Question about NEX Lenses...

RedOctober25

RedOctober25

Member
; ; I am trying to figure out the major difference between a couple of Sony Nex Lenses and not seeing much of a difference. ; The two lenses are the older 18-200mm lens and the newer 55-210mm lens. ; The price difference is around $400 (the 18-200 being $800 and the 55-210 being $350). ; The only difference I see is that with the 55-210, you would need the 18-55mm lens to cover the same range as the 18-200, which brings the price up from 350 to $650 (still $150 difference). ; Is there something else that I am missing in this equation?
; ; I played around with the NEX-5N at Best Buy today and really liked it, so I might be looking to buy an upgrade early next year (maybe prior to my hopeful Disneyland trip) and see that a NEX-7 is due out soon. ; Any insight anyone can provide is greatly appreciated.
 
I think you got it there Red. ; The 18-200 has more glass elements inside and needs that glass to be more corrected so that's why it costs more.
 
That's pretty much it - the 18-200 is a superzoom - it's a larger lens in circumference, much fatter. ; The 55-210 is for those looking for a second lens to add on with the kit and don't need the wider range - it's a slightly longer and much thinner lens, and a little bit slower, and so a bit cheaper since it doesn't have quite as fast glass and doesn't need to cover the wide range too. ; Both lenses seem to rate very well. ; I'll be picking up the 55-210 myself soon - it's just what I've been wanting. ; The 18-200 was too much for me, since I don't really need an all-in-one walkaround lens for my NEX as I use it primarily as a second body or lightweight travel replacement.
 
So in what situation would one need a 200mm f/3.5 lens (as the 18-55mm is f/3.5 and the 55-210mm is f/4.5). ; I also just saw on B&H that there is a Zeiss lens for $1,000 for the NEX. ; Crazy.
 
Well, birding and wildlife shooters are always hunting for the longest AND fastest lens they can get...200mm F2.8 is a very common one, and 300mm F2.8 is very desirable. ; I suppose if someone had a NEX system as their only system camera and was into birds and wildlife, that fast a long lens would be desirable. ; Not for me - I do my birding with my DSLR and fast lenses...the NEX tends more towards landscapes, scenics, handheld night shots, and travel photography.
 
Red, Zeiss is a sought-out name for optics. ; There *is* something about images Zeiss glass produces that puts it above most others. ; The color rendition plus incredible micro contrast is usually what is described. ; Yes it's expensive, but a good chunk of that price tag is worth it. ; If you need that specific lens.
 
I knew Ziess was a big name, just not that big. ; Those two lenses are out of my range for me right now. ; I've started my Wishlist at B&H for the new camera, and between the camera (nex7) and lenses alone I am already close to 3 grand total. ; Good thing my college loan was just paid off. :)

brought to you by an (HTC) "Incredible" Guy.
 
It's only just begun! ; Photography can be a ridiculously expensive hobby, if you get addicted to it, or if you let it. ; Even buying cheaper cameras like entry level bodies, it's very easy to blow a few grand on one lens.

The good news is you can also do it cheaply - shop used lenses, if you go with the NEX, start experimenting with manual focus lenses for your fun shooting and experimentation, and pick up some of the cheap-but-good lenses out there (the 55-210mm for the NEX looks like a great deal for what it delivers). ; On my DSLR system, I easily exceeded $2,000 a year - even with a $1000 camera, I've got 6 times that in lenses. ; I know a few here have easily topped that! ; But for my NEX3 system, I've got 20 lenses - compared to 7 with the DSLR. ; My total investment for the NEX has been $500 for camera & kit lens, and $210 for all the other lenses and adapters! ; Some of that old manual glass is excellent quality, gorgeous optics, but manual is out of favor and super cheap - my most expensive manual lens cost me $16...the cheaper ones around $4-5. ; For fast standard and long primes, and constant aperture zooms.
 
A few ways - one most obvious is eBay, though I must admit I do not trust eBay at all, and don't use them. ; Another are used camera stores such as KEH.com, where I picked up 3 lenses very cheap. ; And the other source was Craig's List, finding some local sellers offering old film camera kits for cheap - I buy the camera and lenses, and just use the lenses. ; I got a Chinon SLR with 3 lenses, and a Konica SLR with 4 lenses, for $100 total, with filters and accessories, boxes, and a bag. ; From KEH, I picked up 3 lenses for $13, $11, and $7. ; These are all very nice lenses too: A 40mm F1.8, 50mm F1.7, 28mm F2.8, 135mm F2.8, 200mm F3.5, 70-210mm F3.5...decently fast and good optics.

The good thing with the NEX is, brand and mount don't matter. ; I've mainly been buying Pentax K mount and Konica K/AR mount - the Pentax because I had a few Pentax lenses already, and the Konica because they have one of the smaller registration distances so the adapters are small. ; If you want to do some manual focus experimentation, look for good manual lenses for cheap and ignore the brand or mount - just go pick up the needed adapter once you find some lenses worth buying. ; Or for those prices, you can even take a risk or two!

Here are a couple of shots with the $13 200mm F3.5 I picked up in Konica mount:
original.jpg


original.jpg


And the Chinon 135mm F2.8 that was part of the 7-lens package with the two SLR bodies:
original.jpg


My old Pentax 28mm F2.8 that I still have with my 1977 Pentax SLR:
original.jpg


Note: these are 30-40 year old, uncoated, manual focus lenses all costing less than $20! ; And the manual focusing and aperture rings really hark back to a classic shooting feel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So after looking at keh.com I can assume that you are getting lenses with the "ug" condition? ; If you pay $12 for an ugly lens and you get a little use out of it you are not out that much.
 
I usually look for the BGN lenses - not usually the UG...though even UG can be reliable with KEH - they're a good vendor and trustworthy - they usually rate lenses conservatively. ; Also, remember that hunting for 'off' brands can land you the real deals - rather than looking at Canon, Nikon, Leica, etc...try looking at the lesser used mounts like Konica, Contax, Pentax, Olympus, etc...and check out some of the 'other brand' categories especially for primes. ; I found Chinon gear, which uses Pentax mount, for under $30 even for LN and EX condition, whereas the very same focal in Pentax brand was running $50-80. ; With Konica K/AR mount, the Hexanon Konica lenses were absolutely excellent, but are an abandoned mount so they go very cheap - and off-brand Konica mount gear from companies such as Vivitar can have some amazing hidden gems for under $15 (Vivitar used as many as 5 different manfacturers to make their lenses - two of them are highly desirable, while the other three aren't - so it helps to do a little serial number searching...those built by Komine are often the most desirable, and two of mine including the one with the squirrel and hybiscus samples above are from Komine).

And you're basically right - for the little money you spend, BGN and UG lenses can be fun pickups because you really can't lose much at all. ; They'll usually let you know if the lens is in working order or not when buying an UG lens...if it's all scratches and marks on the body, but the optics are fine, then it could be a great pickup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top