The BEST LENSES for Sony cameras (a6100, a6400, a6600, zv-E10): a tier list for Sony APSC
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- In this video we're checking out all the Sony APSC E-mount lenses I've ever used and ranking them; very objectively, using a fool-proof, scientific, tried and tested method: the social media TIER LIST!
As an ultra-super-professional expert of photo and video, I'll also provide some recommendations for what lenses to get. Performance is HIGHLY dependent on buying them from my affiliate links below however... :-)
Recommendations
-----------
Best zoom lens (for a6500/a6600):
Sony 16-55 f2.8 amzn.to/3DIc0AA (affiliate link)
Best zoom lens (for a6000/a6100/a6300/a6400/zv-e10):
Tamron 17-70 f2.8 amzn.to/3S11icN (affiliate link)
Best zoom lens for travel/hiking:
Sony 18-135 OSS amzn.to/3BATs2M (affiliate link)
Best zoom lens for video:
Sony 18-105 f4 OSS: amzn.to/3faysIF (affiliate link)
Best ultra wide angle lens:
Tamron 11-20 f2.8 amzn.to/3xG6hYs (affiliate link)
Cheaper alternative:
Rokinon 12mm f2 amzn.to/3BBFOw8 (affiliate link)
Best vlogging lens for the ZV-E10:
Sony 11mm f1.8 amzn.to/3Ly60MS (affiliate link)
Best wide angle prime lens:
Sony 15mm f1.4 amzn.to/3R1soze (affiliate link)
Best walk-around prime lens:
Sigma 30mm f1.4 amzn.to/3f8SIKH (affiliate link)
Best portrait prime lens:
Sigma 56 f1.4 amzn.to/3BYnMFN (affiliate link)
Comparison of Tamron 17-70 & Sony 18-135
-----------
• Tamron 17-70 vs Sony 1...
Timestamps!
-----------
00:00 Intro
02:07 Sony 10-18 f4 OSS
03:30 Rokinon 12 f2
04:20 Sony 16 f2.8
05:00 Sigma 16 f1.4
06:20 Sony 16-50 kit lens
07:31 Sony 16-55 f2.8
08:19 Tamron 17-70 f2.8
09:20 Sony 18-55 kit lens
10:07 Sony 18-105 f4 OSS
10:49 Sony 18-135 OSS
12:25 Sony 20 f2.8
13:28 Sigma 30 f2.8
14:50 Sigma 30 f1.4
15:36 Sony 50 f1.8
16:30 Sigma 60 f2.8
17:40 Final thoughts + Other lenses not on the list
My favourite gear
(affiliate links)
-----------
Cameras
Sony a7c: amzn.to/3S0qJLR
Sony a6400: amzn.to/3duxgiD
Sony a6000: amzn.to/3DYTKDx
Full Frame Lenses
Sony 20mm f1.8 G: amzn.to/3duxrdN
Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 DG DN: amzn.to/3SiHSjq
Rokinon 35mm f1.8: amzn.to/3BYiNVF
Rokinon 75mm f1.8: amzn.to/3BT3Kvp
APSC Lenses
Sigma 18-50mm f2.8: amzn.to/3DEIGej
Sony 18-135mm: amzn.to/3BATs2M
Sigma 16mm f1.4 for Sony e-mount: amzn.to/3S2Mj2d
Sigma 30mm f1.4 for Sony e-mount: amzn.to/3f8SIKH
Microphones
Rode Videomic Go II: amzn.to/3xFvq5o
Smartphone
Google Pixel 6: amzn.to/3DIFQ8m
Tripods
Sirui AM-225: amzn.to/3LAbQNW
Leofoto LS-225C: amzn.to/3Sf39L6
AOKA mini-tripod CMP163CL: amzn.to/3QWOaUJ
Camera Bag
Shimoda Explore v2 25L: amzn.to/3qVVd5F
Camera Accessories
Peak Design capture clip: amzn.to/3BwIco8
Memory Cards
Sony Tough 64GB UHS-II: amzn.to/3xGx4Uk
Sandisk Extreme Pro UHS-I: amzn.to/3xG3s9O
Powerbank
Anker PowerCore 10000: amzn.to/3R2kd5J
Wireless earbuds
Google Pixel Buds A-Series: amzn.to/3UqHQbc
Full disclosure: these are Amazon affiliate links. Buying from here costs you nothing, but helps me continue to make videos like these... your support is greatly appreciated!
#sonyalpha #lenses #apsc #apsclenses #emount #sony #tamron #sigma #rokinon #samyang #a6000 #a6400 #zve10 #a6600 #a6500
Perfect list. I agree 100% with it.
Tamron 17-70 and any of the Sigma 1.4 is the best image quality and value you can get.
Hey thanks for watching! Indeed it's nice to see Sony APSC have so many quality options. There's truly something for everyone now
I own a6400 and the sigma 56 1.4 was my first lens besides the kit lens. It is really sharp and now i consider the 17 70 Tamron to provide a good standard zoom and better image quality than the kit
@@7784000 hey thanks for watching! Indeed, you can't really go wrong with that Tamron. So nice to have so many options these days.
@Kiflin 50-70 meters?
Thank you Andreas, this video really cleared a lot of confusion I had. Every lens has their story, but with your experience,
I was able to understand what I had learned so far, better.
Hey thanks for watching! I'm glad you got something out of it! 👍
What an excellent review and i think one of the best around youtube about aps-c shooters(i own an a6400!)Very helpfull video and thank you for this awesome review of the lenses!!
Ein großes Kompliment für das Teilen deiner interessanten Einblicke und Erfahrungen . Danke für dieses tolle Video !!!!
Cool video man watched through it and made me feeling pretty good about my lens buying decisions ;)
Hey thanks for watching! Most important thing is that you enjoy what you've got 😉
Great video. I just bought a used Sigma 30mm for my A6500. It's a bit quirky but beautiful image quality. It's been on my camera most of the time now. I'm saving up to complete the trilogy with the 16mm and the 56mm, having been that impressed with the 30mm. And f1.4 give the APSC camera that full frame look.
Hey thanks for watching! If it helps, the 30 is the weakest of the bunch, but that says more about how good the other 2, really. Enjoy!
Great review! Thanks for the content!
Hey thanks for watching! Glad it was useful.
This is the video i needed! Thank you
Hey thanks for watching! Glad it was helpful!
I am getting one of these I have a question? if I was to buy a UV Filter for the Sony ZV-E10 with size filter would I buy 50mm??? thanks
Hey thanks for watching! It depends which lens the filter is for.
If you're looking for a filter for the 16-50 kit lens the zv-e10 comes with, it takes 40.5mm filters.
Excellent video. I have a lot of the top-tier lenses and they are great! The 11-20 is superb.
Hey thanks for watching and for the kind words! I'm kinda disappointed full frame emount doesn't have a wide zoom as small as that 11-20. The 17-28 is sharp, but significantly larger. Tamron is killing it though in terms of quality glass.
@@andreas1701d I am basically a Nikon FF shooter but I have the a6600 and 6500 and those top lenses you mentioned. I get tired of carrying the heavy Nikons, although I still use them, so I got the A series. I am amazed at the sharpness of the Tamron lenses and the 11-20 focuses very closely. Great presentation!
Thanks for best video. Sory 1 have question, For ZV-E 10, what lens do you prefer for video, more bokeh and more soft skin effect? thanks
Hey thanks for watching! To be honest it depends what's in the background and if it's distracting or not. Either way though, choose an aperture that'll ensure both eyes are sharp.
This is probably the best video I have seen regarding this topic
I am super happy that I bought a6400 with kit lens and a sigma 30mm 1.4 a few months back. Sigma performed amazing in few events and sponsored trips and I am very happy with it so far but I just wish either my camera or lens had Stabilization but for that
Now I have seen Tamron 17 to 70 on your list and I am sure the next lens I am going to buy will be this Tamron and wide angles are amazing too but they are same price as the camera :(
Also I request you to make a video covering different affordable and other Gimbals for these cameras as if I will be using Sigma than I must need a gimbal to shoot with so that will be great
Once again man thanks a lot for the video and now I am definitely a subscriber
Love
Hey thanks for watching!
Glad you're enjoying your gear. Stabilization is a tricky issue because for handheld footage, Sony's IBIS isn't sufficient. However the a6400/sigma combo is light enough for most gimbals.
I'll see if I can get my hands on a couple to test.
As for the Tamron, can't really go wrong; it's a great lens. But be aware that it's quite large & heavy. For use on a gimbal, the Sigma 18-50 may be a better choice.
Damn too good man ❤️❤️
You deserve more subscriber❤️
Hey thanks for watching and for the kind words!
Won't lie, when you mentioned the 16mm I got super excited as I'm picking up an a6400 with one tomorrow to get back into photography. Definitely gonna be visiting this video over and over again for future purchases haha
Hey thanks for watching! I should mention, there are some lenses I'd maybe consider which came out since this video was made.
While I loved the Sigma 16 and it was my fave on Sony APSC, I'd probably opt for the Sony 15 1.4 today because it's significantly smaller, though it is twice the price.
The Sigma 18-50 is another highlight that I'd definitely opt for as a standard zoom, again due to its size & price.
Lastly for a wide angle, the Sony 11 1.8 would probably be my choice today over the Tamron 11-20.
Hope this helps! I should probably make an update to this one lol.
@@andreas1701d appreciate the response brother! I’m definitely open to some options as I would be fresh into the Sony ecosystem. My dream lens would be a sigma art lens in the ~35mm area and would love some input on a starter zoom lens.
@@Thiccology forget starter... The Sigma 18-50 is a terrific zoom lens for just about anything. Small, light, inexpensive vs the competition... The only reason to get anything else is the Sony 18-135 if you need the extra reach or the Tamron 17-70 if you absolutely need stabilization. Personally I never found it necessary for what I shoot. The 18-50 is a great do-it-all lens at a terrific price.
@@andreas1701d hood to know! And the 17-70 would’ve been end goal for me too! But I might snag the 55-210mm for anything out my reach to get hang of to start
Hi thanks for the comparison, i have a sony zv-e 10. Thinking of buying either sigma 18-50 or sony 18-135. Which one do you recommend? I would like to have sharpness in photos and interested in landscape, portrait pictures, all round travel lens. Thanks. 🙂
Hey thanks for watching!
The decision comes down to one thing: would you find better low light performance more useful than a longer zoom range?
In terms of sharpness, the 18-50 has an edge, but the 18-135 is not "bad", it's simply not as sharp. I think you'd be happy with either one in this regard.
They're both really small & light for what they are making them excellent travel companions.
If it were me, I'd choose the 18-50. You can usually move closer to your subject or crop in post for a more zoomed in field of view, but you cannot make an f3.5 lens gather more light 😉
Nice vid thanks! Subbed.
Hi Andreas, i'm approaching to choose one between the Tamron 17-70 and the Sony 18-135. In terms of IQ, are both very similar? I've seen your video between them and the 18-135 costs half the tamron. what do you suggest me?
Hey thanks for watching!
I would highly recommend you look at the new Sigma 18-50 2.8. If I still had my a6400 and had to choose all over again today, that would be my all-purpose lens. It's smaller than the already tiny 18-135, is just as fast and optically good as the Tamron 17-70 and is less expensive than both.
You lose some range, so if you're photographing birds for example I'd say get the sigma and use the left over money to pick up a telephoto lens 😉
I’ve shot Sony for a decade now. You were pretty much spot on with every model in my opinion. The only criticism I could think of is the 20mm 2.8 pancake people are a bit tough on. There isn’t anything else out there that compact and it’s not a bad lens. Huge improvement over the 16mm. The other major issue I see with this video is skipping over the 35mm 1.8 oss. It’s gotta be the lens that I grab most for versatility. Incredible prime with a compact size much smaller than the sigma 30mm. It’s also very comparable in sharpness. The 50mm oss from Sony is far too zoomed in for me being that apsc makes it around 85mm.
Hey thanks for watching! Indeed I've heard that people who have it love that 35. I just never used it myself, therefore I didn't feel qualified to advise people on it.
I had chosen the Sigma 30mm 2.8 over it for budgetary reasons at the time and was so happy with that that i stuck with Sigma and got the 1.4 afterwards.
I have sony a6400 and two lense Sigma 56mm and sony 1670ziess please suggest me 1670 is good or we buy 18185 power zoom which is sharper lens please reply soon
Hey thanks for watching! Unless you REALLY need the extra 35mm reach, or the power zoom specifically, there is not much benefit in switching from the 16-70 to the 18-105 in my opinion.
If you want better image quality, I'd go for the Tamron 17-70 or Sony 16-55. At least there you'll also get the benefit of f2.8 in addition to a sharper image.
Great video man. I got the 18-105mm for video shooting as on the gimbal it stays balanced
Hey thanks for watching!
Indeed a good choice for video... Enjoy!
Thanks I needed this
Hey thanks for watching! Glad I could help 👍
I recently bought sony a6400, and having the kit lens 16-50 and sigma 30mm 1.4. Now I need to get a travel lens which i would like to cover telephoto wide range and portrait with good bokeh effect on full zoom ( focusing mainly on photography) with good image quality. In confused with tamron 17-70 and sony 18-135 or any other lens which i should go for with my sigma 30mm lens satisfying all my needs.
Hey thanks for watching!
You've got a great start to your kit there. Given that there's no ibis in the a6400, those two lenses are great options and will get you some nice depth of field at the long ends.
There are three main differences to consider:
1, the Tamron will be better in low light and get you that depth of field at a closer distance.
2, the Sony is significantly smaller and lighter if that's important to you.
3, the Sony can be had for about half the price, at least here.
If it helps, I've made two videos directly comparing those two here:
czcams.com/video/FPoZlgYWzBw/video.html
czcams.com/video/rcepe2myZAg/video.html
I fully agree with your ranking here. I’ve tried 8 of these lenses on your list, and have owned 5 of those for quite a number of years. Additionally I also own a Sony 35mm f1.8, Sigma 56mm f1.4, and more recently a Sony 70-350mm G. I’m still using these three, together with Sigma 16mm f1.4 and Sony 20mm f2.8. My favourite of the bunch is the Sigma 56mm. Thank you for the video..
Hey thanks for watching! I always heard good things about that Sony 35 but never owned it myself, mostly because it was a little redundant with my Sigma 30.
I'm intrigued that you went all primes at the lower focal lengths and zoom after 70; I'm thinking of doing the same on full frame now.
@@andreas1701d The Sony 35 is a very good lens. It does have some quirks like flaring & CA wide open, but with use it’s not hard to find a workaround. The size & weight is what made me choose it over the Sigma 30.
I do like the convenience of zoom lenses, but I also value the form factor of primes (excluding the Sigma 16 😅) Can’t quite swallow the pricing of the 16-55 G for the time being, so I’m sticking with the primes.
I’m thinking to replace the Sigma 16 and Sony 20 with the Tamron 11-20, reasoning being - with similar size and weight, I’d rather carry one zoom lens and get the extra wide end.
@@saifaldin_ that Sigma 16 was my fave, but I definitely considered the same switch before full frame
@@andreas1701d One of my favourites too. Image quality is practically perfect on that Sigma 16. I should shoot with it more often, but the weight and size do make me choose other lenses more (especially if I don’t know what I’m shooting for the day).
The Sigma 56, on the other hand, is very suitable for a walkaround lens. It’s small and quite light, excellent in low light. Great for portraits and most outdoor scenes.. also nice for closeup shots. Very versatile.
@@saifaldin_ it's interesting... I prefer smaller/lighter gear as well. That 16 was an exception, as was the Tamron 17-70... I've found more options than I thought I would on full frame. The Sony 20 1.8 is ridiculous and the only lens I've enjoyed more than the sigma 16 (it's smaller and lighter too), and everything from rokinon/samyang at f1.8 is terrific so far. I regret not buying their lenses sooner, even for apsc.
^Which lens takes good sharp photos and also compact? Like a step up in size from the kit lens. I just want to take sharp photos of faces of family when traveling and for occasions.
The Sigma 18-50 2.8 wasn't out when I made this list; its small, light, affordable and can shoot pretty much anything very well. It's really a great value and awesome step up from the kit lens.
Definitely an underrated content. Amazing video. I really appreciate. So what is your lens recommendation for somebody who is a Sony apsc shooter but definitely will be a fullframe shooter one day:)
Hey thanks for watching!
Honestly I'd look at the tiny series from Samyang/Rokinon. 24, 35, 45, & 75 1.8 lenses pair great with apsc bodies because they're small & light and provide excellent image quality for the price.
The 75 is a particular favorite of mine because of its unique focal length on full frame. It also gives you a beautiful 105mm equivalent for portraits on apsc.
@@andreas1701d I think i have to add 12 mm f2.0 [ aps-c] from Samyang. It'is so hard to find a super wide and fast ff lens. At a reasonable price point:) what do you think?thanks by the way.
@@dtyusufceylan the 12mm is a great lens, no doubt, but it will not work on full frame unfortunately.
Interestingly, the Sony 10-18 *can* work on full frame. The vignetting is nearly gone at around 13mm or so. That could be an option, though it is more expensive.
Lastly you could look at the 14mm f1.8 GM if you want something wide.
@@andreas1701d yeah you're right but GM is way too much expensive for me and 10-18 is not fast enough for low light (I mostly shoot indoor). İ think one of my lenses will be just for apsc but there is nothing I can do about it.
@@andreas1701d but I will consider 10-18 anyway 💪🏻
Thank you Andreas for the very informative and honest video.
I have a question - Can I use the Sigma 16 mm f1. 4 in full frame cameras in case I get one later?
For now I am planning to buy a Sony ZV1
Hey thanks for watching!
All Sony full frame cameras have an APSC mode which effectively crops the sensor, allowing you to use the APSC lenses.
While it'll give you fewer megapixels, many people use that mode for video shooting, something the sigma 16 excels at.
If you're more into photo than video and want good resolution while using APSC lenses on full frame, the best way to get it is with one of the a7R series cameras.
@@andreas1701d this is wonderful to know. Since I am only interested in videography, so I think I will get the Sigma 16mm F1. 4
I will get the Sony zv e10 is what I am thinking. Have you made or planning to make a video on that?
@@sandeepmortal I have not had the pleasure of shooting with it, but it's got the same sensor as all the a6x00 series cameras which I have tons of experience with.
I just made a video talking about which Sony APSC cameras are best at various budget, and I do talk about the video category specifically.
czcams.com/video/9nGFiXNIpX0/video.html
The ZVE10 is good, but there are 2 which I personally rank higher if you can afford them 😉
@@andreas1701d thank you. I watched it. But right now even the ZV E10+Sigma 16mm is stretching my budget way too much. I had earlier thought of getting the iPhone 13 mini but then I saw that the cinematic mode isn't perfect. Hence I thought of getting a real camera instead
Nice list, definitely agree that the kit lens gets more flack than it deserves. Like you said, it's not the sharpest or the fastest, but its performance per dollar and weight is plenty fine for a kit lens.
That being said, it'll never take the spot of my Sigma 16 f1.4. It might as well be sold as a bundle with all Sony APS-C cameras since any owner of one is losing out if they don't already have one
Hey thanks for watching!
No argument here on the sigma 16!
Im thinking 12mm f2 over sigma. Now has a version with autofocus. Sony E10 has a crop to active and i probably would use wider than 16mm for interior film
If interior shooting = real-estate, definitely get the widest you can afford. The Laowa 9mm and Sony 10-18 would be the widest, followed by the Tamron 11-20 and Samyangs 12mm f2. They're all good glass, so the choice comes down to focal length and how bright an aperture you need.
@@andreas1701d im architect, shot interior designs. Also, make some tutoriais "diy". Well... 16mm is good, but I think will gonna loose wide wirh crop. I think E10 has a digital zoom for sensor... well. Have you ever tried rokinon or samyang 12mm f2 Af (looks The same)
@@oqueeutofazendoaqui Yes the 12mm is a terrific lens, though it's slightly less consistently sharp corner to corner.
The crop of the active stabilization will definitely make a 16mm not wide enough.
If I were you for that type of use I'd go for either the Laowa 9mm or the Tamron 11-20 as they have better overall image quality corner to corner.
What do you think about new Tamron 18-300? First I was excited about Tamron 17-70, but now when 18-300 is out i think it will be more usefull to me, cause i like to photograph wildlife, and am often hiking. Im just hoping that i won loose too much in optical quality with 18-300, besides loosing in speed/lowlight...
Hey thanks for watching! I haven't tried it yet, but from all the reviews I've seen the 18-300 is optically pretty good (though not quite to the level of the 17-70).
I do find the 18-300 kind of expensive for what it is though. For not a whole lot more money you could pick up a used Sony 70-350 and a sigma 18-50 2.8. If I was in your shoes, that's what I'd do, assuming you can afford the extra couple hundred bucks.
@@andreas1701d Nice idea, wasn't thinking in that direction, but will give it a thought. Ill definitely wait for more reviews and comparisons of that 18-300.
short and sweet, nice job
Hey thanks for watching! Glad you enjoyed it.
I use the ZV-e10 as my backup stills and video cam- EPIC lens kit for it- sigma 16, 30, 56 1.4s and the tammy 17-70 when I need IS.
Hey thanks for watching!
How does the Active Stabilization compare to the VC on the Tammy? Was always curious about that.
@@andreas1701d its actually quite good but it does crop in pretty signifiantly. Not a real issue on sony 4k with the oversampled footage- I prefer the lens IS but nice to have the AS in a pinch or when using the primes.
I have the sony 70-350; sigma 16mm, sigma 30mm, and somy 18-105, was thinking of adding sigma 18-50 2,8
Hey thanks for watching!
I suspect adding that lens will greatly reduce your usage of the 30 and 18-105... It's a great lens that can really replace so many others due to its cost and size along with terrific image quality
Hey Andreas, nice video! I've been thinking about getting a tamron 17 70 for my a6400 and suddenly sigma presents an 18 50 also 2.8 but smaller, lighter, better optics (if the reviews I saw were true) but lacks stabilization. I have some doubts regarding which I should choose. I do a lot of hiking, so although weight isn't the main decision factor it would be a nice plus. My mainly use of the camera is for stills and in a good light environment. I don't mind pump up the ISO in some shoots to have a faster shutter speed. Price wise I could buy the sigma 16 1.4 + 18 50 2.8 for the same amount of a tamron 17 70... Do you have any thoughts?
Keep up the good work.
Hey thanks for watching!
Sounds like our usage would be similar. Before buying the a7c, I had the a6400, sigma 16/30 and chose the Tamron 17-70 for hiking over the 18-135 which I had before. The Tamron was large, but I used a peak design clip on my backpack so the increased size wasn't a huge deal.
But price and size? That's a tough combo to pass up. I can tell you unequivocally that if the sigma 18-50 had existed at the time, I would've bought it instead of the Tamron especially given that I already owned the excellent 16 1.4. I then would've spent the savings over the Tamron on a 70-350 for telephoto.
This sigma 18-50 is a winner for me and I wouldn't hesitate to buy it over the alternatives based on the reviews. It seems to be the single best value on the market today for Sony APSC cameras, not only among zoom lenses, but the lineup at large.
@@andreas1701d Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Subscribed 🤘
Great content. I just picked up a zv e10 and do two person video interviews indoors and outdoors, portability is key. Would like a bokeh. What lense would you suggest? Sounds like Sigma 16 1.4 except it is heavy?
Hey thanks for watching!
The Sigma 16 1.4 is my fave lens on the system, but it is one of the larger ones available. In my opinion it's well worth the tradeoff in terms of image quality though.
An alternative could be the Tamron 11-20 2.8, though it's double the price. It'll give you less bokeh but the versatility to go wider and is a little smaller/lighter.
If you want the most compact option, the Sony 10-18 is an option but it won't be very good in low light and is ridiculously expensive for what it is.
Lastly, the Rokinon AF 12mm f2 is optically very good, is lighter than all of the above and reasonably priced. 12mm may be too wide though.
@@andreas1701d is there a link for the Rokinon so I get the right one?
@@b2bfusion This is the one: amzn.to/3jDwLSA
@@andreas1701d I don't think it works on the Zv e10, others in the comments said so :(
@@b2bfusion all emount lenses should work, without a doubt, but I haven't tried
Nice Sony APSC line up summary Andreas, I am still racking my head over Sigma 30mm 1.4 and Samyang 35 mm 1.8 though xD. I don't want to switch to full frame for now but still kinda leaning towards Samyang bit more. I just want to have one lens for portrait, street maybe some landscape. I think it is pretty much the same but if you have an advice then 'shoot'. xD
Hey thanks for watching!
It's interesting you mention these two specific lenses... A little while after making this video, I switched to an a7c and one of my first lens purchases was the Samyang 35 1.8. I absolutely love this lens, though it is a bit tight for indoor use on APSC.
The switch to full frame made me regret not buying full frame glass from the get-go, though when I got my APSC cameras affordable full frame equivalents didn't exist yet. At least, not good ones.
If I were still on APSC, the Samyang 24, 35, 45 and 75 1.8 lenses as well as Sigma's I series would be at the top of my list for sure.
Lastly, I can't say I've really missed the f1.4 of my sigma 30 (going to 1.8 on full frame), even when shooting in low light, simply because the a7c is really good at higher ISOs.
I hope this helps!
@@andreas1701d I think bit yes, thanks for taking the time. Hope I won't end buying both hehe. No, that's not gonna happen xD.
Why would you choose the tamron over the 10-18 sony? I'm on the fence about them for vlogging purposes, but the stabilisation is important as my a6400 doesn't have ibis. What eould ve your advice on this?
Hey thanks for watching!
Two reasons.
1, any type of lens or in body stabilization won't change much on the a6400. If you want smooth footage, the gimbal is the way the go. Also, the wider the focal length the less noticeable the shake.
2, the Tamron is brighter and slightly cheaper. There are ways to stabilize non stabilized lenses. There's no way to turn an f4 into an f1.8 whether it's from the perspective of depth of field or light gathering ability.
But that's just based on my uses and my own experience. I just find the Sony 10-18 overpriced for what it is in 2022.
@@andreas1701d legitimate reasons. I guess I'll need a gimbal, I tried to take some videos today with the Sigma 16 mm f1.4, it's like a constant earthquake. That f2.8 is giving it a lot of usability, low light and background blur. I gues with a gimbal is unbeatable but that adds a lot to the cost of it. What kind of small gimbal would you recomend for such a setup?
@@mihaiserbanescu8676 if budget is a concern, the Moza Mini P3 seems like a decent option. Otherwise I'd look at the AirCross or FeiyuTech G6.
To be honest though, I don't have a ton of experience with gimbals.
@@andreas1701d thank you for your advice. The aircross is good for the money. I previously looked at the Ronin sc and sc2. They're very nice but quite expensive by comparison.
I love dreaming having those and the a6400 lol!
Hey, thanks for watching! The good news is I suspect the a6400 may drop in price on the used market after the release of the ZV-E10. We'll probably even see better sale prices at retailers. It's still a terrific camera and I think it'll become a great bang for the buck once that happens.
I can agree with almost all your ratings except for the 18-105 f4 G. This lens is an absolute photographic powerhouse. I don’t know why in many reviews this lens is referred as not sharp, but in my usage I am using negative texture and clarity values because the image is clinically sharp! It’s way better than the 18-135 in many ways: build quality, since it is G lens. I had many Canon L lenses before and I can tell that this lens is nothing short of great. On par with L lenses (minus the weather sealing). Also, this is internal focusing and zooming design, and it has a constant f4, unlike the 18-135.
The only real omission, for me, is the lack of the 16mm on the wide end… it’s very useful on 16-50 kit lens and I miss it on many occasions. But may be it’s too difficult to include something wider than 18mm on a 6x zoom lens, technically speaking.
Hey thanks for watching! From what I understand, the 18-105 has some copy variance, and this is exactly what I believe I experienced with my copy vs the 18-135 I had. Admittedly the difference wasn't huge however.
As for which is better, I stand by the statement that it depends on use case. For me, 18-105 was way too big and heavy as a photo-centric lens for hiking where the size & weight advantage of the 18-135 outweighs the internal zoom and F4. Of course for others, the reverse would be true.
Neither is a bad lens in the right circumstances, but neither is in the upper tier of apsc lenses either, especially given the new releases since I made this video.
Brother please tell me sony Zeiss 1670 is better than 18105 or not in terms of sharpness reply soon
Hey thanks for watching!
The 16-70 suffers from a lot of QC issues, meaning its sharpness will vary by copy. If you get a good one, it'll be somewhere between the 18-135 and 18-105 in sharpness.
Having said that, for a similar price (at least, here in Canada) the Tamron 17-70 is the far superior lens. It's not really close.
Hope this helps!
Hi Andreas, how will autofocus work with a lens 18-35 sigma art + mc11?
Hey thanks for watching. I've heard good things but don't have direct experience with that combo. That said, there are smaller & cheaper options in that focal range these days which are native emount lenses such as the Sony 14 or 20mm f1.8, sigma 16 f1.4 and Tamron 17-28 F2.8, among others.
At the time when this lens was a popular adapted option on Sony APSC, none of those existed.
@@andreas1701d you can make a comparison 1080 sony vs canon aps-c ?
@@SPQR3ROME to be honest, if you need video, Sony APSC shoots 4k, canon does not. Otherwise, I don't think you'll be disappointed with any modern camera from either brand. It really comes down to personal preference in terms of the body and menu system. They'll both shoot good quality stuff.
That said, I'll try and get my hands on a Canon camera to try but i do not own one.
@@andreas1701d thanks, +1 subs
Good list... I MOSTLY agree, although (shockingly) I think you were a little hard on the 18-105 just because of its size. You failed to mention the excellent OSS and the fact it doesn't extend during zoom, both of which make it an excellent video lens. I have the Sigma 16 and 30 1.4, the Samyang 12mm, the 18-105, and a Kamlan 50mm f1.1 for portraits and those times I'm in SUPER low light.
Hey thanks for watching!
Fair comments on the 18-105... As someone who admittedly didn't shoot a lot of video at the time, and who uses his cameras primarily for hiking, I fully recognize my perception is biased.
Unless you specifically shoot video on a gimbal, there are simply too many advantages in 2022 in going with the Tamron 17-70, sigma 18-50, Sony 16-55 and 18-135 IMHO.
@@andreas1701d I get that, but I like having the 105 (+ more if need with Clear Image Zoom), and the 18-135 is not a constant aperture. I still think the 18-105 is the better video lens for my needs.
@@garystackhouse5787 hey whatever works for you, that's what matters. There's no such thing as a bad tool if it does what you want/need 👍
@@garystackhouse5787 I agree 100% 18-105 should be in the A list category.
@@garystackhouse5787 i agree wtih you 18-105 is the best lens.. ignore bullshit dukheads... idiots spoil our lives without their bullshit
Nice Comparison. My Lens I currently own for My a6400 is the, Sony 16mm f2.8, The Kit Lens 16-50mm as I bought the a6400 separately, My 55-210mm and the Sigma 16mm & 30mm Lens, and I love them all of course I don't use the 55-210 a lot as I haven't really figured out a way to use it at night as here in Alaska it gets cold lmao to shoot or try to learn how to shoot Night time sky scenery. But Still Nice Comparison.
Hey thanks for watching! Alaska is on my travel bucket list... Im Canadian so cold doesn't scare me lol... Any recommendations for the best time of year to visit?
@@andreas1701d Summer as we get about 18-19 1/2 hours of Sunlight.
Greatly appreciated. How's the Sigma 16mm on a a6400 for real estate Andreas?
It's a super sharp lens, but if I was shooting real-estate today, I'd definitely go with the Tamron 11-20. The 16 isn't quite wide enough for tighter spaces like powder rooms or small bedrooms in my opinion.
I've also heard great things about the Laowa zero-d lens for real-estate but have never tried it.
@@andreas1701d Thanks so much
Cheapest solution is samyang (rokinon) 12mm f2 manual. I got mine used for 150 usd)
@@Garbid good to know. Just bought a Tameron 11-20 mm F2.8 for real estate. Pricey, but I love it.
I have the ZV E 10. It's my first camera & I love it. I see myself buying a couple more cameras. What lense do you prefer for photos of people & pets?
Hey thanks for watching!
Glad you're liking the zv e10... As for lenses, the great part about now vs a few years ago is that there are several great options.
For people + pet portraits and low light performance, you'd be hard pressed to find better than the Sigma 56 and Sigma 30 f1.4. the 30 is more all purpose and is wide enough to use for groups or indoors, the 56 more for close-ups/traditional portraits.
If you look at zooms, the Sony 16-55 and Tamron 17-70 are terrific options, though they are a little big for the zv and would be better balanced on an a6400 or a6600. The 18-135 at 100mm or more will give you nice background blur as well as a large focal range and a relatively compact setup, but it's not great in low light.
My last suggestion: if you think you might move to full frame at some point, consider the Samyang/Rokinon 35, 45 or 75 f1.8 lenses. They're affordable, tiny and sharp!
Hope this helps... Let me know what you end up going with!
@@andreas1701d thanks man. One last question. What's the best lense to take pics of people outdoors? Bright and sunny areas ect?
@@_Eye_Of_Ry in good light outdoors, any lens will do, pretty much. You can even get decent depth of field with nearly any aperture depending on the distance between your subject and your background.
Having said that, if I had to pick a portrait lens, it would be between the Sigma 56 1.4, Sony 85 1.8 or Samyang/Rokinon 75 1.8. they're all relatively affordable, will give you nice blurry backgrounds and are sharp.
Personally, I've chosen the Samyang 75 1.8 because I have both APSC and full frame cameras and prefer its focal length and size to the Sony 85. Before getting the full frame camera, I was using the Tamron 17-70 on my a6400 for portraits.
Which lens you are using with ZV E10?
Great way to put a video together
Hey thanks for watching! I'm glad it was helpful.
So funny... I've gone back to using my kit lens for the compact factor. I will put one of my Sigmas (16/30/56) or Sony 18-135 on there when appropriate, but lately, I've just been grabbing the kits lens - I end up taking more photos when wandering through the streets of Mexico, where I'm living at the moment.
Hey thanks for watching! Indeed it's quite something to have a camera that capable be that pocketable too. I feel like if Sony ever chose to make a new version of that lens it would sell quite well.
@@andreas1701d the best camera is the one you have on you, right?
The Sony 35mm f1.8 OSS is an awesome lens. Viltrox 23mm f1.4 is equally as awesome, although no stabilization, but it's a beautiful lens.. Also, I actually love the Sony 55-210 OSS lens. It's got tons of character and is much sharper than I thought it would be, as long as you have enough light. Definitely a daytime lens, but really good, and I found one brand new for $100, so no brainer. I have the 18-105, and I love it, but.... it really struggles from dusk to dawn, (I use the Sony a6400) and so, I'm thinking I am going to sell it and get that Tamron 17-70. I'll miss the reach, but most of my work is between 12mm and 50mm, and honestly, I find I reach for the Viltrox 23mm and the Sony 50mm 90% of the time, although I always carry the 18-105 just in case, but those two primes cover almost everything for my filmmaking. Oh, and I always carry my Samyang 12mm f2 as well, because it's so light, and when I need something really wide like that, I find it to be an awesome lens, and so easy to carry. It weighs nothing. Great review, thanks for sharing..
Hey thanks for watching! Since the 18-105 and 18-135 are quite similar, you might be interested in my comparison of the 17-70 and 18-135. I found the sharpness to be comparable, but the 17-70 was much more consistent and versatile. I didn't find I missed the reach that much, though admittedly like you, most of my photos are at shorter focal lengths.
In any case if you're interested, here's that video. m.czcams.com/video/FPoZlgYWzBw/video.html
@@andreas1701d I'm 100% filmmaker, and so, that 18-135 isn't really appealing to me as it zooms and changes size, and also the changing aperture, no bueno for me. I don't really care all that much about sharpness in the way photographers do, as you know. The 18-105 would be perfect if it was f2.8, and so, I really look forward to checking out the Tamron. Thanks for the response, much appreciated.
@@RockWILK Fair enough. Indeed video is quite a different animal. If that's the case, the Tamron may not be as much of a benefit as, say, upgrading to an a7c or similar for low light.
Best of luck and if there's any questions you've got about any gear that I've used, let me know!
@@andreas1701d oh boy. Now your really trying to empty my bank account. Lol. Upgrade my camera?? Damn. Anyway… My Viltrox is f1.4, and I have 2 Sony lenses that are f1.8, and the Samyang is f2, and so, I just use those when I need low light capabilities. All good. I actually enjoy the 18 to 105, and I think it has its own character, it’s own unique look, so I appreciate that about it, but it definitely does not work well in low light. The auto focus falls apart, it’s just really difficult because you have to crank up the ISO, but when there’s sufficient light, it’s actually a really awesome lens. I think I’m good with what I have for now, but eventually, I’m sure I’ll get the Tamron, because it’s reasonably priced for what it is, and probably just a little bit more flexible than the 18 to 105 because of that f-stop. But I doubt I’ll be upgrading to a full frame camera and have to get all new lenses anytime soon. :-) Thanks for all the insight. Much appreciated.
@@RockWILK Haha all good... I'll always be the first to say, use what works best for you, not what anyone else thinks you should use.
If I'm honest, had I never found a terrific deal on a used a7c + Sony 20 1.8, I likely would've stuck with my a6400, sigma primes and Tamron 17-70. I was never disappointed unless I was shooting with ISOs higher than 6400 for photos. 👍
Please suggest bought wide angle lens for real estate videography with Sony ZV-E10
Hey thanks for watching! For real-estate you have 3 very good options at 3 price points: the Samyang 12mm f2, the Laowa 9mm Zero-D or the Tamron 11-20 f2.8, depending on your budget.
The best one optically and the most versatile is the Tamron, the Samyang will be the cheapest and the Laowa is the widest.
If it were me, I'd get the Tamron because it can do more different things.
Hope this helps!
@@andreas1701d
What about Sigma 16mm F/1.4 or 30mm I don't know which one is wider and suitable with Sony ZV-E10 ?
@@MasoodJamal both are terrific lenses. But for real-estate, the 30 isn't wide enough. The 16 will work in some scenarios, but for smaller rooms it'll feel tight. In my opinion, 11-12mm is the sweet spot on APSC for real-estate in terms of wideness + distortion control.
@@andreas1701d
You suggested 3 different lenses which one of these option has an autofocus ?
@@MasoodJamal the Samyang and Tamron both have autofocus
Greetings! I just bought the new Sony zv-e10 without the lens. I'm a Barber and I will be doing video tutorials. What lens would you recommend??? A good inexpensive one would be great. I'm not looking to spend more than $500.00
Thanks
Hey thanks for watching! Sounds like you'll primarily be shooting video indoors, and at relatively close range.
At the price point you're looking at, I'd strongly recommend the Sigma 16mm f1.4. It's terrific in low light, one of the sharpest lenses you can buy and has a pretty low close focusing distance if you need to get close-ups of your work. The things to keep in mind here is that it's not the smallest or lightest lens if that matters to you, and that it's not stabilized but I assume you'll be using a tripod.
The Sony 18-105 could be an option as well if you want zoom, but f4 means you'll have to crank the iso significantly higher than with the Sigma. If your environment will be fairly well lit though, it can certainly do the job.
If it were me, I'd go Sigma. You can always move a camera/lens closer if there's no zoom, but you can't make an image brighter without losing image quality.
Thanks a lot! Helped me out tremendously! I’m going with the sigma, I’ll let you know how it goes…
@@blueprintrod1559 fantastic! You won't be disappointed with that lens. Glad I could help!
@@andreas1701d I just bought the sigma 16! Now I’m ready buy a lense for distance! Any suggestions??? Thanks again
@@blueprintrod1559 It all depends what you mean by distance.
If we're talking portraits/headshots, look at the Sigma 56 1.4 or Sony 85 1.8. For a zoom, the Tamron 17-70 or Sony 16-55 are your best options.
If we're talking MUCH more distance, the Sony 18-135 or 70-350 OSS are solid lenses. Which one you choose will depend on your preference in terms of size.
Lastly, if money and size/weight are no object, the Sony 70-200 f2.8 GM is obviously a terrific option, but VERY expensive.
70-350 Sony , awesome lens
Hey thanks for watching! I never had the pleasure of using it but Ive only heard good things.
I can testify to that, especially sharp at f8, and even stopped down as much, the compression is very pleasing. You get 525 mm equivalent for less than 1000 USD. I paired it with the 17-70... not buying anything new in the foreseeable future.
@@user-my5jf3yd9q I have recently bought the 17-70 too and love the fact that I am covered from 17mm all the way through to 350 with quality pictures. No better combination for aps-c than this in my opinion
Thanks
Hey thanks for watching! I'm glad I could help
I bet you wish you did this a couple months later after the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 was released. I've just bought the ZV-E10 and this lens only (for now).
Hey thanks for watching!
Indeed I'm looking forward to trying that lens. It's what I always wished the APSC Sony cameras had for years and years (a small + fast + affordable standard zoom)
Sigma 60mm dg dn is freaking sharp, bit sharper than E 50 1.8, I choose sigma 60mm for headshot and for a bit background blur then e 50 1.8. I own 19 and 30mm dg dn too, best bang for bucks, cheap and sharp. BTW, focusing can be little bit of hunting at really low light with sigma and a bit on the noisy side, but considering the price, still worth it.
Sharp lens no doubt, though I think its age is starting to show.
The extra light gathering ability, bokeh and sharpness of the 56 1.4 is well worth the price difference.
For someone buying new today though, the Sigma 18-50 basically gives you everything the 19 + 30 + 60 does for the same price in one lens.
18-135mm at $400, 18-105mm at $510 and tamron 17-70mm at $699 which one is best value for money for a6400?
It really depends on what you'll use it for.
General purpose, the 18-135 is a great value vs the others as it provides comparable image quality overall.
The 18-105; the only way I see it being a better value at $110 more is if you primarily shoot video and can make use of the power zoom.
The Tamron is better in low light so if that's important, it's well worth the extra money.
Personally, I'd go for the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 nowadays as an all-purpose zoom. I don't think there's a better value zoom lens for Sony APSC right now.
I honestly think E mount lens availability is completely overrated because there's a lot of quantity from a lot of companies, but not a lot of quality, especially from Sony themselves. I used to shoot EF-M and wanted to put together an APS-C E mount kit, and I was shocked to find out that when it comes to really great lenses, E mount isn't obviously better. Both have Sigma lenses, so that's a tie. E mount has good f/2.8 zooms, and that's something, but EF-M has an excellent native 22mm f/2 and 32mm f/1.4 that can be had for less than the E-mount 24mm f/1.8 costs, and EF-M has a tiny, affordable ultra-wide zoom that's great for outdoor vlogging, whereas E mount weirdly lacks something that fits that. When you look at all the great lenses Sony has made for FE mount, and you look at the amazing crop lenses that other manufacturers have made, it's crystal clear that Sony just doesn't care at all about their APS-C lenses.
Hey thanks for watching!
There's one big difference between the two systems, the lens mount.
If you're someone who will forever stick to APSC, what you're saying makes sense especially now that we're seeing more 3rd party support from companies like Viltrox. But let's not pretend that Canon is supporting EF-M any more than Sony is supporting APSC. Both have holes in their native APSC lineups, just different ones. If anything, I expect we'll eventually see an RF APSC camera released, which will signal the end of EF-M support, but that's just a guess.
In the end, I always encourage everyone to shoot what makes them happy. I have had Canon (and Nikon) cameras in the past and have enjoyed them just as much as Sony cameras. And I recognize it's not always possible to know what our future needs will be. But for those who have some sense of where this hobby and/or profession will take them, then a platform with more longevity and flexibility makes sense.
Which lens is good for training ,zoom,you tube ads...video purpose
Hey thanks for watching! Sounds like you'd be using the lens indoors on a tripod. If that's the case, the Sigma 16mm f1.4 is bright, sharp and affordable.
If you want wider, the new Sony 11mm f1.8 is a good pick, though a tad more expensive.
@@andreas1701d will be using on a6600..and for CZcams ads and all.will this be fine?
@@andreas1701d for fb and CZcams ads is this ok lens 16mm
@@ksm9961 The Sigma 16 is one of the best lenses optically on the system. You won't have an issue. Really its only downside is that it's quite heavy which is why I asked about the tripod.
If you have the budget and want the same look, the new Sony 15mm f1.4 is sharper, better built, has more controls and is smaller & lighter. It's twice the price though.
@@andreas1701d for videos no need to have range ?? Focal length
So the Sony 18-105 G is too heavy while the Tamron 17-70 isn't?? Which is over 100 grams heavier
Hey thanks for watching!
The Tamron is certainly heavy, but it's a tradeoff for getting a 2.8 lens with that focal range. There is no such trade-off for the 18-105; it's heavy without any benefit to it being that large. It's not ultra wide, it's not fast, it's not sharper (than the competition). That's what makes it too heavy for what it is.
That's not to say it's a bad lens... If you watched this and my APSC camera video, I still recommend it for video work. But for someone like me who uses his gear for hiking, there are much smaller & lighter alternatives that do everything as good or better than the 18-105.
Hope this clarifies!
@@andreas1701d I mean that still has a great range and internal zoom, fixed aperture plus OSS. which one would you say is a same or better lighter alternative?
@@funjam4015 I want to stress that for video work, I do think 18-105 is a terrific lens. But for my uses (mostly hiking and street), I much prefer the 18-135 if I need range or the new Sigma 18-50 2.8 if I need low light. I'd probably just get the sigma if I had to choose one since it's less expensive and seems to be significantly sharper + brighter (I have not tested it myself yet)
Other than the internal zoom or unless you absolutely need the f4 at 100mm, I don't see any benefit over the 18-135 for my use case, but I could see how the constant aperture is more important for video shooters.
@@andreas1701d understand, although now I can get the 18-105 at about 300 USD used so for that money I think it's really good value for what I want to use it for, as for me the f4 comes into play for video and for at the upper focal lenghts. If I can take this one lense instead of taking 3 lenses or at least 2 lenses on hikes that this will be lighter as well, plus most of my current lenses are manual except the 16-50mm kit and the sigma 16mm 1.4. I'm just looking for something that is great for video work and I won't have to worry about if I want to take photos when I'm out shooting a video or to be covered for most cases on a hike. Also I found that I used 70-100mm or 210mm on my telephoto lense the most. and the lower ranges will be great for portraits on hikes or video. trying to be able to travel light for a change tbh :) so this will be replacing my kit lense which should be an upgrade in every scenario with the 18-105mm I think
@@funjam4015 indeed it will, and at a pretty good price! Enjoy the new gear 🙂
I am using the sigma 1.4s. Very nice, but not as sharp as everyone makes them out to be.
Hey thanks for watching! It's all relative and depends what your frame of reference is.
At the time of the release of the sigma 30, the only competition for Sony APSC cameras was the Sony 35 1.8 and the sigma is significantly sharper.
Same goes for the sigma 16 and 56. Since their release, other manufacturers have certainly caught up.
@@andreas1701d Right, I guess comparing them to FF is not fair.
Did you compare them with others? I got sigma trio f1.4 + 23mm viltrox 1.4 and samyang 12mm f2 for real estate photos. A6600 + a6000 as a backup. 1 speedlight and tripod. More than enough.
Where is the Sony 70-350? A great lens
Hey thanks for watching! I do in fact mention it a couple of times throughout the vid... The reason it's not on the tier list is simply because I've never owned it. I limited my list to lenses I've actually had first hand experience with.
i cant believe you havent listed ANY telephoto lens
The explanation is simple...the only one which existed for APSC when I made this video wasn't worth mentioning: the 55-210 kit lens
are you saying that Sony 70-350 is bad?@@andreas1701d
No thanks to ANY zoom Lens. There are many prime Lenses, you can also use full frame Lenses on APSC Cameras, there are plenty of compact prime Lenses !
Hey thanks for watching!
To reach their own, and I think they all have their purpose. And above all, always shoot what makes you happy!
I know when I shot a wrestling event a few weeks ago, there were many shots I either would've not captured the way I wanted to, or simply missed. I did have a second body with a prime for longer reach/lower light but when it comes to short windows to get a shot, changing lenses on the go isn't practical.
Having said all that, there's no zoom on the planet that can rival a good 1.4 prime in low light.
The biggest problem for me is sony colors
Hey thanks for watching!
That used to be a big issue, but the newer generation of cameras are actually really good with some rivalling Canon and Fuji. Notably the ZV-E10, a7c, a7siii, a1 and now the a7iv are quite the leap forward for Sony, with the a6100, a6400, a6600 and a7iii really being the first ones to take a step forward from old awful skin tones of the a6000 series among others.