QUOTE(d4rkholeang3l @ Aug 16 2014, 06:38 AM)
polarizer depends on the angle of light source for maximum effect. UWA can capture a wide FOV (larger angles), thus some angles above a certain threshold does not give the maximum polarizing effect. That's why u will see some parts are bright.
Dear Pay Ng. its not angle of light, but the angle of light
wavelength. polarizer works with wavelength, not angle of light dude.
wavelength is under Physics.... due to the angle of wavelength travels from the side of the lens angle, the polarizer were unable to cut off the angle of wavelength, hence it did not cut off the light as it suppose to.
as for the Variable ND, u will get X-crosses effect at certain angle on UWA due to the angle of light wavelength escape the polarizing.
do u wan
banana?QUOTE(Neo_Y @ Aug 16 2014, 11:13 AM)
Just got myself the prime portrait/street lens (SEL35F18) paired with my A6000.
Now with all the wide-angle poisons floating around here, so which are the best "budget" wide-angle lenses I should get next?
I was eyeing the Sony 16mm f/2.8 E, Sony 20mm f/2.8 E and Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN E.
Sony 10-18mm f/4 OSS E and Sony Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 E are way out of budget, they almost cost a camera body and I only a newcomer who surely can't fully utilize it to the best outcome.
note: not aiming at you, but in general, why does ppl think 16-20mm is comparable to a 10-18 ultra wide angle? totally diff thing, totally diff effect, totally diff impact on the photo.
uraki: 16mm also no OSS.
and generally, i dont understand why ppl generalize 16mm as not sharp(corner)? at F2.8, generally all wide angle arent sharp in corner due to distortion via deflection in the lens group. all wide angle requires to stop down to gain corner sharpness... even the famous sharp tokina 11-16 is soft in corners until stopped to F8. even SEL1018 requires to stop down a little more to gain prefect sweet spot.