[shoplink 19913 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Image on top shows the [shoplink 19913 ebay]Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 C Biogon T*[/shoplink] for the M-mount system. A similar (but bigger) lens will be announced for the E-mount FF system.
–
Trusted sources told me (with my huge surprise) that Sony and Zeiss worked much closer than expected on the soon to come new NEX-FF system. I now have been told that along the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 FF E-mount lens there will be two more Zeiss lenses! A source also told me there would be a Sony branded G zoom lens too. This makes a total of four lenses that will be unveiled along the NEX-FF camera (in September?). I am now trying to convince sources to share the detailed Lens specs.
The rumor is marked SR4 until I get a clear evidence that these lenses are real. Someone has a picture to share? :=)
———
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
For readers: Subscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream and the Facebook fan page (Click here) in order to not miss any news!
——–
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
120 Responses
My hopes are pinned on the NEX FF working well with those ZM lenses too. I couldn’t live without hyperfocal markings or that great tactile feel.
I’m hoping the new lenses have an auto mode for both focus and aperture, when you turn the corresponding ring past infinity and f/22 with a “click”, and mechanically coupled fully manual operation when you turn the ring back.
Something tells me this is completely achievable and practical using today’s tech, just that nobody wants to do it.
Little bit about Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 C Biogon T* http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2009/12/17/zeiss-zm-35-c-biogon-2-8-lens-review/
Could be the G-Zoom the long awaited E-Mount high performance zoom? Only now Sony decided to be FF compatible and the rumored SEL-85F14 for E-Mount is also a Zeiss FF lens?
I hope too !!
I’m not interested with the slow f4 Zeiss zoom lens with no OSS !!!
I hope a G high quality f2.8 zoom lens !
The FF cam reportedly will have in-body Super SteadyShot
Zeiss is good but also means a high price and a trouble of popularity. I prefer more prime G lenses. But more important is IBIS. It solves all the problem.
Not quite looking forward to this.. Looking at the stuff that Zeiss does for Sony alwasys leaves me thinking, “is that the best that Zeiss can do..?” Always thought well of Zeiss from using a Hasselblad.. But I don’t think the Sony CZ lenses are the best that Zeiss can offer, and definitely not worth the ridiculous price premiums charged for them.. Sony been bleeding from its partnership wif CZ for quite some time already and should really just use its stake in Tamron and/or build on the new partnership with Olympus for lens development.. With their market-leading sensors, I’m sure they’ll sell more E- and A-mount cameras with better Tamron or Zuiko glass…
You don’t think that the Zeiss 24mm f2 is the best 24mm around for SLR? Or the 135mm?
What about the Sonnar 35mm f2 for the RX1 which is sharper edge to edge than the 35mm Summicron and Summilux?
What about the 24mm for E mount of which there is no competitor from any other make?
We have yet to see evidence that the current 50mm 1.4 for A mount is worth its salt but saying that Zeiss is not pulling its weight for Sony is not right. Remember these, now along with the Touit lenses, are the ONLY Zeiss AF lenses after the Contax N series.
Perhaps you are wondering how difficult it is to go around the optical challenges that is to make AF lenses compared to MF ones seeing that you need to have smaller elements in the formula which are the elements that the AF motor can move.
The 24mm E-mount is far too expensive for what it does. At the end of the day it’s a f1.8 APS-C sonnar, and a mediocre one at that.
The Zeiss 35 f2 RX1 performs better because the lens is perfectly calibrated to one body and only one. I have used an RX1 and, while the extreme edges are sharper compared to a 35 summilux FLE and M240, bokeh, micro contrast and natural rendition all fall short.
Zeiss ZMs are pretty much their best effort at IQ, and almost all of them (except the 15,18 and perhaps the 35 2.8) fall just short of their Leica counterparts. They are 90% there, but weak on one or two points. And they don’t have as many f1.4 and f2 lens for the m mount.
IMO they are a good lensmaker, but don’t have the kind of boundary-pushing ability and willpower Leica does. Leica may be milking customers with the D-lux and X-Vario, but they are still the absolute expert on 135 format optics.
You wish what you are saying was true about the RX1 Sonnar
http://tobinators.com/blog/index.php/2013/04/everything-else/sony-rx1-v-leica-m-240/
http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?page_id=188
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX7i7MyjUmc
http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2013/4/leica-m-240-with-35mm-f1-4-fle—some-observations
See the examples yourself and tell me again what you just said.
You are just defending nothing on the basis of nothing.
There is no other lens comparable to the 24mm E Sonnar so I don’t know where you get your thoughts from. “Expensive for what it does”…well..which lens does it better?
ZMs are pretty much the best value for money but you are comparing to lenses that cost two, three, four times as much? And then you say…well Leica is much better. I am sure they can be, and some of them are, but at what price and why are you not whining about that?
Oh rubbish! The ZE 24 is a middling prime with an overinflated price tag. It is barely any better than the Canon 22mm or the Fuji 23mm on the X100/S. the new Fuji 23mm f1.4 will absolutely thump it into overpriced dust and its what 10 times the price of the Canon?
When you cheap ‘nifty fifty’ beats your over priced flagship Zeiss lens there is a real problem.
They also don’t have the boundary-pushing pricing of Leica. For something that is 90% there, as you say, the Zeiss seem to be a very good deal.
The 24mm 1.8 is too expensive for what it is, agreed, but what about all of the other excellent lenses in Sony’s lineup? Some of them are hardly overpriced, if at all, others are some of the best in class.
Hm.
Hm,hm.
For what it does. Hm.
Guess I’m not the only one judging the 24/1.8 and the 10-18 as the best lenses in the NEX Setup.
16,20,16-50,30 macro are crap. 18200 (LE a bit poorer than the other one), 18-55 and 55-210 are medium where you have to circle a lot around ist weaknesses. The 35 and the 50 both 1.8 are quite good. The two Touits are producing good resultes, but suffer from its awkward AF which makes them unusable for Video.
Regarding the 24 – for my taste the only Point for me is the quite visible vignetting wide open. Distortion and CA are well controlled. Colors are expected reproduced on high Level. So what is wrong to price it at premium level?
DiBok, what I meant is that it is too expensive to be the only fast 35mm prime in the system. Not that the lens is bad.
+1
Some newbie may not know that Sony counts on OEM from Tamron for lenses production. And what so called Zeiss lenses are OEM by Cosina(at least ZE and ZF series are true). Now almost the Cine lenses in PL mount are still made in Germany. The classic color tone of Zeiss lenses already missed after the pause of production for Contax. Zeiss is just too busy to produce varies of lens for Sony. You know, German is not quite responsive as Japanese in consumer products. German makes good stuffs but seldom change it until a long period of time.
I seriously don’t understand what you guys are complaining about. With the fullframe NEX you suddenly have a digital back with the best sensor of any manufacturer and can mount and enjoy lenses like the Contax 645 range. Or if you want small and portable, then use the ZM lenses which include the sharpest wide-angle ever tested – a lens that is diffraction limited on fullframe at f4. Anyone choosing to whine about Kyocera or Cosina needs to engage their imagination and consider exactly what’s on offer here and why some are so excited.
Don’t sweat it John, these people will never be satisfied.
Weird generalizations as usual. What would be the “ridiculous price premiums” for the 16-35 and 24-70? As to the lenses themselves, the 24, 85 and the two 135 are rather excellent (and not that far off price-wise from their manual counterparts for Canikon or even Canikon equivalents).
Sounds awesome.
I am betting it would be 24 and 50 maybe?
That would be a great trio to start the lineup with.
Later on you can bring the 35 f2/1.4 and the 85 and 21 (don’t forget Contax and ZM’s 21s are legendary)
my bet is on a 85 f1.4 😀 because there has been rumors around for a bit longer of that lens. a 50 would also be a possible lens as its quite a focal length, but it seems like such a predictable move?
24-35-50 would be too close, doesn’t make sense IMO
You’re right, those focal lengths are much too similar to encourage anyone to buy all three, which I know Sony wouldn’t want. Though, offering both a 35 and 50 could make sense as there seems to be almost a “cult” following for each when it comes to prime users so Sony would at least cover the most popular lengths from the get go. But then, I agree too that while any camera system should have both lengths, to start out with, Sony should have a trio closely following the lenses Fuji first introduced with their X Pro 1 which covered a nice span and more or less met many needs of any photographer.
24 too close to 35? 35 too close to 50?
You haven’t taken a single photo in your life, havent you?
uhh getting personal, sorry didn’t know that these are your focal senses! Sure you have taken more Photos than I did, but how about trying something new, like a tele?
And than accept it, if you want to sell lenses 24-35-50 is too close!
Yep, very close. Practically the same. One would wonder why we don’t simply have a single 35mm to cover it all.
http://canonlensblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/24mm-vs-28mm-vs-35mm-lenses-viewing-angles-difference1.jpg
http://www.digitalartform.com/archives/images/lens_35_24.jpg
I think a fast (f2.0) Planar 50 is almost a given. Its a strong lens design that Zeiss knows well. Maybe we’ll even see an f1.4. If its as sharp at 1.4 as the ZM 50 & CG 45 are at 2.0 without adding much to the size then I think some would be tempted to buy into the system simply for that lens.
I’m guess the third lens (if it isn’t a zoom) will be a 85mm f2.0. I think a faster telephoto will be too big and heavy on a full frame and truth be told even f2.8 would be fine because it would be a good balance of size, weight, and speed. Zeiss does have an optical for an 85mm f2.0 although the ZM lens was discontinued despite being a great performer.
maybe a new pancake lens?
but why f2.8 instead of f2??
I explained this before. It is a clever strategy because the price of the lenses won’t be cheap if they all come with fast speed.
The priority is to make lenses that can be affordable-ish, and high enough quality to warrant the Zeiss name on it.
A 2.8 lens would be cheaper than a f2 lens (maybe £1000) and smaller too. This already attracts people that would otherwise not consider the system. The people that want compact high quality primes and the people that want lenses within their willingness range to pay for them.
If the lens was f2, it would be larger in order to make the lens perform exceptionally well (this lens should not be inferior to the RX1 Sonnar) It would also be more expensive. Let’s say £1400.
Now, a lens of £1000 attracts people to the system because it is AF, compact and high quality. A £1400 lens would make them consider M mount lenses from Zeiss or Voigtlander because they can cost similar or same but be faster speed albeit manual focus. With focus peaking, many would consider this a very viable position. For those who want AF only, the system may be too expensive.
So, 2.8 is a good compromise for now. In the future they better introduce an f2 at least in 35mm though.
why not?
Why F2.8? Because it’s smaller, cheaper and can be optically superior as the design is simpler.
A cheaper f2.8 kit prime that is still high-quality will appeal to the mass market. More informed users will just adapt existing lenses from Leica, Zeiss or Voigtlander. If Sony/Zeiss tried to match it with the established makers of fast lenses then they would just compete away their profits.
who cares if the sensor can handle high iso? Fast Wide angles are nice for an M9 where ISO 800 is max, but I expext more from this sensor!
Because F2.8 on Full-Frame is sufficient. In low light, F2.8 on Full-Frame is equivalent to F1.8 on APS-C, if you take into account that the best full-frame sensors are 1.5 stops better in low-light than the best APS-C sensors.
Sorry Catalin, in low light 2.8 is 2.8, in APS, FF or medium format. Don’t confuse depth of field (where 1.8 APS is 2.5 in FF) with light gathering.
+1
What I was trying to say is that the light gathering ability of an F2.8 full-frame lens is sufficient for a full-frame sensor to produce an image with the same signal to noise ratio as an F1.8 lens on an APS-C sensor.
If you are referring to the ISO ability of sensors, I see your point is saying:
“To keep a similar noise signature in APS-C sensors you need faster lenses than in FF”
The reference to apertures made your point fly away from its argument.
f2.8 is f2.8 but ISO 1600 is not ISO 1600. The previous poster was saying that a FF camera could use a slower lens but higher ISO and not have anymore noise than an APS-C camera with a f1.8 lens.
But why anyone would spend an extra $2000 for a FF camera and be content with results they could have achieved with a much cheaper APS-C setup is beyond me.
Because the main, defining difference between a full-frame sensor image and and APS-C image is the dynamic range, and not the signal to noise ratio (otherwise some cameras like the Canon 1D series would be regarded as having sub-par image quality).
Narrower depth of field with the same field of view?
24mm in APS is 35mm in FF but I would need 1.4 in APS to achieve the depth of field of f2 in FF
Its not all about the ISO.
That being said, I do care for high ISO performance so FF is something I rather need, not want.
mah! Canon 35 is f2 and cost 200 buks, for me is a takeitnow!! and nikon too
The old type costs 300 usd. That one is designed for film, and it doesn’t even have USM. The latest canon 35/2 costs 800 usd! 🙁
Very good. A few good primes is often all that is needed. At least as a start.
if they dont have a 50mm 1.4 its a disaster….
what’s the problem of a 50/1.8? way cheaper, smaller, lighter and only half a stop slower
Prepare yourselves, 50-150 f4 – 5.6 is coming.
tha’s a typical APS-C range not FF
…this would be the biggest disappountment..
Lets say $1400 for 50mm F1.4 lens vs $800 fr 50mm F2.0 lens (remember these would be FF so expensive), I would take F2 lens any day
hopefully the G zoom is a 24-105mm f4
i’m gonna bet on a variable aperture to make the lens smaller
If Sony really wants to make a difference with the FF Nex, they need a good set of native lenses from the start, not just a half solution of working with adapters and lenses which were designed for another mount/system. So IMO it’s a good thing that Sony will really introduce a system (meaning: camera AND a basic set of lenses). I’m certainly interested.
Building up an excellent line of lenses for a mount takes a decade or more. Your expectations are unreasonable.
A decade for a basic set of lenses? Look at what Fuji is doing.
+1
I would say 24 months until we have some 6-8 lenses. 4-5 primes and 2-3 zooms.
Fuji lenses are overrated. How can lenses ever be good if the camera is 16 mp at most? Fuji lenses would be mediocre only on 36 mp.
“How can lenses ever be good if the camera is 16 mp at most?”
How does that even make sense?
It simply does. You can only judge a lens based on the output of the sensor. You can’t tell if a car is any good just by driving around on the parking lot.
It simply doesn’t. Did you try the Fuji lenses on a 36mp sensor? No, you didn’t, so how are they overrated?
Decades ago, maybe. Nowadays, all the researches have already been done. Data could be obtain more easily. I suspect the constraint is not the technology, but rather financial or economy(small demand)m
Or, with all the involvement with Zeiss they could be planning to bill this thing from day 1 as a “Digital Ikon” and release it with a purpose-built M-mount adapter that read lens encodings and looks sharp with the ZM lenses.
Look at what Fuji did with the X100s, with OSPDAF there are more options for focusing aids. What if the new FF NEX, when you attach the Zeiss/Sony M-mount adapter, brings up a “virtual” rangefinder focusing element. I say virtual because it would still be using the same principles as a rangefinder but the split image would be extrapolated from the phase detection data coming from the lens.
Hmm that could be a 21 and a 85 making it a nice 21-35-85 set. Alternatively it could be 35-50-85! both fantastic!! I am already saving the money…
I think one will be an 85mm as well.
Sorry, but sounds like a joke. If no IS is needed it should be no problem to deliver a small lens like the old canon 35mm/F2 with metal housing & less falloff for 600-700 Euro. -> http://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f2.htm
I’m sure OSS will still be needed for video.
I thought the NEX will have a 5-axis IBIS?
Totally agree. Modern CaNikon FF lenses start as low as 200USD (their 50s should be about that) and while their build qualities are rather poor, the optical performance of the lenses are totally usable.
That’d be only for a couple of primes and then prices go high very quick. I am not sure it makes much sense for Sony to go that route.
Why not? These lenses are quite useful, esp. for people that use them in harsh conditions. The most expensive weather sealed lens has an upper limit to the direct physical abuse it can sustain but these lenses are so cheap that you can just treat them as disposables.
Also, one such prime could be the decisive lens (something vital just like the CaNikon 50) that could Sony make sell significantly more bodies. It’s quite a difference if you pay 4500+ or 3200+ for a minimal kit.
Well, there are a couple of things here, Sony will obviously market the FF NEX as something high-end/pro, so they will need to start with “good” lenses, i.e. conveying value. Also, those who will want a cheap kit will probably go the adapter route. They will sell those bodies just for what they are – a small mirrorless FF, which can adapt lenses. That’s my reasoning, although I am completely with you on the “disposable lenses” argument.
Imho, and I could be wrong, Canikon are selling the 6D/D600 and plastic primes at very low margins with the intent to keep their market share. A very good strategy to counter Sony with its innovative products, which cost a lot to bring to the market and may never catch on. So, for Sony to go for the innovation strategy and also the cheaper prices, would be a suicide.
TBH if its such a niche expensive product for the body alone, i’d rather see a high quality zeiss prime lens along with it first to build up a good reputation rather than a “so-so” kit lens which will deter buyers who view it as “not worth the money”. RX1 is a nice example of excellent lens for a expensive camera that has very good rep
Lenses for digital camera’s have totally different set of design requirements. Lenses designed for film are useless today.
Hold it right there Maria, I use my beercan everyday,haha. But seriously, you can expect pretty good results from that old lens. Not every lens I presume.
The lens is actually priced usd 300. I would rather buy Sony SAL 35/1,8 which has better (stellar) performance on digital camera and is even cheaper. Both lenses are huge and on top of that need an adapter to make it fit a NEX camera. All this makes the suggestion of even using that lens seem really silly to me.
I’m not too worried about the lineup at announcement, but they’ll need to maintain at least 3-5 new FF e-mount lenses every year after this.
Say I’m a pro who wants to use the FF NEX as the main system, weddings, assignments, usual stuff. I’ll need, at the very least, a fast 50mm, a portrait lens, wide, standard and telephoto zooms. Ideally there will also be a fast superwide and something longer than 300mm. Sony is too far away from that, and won’t get there in a year or two.
But if I’m using it with an LA-EA3 or with existing manual lens, I don’t care about e-mount at all – a compact zoom may be nice, but everything else won’t be a huge influence on my decision to buy this or not. IMO Sony REALLY needs a good adapter for a-mount, ideally making the FF NEX the same as an A99.
If they are selling a $3,000 camera, the lenses will come. Alpha is not selling as expected and SLT shares are dropping, where else can Sony go?
“Alpha is not selling as expected and SLT shares are dropping”
Yeah, sure.
For NEX users A-mount shares are always dropping. Cause they don’t buy them and don’t want Sony to do anything for A-mount, only for the cameras they have and they want.
Typical blind egocentric approach.
I’m a NEX and A-mount user. No, I don’t see why there should be a mirror inside in the first place. If the FF nex is good enough, Sony can stop making a-mount bodies.
As I’ve said, a good adapter is all Sony needs.
They are. Which is why Sony is dropping the mirror in favor of a mirrorless a-mount. The A58 will be the last APS-C SLT body.
if they’ve done the work to make a FF NEX with on sensor PDAF i don’t think it would take very much to translate that from a NEX to a Alpha using same tech. Example would be when A99, VG900 and RX1 all were released at the same time using essentially the same sensor.
NEX is Alpha. Are you saying that NEX market share is dropping? If so I agree with you.
35, 50, 90 is classic. 35 2.8, 50 2.0 and 90 2.8 could be. The zoom would be for traveling, something like 24-105 or something, 3.5-4.5 or such. Sounds great, I think!
LOL…an aperture ring on the front…come on, someone is having a very good laugh at your expense !!!! 🙂
I use Zeiss lenses most of the time and if they change the established order of the rings I would never buy.
Ha ha ha 🙂
Ahahahahaha I know, right? Only every M-mount lens has the aperture ring in front of the focusing ring, seriously, for a second I thought you were really ignorant.
http://m.bhphotovideo.com/mobile/search?N=4288584243&T=Rangefinder+Lenses&tab=browse
Oh dear, being married to Nikon’s F… […emale] mount has damaged my brain cells 🙂
Leica is not on my list nowadays!
Technically not *every m lens. I can think up two or three exceptions.
But yes, a front aperture ring makes a huge amount of sense.
Always fun to read that some people thing this and this lens is mediocre when they don’t even know how a camera works, or even had a G or Zeiss lens. My experience with Sony lenses is that the lenses perform very good, better then any test you’ll read on the internet. So I’m very interested in what sony is going to do the coming year. I’m a lucky guy that has a camera from a company that is looking to the future and not only to their wallet.
This is a halo product so if there is indeed a lot of collaboration with zeiss and 4 lenses (counting the G zoom) at launch, that would be great!
“A similar (but bigger) lens will be announced for the E-mount FF system.”
– hehe, right!
Similar, BUT:
– Much bigger
– With AF
– Completely different body
– Completely different optical formula
– Most likely without aperture ring (typical for SEL lenses)
so… similar, but NOT SIMILAR AT ALL.
lol
but why they dont leave the dslr products and make only nex cameras? they can compete well in this field
because then all the alpha users will complain and complain about how they’ve been loyal sony consumers and are rewarded by a discontinuation of their beloved alpha system.
plus some people prefer the ergonomics of the DSLR form, i personally have no attachment to the DSLR form nor a-mount alpha cameras so i would love to see sony pour everything they have into NEX 😀
Andrea please bring the specs of full-frame Nex now. September is very close.
Very positive news! I believe that Zeiss is fully competent to deliver lenses that match the NEX FF. Take their latest lens, 135mm for CaNikon. Luminous Landscapes called it the “best lens in the world”.
The ZM lenses are mentioned above and compared to Leica: Compare also the price….
For a NEX FF you do not need chep kit zooms. I you like the quality of those – go for the NEX APS-C instead. You do not need the FF. Save your money.
Do not know about Canon lenses. I have a Nikon D800, the best camera I ever owned. (Owned cameras since 1961, including Leica and Contax). There is a series of lenses, 1.8G, that are not very expensive yet delivers excellently with the D800. Sony may have this kind of lenses later on, but from start they must satisfy the most demanding customers. So lenses have to be expensive.
This is a great chance for Sony top create a market segment where they are alone and CaNikon has nothing. Good luck Sony! Make me sell my Nikon and Fuji systems and need only one system.
New commenter here, so I apologize in advance if this is a redundant question:
“If the new NEX is FF does that negate the release of a new APC version?”
I have a Canon 7D now and a full kit of glass. I am looking to sell them all and and move to the NEX platform. My concern is affordability. If it goes full frame (which would be awesome) I think it would move out of my price range. If there is a new APC version I assume it would be cheaper and I am used to the crop sensor anyway. I could always get the existing NEX but what self respecting nerd wouldn’t want the latest version.
From my understanding, there will be two lines APS-C and FF.
Thanks for the info!
If you now have good lenses from canon and plan to buy a nex do not sell them.
Your lenses can be used on the nex and should be fully functional with an adapter.
Acording to current rumors the new nex cameras may have 5 axis image stabilization built into the camera.
I believe the new feneration of adapters will be even more functional than the old.
The universal nature of the a mount nex system (short flange distance) will allow the use of whatever you currently own.
Please, be logic Sony Zeiss. 24 + 35 + 50 or 35 + 50 +85. I hope at least f/2 for 50 and 85.
It would be good to see focal lengths not currently offered by Sony Zeiss in a-mount. The 35mm is not offered so that’s a good start. There are of course 24mm, 50mm, 85mm and 135mm a mount cz lenses.
A wide angle would be good, i believe zeiss produces a rectilinear 15mm ZF/ZE lens. For the third, perhaps a 55mm or a 100mm macro – with those plus the already existing a mount lenses one will have a great range. Merely duplicating the already existing a mount lenses in e mount would be a little lame for now.
For the rumored high price of the ff nex, Sony would be wise to bundle in a mirrorless a-mount adaptor.
100mm ish macro would be best for full frame.
Any less provides too little distance to subject limiting lighting choices and scaring or squashing of subject.
I very much like macros in fact most of my lenses are macro, but i preffer longer focal lengths.
60mm is suitable for crop senser because it is 90mmthe equivelent on ff.
Which macro lens do you currently use, the current Sony 100mm (SAL100M28) or the 50mm?
Tamron 60mm f2.0 macro for crop sensor.
Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro (almost not the latest one)
Tamron 180mm f 3.5 macro
These lenses are all excellent and economical.
Also sme close focusing lenses…
Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 apo macro..close focus to 1/2 magnification at 300mm
Not the nest but reasonably good and very convenient.. I would like a higher quality similar lens.
And Sigma 50-500mm f 5.6-6.8. Not the latest version. This lens has reasonably good close focusing but not the best long lens out there.
When working macro i often use a bescor led180 to allow stopping down to f8 or f12.
Thanks, I’ll have to check out the 90mm tamron macro. When I briefly tested the sony 100mm macro, I didn’t love it.
I have no doubt that a macro lens will come, but maybe not at the beginning.
Otherwise, I (personnaly) don’t care about what exists or not on A mount. It seems more logical to me to produce 3 or 4 classic focal length than “complete” another mount. However, if you already have Zeiss in A-mount, I can understand what you mean…
Contrary to what they initially did for their APS-C Nex line, I just expect some logic in focal length and some homogeneity in price and performance.
Nex will have the most complete and highest quality lens line up of any camera in existence.
Many high quality high eesolution lenses are coming out AND it will use every other lens line with adapters.
People who still complain about lack if good lenses are talking out if thier a$$e$.
Now lets talk about the pictures.
All cameras take crap for pictures. Because we have not seen better we call them good pictures.
With my eyes I can see a tree AND leaves.
With todays best cameras I can see a tree OR a leaf.
36mp will also not capture
A bird and feathers
A building and brick
A person and hair.
For some reason sony still wants to give us lower resolution in a full frame than in a c camera.
To capture my examples above requires about 200mp.
I do not expect that but at least I would like the same resolution in a full frame as a crop senser especially since the lenses CAN handle it.
24mp in c sensor would be 56mpa in full frame to maintain the SAME resolution.
32mp c would be 84mpa in full frame.
Yes this is more megapixels but not more resolution.
I would like to buy a new full frame camera but do not want a camera that is even lower resolution.
Many of you only view pictures on tv screens and cant see the resolution.
Too many of us are so used yo seing pictures without details and are actually convinced those are good pictures.
USE YOUR EYES! If your eyes see more than your camera than your camera does not see enough.
I know you want more resolution, in truth I’m actually wishing for more resolution as well.(More options anyway)
But you can’t call an image “crap” because it’s low res.
I’ve seen many great images taken on iPhones or other such cameras that are technically poor compared to what you, I, or most of the people here use.
Great images aren’t made by pixels, they’re made by photographers.
We only call them good images because we dont currently have any good images to compare them to.
If birds dont have feathers and trees dont have leaves the image is crap.
When we actually have cameras that take good pictures we will all consider the pictures we take today crap.
Correction.
Ansel Adams took pictures of trees with leaves and landscapes with textures.
HIS images are NOT crap.
I would like to be able to take pictures like that with something smaller than the 8″x10″ virw camera he used.
If Ansel Adams himself could return to the exact same spots and retake his best pictures with a Sony 24mp camera we could put that side by side with the original.
The new pictures would be crap.
But I think you’re missing my point…
Resolution does not make a good image. Subject, composition, artistic vision, etc… are what make a good image.
One person could take an uninteresting, dull image of a wall at 300mp with the best lens, on a tripod, showing magnificent detail.
And another could take an artfully composed image… one that excites and inspires the viewer even though it was taken on a cheap-crap toy camera with a plastic lens using some lo-fi, expired film.
The difference is the photographer.
That said, yes, better equipment makes our jobs as photographers easier. It does not however, make what has gone before “crap”.
I think some people may forget that we’re talking about a full frame NEX, whose body is rumored to be basically an NEX7 but a tad larger. This limits the types of lenses you’re ever going to see Sony produce unless you don’t care about much higher prices and a possible nose-diving camera. This also goes for people that complain about the slower apertures of E mount lenses, especially on their zooms. The rumored Zeiss zoom coming out at a constant F4 I feel, is a great compromise in size and weight, while still offering a very usable F stop for separating your subjects. The constant F4 zooms from Canon and Nikon are all the rage these days too, hitting a sort of sweet spot in the lens market of aperture speed, price, size, and cost.
These are small camera systems and are meant to remain that way. There are and will, definitely be offerings that appeal to the enthusiasts in all of us, but at the end of the day, this is no DSLR. Larger cameras are much more comfortable to hold with larger and heavier glass. I would love it if Sony came out with faster lenses for the e mount lineup, especially some f1.4 primes! But I’m willing to sacrifice a slight reduction as long as the image quality is top notch.
I can see Sony releasing faster glass eventually, but for a new system from a company looking to challenge the big two, it needs prices attractive enough to lure as many people as possible while at the same time, not dipping below image quality standards that enthusiasts would expect from a FF camera system.
Long lenses usually have removable tripod colors.
The proper way to hold a camera with a long lens is from the lens.
Your camera will only take a nosedive if you don’t you hold it correctly.
A lighter camera on a long lens will not be more difficult to handle properly.
I don’t know what we will get from Sony/Zeiss in this round, but overall I expect FF lens prices to go up over the next few years. We already see this in the newest lenses from Canon and Nikon. APS and other small sensor cameras have become so good that the only way to preserve an advantage for FF is with supremely fine lenses, and that last margin of quality is very expensive to achieve.
The NEX FF could be the system I’ve been waiting for from the start of digital, but it may also be hopelessly beyond my budget. Whatever happens, it will be an interesting few months for all of us in photography.
If sony succeeds in positioning the NEX-FF as a respectable and complete high-end mirrorless system, this will be good for the entire mirrorless community.
How those 4 FF lens work with the current E-mount APSC? Just under crop mode or any special features?
they would work like how normal full frame lenses work on aps-c bodies… you multiply the focal length by 1.5x (sony aps-c crop factor) to get the equivalent focal length on a aps-c camera
Why is it not a 35/2? they could practically revive the 35/2 on Contax G, which is a fabulous lens with a quite a modern design, and by all means compact enough for the NEX system.
It doesn’t even need to be revised.