Good lens for tourism?
I'm trying to decide on a good lens for when I travel but, also to round out my set.
I currently have a Sony Nex-5n and, I love it. To make it easier for other camera owners to participate I'll list my current lenses in their 35mm equivalency.
I've got the Kit lens with f/3.5-5.6, 27-82.5mm, and optical stabilization (OSS)
I've got a Telephoto zoom lens with f/4.5-6.3, 82-315mm Equiv
I'm considering a prime lens at around 50mm (Equivalency) as I've heard it's good for street photography and most of my tourism is in city centers, or museums, and occasionally, landscapes. A single lens would help me maintain mobility.
That leads me to two lenses:
A Sigma with F2.8, 54mm but, no OSS, at $199
A Sony with F1.8, 52.5mm with OSS, at $448
Are my thoughts sound?
those sound like solid choices for street photography. depending on the lighting in the museums you might need the extra stop to avoid extremely high ISO's and noisy images or slow shutter speeds. personally I carry a 50mm 1.8 with me most of the time as a walk around lens though that'll probably change when my 40mm pancake 2.8 arrives. personally if it were me depending on the amount of traveling I'd be doing I'd split the difference and go with a cheaper lens and small external flash. Basically unless you're willing to lose a lens don't buy for a vacation or such. I find that's a good rule of thumb to follow. Another thing you may want to look at is how long the lenses are as if you have a shorter lens it may be easier to slip the NEX-5 into a pocket out of sight.
I would go with the biggest Aperture(smallest F stop #) you can afford.
There is a f2.8 24mm lens for $248 how would that one compare? I like the compactness as it brings the objective end of the lens to stick out only a little bit more than the grip area.
only compromise on the 40mm is the 2.8 aperture max as opposed to a 1.8 on the 50. With that said the 40 is useable wide open whereas a 50mm is just starting to get tack sharp at 2.8 and reaches peak sharpness around F4 in most cases. a 24mm 2.8 would compare it would just simply be a wider FOV. There are 28mm 2.8's as well but my main reasoning for getting the pancake was that it's tack sharp across the entire frame wide open has a short MFD and can get great bokeh when used as a macro lens or even doing portrait work where you want some background for contexe
I am not sure how Sony's F stop number works but I am more use to the Cannon Lens
I bought my dad a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L lens
Aperture Maximum: f/4
Aperture Minimum: f/22
My go-to right now has been the 17-40.
Really enjoying it... now I am dying for a tripod :\
So, it looks like I'm back to the two 50ish lenses.
How important do you think the optical stabilization is for general tourism (street, museums and occasional landscapes)?
as the camera shake is noticeable
At that focal range, I don't think it's terribly important as long as you have decent lighting and a fast lens. On my 70-200 f2.8 IS II I can get a cleaner shot at 100mm without IS than I can with my 28-135 at 100mm with IS turned on just because of the amount of light coming into the lens.
For general shooting on a crop sensor camera, my favorite lens is around a 35mm. That's a really comfortable all around lens for anything from landscapes to portraits. The Sony 16-50 looks like a great choice for around $550, it's f2.8 constant which is very doable in low light situations and the focal range will work great with anything from landscape shots to portraits.
Hope that helps.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 AM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO
© MCB Network LLC