—
Preorders of the new QX cameras:
E-mount QX1 in USA at Amazon (Click here), SonyStore US (Click here), BHphoto (Click here).
E-mount QX1 in Europe at Sony DE, Sony UK, Sony FR, Sony ES, Sony IT, Sony NL, Sony NO, Sony BE, Sony PT, Sony SE, Sony FI.
QX30 in USA at Amazon (Click here), SonyStore US (Click here), BHphoto (Click here).
—
The slide on top shows the pricing info of the next two new E-mount lenses (Click on the slide to enlarge). The new Zeiss 16-35mm f/4.0 OSS FE lens will cost 1350 Euro and ship end of October. The 28-135mm f/4.0 Powerzoom will cost 2500 Euro and ship beginning of December.
And here is the slide concerning the QX1. It has the same 20 Mp sensor from the “old” Sony A5000.
Reminder: Follow the QX and E-mount lens announcement live here on SonyAlphaRumors at 16:00 Berlin time (September 3).
——–
Sources can send me anonymous messages here:
[contact-form-7 id=”14822″ title=”Share”]
For readers:
Plenty of rumors and stuff coming the next days! Do not miss any rumor and join us here:
RSS feed: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SonyAlphaRumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/104216500156717934391/posts
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!
0 Responses
More Stuff!
awesome!
Yes, so you said.
“Triple rings realize rich expressions”? Come on Sony. Don’t write your press releases in Engrish.
My doctor told me I have a Cadillrac, I said no doctor I drive a Rincoln
Yes!!! Now with Wide Angels!!!! Much better than slim Angels.
Darn. I wish it were USD1350 for the 16-35.. or 1200 like the 24-70!
The 16-35 will be around 1299 in the USA everything is always more in Europe
I hope! And I hope the price difference compared to the 24-70 f4 is due to corner sharpness improvement!
I’m a little disappointed at the cost of the 28-135, but I’m probably still going to save and get it. It’s such a useful range for video, with OSS, hard to say no. Damn you Sony….damn you….
The “lack of E-Mount lenses” crybabies are slow on
the uptake today.
Oh well, looks like this would be a lot less compelling since it’s not the A6000 sensor…..
No A-mount slides? 🙁
Notice the NDA 18th August on the lens slide. This is a Non-Disclosure Agreement, which mean that the person who has the slide is not allowed to reveal it until after the 18th August.
It is possible that the a-mount stuff / slides / info has NDAs on it already. Could be before, during or after Photokina. When the NDA runs out we will find out about it.
Press says Sept 18. So No Amount for Photokina then.
Wow, whats a “premium wide angel zoom”? What kind of lenses do angels use?
Big telephotos, I guess, if they shoot from the heavens.
White color would also fit nicely.
yay! 16-35mm finally! OSS is a bonus too I guess
Aaahahahahahahahaaaaahahahahahaaaa!!! LOL!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LOLOLOL!!!
It’s the low budget sensor from A58, A3000 and A5000. The worst APS-C sensor of them all, much worse than the Sony 16 MP and 24 MP sensors. Heck, it’s even worse than the old 14 MP sensor from the first NEX models, and worse than Samsung’s and Canon’s sensors.
You’re out of your mind. That sensor is very good.
Why then is it only used in budget entry-level cameras? Why hasn’t it been widely adopted like the now classic 16 MP sensor? The only camera using it besides the three mentioned low budget Sony cameras, is the new Pentax K-S1. You know the one with the blinking LED lights. It’s a toy sensor for toy cameras! LOL!!
Just see the link I posted then STFU.
And it makes sense not to put a higher resolution sensor in this small device that would slow down refresh rates on the smartphone/tablet. I don’t think the 20mp sensor is a detraction at all.
This is hilarious! Fanboys trying to rationalize the catastrophic decisions made by their favorite company! Priceless! Hahahahahaha!!!
Or maybe you’re just an idiot, for which there is no cure.
What is so interesting is the multitude of posters here that despise Sony yet come every day to see what’s new. It’s pathetic. Also pathetic is the lack of interest and far fewer posts on Canon, Nikon, Fuji or Oly rumor sites.
Never said anything about despising Sony. They make the best sensors in the business, but the 20 MP sensor is not one of them. And it takes afanboy not to realize that.
Please tell us in what respect the 20mp sensor is inferior.
Image quality. Just look at the images produced by that low budget sensor, and it’s pretty obvious what I’m talking about.
The images produced by that sensor have always looked comparable to Sony’s other recent sensors.
You’ll have to show us some examples and comparisons to backup what you say. I’ll bet that you can’t.
I don’t like to argue with trolls. Nothing I have to show you will change your biased opinions. It’s sad really.
Yeah, I’m the troll. Obviously.
Why am I biased? I don’t own a camera with that sensor, and I’ve owned the NEX-5 with the 14mp sensor and own the NEX-6 with the 16mp sensor, so I have no reason to particularly favour the 20mp sensor. I’m just not retarded enough to believe your trolling bullshit.
You can’t show me anything, because there is nothing to backup what you say. You made it up in order to troll this forum – now THAT is sad.
So it is not the best sensor in the business. Still a camera of its own. No competition.
What do you expect for $300.00? Your not going to buy one of these anyway. These are for Asians that are addicted to selfies.
All the cretins are out in force today.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A5000-versus-Sony-NEX-7-versus-Sony-NEX5___929_736_652
The ‘old’ 16M sensor from a nex 5T destroyes my 18M 7D. Go play with your….
Yes, but that’s because it’s a great sensor. The 20 MP sensor, however, is not. That’s the sensor Sony has put in the QX1, not the 16 MP sensor.
Actually, the 20mp pixel was as good as the old 16mp sensor (if not better). Remember David Kilpatrick praising the A3000 sensor? Yep, this is that sensor (or a version of it).
i would be more willing to move to Emount if there was faster AF glass available.
Faster glass is reserved for A-Mount. Native E-Mount fast glass doesn’t make sense on a compact system anyway.
At that price, I’ll buy samyang instead
Why is f/4.0 the new FE Standard??! Can’t we get anything faster?!
In E mount it doesn’t seem likely anytime soon if ever.
If you need speed switch to a another system like m43 or Fuji.
For some reason Sony decided f4 is enough for zooms and f1.8 is the max for primes even though Fuji makes some lovely f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms without being terribly large or overtly expensive.
And here comes the equivalency brigade… 3, 2, 1…
1.4 exists in A-mount version. There is no point to duplicate a lense. Fuji doesn’t have a mirror lenses lineup, do they
Downgrade from Full-frame to m43? I’ll pass, but thanks for the suggestion… I guess if it becomes such an issue, just switch to the a7s and bump the ISO.
Fuji is not Full Frame
Fuji only make APS-C lenses, right? An APS-C 50-150 f/2.8 lens is the same size as a Full Frame 70-200 f/4.
Micro4/3 lenses can have even wider apertures with the same size, at the cost of the sensor size.
Because e mount is optimized for size. The larger faster zooms etc will come only after the line up is filled with smaller slower zooms. (And if Sony does kill the a mount)
Would much rather have a smaller f/4.0 UWA. No need for f/2.8 on an UWA zoom.
Regarding the zoom ranges ƒ/4.0 plus OSS is pretty fast. I also really doubt BrendonF is getting equivalent zooms with equivalent DOF with other systems, since this would mean 11-24 + 19-90mm ƒ/2.8 on APS-C and 8-18 + 14-67mm ƒ/2.0 on µ4/3.
First off, an f/4.0 is an f/4.0 no matter OSS or extra features a lens has. OSS does not compensate for a fast lens in all circumstances. If you’re dealing with a static scenic picture, then yes, OSS works.
OMG equivalence again. Yes for DOF smaller systems will be worse off but for using faster shutter speeds the lens with larger aperture will always win over the lens with smaller aperture regardless of sensor size.
Now also consider the Fuji system with their f1.4 lenses and you can see that small light not terribly expensive lenses are possible but Sony does not make them for some reason.
If i mount 135/1.8 to Pentax Q, do I really get the equivalent of 750/1.8 FF?
Of course it will ! Try it and see. 🙂
Is 500/10 on FF equivalent to 90/10 on the Q?
No, the image from the second lens will suffer from diffraction and noise.
Err I wasn’t referring to IQ ! 😛
But to FOV and shutter speeds. 🙂
Go ahead. Try it and see !
Oh, yes. get yourself a FUJINON LENS XF10-24mmF4 R OIS – complete equivalent to Sony’s FE 16-35 ƒ/4.0 with the only difference of being APS-C instead of Full Frame. Fuji’s got two primes with ƒ/1.4 and one offering ƒ/1.2 ALL WITHOUT Image Stabilisation, so you’re getting faster shutter speeds with much slower Sony lenses – don’t get me wrong: great Fuji lenses, making me a little jealous concerning their optical quality, but they’re not proofing your arguments.
Right so you post ONE lens to prove me wrong.
Image stabilization is nice to have but it won’t do anything to freeze subject movement. I would take speed over IS anyday if forced to make a choice.
Fuji has 35mm f1.4, 23mm f1.4, 58mm f1.2, 18mm f2 and the recently announced 16-50mm f2.8 OIS and 50-140mm f2.8 OIS.
The DOF differences aren’t terribly different between the two systems but the Fuji wins on speed and the ISO differences between the A7 and the Fuji XTi aren’t very high either.
All these lenses are good to very good optically without any real flaws like the Sony CZ 24-70mm OSS. And most of them are priced far less than what Sony charges for these CZ lenses.
And my point is not just for these overpriced optically flawed FE lenses but for the APS-C E mount as well which Sony seems to have forgotten about.
Brendon, If you’re so impressed by the Fuji system why don’t you just go out and get one instead of worrying about what Sony has or do not have to offer?
I have invested in an A mount system. Don’t care for mirrorless so don’t want either Fuji or Sony NEX.
Well, I’d posted FOUR Fuji lenses to proof your argumentation wrong and mentioned their outstanding optical quality before you tried to argue with that against me. So why are you wasting your time polluting your frustration into E-Mount threads instead of switching to Fuji anyway? I’m fine with E-Mount for Photo + Video Dual Use with my Sony lenses plus even more manual lenses. If you’re in need of something else, nobody’s keeping you…
saying that an aps-c F4 is as fast as a ff F4 is just as stupid as saying that a cellphone F4 is as fast as your DSLR. Yes you seem to get the same shutter speed independent of the sensor size, however the SNR for an APS-C camera is usually 3.7-7.5 dB lower. To compensate that loss you need F2.8 on your Fuji.
And remember, we want faster lenses because they give us faster shutter speed while the SNR is still acceptable. If you gonna say “WTF is this SNR crap I dont give a s***” then fine just raise your ISO up. Now you have your shutter speed.
What is stupid is comparing cell phone sensors with APS-C. But hey you brought that up not me ! 🙂 Next I am sure you will bring up infrared camera sensors or some other crap to the discussion table !
You are using general figures which may or may not hold true given that Fuji offers class leading high ISO performance any ways.
Anything faster won’t be compact.
The whole point of E-Mount’s existence is compactness.
If you’re willing to use big f/2.8 zooms, there’s the A-Mount for you.
I’m not concerned about DOF equivalence… When you’re dealing with fast lenses and its f-stop, my concern is the amount of light hitting any one pixel at a point in time… f-stop = (focal length) / (diameter of pupil)… Simple math equating to amount of light hitting the sensor… And these are full-frame EMount lenses… You’re not really concerned about compactness anymore – yes, it’s smaller than normal FF, but their current zoom lineup is still hefty in size as it is.
On the one hand, you can’t help but marvel at the imagination and boldness in releasing products like the QX lens camera.
But on the other, if you’re still waiting for lenses you want or need to get the most out of a Sony camera, I don’t see how not to feel anger at the company for spending resources on an adapter to attach lenses that don’t yet exist to a cell phone that few would prefer to use than the camera they just purchased.
The “lack of E-Mount lens” trolls have arrived!
E mounts seem to have finally reached a respectable level. FE on the other hand, not so much. Was the first generation of this product such a hit that it warrants another round? If Sony has so much resource that it isn’t impacting the FE lineup, no foul. But as they haven’t exactly over delivered, it seems odd. But call it trolling if you like
So you stilll haven’t understand the purpose of E/FE mount…
If you want 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 lenses, go with A mount as these will be to big for A7/r/s and A5xxx/6xxx (and old NEX)
Maybe I don’t! 😉 I want a system that contains a full range of lenses. Sure, a bigger lens won’t balance as well on a small camera, but with a battery grip, or a body designed to support it out of the box, you could stay in the same system, which would be preferable to owning different systems. Olympus seemed to have realized this with their OM system: the same tiny EM10 is optimized for small lenses. But the EM1, with a big grip, has no problem with zooms. Fuji went the same way: the XT1 has a substantial grip AND a battery grip add on, and shares lenses in the same mount, with smaller bodies. An A7 battery grip, or even a new A7 body, would allow them to deliver the full lens lineup. I bet they do it. Some day.
Then use the Sony adaptor and the A mount lenses, problem solved.
Have you tried this? I’d imagine there’s a measurable performance impact. Hard to compete with native, no matter how good the adapter is. But certainly a stop gap
But those are without stabilisation and require an additional adapter (additional money and fiddly to use), just to nominate two issues with that “solution”
He wanted a solution, I propose one. If he wants stabilisation and big lenses, use A mount like I said above.
And the A7 standard grip is pretty comfortable and could probably handle just fine with a fast zoom right now.
Sorry if I start asking for your official source about the “purpose of E/FE mount”…?
All I see is they are smaller, in part because they are mirror-less. Does that rule out the option of using big lenses (with large aperture and stabilization for example, or long range) on them? No.
No, but the purpose of the system is to be small, portable and lightweight.
The 24-70 and 70-200/2.8 lenses are all but small and lightweight.
f/2.8 zooms are reserved for A-Mount.
E-Mount is about compactness, so it’s f/4 zooms and f/1.8-2.8 primes.
If you’re willing to use big/heavy lenses, why not buy an A99 instead in the first place.
Because the A7’s give you the option to go small when you want to, and to adapt many lenses, both big and small. And between a 900 gram body + heavy lens and a 500 gram body + heavy lens, I still pick the former.
You can adapt A-Mount lenses just fine. You’ll lose some light with LA-EA4, or get slow AF with LA-EA3, but it doesn’t justify Sony’s releasing a whole new line of wide-aperture lenses for those few people who want to use big lenses on a compact camera, while all those lenses are readily availible in A-Mount.
You forgot to mention the fragile 160 g LA-EA4 adapter, which is what persuaded me to buy only native FE-Mount lenses.
I use both. I keep the 35 mm f/2.8 glued to the A7, and use it for just to supplement my primary camera. It takes up virtually no space in my compact bag.
For me the A7 is great for using compact primes. I use it all the time for those occasions when there is no time for a lens switch. I don’t like being caught flat footed and miss an important the shot.
I call the A7, and the 35 mm f/2.8 my insurance policy.
But, an A-Mount Zooms on a A7 without the battery grip is just a bad idea. The A7, and adapter weighs almost as much as an A99 you lose stabilization, and the ergonomics is horible unless you own the A7 battery grip.
I think it’s clear who’s being the troll here. I can’t believe people actually bother to do stuff like that.
Sony Imaging divisions in general do seem a bit scattered.
I would definitely prefer to use a dedicated camera to this.
+1
It has RAW mode~!!!
Yeah, first thing I noticed in the specs, probably one of the more important new features: makes it a ‘full featured camera in a novel format’, rather than the older versions which were ‘basic camera phone replacements’. This important difference is totally missed by the ‘must argue about lenses’ brigade though…
True, Sony needs to settle down right with their lens roadmap. Just look at Panny and Oly, they got their lens range pretty much well covered
Okay, thanx, now I know I’ve got to wait for the QX1 II hopefully recording XAVC-S and at least offering a hot-shoe taking a XYST1M Microphone…
28-135mm f/4 at 2500€!!!!!! Are they kidding??
that is a cinema lens, do you know how much the other cinema lenses priced?
Ok… but at this price tag I’m afraid most photographers will keep away from this lens!
because this lens is for videographer that use big and expensive cinema cameras like F55, F5, or fs700. This lens is big and heavy and all the three belts have teeth for follow focus support that will be uncomfortable for still shooter.
F5 and F55 don’t take E-mount lenses, but this will be good for FS700, A7S, and the upcoming E-mount 4K XDCAM.
Most still photographers should stay away from it. Why pay for power zoom if it’s unnecessary?
1350 Euro… Better start looking into adapted UWA-zooms then.
Well you usually get what you pay for…
Not always, at least according to most people the Zeiss 24-70 is not really prime glass for the money. I’m afraid that this will be something similar. I can add though that I have the Zeiss-zoom and I like it, but yes it does lack in corner sharpness. At 1350 Euros, this UWA-zoom needs to be better than that.
Obviously, E-Mount (and FE) designs involve IQ compromises to keep the lenses compact.
And price should be adjusted accordingly in my opinion, optical compromises and slower aperture needs to be compensated. The 16-35 Zeiss for A-mount is more expensive (at least where I live), but on the other hand it’s 2,8 and it has a good reputation. For me, it’s not so much about the price (although it will make a serious dent in my wallet), rather I just hope that it performs well enough to justify the price. The FE-lenses are pricey, and whiole I think that they perform well in general, they come with a price premium that is not always justified.
Sony’s is the only Full Frame Mirrorless system, and they are understandably milking that cow.
Their prices for certain A-Mount lenses are harder to justify.
Haven’t used A-mount for a couple of years, and quite recently sold the few lenses I had left since I won’t be going back that route. In general, Sony’s pricing is quite steep when it comes to lenses. The major problem with the A-mount lenses are that they are charging premium prices for lenses that are more or less rebadged 80’s designs.
A wa to tele zoom will always have qualitu issues.
Both ranges require very differrent corrections.
A seperate wa and tele is a better qiality option.
As long as the lens matches up to the price, then I’m pleased to see it being fairly expensive.
This is the lens that hopefully pairs up with all those a7R’s and makes a perfect landscape combination.
I’m just hoping Sony got this one spot on.
SEL28-135mm is expensive but i hope the quality and performance also superb, then i will consider to invest it. Still not sure what special about it especially 3 ring adjustment, focus, aperture and?
zoom
i totally forgot about that, thanks lol.
Its a video oriented lens. The precision levels for such a lens are much higher than AF lenses for photography purposes.
TBH it does seem a bit high but such lenses more often than not are very good optical beings.
I already have camera and lens from Nikon if it was suitable to my lenses
I would buy.
Such a shame Nikon not Creative like Sony
Metabones Adapters?
Jesse Lim Jia Nian, Is it?:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1002616-REG/metabones_mb_nfg_e_bm1_nikon_g_mount_lens.html
I think it is coz I’m not a Nikon user and nit sure with the mount type. Maybe you could find Nikon community using adapters on NEX, there are plenty of them I believe~=)
Maybe the 16-35 won’t be a disappointment.
I’m hoping that too, and it better not given that sky high price, but Sony-Zeiss zooms have a history that tells us otherwise.
Correction: The FE Sony-Zeiss zoom (all 1 of them) has that (very brief) history. The E-mount 16-70 is actually quite good, and the A-mount ones have been stellar.
The 16-70 sucks too. You may have a good copy, but go over to dpreview and you’ll find plenty of examples of decentering, and a blind test where no one could tell the difference from the 16-50 kit lens. That adds up to one bad lens.
A mount might be alright, I actually meant e-mount sony-zeiss zooms.
Fair enough. It does seem down to sample copy with the 16-70. The early ones, especially, seem to have a lot of problems. Shame.
I owned the 1670E on my N7, and it had several weaknesses.
Most of those were possible to be corrected without much effort, but it had almost the same sharpness issues as the 2470. Slightly better due to APS-C format but anyway. Corners (and I am not talking of extreme corners) where not sharp up to min. f9.
I just returned from our summer vacation where I used the 16-70mm on a Sony A6000 extensively. I am very happy with the quality of the pictures. Comparable with the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8.
My Sony Zeiss 24-70 2.8 and 16-35 2.8 have performed excellently.
If you’d compare the ZA2470 with the FE2470 you would see why Hendrick is hoping – so do I.
At the moment I am working with my ZA via LA-EA4, and it is not all that comfortable from size and weight pov.
So I hope that Sony learned out of the criticism against the FE2470 and did a better design job on the uwa zoom…
I think its gonna perform as well as the 24-70mm because Sony is well aware of the lack of third part vendors offering FE lenses so I don’t think they are to worried.
I wish Tamron would get in the game because they had a f2.8-4.0 full frame wide angle that was both light weight and a stellar performer that’d probably give the Zeiss model a run for its money.
In fact if they launched the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for the A7 the Zeiss model would be outclassed immediately, because the 28-75mm is sharper at f/4.
They’re overcharging for this lens. I doubt it’ll perform as well as the Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8.
The ZA 16-35mm f/2.8, and 24-70mm f/2.8 are stellar performers. I assumed the 24-70mm f/4 was going to be outstanding as well, I bought it for my A7, and was utterly disappointed. Had it been an A-Series lens like the A77’s 16-50mm I would have thrilled, but it wasn’t, and they charged a premium for it.
I actually returned it.
The only thing the A7 Series has done for me so far it to reaffirm my commitment to the A-Mount.
I wonder if you own an A7 at all and if it is as imaginary as those sales figures you keep referring to – the ones you can’t seem to post here.
I bought it with the kit lens, and the 35 mm f/2.8, on sale at Henry’s. I’ll post them again for you. Notice the big red A-Mount bar standing on top of the little orange E-Mount bar, and get used to playing second fiddle to the A-Mount community.
Can I ask where you got those? Which market do they refer to?
I’m not sure what I need to get used to, as I’m invested in both mounts, so the continued success of both mounts is in my interest, don’t you think?
I find your bravado over A-mount sales strange to say the least.
They are slides directly from a current Sony’s presentation? The slide is the actual global sales figures, and should make it clear that the A-Mount is growing rapidly.
The A-Mount generates well over 50% more revenue than the e-mount, and it revenue steam is growing faster.
The more Sony focuses on mirror-less the more people buy A-Mounts.
With one A-Mount body released in the last year and a half and precious little in terms of lenses, and with apparently nothing significant coming at Photokina, how long do you think that revenue stream will continue to grow? No company can be successful indefinitely in a business segment it is neglecting.
Bingo. With all the love that Sony gave the E-mount in 2014 I would be shocked to see A-mount grow over 2013 or at a rate greater than E-mount with all those A7 bodies, the A6000, 5100, etc.
This is coming from an A-mount guy who shot the A900 and a nice portfolio of lenses for years. I still have all the lenses to use with the LA EA-4 but I finally gave up on the A900 when the A7s came out. The writing is on the wall.
We will see after Photokina where the A-Mount sits. If you haven’t been tracking the A99II posts generate far more comments than any other on SAR. The demand for it is enormous.
The A77II, and A99II will drive sales for the A-Mount like the previous models did.
Sorry man but you need to learn how to read a chart. Wherever you got that from, it does not show A-mount rapidly growing. Looks like it went from about 25% of total sales in 2009 to 30% in 2013. You call that rapid?
It does, however show the mirrorless segment growing from almost nothing in 2009 to about 22% last year . That is huge growth.
LOL indeed.
Do you actually read the paper?
Actually moron they grew to 33% when the bottom dropped out of the point and shoot camera segment, when DSLRs flatlined and camera phones hammered just about everything.
Plus they grew faster then the e-mount in the last two years even through the DSLR market turmoil.
Sony’s A-Mount is growing when the rest of the DSLR market is contracting which is an impressive feat fuc*tard.
ROTFL………
Funny man you asked a troll to read. Next you’ll do something crazy like tell them to keep their ill-informed mouth shut before they make stupid comments, cause they obviously never read a market analysis report ever.
We all know the A-Mount is rolling back to its previous market share, cause people are only now comfortable using and demanding EVF (cause of smart phones) on their interchangeable lens DSLR cameras, and Sony is the only game in town.
Yeah Willful, you got me. Clearly I do not understand 20% growth over five years vs. 5% growth over the same period. If our friend BRWAT had been smart enough to just say that A-mount has higher sales figures than E-mount, he would have been fine but he had to put his foot in his mouth and claim that A-mount revenue steam (sic) is growing faster. And you had to defend him. tsk tsk.
Please enlighten me. As I read the graph, the pink portion of the bar is Digital Single Lens Reflex Camera (A-mount, no?) The orange section of the bar is Mirrorless camera (E-mount, no?). E-mount grew from what looks like 2-4% in 2009 to 22% in 2013 – a gain of 20% while A-mount grew maybe 5%.
Please show me the error of my ways. Pretty sure my IQ has cleared the “moron” barrier at least. Maybe a “fuc*tard” but definitely not a moron.
No, I did not read the paper. I read the chart that Lu CID posted. If there was a paper, I guess my moron powers kept me from finding the imaginary link.
Sony has published its quarterly results. Its impressive, they’re probably going to be the second largest interchangeable lens manufacturer soon.
If you want to see a breakdown by segment you’ll need to go to a product launch. Sony holds onto that data, and rarely gives it out to the public.
The difference between Sony, and Nikon’s revenue stream is less than 10 million dollars per quarter, however Nikon is loosing money, while Sony is profiting from the RX Series, Mirror-Less, and SLT.
“plus they grew faster in the past two years”. So you conveniently omit the three previous years? How exactly do you justify in your mind that a 20+% growth of mirrorless is less impressive than what, a 3-5% growth over the same period in A-mount?
2 years is a lifetime in consumer electronics.
Spin it however you like. The graph shows five. Two years does not make a trend, five does.
and it looks like both e-mount and a-mount grew at the same rate over the past two years. Hard to tell from this tiny graph and I would love to have the actual figures behind it.
So what your saying is that Sony mirror-less, and SLT are growing at a time when Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and Panasonic market share is shrinking.
Funny how that is
6 months is. Its almost impossible to make any predictions with Sony. Sony’s marketing department doesn’t communicate effectively with the outside world, and they change directions at the drop of the hat. Investing into a long term Sony platform isn’t a good idea.
The only reason I stick with the A-Mount is because of the lenses I’ve already bought. However I’m slowly buying Fuji mirror-less products, they supplement my A99, but at some point in the future a Fuji will probably replace it.
All I notice is how that little Orange bar has gotten 20% larger in the past four years, while that “big” A-mount bar grew maybe 5%.
Please lookup the word T-R-E-N-D
@Chunk
What you should do is look-up HUBRIS, because Sony suffered from it.
Sony mirror-less has already flatlined. There attempts to create a Full Frame mirror-less market, and not fully develop the (APS-C) e-mount, was a colossal mistake. Not releasing a weather-sealed semi-pro/professional (APS-C) NEX-7 replacement was a colossal mistake.
Now STFU, and go away.
a7 is the nex 7 replacement – one camera to make them all happy 😛 no need for more apsc beside a77 and a6000.
What were the issues with the FE2470 that you disliked? I haven’t had the chance to try one as I have the 2870 kit lens, but I’m curious what about the performance wasn’t good? Not sharp? Vignetting?
Focus speed, soft corners from 24 to 70 mm @ f/4, massive barrel distortion @ 24, and massive pincushion distortion @ 70. The bokeh is poor. This lens is never really that sharp.
The lens feel under developed, and rushed to the market. It’s just not worth the price they’re asking for. It shouldn’t have the Zeiss logo on it.
I really can’t recommend an alternative cause there isn’t one. After using the Fuji XT-1 for a week I’ve decided that I’m dropping the A7 for a platform that has a better lenses, better support, and just feels right.
FUJINON LENS XF18-55mmF2.8-4 R LM OIS
Maybe, won’t, disappointmen!
Allways look on the bright side of life 🙂
It’ll be 100% garbage, but the FE-Mount fanboys will praise it because, that’s what they do. We’ll probably be seeing http://www.dyxum.com reviews starting that its better than all lenses that came before it.
Just like the 55 F1.8 is garbage right? What are you shooting with that is so vastly superior. I’m just curious. You complain about FE-mount “fanboys”, the implication being that are completely unobjective and don’t base their opinions on anything tangible. When you come out and make ridiculous statements with no knowledge or objective fact to back them up, you’re being just as bad. Why don’t we wait and get some tests and experience with this lens when it comes out before we start passing judgement. This is super simple stuff.
Actually numb skull the 55 mm is an outstanding lens. Just like the 35 mm, and the 70-200mm f/4.
However the 16-35mm is going to be garbage, cause the 24-70mm is garbage. They’ll make a fine pair of lenses for those willing to keep lens correction on forever.
This comment is 100% garbage.
1350euro… kinda out of my range. Maybe I’ll have to wait for the Zeiss manual focus wide angle. Hopefully it will be cheaper and will be available before my trip to Japan next year
Ummm gate to spoil it for you but have you seen the prices for ZM wide angle primes from zeiss, or any wide angle for that matter. The new loxia lines proves this. It ain’t gonna be cheap that’s for sure
If the loxia is price at around the same as the ZM then it’s well with in my expectation. Or else I’ll just have the Voigtlander ultron. Not gonna pay anything more then USD 1200 for a lens.
hate to spoil it but you won’t find any Zeiss ZM wide angle lens under 1,200 – cheapest is probably the 25mm at 1,200 going up to the 15mm at 4,600 with the inbetweeners hovering around 1,500
21mmf4.5 biogon. I have it. It just doesn’t work on my a7r.
no wonder, firstly it’s a biogon – any ZM biogon is rubbish on the A7R as the lens element sits too close to the sensor and second, it’s the ‘classic’ version which is zeiss for really not modern at all. sell it and wait?
Already sold it. Wanted to wait for the loxia before buying the voigtlander ultron. Doesn’t have much confidence in their paint job as my voigtlander adapter already started to lost some paint where else my Planar still in good condition. But in the end I’m pretty sure I’ll end up with the Ultron. The chances of loxia being cheaper is pretty slim unless they went for slower speed.
the way I see it, take the equivalent ZM and add on USD200 – that’s your Loxia price. based on that, there’s no way we’re going to reach CV lens prices.
Yup. Pretty sure I’m gonna end up with the Ultron. It’s not bad. Just a little bit heavy. And have no weather sealing. But at least it’s not focus by wire.
vario-tessar means sucks
If it really is heavily based on the Tessar design…it most probably would, but it’s more likely that it’s only a brand and doesn’t really have much to do with the original Tessar.
I’m super worried. Sony has not demonstrated a stellar lens design ability for really tricky problems. A full frame sensor, with a fairly thick cover glass, and some serious hurdles to deal with in the corners on an ultra wide zoom is a tricky problem.
At $1,700 USD on an f/4 lens… I hope they understand what the expectations are. And meet them.
It will be about $1299 U.S.
It seems that with 24-70 f/4 they compromised IQ for compactness.
May do this again with this one.
With a 24-70mm, it’s *almost* understandable that the wide end be a little funky. At least it’s something to expect, based on how hard it it is to design a lens that’s great at wide and short-tele.
But this lens… this is for landscape guys. This is for the harshest, pixel-peeping, counting veins in leaves at infinity focus in the corner of the frame, wide-open at 16mm guys.
If they think they can BS this lens, “fix it with software” and pray that nobody complains… there’s trouble ahead.
I hope they take a no-compromises approach! (For the system’s sake)
This is Sony. They don’t mind over pricing and under delivering.
That kind of landscape guys probably won’t settle for anything less than Zeiss‘s 15/2.8 lol
You hit the nail on the head man! This lens is no joke, it’s for the true enthusiasts. I’ve been waiting for it for months now, using a 10-18 in the meantime, which really doesn’t have a place on a FF camera.
I have no idea what Sony is thinking with pricing. Canon’s priced their new entry at $1199, and it is exceptionally well-reviewed, apart from of course, carrying the Canon branding and all its weight. Even without corrections, distortion is incredibly low, and it’s sharp to the edges even wide open. Stonking good value!
Companies that are lacking market share or brand awareness have to compete at least a little on price, and Sony is just too arrogant to do that. This situation is made even worse when the quality of their lenses is inferior to just about every company out there.
The European price has almost always been roughly the same number as in dollars. So you should expect a MSRP of max. 1.399,- $
I hope you’re right.
Bart, unless this lens tests really great, I’m going Voigtlander 12mm for my A7 UWA. It’s really tiny, and with my 35mm Summilux, 50mm Summicron and 90mm Tele-Elmarit will make a really compact FF system. I’ll work out the vignetting/magenta-corner issue. I’m not optimistic about likely performance of a 16-35mm zoom.
Exactly. Those euro prices always include 19% VAT, so what they lose in exchange rate they make up for with not having to factor VAT into the MSRP as the tax is added after in The States.
Ah, I seriously hope so. That would make much better sense. Still though, that 28-135 looks beastly for the A7 in terms of size.
It is a specialized video lens meant to be rigged. Get over it.
Guess so, I’m not a video guy….I’m already over it.
If it end up priced at US$1399, unless it perform a lot better than Canon EF 16-35 f/4L IS and more compact than Canon’s, I would rather get Canon’s.
This to me is the ultimate fail for FE. The pricing is absolutely ridiculous for lenses slower than what M43 has to offer. Are they serious? They don’t even look small and there are some solid first and third party options for a-mount. I get the G zoom is specialized for video, but seriously? I must be missing something here.
Any of us who already own Sony’s 16-35mm aren’t gonna buy this. It’s really meant for the new A7 users who want a native lens. Diehard mirror-less fans.
No way in helll after these past few announcements I’m moving over to e mount. No….freaking….way. A mount or no mount for me.
I’m sticking with the A-Mount Zeiss combo for my primary DSLR, but the Fuji XT-1 is my only CSC.
It’s an odd combo, but it works for me (plus Zeiss also makes AF lenses for Fuji mirror-less)
Really? Which M43 8-18mm f/2 UWA and 14-70mm f/2 are you referring to?
Exactly.
Is that the Xperia Z3 in the slide~!?
Play Memories V5 with new UI…. Mentioned in the slide… Hope it works with Andorid L (current one doesn;t)
1.350,-€ appears a little bit overdrawn. I’d consider, if the performance (especially sharpness) is significantly better than with the 2470.
finally 16-35…hope it is as good as the canon one.
Everyone does.
Slow, but I admit they look good. DOF worse than that of micro four thirds with these guys. What…is…the…point. Oh wait, they are zooms. Ok, so you get like one stop additional DOF advantage over Oly or Panny zooms. Meh. Prices look…..INSANE!!!! INSANE!!! Even for a specialized movie lens.
For mirror-less I’m sticking with my Fuji 10-24mm f/4.
I feel like mirrorless is owned by olympus, panasonic and fuji- and for good reason. Tons of lenses and great all around systems that at this point are well rounded. For the big…”I gotta have a full frame and killer lenses”….stuff, I don’t see the point. Keep the DSLR gear, save serious coin, get the same if not better performance and call it a day.
Sony’s too busy trying to herd us towards their FE-Mount. Not replacing the NEX-7 was a really bad idea. Sony screwed the entire E-Mount fan base by not delivering its successor, which is what users were looking for.
X-Pro is a better overall system, the 23 mm f/1.4, 35 mm f/1.4, and the 56 mm f/1.2 are tiny but extremely usable, and we’ll never see Sony produce anything remotely similar on its e-mount.
If I go FF mirror-less in the future it’s definitely not going to be a product produced by Sony. Fuji supports its users, Sony doesn’t.
If Sony had a brain they’d produce an APS-C version of the A7. Give it the ergonomics, and weather sealed housing of the A7, and the AF speed of the A6000, and they’d make serious inroads.
The E-Mount already has a decent selection of lens that the A7 can’t take advantage of.
But they won’t, and Fuji will, so they’ll dominate semi-pro mirror-less, and Sony won’t
Ohhh… an identical A7 series camera but in APS-C would be fantastic!
I agree. I’ve been sort of hoping for one, too. Would let me use my NEX-6 lenses. I’m not excited by the absence of audio input on the A6000…
I agree after using you XT-1 I’m strongly considering moving away from the A7. I only have one decent lens for it always.
As you’ve noticed yourself, there is no 8-17mm f2 nor a 14-70 f2 for m43. And if there were any, they’d cost the same or more if the pricing of FT lenses are any indication.
For native lens mount stuff, I have moved away from Sony because their pricing doesn’t make sense for me either. APS is good enough for most people as long as the glass is good but Sony doesn’t seem to get it. However, for people like myself who’ve got a pile of good old glass lying around, the Sony bodies are still the ones to beat in terms of price/performance, so I’ll probably keep at least one of those bodies around for use with old glass.
Insane pricing.
Does it shoot xavcs too? 1080/60p?
Interesting. Looking forward to these items and their respective reviews. I dont mind paying for quality so these 2 articles I expect to be good. So far have been impressed using the Zeiss 55mm on my A7s.
Holy pants down Batman! If the price for the 16-35mm is right, it better be an absolutely outstanding lens for that money.
Wow that 28-135mm is insanely cheap, I was worried it would be twice that price!
?? I think it’s quite cheap. Ziess 16-35 in cinema doesn’t have OS and it’s $20000. I am sure it will be really sharp. 28-135 with in $3500 range? Are you kidding me? its so cheap!??!? Look, the cheapest Current cinema servo zoom lens is Fujinon 19-90 $40000….Oh god, I wish the FS700II would be full frame that I could use this lens.
That’s exactly what I was thinking! The whingers on here who think the 28-135mm are expensive, this lens is definitely not aimed at them… For those who know, this lens seems INSANELY cheap.
it’s a fake zeiss duh. mtf charts show it’s worse than similar from other brands it’s also more expensive. compare peanuts to peanuts!
I just bit the bullet and ordered an A7s, plus both LEA adapters, keeping my A-mount cameras, and lenses, too. I’m excited about the new camera, but I’m not sure how I feel about having to buy one mount for sensor performance (really high ISO, high DR) and keep the other mount for lens performance (f/2.8 through the range). So, I’m diversifying my portfolio, hoping Sony will support at least one of these mounts in the future.
Good-luck not real name. I was suffering GAS too, and I was almost about to pull the trigger on the A7s until I heard that a 36mp 12fps A99II might be arriving within the next six months. So I decided not to because:
I just couldn’t bear the thought of losing the stabilization I’ve grown so accustomed to on my close to twenty Zeiss, and G-Series lenses.
I just couldn’t imagine using a camera that’s burst rate that’s only 1/3 of my A77, and only 12mp.
I only recently found out the A7s body is moisture resistant, and not weather sealed which is a shame cause I’ll be using it outdoors.
The A99’s design is a perfect for my mitts. Its like a well worn baseball glove, and feels like an extension of my body. It’s a feather weight compared to my A900
So I decided I’d buy a shinny new 50 mm f/1.4 Zeiss lens to pass the time.
not buying the a7s because of a new a99 on the horizon? sounds a bit strange because they are so different and serve different needs.
If your really suffering GAS there is only one true solution…TUMMS. Oh yeah, I have the 50mm 1.4. Next to my Zeiss 135mm 1.8…dang fine is what that is.
RAW on the Q, very good, now for the response time…