Hey there! I have a kit Lens 16-50mm I am looking to upgrade (cheaper) for my a6000 … i live macro and focus photos ( funko pop style) and street pictures… which should I get ? I have watched five videos from your channel already
Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a great perfect first prime lens. Usually on the cheaper side for primes, has nice bokeh. It’s not a macro lens, but I think it’s still a great starter lens for bokeh and just all around shooting. The Viltrox 33mm f1.4 is a good choice as well. If you want a zoom, but short range with Nike depth of field I’d say the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8. If you do want macro, the Sony 30mm f3.5 is regarded as a great entry point for that and it has auto focus and can be a normal lens as well. 👍🏻
You sure? He actually said that? I feel like I’ve seen the same video and he didn’t say that of this lens at f0.95. If you don’t mind, would you kindly provide a link to the time in the video he said that?
Nice review. Tough sell that 0.95. I have a 35mm f 1.4 in my shopping list at some point in this life time. So far I've been using a nikor 35mm f 1.8 and I really like it, I feel like it's got so much more to give than what I can take out from it right now.
October 17th! (Had to stalk your Instagram and go way back lol, but also got to see all of your old pics). Also saw that someone beat me to it, so congrats to them! How was your trip out to the West in 2016?? I live in Utah, have you been out to any of the national parks here??
Hmmm, perhaps a decent lens for some high key stuff where you want softness? Can sometimes correct lens flare in Lightroom along with other things. Haven't made up my mind if I would like it or not. Think I'll just stay with my Sony 1.8 which I do love. Thanks Kyle.
This lens is weaker at close focus distance at 0.95. However at portrait length (2m-10m) it performs decent, with good center sharpness (a lens hood helps). At infinity, it is again soft. I guess this is a compromise for the low price and low element count. They can add a floating element to improve close focus sharpness. It will increase the complexity of this lens. The 7artisans 25mm 0.95 is a relatively more complex designs and has better output.
imo this lens is great if used for what it is intended, a portrait lens. It's obviously optimized for mid distance where it is reasonably sharp even at 0.95. See what INSANE images Peter Coulson takes with this lens ! Look from 13:30 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0HlnVv0bLfs.html
Congratulations on your wedding! I have a copy of this beast but it's not as soft as yours. Perhaps you have received a faulty copy? I do agree that its a little soft at 0.95 and the CA is rather obvious. If the user is fine to do a little post editing, this is a fun lense to have. I also have the 35mm. IMHO, that's better. Lesser CA and the focal length is ideal.
Indeed it does. It could work in certain scenarios. Looking back I should have shown video of me moving from 0.95 down to f2.8. But I did do it in photos. Gah, always think of things after the video is live!
Congrats on the wedding. 10/17 and i would say 2015 for the start. If I win this lense, I will try using it for night photography in NYC. Maybe even with a mist filter. I have an F4 lense but it is terrible as soon as it gets dark.
You’re correct, (not the year) but I’m afraid the pinned comment is the winner and it was within the first 100 views. I’d recommend trying out a lens like the Meike 35mm f1.7. Under $100 and you could experiment with a lens that has a wider aperture.
@@kyletaggart ahhh no worries! Congrats to the winner! Ok thank you for the recommendation. I will take a look at the 35 mm. I always see these cool shots of neon store signs at night. With the glo. I always wonder what lense those people use. Because on mine, it looks like a mess! 😆
@@TomSundayGames no worries! and yeah probably something at f1.8, and a lot of photographers use full frame cameras which in general are better in low light. But yeah, there are plenty of cheap manual lenses for the sony a6000 series where you can get amazing results in low light.
I am just finding you now, really late into my Sony use (just really beginning to learn after owning it for almost 3 years). FYI - 10/17 was the first date that came into my mind.
Hi, thanks for the great videos on this and the 35mm. I am in the market for something for low low light and was considering the two. Which one is better (I mean in terms of perfirmance with softness, haze and CA) at 0.95? I have heard the 35 beats the 50mm by a long shot, doest it?
@@kyletaggart thanks a lot! I have an AF 35mm right now and was thinking about the 50 to not repeat the focal lenght in the arsenal but if the .95 from the 50 is really lacking I might reconsider the 35 or the 56mm 1.4 from sigma that is not that much pricier but apparently is razor sharp and clean at 1.4 and I believe the modern Sonys will handle that extra step in ISO 🤔 Have you tried that one? If so, what do you think? Is the 1 stop and extra big bokeh balls worth sacrificing the optical performance and AF because I can relate to not having the best sight too 😆 (Sorry if you made a review I didn’t see, new here 😉)
