Review Sony FE 28-60mm f/4-5.6

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Interceptor121

Contributor
Scuba Instructor
Messages
4,414
Reaction score
725
Location
Weybridge, UK
I have recently aquired a Sony A1 well actually two and I bought this lens to match with the Nauticam WWL-1 I already own
There is a lot of discussion of how much better is the WACP-1 or the new WACP-C over the WWL-1 and a tendency to look at performance at the edges
However my experience and all data existing suggests this lens does not perform well at all at the edges so the improvement you get changing adapter is not really night and day but more a question of preferences
 
I have recently aquired a Sony A1 well actually two and I bought this lens to match with the Nauticam WWL-1 I already own
There is a lot of discussion of how much better is the WACP-1 or the new WACP-C over the WWL-1 and a tendency to look at performance at the edges
However my experience and all data existing suggests this lens does not perform well at all at the edges so the improvement you get changing adapter is not really night and day but more a question of preferences
I shoot a Sony A7R3 above the surface. The A1 is pretty much Sony's flagship camera body, but the 28-60 f/4-f/5.6 is a kit lens and is not in the same league as the A1. This is the lens that Sony sells as a bundle with a body when the customer wants a good camera but doesn't want to pay a lot extra to get out and take some pictures. If you want to exploit the capabilities of the A1, then there are other lenses that will be better suited. As a start, look for a lens that is a "G" or even a "GM" series lens that is supported by your lens ports (although to be honest, you will likely need to buy a new port) and the WWL-1.

Having said that, if the 28-60 meets your needs and you are happy with it, then really, that is all that matters. Enjoy it and the images that you get with it.
 
I shoot a Sony A7R3 above the surface. The A1 is pretty much Sony's flagship camera body, but the 28-60 f/4-f/5.6 is a kit lens and is not in the same league as the A1. This is the lens that Sony sells as a bundle with a body when the customer wants a good camera but doesn't want to pay a lot extra to get out and take some pictures. If you want to exploit the capabilities of the A1, then there are other lenses that will be better suited. As a start, look for a lens that is a "G" or even a "GM" series lens that is supported by your lens ports (although to be honest, you will likely need to buy a new port) and the WWL-1.

Having said that, if the 28-60 meets your needs and you are happy with it, then really, that is all that matters. Enjoy it and the images that you get with it.
The 28-60 is a nice small, light weight lens for walking around "snap shots" but it doesn't have the resolving power to make best use of the A1 or SONY'S higher resolution "R" bodies. The SONY 90 mm macro and the 16-35 f2.8 or even 16-35 f4 are better choices if you want more detail or need to crop in significantly. There are also several sharp choices in the 24-70 zoom range from SONY and third parties.
 
The 28-60 is a nice small, light weight lens for walking around "snap shots" but it doesn't have the resolving power to make best use of the A1 or SONY'S higher resolution "R" bodies. The SONY 90 mm macro and the 16-35 f2.8 or even 16-35 f4 are better choices if you want more detail or need to crop in significantly. There are also several sharp choices in the 24-70 zoom range from SONY and third parties.
those lenses are not compatible with most water contact optics
Once you place a 16-35mm in a dome resolution across the frame drops
Besides no lense will resolve 50 megapixels underwater other than perhaps a macro lens
I am sorry that my post looked like looking for advice it was not I know exactly what I am doing probably better than you guys lol I was just trying to release some stress on spending $4000 on a water contact optic to solve an issue that can't be solved
 
I am sorry that my post looked like looking for advice it was not I know exactly what I am doing probably better than you guys lol
Even with the "lol" that is a pretty arrogant comment (especially the "probably better than you" part). You have no idea what our photography knowledge, background or talent is. To me, your post came across as someone who has lots of money but no clue. (Buy the expensive camera (twice) and put a cheap kit lens on it.)
 
Even with the "lol" that is a pretty arrogant comment (especially the "probably better than you" part). You have no idea what our photography knowledge, background or talent is. To me, your post came across as someone who has lots of money but no clue. (Buy the expensive camera (twice) and put a cheap kit lens on it.)
Uhm no it does not work like that. As I was trying to explain (and you would know if you shoot underwater I presume you don't) water contact optics with small kit lenses can beat much more expensive optics behind a dome port. Obviously they are not directly comparable as one has fisheye distortion and the other is rectilinear however the prevailing school of thought for underwater wide angle is fisheye looking optics not rectilinear.
This does not take away that the limitations of the master lens in performance balance out the adapters so if you are comparing the WWL-1 with the WACP-C and the WACP-1 you need to take into account that due to the lens limitations the improvement will not be like between night and day
For your information I shoop topside I own a 24-70GMII a Tamron 35-150 a Sony 24/1.4 Macro 90mm GM 100-400 and G200-600 so I have an idea about lenses
Your assumption is indeed presumptuos as you expect I have no idea what lenses I have or not and think that I bought an A1 to get a 28-60mm lens with it?
I just moved from a Panasonic GH5
This is a fisheye zoom shot
bommie-of-jolanda-20220804.jpg


This is a rectilinear lens shot
dolphin-fun-20220801.jpg


First is a canon 8-15mm second is PL 8-18mm in a 180mm dome
And this is a lumix 14-42mm 5 blades cheap zoom with the WWL-1
As you can see the cheap lens with the wet optic does quite well

The same applies to the 28-60mm. The objective of the post was to say that despite the significant price difference in the adapter the relative improvements are marginal but yet the small lens with water contact optic is a great choice and the best photographers use it
 
@Hoag what do you shoot underwater?
I have shot everything from film cameras to DSLRs to Mirrorless both above the surface and beneath it.
Right now, underwater, I am placing a premium on small size and I am shooting a Sony A6000 in a Nauticam Housing. For lenses, I have the 16-50mm PZ kit lens (and yes, I am aware of its limitations I am also aware that given the camera which I am using it on, I am not expecting gallery quality results), the Sony Zeiss 16-55mm f/4 and the Sony 10-18mm f/4.

Above the surface, I shoot a Sony A7Riii with the following lenses:
Primes:
Sony 14mm f/1.8 GM
Sigma 35mm f/2
Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8
Sony 85mm f/1.8

Zooms:
Sigma 14-35mm f/2.8 Art
Sony 24-105mm f/4 G
Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM

And yes, in case you are wondering, I know how to use both of my cameras and I know the strengths and weaknesses of every lens that I own.
 
I have shot everything from film cameras to DSLRs to Mirrorless both above the surface and beneath it.
Right now, underwater, I am placing a premium on small size and I am shooting a Sony A6000 in a Nauticam Housing. For lenses, I have the 16-50mm PZ kit lens (and yes, I am aware of its limitations I am also aware that given the camera which I am using it on, I am not expecting gallery quality results), the Sony Zeiss 16-55mm f/4 and the Sony 10-18mm f/4.

Above the surface, I shoot a Sony A7Riii with the following lenses:
Primes:
Sony 14mm f/1.8 GM
Sigma 35mm f/2
Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8
Sony 85mm f/1.8

Zooms:
Sigma 14-35mm f/2.8 Art
Sony 24-105mm f/4 G
Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM

And yes, in case you are wondering, I know how to use both of my cameras and I know the strengths and weaknesses of every lens that I own.
So the 16-50PZ with the WWL-C will give you better results than the 10-18mm f/4 that will show blurry edges (in reality it has blurry edges on land too)
It is the same story of the 28-60 and WWL-1 and the 16-35mm behind a dome you need 230mm and yet it starts dropping sharpness as you move off centre
The best shooters of Sony full frame use the 28-60mm with one of the Nauticam adapters you should check it out (including A1, A7RV, A7RIV etc etc)
 
Uhm no it does not work like that. As I was trying to explain (and you would know if you shoot underwater I presume you don't) water contact optics with small kit lenses can beat much more expensive optics behind a dome port. Obviously they are not directly comparable as one has fisheye distortion and the other is rectilinear however the prevailing school of thought for underwater wide angle is fisheye looking optics not rectilinear.
This does not take away that the limitations of the master lens in performance balance out the adapters so if you are comparing the WWL-1 with the WACP-C and the WACP-1 you need to take into account that due to the lens limitations the improvement will not be like between night and day
For your information I shoop topside I own a 24-70GMII a Tamron 35-150 a Sony 24/1.4 Macro 90mm GM 100-400 and G200-600 so I have an idea about lenses
Your assumption is indeed presumptuos as you expect I have no idea what lenses I have or not and think that I bought an A1 to get a 28-60mm lens with it?
I just moved from a Panasonic GH5
This is a fisheye zoom shot
bommie-of-jolanda-20220804.jpg


This is a rectilinear lens shot
dolphin-fun-20220801.jpg


First is a canon 8-15mm second is PL 8-18mm in a 180mm dome
And this is a lumix 14-42mm 5 blades cheap zoom with the WWL-1
As you can see the cheap lens with the wet optic does quite well

The same applies to the 28-60mm. The objective of the post was to say that despite the significant price difference in the adapter the relative improvements are marginal but yet the small lens with water contact optic is a great choice and the best photographers use it
Again, you are making an assumption. I do shoot underwater as well as above the surface. Here are a couple of my shots that I have taken over the years:
20081115-IMG_4087.jpg


IMG_3853 copy.jpg


Cayman Brac22.jpg


FWIW, I currently am trying to downsize even more, and I have my 10-18 and my 16-55 lenses and the dome that fits both of them up for sale in the Classifieds Section. My plan is to use the kit lens with a Nauticam WWL-C to further reduce the size of my kit. I am also willing to accept the images that I get from this set up.
 

Back
Top Bottom