I just broke my standard kit prime lens for my Sony A65. Will this be a good replacement? I want it to shoot landscapes, portraits, food and city life
1696781
I've found this lens to be very sharp, very light, and am very happy with it. Do remember that on the APS-C this is a "normal" lens. If that fits your variety of uses, then it should be just fine. With the bonus of macro.
1696782
This lens is suited for micro-shooting (like tiny objects). Probably not best for your purposes.
1696783
I like to use this as a standard lens on both my APS-C cameras. Its great for walk around use because you never worry about closeness to the subject. It is very sharp and focuses very quickly and quietly.
1696784
really comes down to what you are trying to photograph. If you are really interested in photography, you may want to invest in a few different size lenses.
1696785
This is a great lens for the money. I use mine for all the reasons you stated, and have been pleased with the photos I have gotten. I have used it with an A700, A350, A55, and A77 and it performered great with these cameras. It is plastic housing which many think derides the lens, but I have found nothing to support this complaint. It is a good general lens, and I would buy this again if needed.
1824722
The 22mm lens is amazing! It feels and has better build quality than the plastic primes of Canon's. Image quality is just too good. 1. Its a prime lens 2. Its F2.0 hence way better than the kit lens.
1856380
It is an excellent lens for landscape photography. Light, sharp, relatively inexpensive, takes filters. You can get marginally better iq if you want to pay twice or 3 times as much
1620736
It is a f 3.5-6.3 lens and as such, performs as well as it should within those peramiters. If your camera has great high ISO with low digital noise, you should be happy with this lens as it also has lense satbilization except with Sony's A mount version.
1023868
This is a fantastic lens, I love it and have it on one of my cameras all the time. But it is not the best for landscape photography, especially on an APS-C camera like the 60D. As Archman below said, I'd look for something with a wide angle in the 10-18mm range. Also concur--rent a couple of lenses if you can locally to see what you like best. Of course, you might pick something that was more than you planned to spend.... Good luck and have fun!
2236918
It's ok but not great, for daily use i would recommend a 24-105mm, for landscape 17-40mm or 16-35mm, or course your gonna add a few hundred bucks for those lenses but it's worth, I have one of these (28-135) I rarely use it... I don't even know where it is right now... but i have one. If you're really gonna do photography try to invest on a few good lenses...
1634465
I'm using one of my dad's old minolta AF28-70 lens on my A65, so I'd think it should be fine. Sony absorbed (bought?) the Konica Minolta technology, so they advertise that they are compatible.
36982
It depends on what you photograph and how you do it:Primes -- better for low light, but aren't weather-sealed, and you have to swap between them (not good if things are happening quickly).This lens -- a bit more than a full stop slower (optically), but sealed (good for outdoor shots with unpredictable weather), and zooms so it's an excellent walk-around lens.
939836
I agree. Make sure your lens is decent. Other than that it takes great photos!
18315
I purchased the 56/1.2. What an amazing lens! I have a blast with the portraits now I am able to take. Another great prime lens would be the 23/1.4. I don't have it since I have the X100s as well. My last Fuji lens is the 55-200. Very sharp, well built lens. Took it on an air show and was able to take great, sharp photos on fast moving jets and airplanes. Can't go wrong with it.
521136
Yes it is a good lense. I have the 35mm as we'll. if you are going to be taking more picture inside than out, I would go with the 35mm. If more outside then the 50mm. Both do an excellent job.
827133
It's a good lens for my needs. I have found the 18-300mm type lenses just don't do all that well, I think too much range to cover but this does well and being a f/2.8 it's better for darker shots. Heavier than a kit lens but worth it in my opinion.
2043945
It should do just fine with a sharp prime lens 2.8 or faster and a moderate ISO rating. Be careful not to set ISO too high or you will get hot pixels on long exposures. Best to shoot RAW so you can have greatest flexibility in post when processing the image, and use an image editor that will allow you to map hot pixels and mask them in all other resulting images.
1979641
this works fine on the k20d. I have it on my k20d and it is a fine lens. great to have if you want a good prime lens.
741800
If you can get the correct adapter, it should. The NEX can do focus peeking, which makes focusing a manual lens pretty easy. If the a65 also has focus peaking, then it should work quite well on that camera to.
1983279
Yes. It's a very sharp lens. Better range than the 16-50mm kit lens though certainly heftier.
2186824
Notr much. I have not tried the kit lens but the 24-70 was not up to the Zeiss quality standard. The 16-35 and the 35/2 will have much more image quality.