I have about 800 dollars saved up for a new lens but looking at the options is making my head spin. I see stuff from Sigma and then some from Panasonic and the prices are all over the place. Is 85mm the one I want for this kind of thing? Someone told me that but then I saw a 50mm and it was way cheaper so now im just lost. I really want her photos to look professional and not just like I took them on my phone. Sorry if this is a really basic question but I just want to make sure I dont buy the wrong thing and waste my money because I cant really afford to buy more than one right now. Which L-mount prime lens should I get if I want those really pretty professional looking portraits with the soft backgrounds?

I have about 2500 bucks to spend before my Yellowstone trip in two weeks.

• Panasonic 70-300mm (seems too short?)


• Sigma 60-600 (too heavy?)


• Leica 100-400 (is it worth the cost?)

Is there a secret lens I'm missing for birds and bears that wont break my back or miss focus constantly?

I spent so much on the camera body that I only have $1000 left for a lens and I need it for my Yellowstone trip in two weeks. I just want one lens that does everything like zooming in on bears but also taking pictures of trees. Everything is so expensive and I'm kinda lost. What zoom lens should I actually get for just general stuff?

My logic was to go for the RF 85mm f1.2 because it is basically the gold standard right? But then I saw some samples from the RF 135mm f1.8 and that compression is just insane for outdoor stuff. I have about $2600 saved up from my summer gigs so I can technically afford the 85 if I find a good deal but the 135 is cheaper and leaves me room for extra batteries and maybe a new bag which I definitely need.

I am also slightly considering the 85mm f2 just to save a ton of cash but I am worried the autofocus wont keep up with kids or moving subjects during my shoots since I heard it is a bit slower. Is the f1.2 really worth the extra weight and cost over the 135mm for someone shooting mostly in parks and open fields? I usually have plenty of space to back up so the focal length isnt a huge issue but I just cant decide which one will give me that wow factor before my October schedule kicks off...

what is the best all-around prime lens for this?

my budget is strictly under 900 bucks so im probably looking at the used market. im just worried the f4 might be too slow for those dim kyoto alleyways but 75mm feels a bit short for street stuff sometimes. honestly what is the one lens you just never take off your e-mount body?

Im supposed to shoot my sisters engagement photos next month in a park near Seattle and I need something that actually looks professional and creamy. My budget is around 700 bucks if I buy used. Ive been looking at the 85mm 1.8g or maybe a Sigma Art but I dont know if the weight is worth it. Is the 85mm really that much better for getting that blurry background or am I just doing something wrong...

Im really torn between these three right now:

• the 27mm f2.8 r wr pancake lens


• the 23mm f2 r wr


• the 35mm f2 r wr

The 27mm seems perfect because it makes the camera so tiny but I'm worried f2.8 might be too slow for some night shots in the subway or whatever. The 23mm is the classic focal length everyone raves about for street stuff but it sticks out more. Then there is the 35mm which is super sharp and fast but I'm scared it might be too tight for narrow streets. I mostly do candid shots and some architecture stuff. Which one should I go for if I can only bring one prime? I keep switching my tab between ebay listings and I just cant decide...

So I was thinking about the Sigma 30mm f1.4 because everyone says it is the gold standard for E-mount crops but then I read that it doesn't have any stabilization. Since my a6000 is the base model and doesn't have IBIS I'm worried my shots are gonna be all blurry if I'm walking around Shinjuku at night. The Sony 35mm f1.8 has OSS which sounds safer but people say it's not as sharp as the Sigma and it's older tech now. My logic was that maybe the f1.4 aperture makes up for the lack of OSS because I can use a faster shutter speed? But then some people say for video the Sony is way better because the autofocus is quieter and smoother. I do want to take some clips of the markets and stuff but photography is the main priority.

Then I saw the Sigma 16mm f1.4 and that look is so cool for street stuff but it looks huge in photos. Like it would just tip the whole camera over and I want to be low profile. I have a budget of maybe $300 to $350 max and I'm looking at used markets like MPB or even local shops but I have to pull the trigger tonight or tomorrow morning for it to get here before my flight.

• should I prioritize the OSS on the Sony 35mm since I have shaky hands and no IBIS?


• is the 30mm too tight for general travel or should I go wider?


• does the Sigma 30mm autofocus actually hunt as much as people say in low light or is that just people being picky?

I'm just going in circles here and the clock is ticking...

i was thinking about the 16-80mm f4 because of the range but everyone online says its not sharp enough for the 40mp sensor. then i looked at the 16-55mm f2.8 but its like carrying a brick and i dont want my neck to die. my budget is around 900 bucks. what is the actual best all-rounder that wont make me regret my life choices...