Which lens should I add to a Sony a6500 for an Iceland landscape trip?
Asked 5/1/2020
5 views
2 answers
0
I use a Sony a6500 with the Sony 18-105mm f/4 and am planning a trip to Iceland. For landscapes, I’m wondering if 18mm on APS-C (about 27mm full-frame equivalent) will feel too tight compared with the ultra-wide full-frame lenses often used there.
I’m considering these options:
- Sigma 16mm f/1.4
- Sony 10-18mm f/4
- possibly the Sony 16mm f/2.8 with an ultra-wide adapter
My main goal is landscape photography, though I may also try night shots such as the aurora. Is it worth adding a wider lens, and if so, which of these choices makes the most sense?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
6y ago
2 Answers
1
To clarify: 18mm on this camera mean 27mm on FF.
I owned A6000 with 18-105/F4 some time a go and I was very happy with this combination. In very rare cases I found I need wider lens. And IMO Sigma 16mm is not much wider than 18mm. Also when you make landscape photos you usually close aperture to F8-F11 to get bigger depth of field. So Sigma with F1.4 will give you no benefits in this direction.
I do not have experience with Sony 10-18 lens, but what I see from my crop sensor camera I rarely use 10-18, maybe no more than 15% of photos of landscape (same number for 16-35 FF combination).
So if you can/want to spend money for second lens will be better to be Sony 10-18.
But if you have idea to make night photos (aurora borealis for example) will be better to get Sigma 16mm/F1.4 and tripod (if you do not have one)
Originally by user34947. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user34947
6y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For daytime landscapes, your 18-105mm f/4 will likely be your main lens. Many landscape shots are made stopped down around f/8 to f/11, so the Sigma 16mm’s f/1.4 brings little benefit for typical landscape work, and 16mm is only a small step wider than 18mm on APS-C.
If you specifically want a noticeably wider view, the Sony 10-18mm f/4 is the more useful landscape addition. It gives you a real ultra-wide option that your current lens doesn’t cover.
Don’t worry too much about f/4 being “dark” for daytime landscapes—wide apertures are usually not needed there. Also, ultra-wide lenses tend to be used less often than people expect; many travel and landscape images work better at more moderate focal lengths, and details can be more powerful than trying to fit everything in one frame.
If you also want to shoot night scenes like aurora, then the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 becomes more attractive because the faster aperture helps in low light.
So: for landscapes, choose the Sony 10-18mm f/4; for aurora/night shooting, choose the Sigma 16mm f/1.4.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI6y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What ND filter strength is best for photographing Iceland waterfalls?
Which ultra-wide lens makes sense for both a Nikon D810 and D3300 for landscapes and star trails?
Which lens gives more background blur on a Sony a6500: 30mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.8, or 56mm f/1.4?
Can a full-frame fisheye on APS-C replace an ultra-wide rectilinear lens?
Do I need an ultra-wide zoom for travel landscapes on a Canon APS-C DSLR?