Travel lens for Sony A6000 - any advances on Sigma 18-50?

Participant

Participant

Participant

Caporegime
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
34,266
Location
Warwickshire
Hi all

I'm going on a trip from San Francisco to Las Vegas in October with my ageing parents and brother.

This is likely to be the last time we ever do this together so I'm keen to capture some decent photos.

I was just going to upgrade my smartphone but then thought this would be a point of regret, so have instead decided to upgrade the kit lens that came with my Sony A6000 and take that instead.

From some research, my main options for a single does it all lens appear to be between the Sigma 18-50 and Tamron 17-70.

The Tamron is larger, more expensive, and not discernibly better for photos as far as I can tell, so I'm leaning towards the Sigma.

Does this sound sensible please? Any other options I should be considering?

The photos will be landscapes, people, and perhaps some night stuff in Vegas.

Thanks.
 
The best lens/camera is the one you have with you at the time that captures the moments. I'd chose the smaller sized lens personally as it'll be easier to carry around, and as a result, you'll be more likely to use it.

I think from my experience, unless its an OMG are inspiring landscape picture, the photos that bring back the memories later aren't landscapes, shots of buildings or locations, but the photos with the people, their faces, their smiles, their relationships in them etc etc. My grandparents used to go on euro-trips over the winter, and took tons of photos in books. The landscapes/places got ditched when sorting through their stuff. The ones with people in were the keepers.

We are doing a Euro Disney trip later this year, and I want to bring the Canon camera, but I think I'm going to limit myself to a single prime lens which would suit near-ish photos with people in them. I just want the camera to be something I can pick up, take a quick shot and not be obtrusive.
 
Did a similar journey and had my A7R with 24-240 combo at the time. Can honestly say the long end was not used unless you're wanting to capture shots of animals in national parks. Short end between those will not be noticeable. Go for the easiest handling and can always crop out he images to get 'closer' framing.
 
henry hoov3r said:
By all accounts that sigma 18-50 is meant to be a really good all rounder. I’ve got the same camera and I’ve just bought the sigma 30mm 1.4 prime.
Click to expand...

mOdO said:
Had both and couldn't fault them on the a6300.

17-70 is bigger but superior.
Click to expand...
Hi, thanks for these - I've just realised that the Sigma doesn't have stabilisation and neither does the a6000 of course.

How much does this really matter? People were taking great photos for many years without it. I will do some low-light stuff but mainly people and landscapes in daylight.
 
Participant said:
Hi, thanks for these - I've just realised that the Sigma doesn't have stabilisation and neither does the a6000 of course.

How much does this really matter? People were taking great photos for many years without it. I will do some low-light stuff but mainly people and landscapes in daylight.
Click to expand...

Back in the old days you needed skill and great technique to use slow shutter speeds.

Then stabilization came along and you could use shutter speeds you never thought were possible.

Several stops worth of light is huge in photography.

but of course it only helps with static subjects.

Tripods were more important before stabilization, I still have one but use it much less now.
 
I've been using this lens on my A6400 for a good while now and I love it. The lack of stabilization on the lens and the camera is a non issue for me. It's really light and will fit in a coat pocket when mounted on the camera which is a huge plus and has me taking it out more. If you want to see examples you can find me on social media as Lang Shot Photography, loads of my stuff from the last year has used this combo.
 
Update: absolutely thrilled with the Sigma 18-50. It's given my a6000 a completely new lease of life. I took some amazing photos of my family and some friends last weekend on a walk and as far as I'm concerned it's already paid for itself with some of the memories it's captured. I had no idea it could take such good photos.

oJarsDYh.jpeg
 
Participant said:
Update: absolutely thrilled with the Sigma 18-50. It's given my a6000 a completely new lease of life. I took some amazing photos of my family and some friends last weekend on a walk and as far as I'm concerned it's already paid for itself with some of the memories it's captured. I had no idea it could take such good photos.

oJarsDYh.jpeg
Click to expand...

Is that your only lens other than the kit lens?
 
Hey all. Just got back from my fantastic trip up the Californian coast from LA to SF then Vegas, and the combination of camera and lens did very well.

I'm not the most talented photographer but I took some great shots of seaside towns, Big Sur, San Francisco, the Grand Canyon, Hoover Dam, and Las Vegas.

vj03Sst.jpeg


25kLPPP.jpeg


Ak8HTxJ.jpeg
 
Haven't used them for ages since I bought my fixed lens Ricoh GR3 which I've been using exclusively for a couple of years, but I own a Sony a6600, the Sigma 18-50, Sigma f1.4 16mm and Sigma f1.4 56mm. All fantastic lenses. The 18-50 was my most used and fortunately the a6600 has image stabilization which for me is very important. Glad you had a great USA trip and are enjoying your 18-50!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom