A6000/6300 Users - All in one lenses?

Looking for input from the experienced A6000/A6300 users. . .

I currently own an A6000 with the standard 16-50 and 55-210 kit lenses. We have a Vancouver-Hawaii cruise booked for September and I want to purchase a second A6000 (possibly A6300) both as a spare and for the wife to use (she's a beginner as far as photography goes, although she has used my A600, DMC-200z, and my no longer owned Canon T5.).

She's not going to want to be bothered changing lenses in the field. I was thinking about an all in one lens for her.

So I see three possible Sony lenses and a Tamron offering. In the Sony camp, I see the 18-105, f4, the 18-135, and the 18-200 which is somewhat pricey at $850. Tamron offers an 18-200 also in the $550 range.

I understand the technical issues with wide range zooms and sharpness at the ends.

Of these four, what might be best bang for the buck for both a beginner and Hawaii? I dont have any objection to spending the money if needed to get quality versatility.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Forums mobile app

Looking for input from the experienced A6000/A6300 users. . .

 

I currently own an A6000 with the standard 16-50 and 55-210 kit lenses. We have a Vancouver-Hawaii cruise booked for September and I want to purchase a second A6000 (possibly A6300) both as a spare and for the wife to use (she's a beginner as far as photography goes, although she has used my A600, DMC-200z, and my no longer owned Canon T5.).

 

She's not going to want to be bothered changing lenses in the field. I was thinking about an all in one lens for her.

 

So I see three possible Sony lenses and a Tamron offering. In the Sony camp, I see the 18-105, f4, the 18-135, and the 18-200 which is somewhat pricey at $850. Tamron offers an 18-200 also in the $550 range.

 

I understand the technical issues with wide range zooms and sharpness at the ends.

 

Of these four, what might be best bang for the buck for both a beginner and Hawaii? I dont have any objection to spending the money if needed to get quality versatility.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Forums mobile app

I own the 18-105 f/4 and it seldom leaves my A6300. I do carry my A6000 in a waist-pack with an ultra wide or other complimentary lens but the 18-105 covers most of my shooting needs. The drawback is that due to the constant f/4 maximum aperture, it is fairly large and heavy. The newly released 18-135 is considerably smaller and lighter and gives a bit more reach at the cost of a smaller maximum aperture at the long end. Initial impressions of its image quality are very favorable and if I were to buy a "95%" lens today (one that covers 95% of my shooting) , the 18-135 would likely be my choice.

The 18-200 from both manufacturers (actually, Tamrom makes the Sony later model 18-200) are rather soft at the long end. Unless you really need the extra reach all the time, I would go with the 18-135 and use the 55-210 if you were to go whale-watching or something that needed the reach.

if you're interested, here's a gallery from a London trip where all I took was the A6300 and the 18-105:

http://galleries.pptphoto.com/london2017

The image quality from the 18-135 is reported to be very similar.

My 2¢...

Dave

I have the 18-105 (the a6000 is my backup body) and I pretty much use that all the time with it. Because of the size I use the kit lens when I want a pocket camera.

If I was buying today it would probably still be the 18-105 because of the F4, but I would be torn between that and the 18-135 for the slightly bigger range.

I'll represent the 18-135mm users group. I had been looking for what I'd call an 'extended kit lens' for a long time, to replace my venerable 18-55mm kit lens with some more reach as an all-in-one travel solution. As Dave mentioned, the 3 varieties of 18-200mm lenses made for E-mount were all fairly soft at the longer end - the best of the 3 was the 'original' silver 18-200mm fat-body - which was a little too bulky for my taste as a travel all-in-one. The 18-105mm came along as a small temptation for me, but still a little larger and for me the deal-breaker was the power zoom/compacting design, as I really dislike this style of lens.

The 18-135mm was the answer I had been looking for. Compact, light, and small, covers the 18-55mm range of my original kit but reaches out to 135mm, good stabilization, and still reasonably fast at F5.6 at the long end (rather than dropping to F6.3). Moreover, the newest design from Sony means it gets all the good, modern coatings, good focus speed, and very strong optical performance throughout the range, with center sharpness extremely good at both ends of the zoom. And the price was reasonable too.

I only got to test the lens with wetlands and swamp scenery, and some wildlife and bird shooting - not that I'll be planning on doing much of that type of shooting with this lens, but even so, it held its own and did a very nice job...I'm looking very forward to really exercising the lens in June when I head back up to Disney World.

I've owned an a6000 for several years, and I absolutely love it. The a6000 came with the 2 kit lenses, but subsequently, as an "all in one" travel lens, I bought the Sony 18-200mm (the silver one). The 18-135 was not available then. I'm not sure which I would have bought if it were, but I probably would have gone for the longer reach, given the uses to which I put this lens -- having versatility (greater reach) and not carrying around more gear, particularly on shore excursions and other travel. This is not in any way, shape or form to quarrel with anything Dave or the other experts who have posted above have said, I just know how I shoot, how much gear my knees can handle, and when I am unlikely to be changing lenses.

Here are a few images shot on my a6000 with the Sony 18-200mm. The first is at 194mm (a scarlet macaw in the wild (in Costa Rica). I had a brief moment to get this shot; I could barely see the bird up in the tree with my naked eyes). The other two were shot at 200mm.

When I had it on my old Nikon, the versatility of the 18-200 lens far outweighed its negatives by my values. On a crop camera, that 200mm is roughly equal to 300mm which helps a ton vs the true 200mm I'm currently at on full frame. I primarily shoot while traveling, and that zoom range plus size was absolutely wonderful for a travel lens.

I had the 18-105 and used it for about a year. I sold it and bought the 18-135 sight unseen. The 18-105 was good, but heavy and big compared to the new lens. I also bought a 6300 at the same time. I really like the size and weight of the 18-135 and would highly recommend that combination for your wife.

Both taken with the 18-135

So far the 18-135 hasn't left the 6300, and until I want wildlife shots it probably won't. I also have the 24-240 (full frame) lens. I haven't tried it on the 6300 yet, basically I just don't need the reach around here.

24-240 on 6000

So, right now I have a 12-18 wide (living on my 6000), the 18-135 and the 24-240. I was used to a point and shoot with a big zoom before moving to the 6x00 series. New question - what lens do I need to fill out my selection?

Vic

I had the 18-105 and used it for about a year. I sold it and bought the 18-135 sight unseen. The 18-105 was good, but heavy and big compared to the new lens. I also bought a 6300 at the same time. I really like the size and weight of the 18-135 and would highly recommend that combination for your wife.

 

Both taken with the 18-135

 

So far the 18-135 hasn't left the 6300, and until I want wildlife shots it probably won't. I also have the 24-240 (full frame) lens. I haven't tried it on the 6300 yet, basically I just don't need the reach around here.

 

24-240 on 6000

 

So, right now I have a 12-18 wide (living on my 6000), the 18-135 and the 24-240. I was used to a point and shoot with a big zoom before moving to the 6x00 series. New question - what lens do I need to fill out my selection?

 

Vic

Time for a fast prime.

35/1.8, 50/1.8 or 85/1.8, depending on your use and tastes.

New question - what lens do I need to fill out my selection?

 

Vic

FISHEYE!

Rokinon 8mm F/2.8

I bought it on a whim and have been surprised how much use I get out of it.

Dave

Time for a fast prime.

35/1.8, 50/1.8 or 85/1.8, depending on your use and tastes.

That's what I was gonna say. Your current lenses are great for outdoors in the daylight.

Once the light starts getting iffy (or just goes to night), a fast prime will get you some really cool shots your current set can't.

I mean, I like superwide shots too. I just find I end up needing a fast lens WAY more often than I would shoot a superwide. I rented one for a trip where I thought I'd use it the majority of the time. Turns out, I didn't. I mean, I was glad I had it. It's just that it turns out that 80-90% of the time, I'm in the 24-70 zoom range and outside of that, I'm more likely to need more zoom than to go more wide.

Maybe rent a superwide and a fast prime and see which one you'll use more?

it won't be a fisheye! that look makes me seasick ;p

:D

Vic

I always feel guilty if I don't carry a bunch of lenses when I go on trips. That said, most of my shots have been on the 18mm-105mm!

That said, I sold the 18-105mm and replaced it with the 18mm-135mm!

I always feel guilty if I don't carry a bunch of lenses when I go on trips. That said, most of my shots have been on the 18mm-105mm!

 

That said, I sold the 18-105mm and replaced it with the 18mm-135mm!

That's how I feel. Especially cruising, I am usually out and about during daylight hours. The next one is in northern latitudes so there will be a lot of light. Now I'm wondering if I should rush out and buy a fast prime! Mostly for London evening photos - I never should have asked. :o

I have the wide (10-18) for monuments and grand architecture on a second body now, so that should make for an improvement. I'll just have to bring my baby tripod with me.

Vic

That's how I feel. Especially cruising, I am usually out and about during daylight hours. The next one is in northern latitudes so there will be a lot of light. Now I'm wondering if I should rush out and buy a fast prime! Mostly for London evening photos - I never should have asked. :o

 

I have the wide (10-18) for monuments and grand architecture on a second body now, so that should make for an improvement. I'll just have to bring my baby tripod with me.

 

Vic

Never mind, you talked me into it! (Without even saying anything) I bought the 33 mm 1.8. It should be delivered tomorrow.

Thanks?!

Vic