm; a bigger more satisfying bokeh portrait lens. But, what do I know: I never expected a Loxia 2.4/85mm.

FE28 would work too, I would avoid the Zony 24 1.8, I had one, its a good lens but for 700-900 dollar lens and being crop only its way over priced.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18233969
...OTOH, this year I have a new resolution: photography for fun only!! Resolving to do no more paid jobs. And that means if I can't get the shot because of not having the perfect focal length in my bag, I don't have to care.

Good luck!

mystik610 wrote in post #18233976
.....The thing about zooms is that no matter how much I mentally tell myself not to, I get super sloppy with composing with a certain FOV in mind vs zooming in or out because its easier and more convenient to do so. I always kick myself later when something is shot with an awkward 66mm FOV lol.

Me to....I haven't owned a zoom for many years for this reason.

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #18234019
FE28 would work too, I would avoid the Zony 24 1.8, I had one, its a good lens but for 700-900 dollar lens and being crop only its way over priced.

Funny you mention this. I totally agree. It's WAY overpriced. I just replied to a post on FM about this lens. Here's some of that post....

...I'm glad to have the 24mm for it's 35mm equivalent FOV. I will say that I think this particular lens is WAY overpriced...even on the used market. I paid $700 and really think the IQ is no better than the 300, maybe 400 dollar lenses out there. I'm also not seeing this "Zeiss pop" that people rave about. The colors are good, but not mid blowing. Maybe my opinion will change as we move into seasons of weather with more color. Lastly, it doesn't support all the AF functions of the a6500....1) AF drive speed settings can't be changed in video mode and the continuous AF is very slow; 2) The little "snow flakes", as Gary Fong calls them, don't show up in continuous AF tracking (not sure if that is affecting the tracking but bugs me cause I'm anal ).. Don't get me wrong, it's a fine lens, just overpriced. I really like the size...

My biggest issue is I really like the 35mmFOV. Now having only the cropper camera body the Zony is the only option. I would like to try the Batis 25 but can't pour that much money into this hobby right now. I've got other hobbies that need funding! 28mm puts me into the 42mm FOV range and starts moving into a range I am not interested in. i.e. I've always been a 35mm guy over a 50mm guy. Maybe I should try the 28?? It's certainly more affordable.

to throw in some more confusion..... I love the FE 35 on FF, that's my goto nice and small kit that I use often. It gets me by, I'm not super technical about it or anything, I just like the snapshots I get from it. Doesnt have the best bokeh being f2.8, but it's not busy or annoying. I'm more of a 50 shooter myself, but use the 35 more since I have a micro bag that fits the 35, but wouldnt 50, so it's my go everywhere combo.

I had the 28/24 debate with myself when I picked up the a6300 and ended up going with the 28 however I find it too long at times especially indoors. I like how I can use it on both bodies though and I love it on FF (im also enjoying it on crop its just the focal length issue at times)

One more

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/QL9A​NK

xpfloyd wrote in post #18234075
I had the 28/24 debate with myself when I picked up the a6300 and ended up going with the 28 however I find it too long at times especially indoors. I like how I can use it on both bodies though and I love it on FF (im also enjoying it on crop its just the focal length issue at times)

Hmmm, for the price of the 24 ZA I could get the FE 28 and the E 16mm (albeit only 2.8) which would help out when I wanted wider shots.

Eddie....could you please try your 28 in video mode on your 6300 and let me know how responsive the continuous AF is? It's virtually useless on the 24 ZA. Manual focus is a must. Also, do you have any examples of your 6300 paired with the 28 shot wide open? Thanks

idsurfer wrote in post #18234112
Hmmm, for the price of the 24 ZA I could get the FE 28 and the E 16mm (albeit only 2.8) which would help out when I wanted wider shots.

Eddie....could you please try your 28 in video mode on your 6300 and let me know how responsive the continuous AF is? It's virtually useless on the 24 ZA. Manual focus is a must. Also, do you have any examples of your 6300 paired with the 28 shot wide open? Thanks

I'll have to fish the manual out to find out how to use the video function as I've never used it on any of my bodies. I'll have a look through my files for wide open shots with the FE28 and a6300

xpfloyd wrote in post #18234092

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/QL8J​cz Callum - 29.12.16 by xpfloyd, on Flickr

interesting looking place, is what is it?

xpfloyd wrote in post #18234118
I'll have to fish the manual out to find out how to use the video function as I've never used it on any of my bodies. I'll have a look through my files for wide open shots with the FE28 and a6300

Vid is probably easy. Put it in continuous AF and select center AF area and hit the "go" button. Frame the shot with the subject in the middle of the screen. Then recompose with something further away in the middle and see how quick it makes the adjustment. Then recompose to something close and so on. No worries. If you have the opportunity. Otherwise, not a big deal. I'm just thinking out loud.