Lately, I have been looking at my cameras and lenses to assess what do with four different systems (Leica, Sony FF and APS-C, and Fuji). Though I am a long way from making up my mind (the idea of selling my Fuji stuff pops up time and again - but then: I do really like it), in the process I stumbled upon my old NEX 6 (and NEX5R) and the famous Sigma APS-C trio: 19f2.8, 30f2.8 and 60f2.8 DN.Since I had some time on my hand, I tried the lenses on the a7r3 - and I was suprised about the results. They were close to newer, more expensive lenses. I knew that the 60mm was good. But the even the 19mm retuned cery good sharpness across the frame.I have sold most of my Sony APS-C cameras and lenses and only kept the 18-135 (which I also use on FF), the 20mmf2.8 and the three Sigmas. My daughte still has my a6500 and for a moment I thought I ask her to give it back (as she usese her phone, anyway). But the NEX6 is much smaller and nicer with the Simga lenses.For the next weeks, I will use the NEX6 and the three Sigmas exclusively to see how it works out. The Sigmas are a classical prime trio incuding a wide angle lens (29mm FF), a "normal FoV lens (45mm FF) , and a tele lens (90mm FF). That is pretty much how I started in the film days. There was a time when I wasn't happy to leave the house without most every focal lengt in my bag. And I do see many posts here asking for the best lens line-up, and folks being concerned about gaps in their line-up.Nowm UWA can have use in certain situations either for drama or to get everything into the frame. Long tele lenses have their place when strong compression is required, or ons simply can't get close enough.But for most every situation that I expect to encounter in the streets, the 19/30/60 seems just the right combination.All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.

I look forward to seeing your results!  Having just added the Sony 11mm/1,8 to my collection I am now beginning to think about something in the 50-65mm range.  Interesting to see whether the Sigma 60 dissuades me from the current project to get the Sigma 56mm/1.4CheersMike M

DutchMM wrote:I look forward to seeing your results! Having just added the Sony 11mm/1,8 to my collection I am now beginning to think about something in the 50-65mm range. Interesting to see whether the Sigma 60 dissuades me from the current project to get the Sigma 56mm/1.4CheersMike MThe 60 is very sharp. But so is the 56f1.4. And it is also small.

Nielk Mike wrote:Lately, I have been looking at my cameras and lenses to assess what do with four different systems (Leica, Sony FF and APS-C, and Fuji). Though I am a long way from making up my mind (the idea of selling my Fuji stuff pops up time and again - but then: I do really like it), in the process I stumbled upon my old NEX 6 (and NEX5R) and the famous Sigma APS-C trio: 19f2.8, 30f2.8 and 60f2.8 DN.Since I had some time on my hand, I tried the lenses on the a7r3 - and I was suprised about the results. They were close to newer, more expensive lenses. I knew that the 60mm was good. But the even the 19mm retuned cery good sharpness across the frame.I have sold most of my Sony APS-C cameras and lenses and only kept the 18-135 (which I also use on FF), the 20mmf2.8 and the three Sigmas. My daughte still has my a6500 and for a moment I thought I ask her to give it back (as she usese her phone, anyway). But the NEX6 is much smaller and nicer with the Simga lenses.For the next weeks, I will use the NEX6 and the three Sigmas exclusively to see how it works out. The Sigmas are a classical prime trio incuding a wide angle lens (29mm FF), a "normal FoV lens (45mm FF) , and a tele lens (90mm FF). That is pretty much how I started in the film days. There was a time when I wasn't happy to leave the house without most every focal lengt in my bag. And I do see many posts here asking for the best lens line-up, and folks being concerned about gaps in their line-up.Nowm UWA can have use in certain situations either for drama or to get everything into the frame. Long tele lenses have their place when strong compression is required, or ons simply can't get close enough.But for most every situation that I expect to encounter in the streets, the 19/30/60 seems just the right combination.All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.I have the Sigma 30/2.8, and my main gripe is that 30mm often feels a bit too narrow.  Indoors, I just need wider.  Sharpness is great -- impressive for such an inexpensive lens -- but the AF isn't as good as newer lenses.  This was noticeable even on my Nex-6.  It's ok most of the time, though. So, my Sony 20/2.8 gets more use.  More compact, better AF, and the wider angle I tend to like.  I keep feeling like 24mm would be ideal, though. In a lot of travel situations, I think this trio would be just fine.  On a couple of trips, I've gone with a 20mm or 16mm lens, and that worked out better than you'd think.

GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:Lately, I have been looking at my cameras and lenses to assess what do with four different systems (Leica, Sony FF and APS-C, and Fuji). Though I am a long way from making up my mind (the idea of selling my Fuji stuff pops up time and again - but then: I do really like it), in the process I stumbled upon my old NEX 6 (and NEX5R) and the famous Sigma APS-C trio: 19f2.8, 30f2.8 and 60f2.8 DN.Since I had some time on my hand, I tried the lenses on the a7r3 - and I was suprised about the results. They were close to newer, more expensive lenses. I knew that the 60mm was good. But the even the 19mm retuned cery good sharpness across the frame.I have sold most of my Sony APS-C cameras and lenses and only kept the 18-135 (which I also use on FF), the 20mmf2.8 and the three Sigmas. My daughte still has my a6500 and for a moment I thought I ask her to give it back (as she usese her phone, anyway). But the NEX6 is much smaller and nicer with the Simga lenses.For the next weeks, I will use the NEX6 and the three Sigmas exclusively to see how it works out. The Sigmas are a classical prime trio incuding a wide angle lens (29mm FF), a "normal FoV lens (45mm FF) , and a tele lens (90mm FF). That is pretty much how I started in the film days. There was a time when I wasn't happy to leave the house without most every focal lengt in my bag. And I do see many posts here asking for the best lens line-up, and folks being concerned about gaps in their line-up.Nowm UWA can have use in certain situations either for drama or to get everything into the frame. Long tele lenses have their place when strong compression is required, or ons simply can't get close enough.But for most every situation that I expect to encounter in the streets, the 19/30/60 seems just the right combination.All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.I have the Sigma 30/2.8, and my main gripe is that 30mm often feels a bit too narrow. Indoors, I just need wider. Sharpness is great -- impressive for such an inexpensive lens -- but the AF isn't as good as newer lenses. This was noticeable even on my Nex-6. It's ok most of the time, though. So, my Sony 20/2.8 gets more use. More compact, better AF, and the wider angle I tend to like. I keep feeling like 24mm would be ideal, though. In a lot of travel situations, I think this trio would be just fine. On a couple of trips, I've gone with a 20mm or 16mm lens, and that worked out better than you'd think.Yes, compared to a more "modern" set of primes, it is limiting - but may be also liberating. The Sony E20 seems to be a tad less sharp compared to 19mm Sigma - but really hardly noticable in real life. It is really small, yet not bad at all.The purpose if the next weeks will be to resist the urge to take anything wider than the 19mm, or longer than the 60mm, and still come back with images that make sense and look good. Also to find ways to create nice background seperation without f2 or f1.4. I am really looking forward to it. Only thing that will hold me back for the next days is the weather. Rain and sleet in the forcast.

Nielk Mike wrote:GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:...All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.Oh yeah, even lenses that are sub-par just get upgraded with DxO.  I probably would not be as happy with a couple of my lenses except for DxO.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.I have the Sigma 30/2.8, and my main gripe is that 30mm often feels a bit too narrow. Indoors, I just need wider. Sharpness is great -- impressive for such an inexpensive lens -- but the AF isn't as good as newer lenses. This was noticeable even on my Nex-6. It's ok most of the time, though. So, my Sony 20/2.8 gets more use. More compact, better AF, and the wider angle I tend to like. I keep feeling like 24mm would be ideal, though. In a lot of travel situations, I think this trio would be just fine. On a couple of trips, I've gone with a 20mm or 16mm lens, and that worked out better than you'd think.Yes, compared to a more "modern" set of primes, it is limiting - but may be also liberating. The Sony E20 seems to be a tad less sharp compared to 19mm Sigma - but really hardly noticable in real life. It is really small, yet not bad at all.Have you personally compared the two?My 20mm seems to be a very good copy -- it's maybe a bit sharper than my Sigma 30, or at least similar. I don't know why it has such a bad rep. I don't have the Sigma 19 for comparison, but it's supposedly not as sharp as the 30mm.The purpose if the next weeks will be to resist the urge to take anything wider than the 19mm, or longer than the 60mm, and still come back with images that make sense and look good. Also to find ways to create nice background seperation without f2 or f1.4. I am really looking forward to it. Only thing that will hold me back for the next days is the weather. Rain and sleet in the forcast.You might not need the 60mm. On many of my trips, I wouldn't. Maybe good if you plan on doing the occasional portrait. With the 60mm, you can get some bokeh, for sure.  If you want to simulate a wider aperture, look into the "bokehrama" technique  (stitching photos, but not really a panorama).

GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:...All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.Oh yeah, even lenses that are sub-par just get upgraded with DxO. I probably would not be as happy with a couple of my lenses except for DxO.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.I have the Sigma 30/2.8, and my main gripe is that 30mm often feels a bit too narrow. Indoors, I just need wider. Sharpness is great -- impressive for such an inexpensive lens -- but the AF isn't as good as newer lenses. This was noticeable even on my Nex-6. It's ok most of the time, though. So, my Sony 20/2.8 gets more use. More compact, better AF, and the wider angle I tend to like. I keep feeling like 24mm would be ideal, though. In a lot of travel situations, I think this trio would be just fine. On a couple of trips, I've gone with a 20mm or 16mm lens, and that worked out better than you'd think.Yes, compared to a more "modern" set of primes, it is limiting - but may be also liberating. The Sony E20 seems to be a tad less sharp compared to 19mm Sigma - but really hardly noticable in real life. It is really small, yet not bad at all.Have you personally compared the two?My 20mm seems to be a very good copy -- it's maybe a bit sharper than my Sigma 30, or at least similar. I don't know why it has such a bad rep. I don't have the Sigma 19 for comparison, but it's supposedly not as sharp as the 30mm.I did. See below. The E20 is a bit softer at the very outer edges. But both perform well on the a7R3 (w/o AA filter) and with the help of DxO PL6Sigma 19mm Sony 20mm The purpose if the next weeks will be to resist the urge to take anything wider than the 19mm, or longer than the 60mm, and still come back with images that make sense and look good. Also to find ways to create nice background seperation without f2 or f1.4. I am really looking forward to it. Only thing that will hold me back for the next days is the weather. Rain and sleet in the forcast.You might not need the 60mm. On many of my trips, I wouldn't. Maybe good if you plan on doing the occasional portrait. With the 60mm, you can get some bokeh, for sure. If you want to simulate a wider aperture, look into the "bokehrama" technique (stitching photos, but not really a panorama).I want to use the 60mm in street photography, sometimes cropping to 90mm. Will see how that works out.

Nielk Mike wrote:GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:GaryW wrote:Nielk Mike wrote:...All the images I take will go intianlly to DxO PL6 to benefit from the oustanding NR and Lens Profiles. Then they will be off to LR for further editing.Oh yeah, even lenses that are sub-par just get upgraded with DxO. I probably would not be as happy with a couple of my lenses except for DxO.My trial starts tomorrow. I hope it will work. Thanks for reading my rant.I have the Sigma 30/2.8, and my main gripe is that 30mm often feels a bit too narrow. Indoors, I just need wider. Sharpness is great -- impressive for such an inexpensive lens -- but the AF isn't as good as newer lenses. This was noticeable even on my Nex-6. It's ok most of the time, though. So, my Sony 20/2.8 gets more use. More compact, better AF, and the wider angle I tend to like. I keep feeling like 24mm would be ideal, though. In a lot of travel situations, I think this trio would be just fine. On a couple of trips, I've gone with a 20mm or 16mm lens, and that worked out better than you'd think.Yes, compared to a more "modern" set of primes, it is limiting - but may be also liberating. The Sony E20 seems to be a tad less sharp compared to 19mm Sigma - but really hardly noticable in real life. It is really small, yet not bad at all.Have you personally compared the two?My 20mm seems to be a very good copy -- it's maybe a bit sharper than my Sigma 30, or at least similar. I don't know why it has such a bad rep. I don't have the Sigma 19 for comparison, but it's supposedly not as sharp as the 30mm.I did. See below. The E20 is a bit softer at the very outer edges. But both perform well on the a7R3 (w/o AA filter) and with the help of DxO PL6In the center, they're both pretty sharp -- I can't easily say which is better.  On the edges, the 20mm needs to be at f5.6 on my copy to have really good edges.Sigma 19mmSony 20mmThe purpose if the next weeks will be to resist the urge to take anything wider than the 19mm, or longer than the 60mm, and still come back with images that make sense and look good. Also to find ways to create nice background seperation without f2 or f1.4. I am really looking forward to it. Only thing that will hold me back for the next days is the weather. Rain and sleet in the forcast.On one trip, I only took the 20mm, and on another, I only took the 16mm.  These were trips where I didn't expect to do a lot of photography, and just wanted to go light.  Given that, I think it was fine.  The 16 is a lot of fun.  Yeah, the corners are crappy until you stop down, but I thought the wide angle helped with architecture and landscapes.   If forced to use a more narrow focal length, you can always take overlapping photos and stitch later to get a wider angle, in a pinch.You might not need the 60mm. On many of my trips, I wouldn't. Maybe good if you plan on doing the occasional portrait. With the 60mm, you can get some bokeh, for sure. If you want to simulate a wider aperture, look into the "bokehrama" technique (stitching photos, but not really a panorama).I want to use the 60mm in street photography, sometimes cropping to 90mm. Will see how that works out.Should be fine.  Just like I should be able to use the 20mm, and crop to 24mm equivalent.  We have some leeway.

I have the same combo, and my main criticism is the lack of PDAF across the frame except the centre AF point, which makes them difficult to use. The 19mm also pulses like crazy on my a6400 in less than ideal situations - I don't recall having tested it on the NEX-6.On the other hand, the 60mm gives excellent sharpness in landscapes even with the NEX-6, while the 30mm is good for travel photography, esp. architecture, as a compact prime.

DutchMM wrote:I look forward to seeing your results! Having just added the Sony 11mm/1,8 to my collection I am now beginning to think about something in the 50-65mm range. Interesting to see whether the Sigma 60 dissuades me from the current project to get the Sigma 56mm/1.4CheersMike MSigmas 19.30.60/2.8 do not support hybrid autofocus. There was a link to an alert from the manufacturer in this section of the forum.The Sony a6600 autofocus will behave like the Sony a6000.P.S. *SIGMA 19mm F2.8 DN | Art,SIGMA 19mm F2.8 EX DN,SIGMA 30mm F2.8 DN | Art,SIGMA 30mm F2.8 EX DN, andSIGMA 60mm F2.8 DN | Artare not compatible with the Fast Hybrid AF.https://www.sigma-global.com/en/news/2019/04/25/10812/

Thanks!  I had hoped that there might be a firmware update that fixed this, but I seem to have exhausted google looking for it.   In the circs, the 56mm/1.4 looks like a better bet.

https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/03/02/which-lenses-are-the-sharpest-for-a-a6xxx/

dgsjsj wrote:DutchMM wrote:I look forward to seeing your results! Having just added the Sony 11mm/1,8 to my collection I am now beginning to think about something in the 50-65mm range. Interesting to see whether the Sigma 60 dissuades me from the current project to get the Sigma 56mm/1.4CheersMike MSigmas 19.30.60/2.8 do not support hybrid autofocus. There was a link to an alert from the manufacturer in this section of the forum.The Sony a6600 autofocus will behave like the Sony a6000.P.S. *SIGMA 19mm F2.8 DN | Art,SIGMA 19mm F2.8 EX DN,SIGMA 30mm F2.8 DN | Art,SIGMA 30mm F2.8 EX DN, andSIGMA 60mm F2.8 DN | Artare not compatible with the Fast Hybrid AF.https://www.sigma-global.com/en/news/2019/04/25/10812/Yes. CDAF is slower but also very accurate. The obejctiv is to use the lenses within their limitations - so likely not for sports, running kids and flying birds.

dgsjsj wrote:https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/03/02/which-lenses-are-the-sharpest-for-a-a6xxx/I'd take that list with a grain of salt. The E20f2.8 is listed as "Bad". The 19f2.8 as average. If you look at the image below, that is hard to explain.

davelok wrote:I have the same combo, and my main criticism is the lack of PDAF across the frame except the centre AF point, which makes them difficult to use. The 19mm also pulses like crazy on my a6400 in less than ideal situations - I don't recall having tested it on the NEX-6.On the other hand, the 60mm gives excellent sharpness in landscapes even with the NEX-6, while the 30mm is good for travel photography, esp. architecture, as a compact prime.Can't really use AF-C with the lenses. But that is fine.

It is cold and gray outside. But the dog needs a walk. So let's see what the NEX6 with the Sigma 30f2.8 can do.The evening before - looking out into the wineyards with the Sigma 19mmf2.8B&W seems to fit the mood bestThey expect up to 100 liters of rain in the comming days. And this is where it will go. It is a reservoir that currently sits there dry.The dog knows his way.Quite some construction going on in our little town. Spring is obviously close. A week or so.

Nielk Mike wrote:Yes. CDAF is slower but also very accurate. The obejctiv is to use the lenses within their limitations - so likely not for sports, running kids and flying birds.Been using the Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN for about seven years before I switched to the a6100. I know it's a great lens. Never made any limitations to myself on its use. Running and playing children is a perfectly acceptable use for it. Judging by your outfit list you also have a clear idea of how this excellent lens will differ from the capabilities of the SIGMA 35mm F2 DG DN | Contemporary 020.

Nice images. The Nex 3 was my first Sony. Incredibly small. And the 16mm was quite okay on it. At the time, I came from a Canon 7D with the 17-55 f2.8. The difference in size and weight was like - wow

Cold outside - but my wife does enjoy a nice place in Baden-Baden for lunch

Nielk Mike wrote:Lately, I have been looking at my cameras and lenses to assess what do with four different systems (Leica, Sony FF and APS-C, and Fuji). Though I am a long way from making up my mind (the idea of selling my Fuji stuff pops up time and again - but then: I do really like it), in the process I stumbled upon my old NEX 6 (and NEX5R) and the famous Sigma APS-C trio: 19f2.8, 30f2.8 and 60f2.8 DN.Wow!  You have quite an eclectic taste in photography gear.  I thought that my choice to support two systems was unusual (lately, considering adding a Fuji camera and maybe 2 or 3 lenses for a 3rd system).  Four systems?  Amazing!I have had the older Sigma f/2.8 trio (19mm, 30mm & 60mm) for Sony APS-C and still have this trio for Micro Four Thirds.  I sold the e-mount f/2.8 Sigma trio years ago and now have Sigma's f/1.4 trio (16mm, 30mm & 56mm).  These lenses can transform the Sony APS-C photography experience!  I have several Sony APS-C lenses but if I was starting over with Sony APS-C lens purchases with 20/20 hindsight, I would purchase a single walking around zoom and 4 primes (Sigma f/1.4 trio plus Sony 11mm f/1.8).  There would be no hesitation choosing the new Sigma f/1.4 trio over the old f/2.8 trio!Jim