I always have friends asking this "What len to use ha?" or "What lens to buy ah?" I am no expert and can't give much advise :P

I am sure some folks will have the same questions too which I believe the Masters & Experts (using diff cam) can provide some advise ya... B)
Of course, your advise will serve only a guidline and not a 'Must to-do' thing and the folks cannot hold you responsible in any circumstance... :D

Qs I normally get:

Lens to use/buy for:
1. Landscape
2. Multi-purpose len
3. Marco
4. Indoor
5. Sport
6. etc etc

Masters pls pour in your advise...Many thanks in advence ;)

-edited-

Isaac ! :o
I think you'll make the newbie will be more confuse because you put too many lenses on the list :blink:
My suggestion is you only need to write one at every category. That's enough, my friend

1. Landscape
= Sony DT 11-18mm F4.5~5.6

2. Multipurpose Lens
= Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3

3. Macro Lens
= Sony 100mm F2.8 Macro

4. Indoor
= Vario-Sonnar T* 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM

5. Sports
= Sony 70-200mm F2.8G

6. Portraiture
= Sony 50mm F1.4

Hope this help ! :D

1. Landscape
= Sony DT 11-18mm F4.5~5.6
= Vario-Sonnar T* 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM
= Sigma 10-20mm F4~5.6 EX DC
Due to its larger aperture size at the shorter end and larger range of focal lengths compared to the 11-18. This is an alternative to the Sony DT 11-18mm.

2. Multipurpose Lens
= Sony DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6
= Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
Longer range, sharp pictures produced. Personal favorite.

3. Macro Lens
= Sony 50mm F2.8 Macro
= Sony 100mm F2.8 Macro
Can be used as mid-range telephoto lens, produces excellent and extremely sharp pictures due to it being a fixed lens.

4. Indoor
= Sony 20mm F2.8
= Vario-Sonnar T* 16-35mm F2.8 ZA SSM
Large aperture and wide angle to encompass everything into one picture which is required for indoor photography and low-light shooting. Also produces sharp images because of Carl Zeiss make.

5. Sports
= Sony 70-200mm F2.8G
= Sony DT 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
Larger aperture means faster shutter speed which is essential when shooting sports. Also more versatile.

6. Portraiture
= Sony 50mm F1.4
= Sony 35mm F1.4G
= Vario-Sonnar T* DT 24-70mm F2.8 ZA (Personal Preference) ;)
Essentially, the 35mm F1.4G is the better choice for portraiture due to the soft focus images it produces, but I believe that the 24-70 is more versatile and does more. PP can be used to achieve the same soft-focus feel anyway.

Many apologies.. here is my corrected list. ;)

Red: Recommended

Cheers,
Isaac

I think the Nifty Fifty - 50mm f/1.4 is a good lens that you can't miss !
It's my recommendation over Vario-Sonnar T* DT 24-70mm F2.8 ZA for portrait photography. Maybe it is not versatile as 24-70mm, but the 50mm f/1.4 will give you better bokeh ;)

Read this from other thread.
So which one do you prefer ? ;)

Nikkor AF-S Micro 60mm f/2.8G ED
(sharp result from edge to edge for portrait, light weight, ALSO save money)

or

Nikkor AF-S VR Micro 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
(better working distance ONLY)

I would pick the 105mm actually.. Because since the macro lenses are use mainly for close-ups of very tiny objects like insects and what not, putting enough distance between you and the subject is a must.

If you get too close, you'd spook the subject and make it run away, which is a bad thing. That's why I prefer the 105mm.

I've mentioned this many times to many people: The 105mm can also be used as a mid-range telephoto lens for capturing candid expressions on peoples' faces when shooting street. It being a prime lens, the sharpness is uncompromising and nobody really notices that you're taking pictures of them because of the distance you are able to put between yourself and them. ;)

I know.
But you won't use it again if you already had 70-200mm or 80-200mm, it's much better for candid portrait ;)

The 70-200 and 80-200 - when compared to the 105mm Micro - is significantly bigger and might draw some unwanted attention when not shooting from the hip.

And quality-wise, prime lenses are always better, right? :)

Ok Ok I lose in this debate. Just like John McCain lose to Barack Obama :P

So if you like to take candid portrait, I guess you carry that lens everywhere. I wish I see your candid photo soon :D

Well.. I wouldn't say that this is the ideal lens for candid portraits; it's just a 2-in-1 lens :P

I did this candid shot using the 105mm.

so cute :wub:
is she your friend ? or girlfriend ? ;)
looks like Korean girl ....

nice face expression. she didn't realize it ?

I guess u sat not too far from her so only had headshot with 105mm

Haha she's a bit of both..

My girlfriend's friend :lol:

Shot this on the MRT while they were busy talking :)

do you already had girlfriend ?
yours should be more cute then her :blink:

Hmm now I am tempted to be a Paparazzi because of you :D

umm.. i wanna ask guys..
im considering to buy telephoto lens..
which one is better..

Sony 70-200 F2.8 SSM
Minolta 70-200 F2.8
Tamron 70-200 F2.8
or Sigma 70-200 F2.8 HSM ?

thanks for the replies :D

Hi Fredy,
correct me if I am wrong, you are using a A200 right ?
Hmm.. for a telephoto lens... i guess a sony 18-250mm at SGD 759 from sony's webbie would be good...
but if there is alot of spare cash running, Sony's 70-200mm F2.8G lens would be worth considering (at SGD 2999) ...

I guess before getting the lens, need to ask on the budget and the frequency that the lens would be put into good use. No point spending alot of money on the lens and let it sit in the dry cabinet.

cause the lenses you have mentioned I guess are kinda bulkier as their apertures are fixed at 2.8 which helps alot in low light situations. but if you just need a telephoto lens, i would suggest the DT18-250 which would be good choice that will stay on your camera body most of the time and its lighter, moreover it has a good range from wide angle to telephoto of up to 250mm. Good for holidaying... unless you are into sports photography, considering the sony 70-200 G lens would be good... good to read the reviews of the different lenses of the sigma and tamron at dpreview.com . it will help make an informed decision

Cheers,
Benny

yeah now im using A200 but planning to upgrade to A700.. :)

sony G lens and minolta one is the same but minolta ones are cheaper by SGD400-600..

yeah cuz im looking for F2.8 telephoto..
cuz most likely i will be dealing with low light situations and needed fast lens.. :)

anyone here using the sony 70-200 F2.8 ??
how is it? :D

thanks for the reply benny..

Sony 70-200 F2.8 G ....

Other than it being a heavy tube, I can only say that it is simply a fantastic lens.

Sidenote:

Comparing Minolta prices with Sony prices isn't realistic since Minolta lenses are no longer in production. You're basically buying "2nd hand" goods hence in order to do a fair comparison, it has to be "apple with apple".

Cheers.

hmm..
are sigma and tamron lenses good and sharp?

How much is your budget ? ;)

hmm, around SGD2000-3000.. :)

do your sum carefully, is it worth to get the 2nd best with a saving of couples of hundreds, I'll support you if is $1000 :lol: ...what if you regret next time, and you have to fork another few thousand to get the Sony's lens?

Pardon me ya, I always think from accounting point of view ;)

Yeah good question, which one is the best between :

Sony 70-200 F2.8 SSM
or
Minolta 70-200 F2.8
or
Carl Zeiss (don't have I think ...)

but my Sony friends all are using Sony 70-200 F2.8 SSM ;)

yeah..
i think i'll just buy the sony one..
its better to stick with the original one ;)

i have to start saving money now.. :lol:

Tamron for Resolution Performance:

Tamron 70-200 - Very sharp, modern design with resolution and lens performance as priority (Strongest resolution performance towards the wide end of the lens), high resolution, good for general usage, but comparatively not as responsive as the rest of the two. (MFD = 95cm)



Sigma for general Usage Responsiveness in quick situations:

Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM - not as sharp as either of both, but usably sharp, but responsive due to the HSM motor. (MFD = 100cm)



Sony/KM - for the mix of both worlds (at one time the world's top ten sharpest lens for 35mm format at time of its introduction, and the only Zoom lens to be on the list, the rest of the 9 were primes, but generally, new lenses should generally improve on resolution):

Sony 70-200 - Very sharp images - especially at the wide end (strongest end), smooth tonal character characteristic of the KM G lens design era (different from what you'd expect from a CZ - which has very rich, contrasty colours), as the Sony 70-200 f2.8 G SSM is actually a KM design rebadged with the Sony label. The sweetest spot for bokeh of this lens at around the focal length of 135mm. (MFD = 120cm)



MFD - Minimum focus distances are actually helpful numbers to provide, because they are important if people want to do some ad-hoc close up shots. Closer MFD also allows for a greater degree of camera to subject to background difference - leading to a greater defocus, which makes for larger bokeh.



Comparing to contemporary designs from other brands, Sony, Tamron and Sigma designs are of newer makes. Newer designs tend to have closer minimum focus distances. Compare them to the Previous Generation of 80-200mm lenses, which has 1.8m MFD, and of models from other leading brands that were introduced much earlier - which can put the shooter far off into a distant walls while trying to take a headshot. :)

Canon 70-200 2.8 L USM - 1.4m
Nikon AF-S VR Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G - 1.5m

:D

Great brief Richard. Thanks for the insight.

thanks for the explanation richard.. :D

today i go to sony style and compare the diffrences between 70-200 F2.8 and 70-400 F3.5-5.6

aside from the weight, 70-200 F2.8 is a very fantastic lens.. :rolleyes:

Hmm typical of Sigma lens
Low quality control. Usually front or back focus.

Average quality of output (sharpness)

But fast (HSM) and cheap :D

Thanks guys, that's from my experience.

Let's not discount sigma's potential, some of the lenses out there from sigma, especially the Wide Angle 12-24 is probably one of the best wide angle for FF that money can buy these days.

Of course, Sigma Lenses are not bad in general, and some of them are very sharp, excellent lenses, especially many of the Wide Mid tele zooms are very good. Just that some EX models are prone to having their paint jobs peeling a little. :)

I wouldn't be too quick to discount lenses of any brands as viable tools due to economical, practicality, and quality reasons. If you need to deliver a piece of work while on a budget, any lens would do so long as it gets the works done.





Well, all these lenses, Tamron, Tokina, Sony, Sigma, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, differ from each other in minute levels, detectable only when viewed with close inspection - at 100% on a 72 dpi monitor, it's like viewing a 1.5 by 1m print from a distance you'd normally read your newspaper - Compare that to what we normally do for our photos today - where the average consumer with a DSLR shoots at around at least, 10-12 megapixels in picture resolution, but use around only 5% of it, like 0.54 megapixels for a 900 x 600 photo.

So yeah, you'd get what I mean... ;)

Hi, I own a Sony 350. Still pretty amateur but definitely continuing to learn. Like to check the Sony lens that's being mentioned, it is not the kit lens right?

I'm looking at getting a lens but I'm torn with which ones to get first.

hi guys...
today i just got my 50mm f1.4 :D :D :D
fantastic lens :D

That's definitely a great lens to have. I got mine a month ago and haven't stopped using it. Only problem I had so far is determining its sweet spot. Anybody have any idea?

I'm also thinking of getting an all-purpose lens. Anybody knows the difference between the Sony 18 - 200 and 18 - 250? Seems like no distinct difference other than the price. Also, any problems to get bokeh effect with only 3.5 f stops at its lowest?

Congratulation Fredy & RunVeryFast for your new lens ! ;)

Hi cutiephinphin~*

welcome to the forum... ;)

yupz what was mentioned is not the kit lens... kit lens are the DT18-70mm and the DT55-200mm which both lenses are quite useful for close up and telephoto shots. =) [somehow or rather they seem to be discontinued item in the sony website]

most of the time getting another lens would help acheive what is hard to achieve in the current lenses. 50mm 1.4 is good to get for portraitures and achieving a shallow dept of field bacuase of its wide aperture... hope it helps... ^_^


fredysen and runveryfast , congrats on the new lens :)

thanks guys.. :D

one down 2 more to go.. :P

Have you already gotten your 2nd and 3rd lens ? ;)