Your opinion... lens kit for Sony A6000

A mirrorless with an adapter and an slr lens is almost as large as an slr with the same lens and offers few of any advantages. Trust me, I’ve been using the things since a Nex-5n was a current model. It just never works quite as well as the same lens on an slr or the same camera with a native lens. You discover little frustrations that will drive you nuts and you lose the benefit of the better slr af system and the slr battery life. The only time it makes sense is if you’re a classic camera nut with excellent manual focus primes and you enjoy working slowly, but you no longer have good enough access to film and processing, so you get an a7 and adapters and use a tripod all the time.

Get yourself a d7000-series or some Sony glass.

I'm thinking you folks are right. I should have known better. That stated, since I've already spent the money, I'll give this setup a try for awhile. If I find it doesn't perform to my liking then I'll start over. At least I'll have learned a bit regarding relatively current digital offerings.

FWIW, I don't mind manual focus, manual exposure, etc. All I really want is manual compatibility and image stabilization for normal-long lenses. I'm very accustomed to balancing manual ambient light with flash and balancing use of CC filters on the lens to correct ambient light with opposing filters on the flash to achieve balance on both exposure and color. I did that every day without significant error. Of course, that was decades ago.

My experience is dated, but when I bought the Nex-7, I tried a few of the kit type lenses in sony's (then much more narrow) crop line and wasn't very satisfied. I then spent a bunch of fun times adapting a variety of old lenses sitting in my closet and they pretty much all worked really well. I ended up trying to do a lot of magnified focus peaking. Some lenses like the Leica SM non rangefinder coupled Voigtlander 25 was actually better on the Nex, at least using it and focusing. Lots of old Minolta and Contax manual lenses work quite well, and the small ones don't look bad mounted on the camera. Seeing Leica M or old Contax IIA lenses mounted on the NEX was pretty humorous.

That said, I wouldn't mind finding a nice Sony E crop lens (or Zeiss E lens) that I could use as a sort of kit lens on the Nex (or a later version) as a carry around camera. I didn't much like the Nex's EVF though. I'm hoping they are better now? I know the later ones like the 6500 has in body stabilization and better low light performance but they're still 24MP. I'm guessing the 6000's sensor is better than my camera.

I too like the results adapting vintage lenses to an older mirrorless body.

I don't understand why my Nikon mount 12-24 Tokina refuses to render a usable image on the mirrorless but it's truly awful.

It works fine on a Nikon D90.

Next modern camera I buy will be a mirrorless with IBS and fully articulating screen.

Correction regarding the Sigma...

First, I failed to mention that this lens/adapter combo works fine. Everything seems to function as it should, except I don't trust autofocus accuracy. That doesn't bother me though.

It's much sharper than I originally thought. I was fooled because it's focusing beyond infinity which might be due to the Sony adapter, though it would surprise me that Sony would make their adapter too short. Also, I trusted reviews which clearly stated there is no significant focus shift when zooming. This one does shift focus, though it seems to stop at the longer focal lengths.

The above stated, this lens is always fuzzy on the left side of the image, no matter how careful I am. Did I buy a faulty lens?

Now I'm getting pissed. I bought a Viltrox Sony-Nikon smart adapter so VR would work on my Nikon lenses. VR doesn't work and neither does auto focus. Maybe a firmware update??

I'm returning the Sigma 8-16mm because it's faulty. I bought another one for US$51 less. I hope the next one is better.

No, I expect 'reasonable' operation with adapters, as promised by the manufacturers/sellers.

I tried a Nikon-G lens on a Sony A6000 body. The Viltrox NF-E1 adapter is guaranteed to work in every way. It doesn't.

I don't have a Nikon body. I bought the Sony mirrorless body because Nikon only has new very pricey offerings in mirrorless. I bought Nikon glass because it's moderately better than Sony offerings and is less pricey.

But . . . You have been told, from the beginning, that VR wouldn't work. That quality would suffer. That you could easily spend more than just selling your kit and buying Sony or compatible lenses. That you are trying to solve a problem that you don't need to have.

All because you "need" a mirrorless body? And, an old one at that?

Yes, but I've read reviews which claim the latest adapters do work. As I'm sure you're aware, filtering through all the internet conflicting misinformation is very difficult.

I can't afford the latest/greatest so 'old' is all I'll have access to.

My experience is dated, but when I bought the Nex-7, I tried a few of the kit type lenses in sony's (then much more narrow) crop line and wasn't very satisfied. I then spent a bunch of fun times adapting a variety of old lenses sitting in my closet and they pretty much all worked really well. I ended up trying to do a lot of magnified focus peaking. Some lenses like the Leica SM non rangefinder coupled Voigtlander 25 was actually better on the Nex, at least using it and focusing. Lots of old Minolta and Contax manual lenses work quite well, and the small ones don't look bad mounted on the camera. Seeing Leica M or old Contax IIA lenses mounted on the NEX was pretty humorous.

 

That said, I wouldn't mind finding a nice Sony E crop lens (or Zeiss E lens) that I could use as a sort of kit lens on the Nex (or a later version) as a carry around camera. I didn't much like the Nex's EVF though. I'm hoping they are better now? I know the later ones like the 6500 has in body stabilization and better low light performance but they're still 24MP. I'm guessing the 6000's sensor is better than my camera.

This was my experience as well. I ended up going full Fuji and love the results. It's not as cheap as some other options, but the 18-55 and 55-200 lenses are actually really good, the 10-24 is great and very sharp (important as I sometimes shoot real estate listings) and the 35/1.4 and 56/1.2 are stellar.

I know primes are better than zooms and the faster apertures would be nice but I can't afford to buy six or eight primes... not good ones anyway. This system is more for casual enjoyment than anything else. I spent too much on the Sigma 8-16 HSM but I like wide lenses and that one is very good for the price (used) and given its extreme design.

If I can make this setup work for my needs then I'll have reasonably good lenses ranging in focal length from 8mm - 200mm plus a very good dedicated macro.

I've been corresponding with the seller of the Viltrox adapter. It's supposed to be VR compatible. Maybe mine is defective.

In the meantime, I ordered a 58mm f/2 Soviet Helios 44-3 (ca. 1986, with 13 aperture blades) for portraits. And a Jupiter-9 (ca. 1988, with 16 aperture blades) for closer portraits.

The retailer who sold the Viltrox adapter advertised that the VR function works with all Nikon lenses with that feature. They confirmed with Viltrox this isn't true. Hmm... you folks already told me that.;) So they accepted return of the adapter.

I'll be replacing the Nikon lenses with Sigma equivalents made to work properly with the Sony A6300. I'm also considering Sony brand.

Sony has been working hard on the full frame lenses but not much on the APS-C lenses, and the full frame lenses are way too big for such a small camera IMHO. I’m back to Leica digital Ms these days. I did like the Nex, but the EVF was pretty poor image quality and there just wasn’t a modest, small, high quality zoom to be the core of the Nex/APS-C experience. Is the EVF better on the 6300 and 6500 I wonder? I notice they are a bit thicker than my camera.

I will say that adapting lenses and using focus peaking and magnifying DID work, but it was slow going, even slower than a rangefinder (though the rangefinder is faster most of the time than the old manual SLR microprisms/collar/split image system).

I think I'll have it right this round. I don't need stabilization on wide-normal FL lenses. I'll have four midrange zooms to test. I'll keep the best one and resell the others. I'm fairly happy with the Sigma 8-16mm and will keep it. On order are two vintage Soviet lenses for portrait use... a 58mm Helios 44-3 with 13 aperture blades and an 85mm Jupiter-9 with 16 aperture blades. These were made in 1986 and 1988. I'm sure I'll have to use a monopod with the Soviet lenses. I also bought some sharp primes... Sigma 19mm f/2.8 ART, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, 40mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor, 60mm f/2.8 Sigma, and Samyang 85mm f/1.4.

I'm looking for a a good 24mm and a suitable replacement for the Nikkor 55-200mm.

Good suggestion: small Nikon DX body.

I would have saved lots if I had done that.

I've used Nikon since '72 when the F2 first came out, and I bought 2 with motor drives.

Nikon menus are much better for me; my Sony a6000 experience is that it took a long long time to become used to Sony a6000 menus.

I think I'll have it right this round. I don't need stabilization on wide-normal FL lenses. I'll have four midrange zooms to test. I'll keep the best one and resell the others. I'm fairly happy with the Sigma 8-16mm and will keep it. On order are two vintage Soviet lenses for portrait use... a 58mm Helios 44-3 with 13 aperture blades and an 85mm Jupiter-9 with 16 aperture blades. These were made in 1986 and 1988. I'm sure I'll have to use a monopod with the Soviet lenses. I also bought some sharp primes... Sigma 19mm f/2.8 ART, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, 40mm f/2.8 Micro Nikkor, 60mm f/2.8 Sigma, and Samyang 85mm f/1.4.

 

I'm looking for a a good 24mm and a suitable replacement for the Nikkor 55-200mm.

Take a look at the Nikon 70-300 VR; mine is a delight to use. It's a little dark.... ;)