Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'samplephoto'.
Found 1 result
Hello! So I'm diving into a Sony a6500 with Fantasea housing. I'm starting out with the kit 16-50 lens with the respective port and gears. I'm evaluating getting a macro setup fairly quickly and looking at the available lenses for macro there's the kit 16-50 with 12.5 diopter, Sony Macro 50mm and the Sony Macro 90mm, you could use the diopter for the last two. So I would like to see if anybody can help me with sample photos or videos of a comparison of the 16-50mm and 50mm with and without the diopter. The 90mm is out of the question right now as it's a pretty expensive set up, from lens, converter, port etc... With this I'm trying to answer two fundamental questions: (1) is it worth getting the 50mm macro lens (I'd imagine it's much sharper image) vis a vis the kit lens with diopter, and (2) what level of supermacro can I get from the 50mm macro lens with the diopter. For wide there are two immediate choices: 16mm w\ fisheye converter and the 10-16mm wide lens. The fisheye option is cheaper, but I fear it suffers from less sharpness and I'm particularly choosy between fisheye and plain wide. I would think you get better results with the 10-16mm as its a more specialized lens and you don't have the fisheye converter distortion. I've found online articles that treat both subjects, but they left me with questions. For Macro: how does the kit lens compare to 50mm macro (as both have same focal length) and how they perform with diopter. For wide I haven't seen anything on the 10-16mm lens, just of the Tokina\Canon lenses, which are expensive to set up. The opportunity cost (ie dont get any lens) is to just buy the Wide Angle and Diopter external add ons, so it's a question of quality and how much you gain by getting the dedicated lens (which obviously looses on flexibility when shooting). If someone sees something incoherent in the post or would like to reframe their response to help with feedback it's much appreciated. I'd think I'd see more a6500/a6300 users given the relative low cost\high quality you seem to get vis a vis other mirrorless of similar quality (em1 mk2 and GH5) or dSLR equivalents (d500), albeit these edge out in other areas. Basically the a6500 costs about half of these other options right now. Cheers!