1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Lens or Camera

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Deadbear77, Jun 24, 2013.

  1. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    Zeiss 32mm or Nikon 5200 with 18/55 and 55/200 lens.


    This is my thought. Both are around 900.00 usd. Which is the better choice?

    A lens to further my collection or a whole new system to further my low light shooting. I have never used a dslr before and wanted to see what the differences in IQ are. If they are not much I will probably go with the zeiss




    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  2. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Mar 25, 2013
    Oh, the Nikon. Easy. That is a superb camera and it is really nice to have more than one system. Especially as rumour has it that you are not exactly short on lenses...

    Although, if I could give one suggestion... if you go the DSLR route, really consider going full frame straight away. You might get there at the end of the upgrade cycle anyway, and it will be cheaper to jump straight to "Go".

    One more suggestion, consider a Sony Alfa system, then you can share some lenses with the NEX ... a lot of nice AF Minoltas for instance...

    There are always differences in IQ between systems, the question is which one you prefer. Also handling and performance is a big issue. (Sometimes you need the DSLR to look the part too, even if that is silly talk.)
     
  3. Frank Teurlings

    Frank Teurlings TalkEmount Regular

    182
    Dec 10, 2012
    Netherlands
    If the weight is not an issue, the nikon.
     
  4. Bimjo

    Bimjo Super Moderator

    Oct 28, 2011
    Washington State
    Jim
    Good cameras are fleeting, good glass is forever. Just sayin'! ;)
     
  5. jai

    jai TalkEmount Top Veteran

    589
    Feb 4, 2013
    I agree, i would spend it on glass? Just for the longevity?

    Of course you could spend half that and get the Sony 35mm f1.8, I have been eyeing that up for a while
     
  6. ChangshaNotes

    ChangshaNotes Super Moderator

    Aug 15, 2012
    China
    Colin
    I agree with all of this, especially since you already have the SEL 35 1.8
     
  7. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    If you already have the Sony 35mm, then what about ... saving the money for future lenses that really expand your collection?

    I might be the minority here, but I think it's totally pointless having two camera systems nowadays - it's simply too expensive. You want to further your low light shooting? A APS-C Nikon won't be much better than a NEX. Sure, you can get f/1.2 lenses, but then again, just add a LA-EA2 and you can get them too.

    If you say now, well, you want to go full frame in the long run, then I just have to say: Why put money out for a crop body now? Sorry, I just don't get which advantages exactly a D5200 would give you over NEX bodies. 24MP without AA filter? Okay, you can't get that now, but if this little resolution advantage is that important, a better lens could do the same easily. Faster AF? The LA-EA2 can do that. Better IQ? You won't get it with the Nikon. Not without going up to a D800E (or any new ff camera).
     
  8. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    Yeah, another system is not going to happen now. Still thinking about the zeiss. If I did get it I was going to test against the 35 and see witch I liked better.

    Really wish zeiss had a 45mm 1.4.


    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  9. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Austria
    I have the 12mm Touit and the 24mm Sonnar and I can tell you - the AF on the Touit is simply bad. If you want an everyday normal lens, and you want to use it (almost) always with AF, you well may like the Sony lens better. If the AF is as good as on my Sonnar, it should be better by a fair margin than the Zeiss AF. But in the end, the image quality the Zeiss brings on the table might convince you to forget all its shortcomings. It's a great lens. All Zeiss E-Mount lenses so far are great, and I wouldn't trade any of them for a Sony equivalent.

    Really, if you want the best possible normal lens for your NEX, currently there's no way around the Touit. It's that simple. And it should be pretty easy to sell the Sony 35mm for a good price, I think. So, if you have to spend money, I personally would grab the Touit instantly. But hey, I'm probably biased due to my awesome experience with recent Zeiss lenses, so don't trust me too much. ;)
     
  10. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    Oh I know they are good. I have the 24. Just wanted something more narrow.


    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  11. LightCentric

    LightCentric TalkEmount Regular

    28
    Mar 17, 2013
    Saginaw, MI
    Andy Richards
    How narrow? I have tbe Touit 32. It AF's differently than the Sony/zeiss 24' but it is no "bad" as the other poster said, in my opinion. The DC focusing motor is louder and may be a bit overpowered, but it focuses fast and sure, IMO. I will be watching the upcoming 50mm Zeiss with interest
     
  12. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    Is the image quality as good as the 24?

    The sony 35 is really nice but I manual focus most of the time and the zeiss seems to have a lot Len barel turns.


    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  13. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Mar 25, 2013
    The question is, have you tried all this for yourself and decided that this is the way it is? Or did you read it on the interweb? ;)

    The reason I ask is that I have three interchangeable lens systems, that in theory overlap. In reality they don't because they have different performance, handling and IQ.

    In theory, I could sell two systems and buy more stuff for the NEX. In reality I would lose a lot of functionality and not gain much.

    BUT - with what I now know about photography and my shooting preferences, I should have gone straight to full frame with only a few L-lenses, say one wide to normal zoom and one tele zoom. That would have saved me a lot of frustrations and money.

    So my advice, free to take or leave, is based on my own experience. I really wish that someone smart, experienced and sympathetic (not saying I am...) had shaken me by the ears and told me to go straight to full frame before I started buying a lot of crop sensor lenses and bodies. (Or are those cr[a]p sensors? ;))

    Each of those lenses and bodies were a response to a problem or frustration that I had in my photography. The purchases were well researched on the interweb, but what I was mising was the experience and judgement to go straight to full frame, and solve those frustrations in one fell swoop.

    For instance, if you today snap up a Canon 5D Mk II while everone is upgrading to Mk III, you will get as good a camera as you'll ever need at a very good price. (Although for an extensive NEX and Minolta user, a Sony Alfa makes a lot of sense.)

    Also my silly comment about looking the part with a DSLR holds some truth. If you go to a function or event with a DSLR (flash, battery grip and huge lens) people will assume that you are there in some sort of official photography capacity and let you get on with it. If you go there with a small compact, they'll assume that you are a weirdo photographing strangers, or a gate crasher. You decide which is preferable ;)

    Notwithstanding that the latter descriptions might be more accurate in some cases, of course :)
     
  14. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    I see your point Jaf... That's the thing, I don't want a big system. Ill stick with nex and slow down on my lens purchasing.... Well at least try to ;) Hopefully sony will come out with a mirror-less full frame sooner than later.

    I think these lenses will hold their value, there will be always someone who wants or needs them (e mount) as long as sony makes a body every couple of years. If not, maybe the next system would use an adapter to keep these lenses alive.

    Yes full frame would be nice, lower noise at high ISO would be even nicer but all in all size does matter to me. I have a feeling a lot of the shots that I get, candid or not would be skewed from the subject seeing a big hulking piece of metal. I know my cats wouldn't like it! Lol.




    Sent from my iPhone using TalkNEX mobile app
     
  15. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Mar 25, 2013
    Perfectly valid point :)

    That's the reason I got my Samsung NX. The shutter is silent and with a pancake 30/2, it's discreet and sharp. Perfect for candid street shooting.

    But that said, one of the best street photographers that I know of uses a Canon 5D and massive L-lens. He still gets candid shots that I can only dream of. It's a lot to do with attitude and technique, for sure.
     
  16. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    916
    Aug 22, 2012
    I could never get used to OVFs of my brother's and dad's Canons. I just prefer WYSIWYG views when shooting, especially since I like to keep my DoF as thin as necessary and that's the one thing you can't see in a OVF. Don't think you get histograms in OVFs either

    So I would get an SLT if I was really going to get a DSLR but I don't really have the time or motivation to learn OVF shooting

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
     
  17. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
    Zeiss has contax g 45mm f/2 and contax c/y 50 1.4 lenses. Both are manual lenses but you can also get af g adapter for contax g, not fast but works. 45mm was the second sharpest lens tested at photodo:
    http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~loui/lenses

    Usually zeiss planar lenses are not famous for their bokeh but stop down sharpness and 3d... Sonnars are better with bokeh eg you can get a cheap jupiter 3, which is a copy of Zeiss sonnar 50mm 1.5 rangefinder lens.

     
  18. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    NYC
    You can change the focus screens on most Canon dslrs except rebel series and 7D/5D III. I replaced my 5D and 40D focus screens, which helped for DOF and the manual focusing. Also dslrs has a button for dof preview. However I stopped using dslrs due to their bulk. Also the manual focus screens get darker with slower lenses so they are not like electronic viewfinders.

     
  19. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    916
    Aug 22, 2012
    DoF preview is also nothing at all like the EVF view and I found it horrible to use

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
     
  20. Jaf-Photo

    Jaf-Photo TalkEmount Veteran

    484
    Mar 25, 2013
    Well, it's all a matter of perspective. People who started with DSLR:s and went over to mirrorless systems often complain about the lack of optical viewfinders...

    The point is that you have to learn to use each camera as the tool it is.

    One of my favourite photographers was asked what he disliked the most about photography. He said People who are staring at the screens of their cameras instead of taking photos of the world that is going on in front of them.

    Besides dof preview, live view and everything else will never give you a 100% accurate preview. The only thing is to learn how different settings affect the photos and to apply them intuitively.

    It worked in the old days of film and it works today. In fact, not using preview trains you to think more about settings and compsition.