The Sony Assist website (access for Sony employees only) has now listed a new FE lens! It’s the long-awaited 24-70mm f/2.8 G Full Frame E-mount lens! There is yet no image or other detailed spec of the lens but if it’s listed it means it surely is going to be announced soon (between now and CES in early January).
I thank the source for sending me this and I hope he can find some more lenses on the database. He should check for SEL1635G, SEL8514G and some more combinations 😉
Thanks!
UPDATE: Here is another image that shows the drop down list:
–
Stay tuned on SAR and subscribe the newsletter to get info when it matters:
[wysija_form id=”1″]
To not miss any rumor quickly subscribe our social network:
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
If you have some “rumor” to share just send me an anonymous messages here:
at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com or use the contact form you see on the right top of this site.
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!
232 Responses
Make him or her look for a135mm f2.0, would you ☺
He is surely reading your comment! And I upvoted your request 😉
There will likely be few if any new product announcements till after the holiday season so as not to detract from this seasons sales.
However it would be nice if things like this were available before next wedding season 😉
Amen.
Please Please Please be a reasonable price 🙂 But I’m more interested in a 85mm 1.4 as well.
Can’t see it being a penny less than say the new Nikon 24-70 or the Canon 24-70 II
Nah probably not, and why should it?
This is great news. I bet it will test great and be a wonderful lens. I say it will be pricey and along the Canon price arena. However, this is a key lens to attracted professionals.
The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II is pretty much peerless. If Sony can match that lens, that would really be something. Don’t care if it doesn’t have OSS, like the Canon doesn’t.
peerless? maybe price-wise… look at that cheap Tamron…
you do realise the tamron is on a 36MP camera and the canon one on a 22MP? So in percentage of total MP the Canon is WAY sharper…
yes, I did. But I also know the performance can not be scaled linear.
But If you prefer to compare on the same low-res camera, here we go:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/30b3635e56e3f32b7139e4e96b49b284f1f0a1089ac963cb506329268a8e220e.png
Same sharpness, slightly higher transmission, less distortion, vignetting and CA’s for the Tamron.
And the price…
Canon: 1700€
Tamron: 790€
… the difference is an A7!
Plus: The Tamron has OSS, the Canon not.
In that case… Wow! :O
Yes, the Tamron is clearly a good lens for the money, but you really need to look at the DXO field maps to see that the Canon shines wide open across most of its focal length range. The Tamron is OK at 24mm f/2.8, but does struggle at longer focal lengths.
Some people may be fine with that, but to those where consistent wide open performance matters, the Canon might be worth the extra outlay.
Great news, but I would still prefer 70-200 F2.8. Just feel 24-70 is already covered with so many fast primes. ????
Excellent, one for my list I reckon.
I wonder if Sony will finally announce their lens roadmap. Having been rumoured for so long I have held off and held off getting new lenses because I want to see what they are going to bring out.
FF lenses are an expense to me so I can’t afford buying them all, so it’s frustrating having being drip fed lens news, mostly from Zeiss and not Sony themselves.
Interesting that this is a G lens. I wonder if Zeiss banned Sony from slapping its blue badge on to underwhelming zoom lenses…
Well, although it sounds great, it is only a non-result search in the Documents Tab. To say that there is a real product just because of that is being really optimistic. It would be nicer if Model or Parts Tab would be visible.
Interesting point, although it looks like the lens appears in a drop down list, rather than this guy having typed it in manually.
In fact, I really hope to be erroneous and that the lens exists and will be soon announced 🙂
Exactly, if this is not a photoshop job chances are good it’s real. I wonder if it’s also visible in the ‘Model’ tab where the combo box refers to. Maybe with more info.
If Tamron can offer an equivalent FE 24-70 2.8 I’m there.
Tamron will not get the volumes from E-mount lenses, as any of the lens they design can be used across multiple mounts. E-mount will require complete re-design and won’t be able to provide big volumes to support the R&D investment.
But we were told countless times that “mirrrorless is the future”, “DSLRs are ancient tech” and so on! Now it turns out it’s not worth the investment, because it doesn’t sell well enough?
This is not what he mean. If Tamron create a lens dedicated to the specification of E-mount then R&D investement can only be supported by the sales of this specific lens because of the short flange distance.
If they create a lens, let say for Nikon mount, then they could sell it trough different mount by just adding a tube in the construction. The R&D cost will be then supported by the sales combined of all the mount.
Tamron like Sigma doesn’t have the sales volume to develop a specific lens to every brand out there, so they pick the one that technically allow them to adapt it easily to other mount.
What is interesting is that Zeiss is seeing a market big enough to create 2 specific lines (Loxia and Batis) for FE lens without the help of another mount unlike the Touit (X & E-mount).
And by judging of the actual backlog of orders for Batis and Loxia they were right to bet on the FE.
According to Zeiss, Sony outsold Canon and Nikon in Germany in August…
According to Leica, the SL has the fastest autofocus on earth. I have my doubts with statements like that.
You can’t argue that sales numbers are much more easy to measure than AF speed which depends lot on test environment and it is not standardized. A sale is a sale.
Adapters are BS. Very few people, if any, are going to buy non-native AF lenses specifically to use on FE bodies. When Tamron/Sigma make those lenses for Canikon, they are NOT meant for FE.
So we’re being told constantly that FE is so much more advanced and progressive than Canikon, but Canikon seems to still be the place where the money’s at.
As for the “adding a tube in the construction” to eliminate the need for adapter, only Samyang does that, not Sigma/Tamron.
Of course the money is in the camp of Canon and Nikon. They have decades of sales behind to back them up. But you can’t deny that Sony’s FE family is gaining traction, not enough for small company like Tamron and Sigma to rely on the system but what did you expect from a 2 years old system?
What happen with Zeiss is encouraging, Voigtlander is also a good news and the fact that Sigma is evaluating the jump show that the sales are significant.
Yes, but tamron already has the software for the native FE lenses because they design lenses for sony. So that R&D is done.
Their 28-75 and 24-70 already work well with the sony A7Rii and A7ii via an adapter.
So why not just modify the existing lenses a little to use the FE mount without an adapter, but give full FE native lens functionality like EYE-AF and video focus etc…
Please, let it be like as good as the Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 Di VC USD (22MPix on D810/31 points in total at DxO, best ranking zoom in that range!) and also not that more expensive….
But I expect it to be at least 2…3 times more pricey…
Please stop, i dont have any cum left after this news!
when you grow up, you’ll save it for the loved ones 😉
You made me laugh so hard 😀 thanks 😀
Weird, as i have never seen Sony put aperture in the Zoom lenses product code. They do that for prime lenses alone. Following the existing naming convention it should be SEL2470G instead of SEL247028G or even if they decided to put aperture in the model name it would have been SEL2470F28G. So maybe someone cooked up something.
That could match with my comment below, good point.
you are reffering to the technical public name of the lens. This is a web page for Sony’s employee and apprently to reach doc regarding a specific product, so they probably added the aperture number to differentiate it from the F4 to be efficient in their research.
It’s like a clerk showing you his inventory screen: bunch of number that have no sense because it’s their inventory code.
It’s either that or Sony is pulling out a 24-7028 zoom…
I believe it’s a 2-47028 zoom
yeah, the widest and the longest in the world.
Though I hope it come with his own wheel and engine to move it along.
As sony seems to have partnered up with Ford, you get a car mount with the lens.
It even come with a built-in bed. And when this baby is aiming to the sun, anyone sleeping on the bed will get barbecued.
It does not need to if it’s F512 😉
Yeah but does it do macro and have a built-in extension tube?
Sony 24-7028 G confirmed!
Finally Sony e-mount can have a premium flagship fast standard zoom and we can all forget about the horrible 24-70/4 ‘Zeiss’ overpriced kit lens and pretend it never happened.
Haha so true
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 G $1299
I want some of what you are smoking 😉
I think you need to double that!
An A-Mount Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 can be obtained for $500. Just saying.
And a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 can be had brand new for Canon and Nikon for $800 but Canon and Nikon still sell their lenses for over $2K 😉
Yes. But there is the Tamron option, and also first-gen Zeiss option (about $750 mint condition) for A-Mount, while the ~$2000 FE 24-70 f/2.8 will be the only one for FE.
You mean the 28-75 F2.8 not the 24-70 F2.8.
No, the 24-70 f/2.8 USD. $500 mint condition
OR
$643 new from store
The store you’re citing has double the price for some reason….
http://www.pleer.ru/_146949_tamron_sony_minolta_sp_af_24_70_mm_f28_di_usd.html?frommarket=https%3A//market.yandex.ru/product/8282437/offers%3Fhid%3D90613%26grhow%3Dshop%26how%3Daprice%26deliveryincluded%3D1&ymclid=48461274659487905128001
There is no legitimate vendor selling the 24-70 F2.8 for under $1000 even factoring in holiday discounts. The link you posted is bogus, you’re confusing the 28-75 with the 24-70.
It’s not bogus, it’s one of the most popular consumer electronics stores in Moscow. I shopped there numerous times. They say the price will be going up to 720$ in December due to the ruble’s continued fall, but still.
That’s a great price, in the US $1099 is the price after mail in rebate.
Hmm… odd. I thought consumer electronics were cheaper in the US.
Not in the camera world, it’s actually cheapest in Asia.
Sony $1299 vs Zeiss $2599
There is simply no way Sony will price an f/2.8 lens at the same price point as their f/4 lens, regardless of the whole G vs Zeiss thing, especially since Canon and Nikon price that lens at over $2K.
I don’t know where this urban legend come from, but the G lens doesn’t mean cheaper than Sony-Zeiss. They tend to be in the same price bracket or a little bit higher in A-mount.
The only relatively cheap lenses are the ones with no marking.
Sony Zeiss FA 24-70 2.8 SSM2 is $2,098.
Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1140694-REG/sony_sal2470z2_sony_24_70mm_f_2_8_za.html/prm/alsVwDtl
In a body smaller than the 55mm 😉
Crap, do you want it to scratch your butt too, or walk the dog and take out the trash?
Where are you getting that pricing?
He’s not getting it from anywhere (apart from maybe a very dark unmentionable place). It’s just another random blurting.
It sounds like wishful thinking. Sony might remove OSS to keep the cost lower, I don’t see it going for less than $1500.
This pricing decision will reveal a lot. Will the prices duplicate the FA equivalent lenses or will
Sony reduce equivalent lens prices to aggressively encourage migration?
The only precedent that currently exists is the 35mm 1.4. The FE price actually exceeds the FA lens (with its outdated Minolta optical design & AF). Although the FE 55mm 1.4 is a bargain compared to the FA 50mm 1.4, it is not truly equivalent obviously.
pick from the sky 😀
Fascinating Sony opted for the G series designation rather than putting the Zeiss badge on it. Exciting to see how the Sony/Minolta inheritance manifest in this new FE era 🙂
My question is, is this an isolated incident of picking G over Zeiss, or has Zeiss pulled it’s badges-of-approval as it is now heavily invested in Batis lenses.
Zeiss Batis and Sony Zeiss lenses compete directly.
Maybe by selecting G, Sony does not need to waste licensing fees on the lens (which they design and produce either way) and will be more flexible in pricing it slightly lower than the FA 2.8. It’s all just branding BS anyway.
Sony likely dumped Zeiss now that Zeiss wants a share of the FE-mount market pumping out the Touits, Loxia and Batis. The Sony/Zeiss and Zeiss-Zeiss clarification was probably a prequel of things after their high-levels broke up with each other. Remember the days when Sony launched the A700 & A900, Zeiss was happily stay silent and Sony was hyping the Zeiss badge? Gone are the days
No they don’t. Sony have no native 85mm or 25mm.
an 85mm 1.4? did I pickup the 90mm too soon? :/
Yup, can’t blame a trigger-happy shooter 😛
hehe
I was hoping for a 135mm but couldn’t wait any longer + macro mmm
I only want to know if it’s white.
No reason for 24-70 to be white… The 70-200 f2.8 probably will though…
Ah..yes. Need my coffee.
Racist 😀
Everyone knows that making lenses white will double the costs for whatever weird reason… I still have to figure out.
I think following in the footsteps of Nikon and Pentax mirrorless, a Pink option must be made available to maximize sales in Japan 😀
A white 24-70? That would be terrible.
If Sony do away with the bogus “compactness” and make this lens as big as it needs to be, this will mean the death of A-Mount and also all DSLR mounts (EF, F, K, SA…)
DSLRs will still be far ahead of mirrorless in many areas, but none of them vital. Like battery life – it’s bad, but you can buy extra batteries and that solves it.
Of course, a full-sized A9 body will also have to come, but I think with FE 24-70 f/2.8 that’s inevitable.
Essentially, the borderline between DSLR and mirrorless will disappear, you will be able to do the same things with mirrorless as a DSLR.
The only question left would be the price… right now I can buy a mint condition Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 for A-Mount for 500$ (or $640 new from store), complete with USD and weather-sealing. This FE thing however….
Sorry in advance for the newb question:
What are différences between Sony G and Sony-Zeiss (IQ-Price-Build quality)?
I have the feeling G is a little bit cheaper but has better IQ.
The G lenses are the most expensive lenses that Sony sells.
Yes – and so are the Sony-Zeiss.
As I said, it is just a feeling that you get more the money with the G…
Sony-Zeiss 55: $999
Sony-G 90 OSS macro: $1099
Sony-Zeiss 24-70 OSS: $1199
Sony-G 70-200 OSS: $1499
I know, it is hard to compare the prices of different lenses but I have the feeling the Zeiss is overpriced, and the G is just expensive.
I think the G is quite expensive and overpriced at the same time:
G 70-200m f/2.8 SSMII: $3000 (~$1k over CaNikon)
G 300mm f/2.8 II: $7500 ($1400 over Canon or $2k over Nikon)
G 500mm f/4: $15000 ($6k over Canon or $8k over Nikon)
So if somebody needs a 500mm A-mount lens, they can buy a 1DX or a D4s + the lens and even afford a trip somewhere to use all this stuff 🙂
No, the most expensive still photo lenses that Sony produces have the G designation. It is not a matter of opinion. I think at least the top 5 most expensive Sony lenses are all G (unable to check at the moment).
Not much difference, G is the Sony, and Minolta before it, premium lens line. The Sony-Zeiss marking is a premium lens line. The Zeiss lenses are supposed to have some Zeiss review of the design and Sony is supposed to use Zeiss QA standards in manufacture. There are of course also Zeiss lenses for Sony mounts as well as Canon and Nikon, all manufacture and QA for lenses are handled by Zeiss, although mostly using subcontractors. I think only the video lenses are actually assembled by Zeiss in Zeiss factories.
They Sony Zeiss lenses also use Zeiss T* coating processes which the non Zeiss branded Sony lenses do not.
S/eiss lenses have Zeiss coatings.
G is optimized for overall sharpness.
Zeiss is optimized for rendering and a field curvature that makes images pop.
As the latter has resulted in unfavorable reviews for zoom lenses, it makes sense that Sony goes for a G lens to shut people up.
It is mostly a branding thing. G was the highest designation for Minolta. Short for Gold. A “G” lens is supposed to have certain features to qualify for the designation such as internal focus, aspheric elements, zoom hold button, high build quality & AF performance and others. It was basically the L line of Minolta.
Sony Zeiss is another branding that Sony introduced to bring cache to their lenses that they developed from new, in-house optical designs. The rendering & colors should be more Zeiss like and less Minolta-y.
They are both (in theory) of equal quality and build speed, though the Sony Zeiss lenses tend to have newer optical designs sometimes giving them an edge (which is moot with this lens if it is badged with a G).
Sony may give it a G simply to differentiate it from the FA Sony Zeiss (and artificially keep the price of one of them higher then the other).
G is for “gangsta”. Zeiss is for… German engineering designed and built in Japan (well, sometimes in Malaysia). Same price, but the “G”angsta lenses theoretically should bring Sony more profit since they don’t have to pay anything to Zeiss for the branding and now it seems like a right time to start marketing their own “upscale” lens line.
Don’t you think that Minolta are the ultimate authority when coming to state what their own “G” denotation stands for?
It means “Gold”, actually. Used to denote their top of the line lenses. And I didn’t find your concoction funny enough to be of any value…
.
Neither I find your comment useful or having any value. Anybody who knows how to use google or wikipedia could figure this simple thing out. If you don’t have sense of humor – that’s your problem, don’t you think so Captain Obvious?
Ugh. If I wanted a huge, heavy lens I’d just buy the A-mount version…or Canon version…or Nikon version…or Sigma version…at which point I may as well just switch back to a DSLR so it all balances and I have better battery life. Those who believe they absolutely cannot possibly survive with f/4 should be screaming for f/2 or faster, not f/2.8. One measly stop is basically irrelevant–except in terms of bulk and weight.
If you do not want it, do not buy it. If you want small, stick to the small lenses. Sony will make this lens, and if it does well then the market will have spoken.
you need f2.8 for the 24-70 focal range. It really does make a large difference. Your statement is probably true for the 70-200mm focal range at f4, but not the 24-70 range because between 24-50mm the blurred background is subtle even at f2.8. It’s nearly non-existent at f4 depending on how far away you are from the subjects.
Also, 1 stop makes a large difference in light. That’s a whole stop of ISO you can go down, makes a huge difference at a wedding reception which is dark when everyone is dancing.
A professional will use whatever tools they need to get the job done. If they can get away with smaller and lighter, then sure they’ll use it. But if they need a large heavy lens, it’s their job, and they’ll suffer through it.
Yeah… People keep on saying, “Why buy Sony if you’re buying a large lens?”
Obvious answer: Because I have the option of switching to smaller lenses to get a compact system, but I want the option of having a fast lens when I need the speed even if it’ll be large.
>the A-mount version…or Canon version…or Nikon version…or Sigma version…
None of these is an FE lens, so you’d have to switch to DSLR anyway, unless you’re willing to use clumsy adapters.
>Those who believe they absolutely cannot possibly survive with f/4 should be screaming for f/2 or faster
The Sigma 24-70 f/2 would be great. They decided not to do it now, but by the time it may materialize, if the “mirrorless revolution” finally takes off, it may be native FE, why not 😀
if there is a DSLR with a 24-70/4 and a mirrorless with a 24-70/2.8, the package size and weight is similar. But I would go for mirrorless, because of better bokeh and the faster lens…
If you shot dancing people in low light, you learn how useful it is to have a 100th second over a 50th.
24-70 f2.8 & 70-200 f2.8 are great to have. The size might not be the best for A7, but these are needed f2.8 lenses for event shooters. I’m crossing my fingers on IQ and AF speed. Hopefully on par or even above Canon 24-70 f2.8 II and 70-200 f2.8 IS II.
Willing to spend little more money for better lenses.
What are the chances this lens is really good? I think this is the question. If it’s going to win working pros (events and weddings etc) it’s going to need to be a boss.
Judging the existing zoom lineup I don’t have confidence they can do it.
I’d rather have a solid 24-120 f/4 fwiw but I’m not a working pro!
It’s funny… I’m currently a Nikon shooter, and I’m not super tempted to switch to Sony. At the same time, I know that if I was shooting Sony, I’d be doing just fine.
But many of my fellow Nikon shooters are threatened by Sony, and they have a list of protestations, “I could never shoot Sony because they don’t have uncompressed RAW!”
Well, that objection is out the window.
Next, “I could never shoot Sony because they don’t have fast zooms!”
That seems to be going out the window soon.
Getting to the point in silliness where the main protestation is, “I could never shoot a camera with only 1 card slot!”
Once sony creates a 70-200mm f2.8, you won’t hear any more complaints from me. That’s really the only thing they’re missing IMO.
Dual SD card slots would be nice too, i just had a 64GB Lexar 2000x go bad on me. I just contacted them yesterday for a RMA.
They’re missing a 135mm F2. Could live without the big 70-200.
Native 70-200/2.8 is probably a must if they want more of the wedding and event market. I would not mind a 135/1.8(2) with EyeAF though 😉
Agree. I love my 135/1.8, but it’s the 70-200/f2.8 that sees the most action when it comes to professional wedding/event work.
Why switch to something new if your system is perfectly fine and you get used to it?
Exactly how I feel about it. But there are Canon/Nikon shooters who feel so threatened. It’s not good enough for them, that their current system is great.. They feel threatened if they can’t talk about the superiority of their system over Sony.
Personally, I’m happy to see competition. I’m happy Sony has to catch up to Canon and Nikon with lens selection. I’m happy that Canon/Nikon might feel pressure to catch up to some of Sony’s innovations. The competition is good for all consumers.
Sony still sucks for sports, but they’re catching up fast, and canikon is getting worried.
They are a long way off for sports, but they could catch up quickly if and when they choose to.
Deficiencies for sports:
-Lack of long lenses for outdoor sports, lack of fast zooms indoors.
-Lack of high burst rate. 5 fps is pretty chincy for sports.
-Bit laggy in continuous shooting, mediocre buffer
-Tracking algorithms still behind Nikon.
Though if they combine the A6000 with the A77ii with the A7 series, they could get the right camera for sports.
Yea, i think they’ll shift focus for the A-series to offer more sports and fast action performance, but using sensor technology from the A7 and A6xxx combined with an external PDAF sensor.
I would have been sold a while ago on the A series if they offered it in a mode that would move the prism out of the way for normal shooting so i wouldn’t lose 1/3-1/2 stop of light. Then move it back for sports shooting so i couldn’t use the external PDAF sensor.
you are a very rare specimen in the comment’s world from whatever brand toward whatever other brand.
I’m simply the anti-fan boy, with no brand loyalty. I love my Nikon system.. doesn’t mean I need to root against other systems. Doesn’t mean I can’t admit that other systems have advantages. The way Sony is progressing, if Nikon doesn’t start following suit, I could see myself switching over at my next upgrade, in 2-3 years. (maybe the A7iv)
I couldn’t agree more! I hear here and there “I’m jumping ship” Canon to Nikon, Nikon to Canon, Canon to Sony, Apples to Oranges, etc… all the time. That’s just silly. The “jumping ship” people should probably just go to a regular ship and jump 🙂
Jumping ship people often think the problem is in their gear, not in the lack of creativity. Same with GAS. There are guys out there who shoot travel, portrait and landscape photos on fe55 only, and their photos are great.
Yes isn’t it nice that we now have an option that is different, rather than just Canon and Nikon (and Sony) making the same stuff?
I’m using Nikon FF & Sony FE.
At this point, they’re like gasoline & electric cars. Each have enough pros/cons that can’t make the other obsolete yet. Electric is new tech so it has a lot of things to cover first compared to gasoline.
It’s annoyance such as the bottom palm clicking the battery grip shutter, extra step for AF selector, and bad customer service/repair that I’ve found that hindered me from going all Sony.
I’ll be following this lens closely to either get it or Nikon’s new 24-70 to replace my old Nikon.
If the commlite adapter is any good, I could perhaps see myself in dual systems. For now, it doesn’t make a lot of sense for me.
I’d move over to Nikon but there are a few things I can’t get past:
1) 50mm offerings are less than stellar. No premium options and Zeiss 50 is outdated plus no AF.
2) 135mm F2 with defocus- want it but it’s not great wide open, lacks contrast and the defocus control is outdated plus it’s still screwdrive. I’m probably the only one who uses a 135 outside of portrait settings. Metal flake exterior sucks. 135mm APO is no AF- pass. Yeah I know, I”m picky.
3) Issues with lenses needing micro adjustment. Much more of an issue I find reading up on Nikon than Canon or Sony.
4) D750 still has that AA filter and it’s 1500 bucks. 4000th shutter speed is from 1980’s. Video is walk away depressing.
I’m not bashing Nikon because I really like what they offer. There are only 4 lenses I need and I can run with a system. 17, 35, 50 and 135mm. They have a stellar flash system and in usage- the D750 is fantastic (purposely gimped out but still) it’s really great. As you can see, my major issues are with these specific lenses and third party options are an option. I’d consider the Tamron 35mm 1.8 but the 50 and 135- nothing third party I’d touch right now and for those- I want it native.
Like I said, I’m picky but I keep looking over.
1 — I’m loving the new Tamron 45/1.8 for Nikon. Then there is the Sigma ART of course. So no lack of options. And no real disadvantage going third party. I agree the 50/1.8 is weak. I haven’t tried the 50/1.4 native.
2 — Can’t comment, I haven’t used it.
3 — It’s a non issue on the A7 series. It is an issue, but I actually found more lenses needed adjustment on the Sony A99. I own 7 or 8 lenses, none have required truly significant adjustments.
4 — I’ve never been so against an AA filter. I can’t comment on video — I really don’t use it. The 1/4000th shutter speed is just fine. I never went any faster when I had the A99 either. Sure, if I was shooting a ton of 1.4 in broad daylight, it could be helpful. But even shooting f1.8, I’ve never needed anything faster than 1/4000.
I’ve never needed a bigger body, more battery life, more lenses and cheaper either.
See its easy to disregard differences as ‘oh well I don’t need them’.
Correct. We each have different needs and priorities, so it’s great when we have more diversity of choices.
Waiting for the flood of whiners when the price is also revealed. This is going to be a $2000+ lens.
If it offers comparable image quality to the canon version, i don’t think anyone will complain because that’s how much the canon version costs.
You haven’t been around here before have you?
They could price it at $599.99 and on this forum, you would still have more complainers than supporters 😉
lol, touché
I use a Canon 24-70/4 that I picked up for $600 on the A7rII and its really good. I could get a Tamron 24-70/2.8 used for about $800 as well, and its also really good. We’ll see what this brings – if its even real.
So?
I am not going to whine – as I agree that a Pro level 24-70mm F2.8 lens should be available for the Pros and those who can afford it – but It would be nice if Sony produced some Sony branded lenses that where more affordable as well – Sony will struggle to win folks over to FE mount if they only are going to cater to the Pros and rich – yes they will have buyers but will not win over those who can get much more affordable non-Pro lenses – Not all users need Pro grade lenses – So far Sony seems to want both – as they are making the A7 and A7m2 quite affordable – and they talk about even making a more affordable FF FE mount body – at that point I can picture many buyers stuck with their A7 or A7M2 and this new cheaper body with the Kit Lens and that is it – I believe that Sony has lost many customers in their E APS-C mount line due to total lack of lenses – yes a nice A6000 body – but just have left consumers wanting many other lenses – so the same trick – a low reasonable price for the body but few lenses – and out of the few half very expensive Zeiss branded – I have many friends with the A6000 but many have moved to M43 or Fuji where they have a nice selection of lenses – while the A6000 collects dust – I am one of them – yes there is the 35mm F1.8 and 50mm F1.8 at reasonable price but there is no 24-70mm F2.8 or 70-200mm F2.8 for example – no F1.4 etc – So yes I like Sony in many ways but they also disappoint in a large way –
What are you talking about? Where are these systems with affordable OEM f2.8 zooms? Did you move to Fuji to buy the 16-50mm f2.8? Where are the affordable Fuji lenses? Oh maybe the 27mm f2.8, where you can just buy the Sigma for Sony, woot! Comment fail – doesn’t have a clue what other systems have.
Sony is probably trying to carve it’s own name path (much like the Canon L) in brand. The G series was a fantastic Minolta line of lenses. Much like Panasonic and Leica, SONY probably felt it needed optics credibility thus the Zeiss relationship.
shock！ no ssm!
You know this how?
(a) you look at the lens designation and it never says SSM
(b) you listen to it and you know it must the SSM or a linear actuator…
a) Neither does the FE 90mm Macro or FE 35/1.4, but they both have SSM
b) I’m not sure how Pancanikonpus would have listened to a lens that hasn’t been launched.
I don’t think Sony uses the SSM designators for any E-mount lenses, even if they might internally actually be SSM. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any E-mount lenses actually specify the focusing motor type…
How long after it is announced do you think it will be available for purchase?
about time – but if I read it correct it will be a G branded lens – so therefore super expensive – seems Sony is just deliberately not producing but very few affordable Sony branded lenses –
It will be interesting when they release their so called affordable FF FE mount soon – yes it might be less expensive then the A7/m2 – but who will be able to afford lenses for it – so far they A7 has been affordable but that is where it ends – I just think it will be hard for them to get many Canon and Nikon consumers that are used to affordable lenses to switch to Sony FE mount – yes Nikon and Canon have expensive Pro lenses – but they also have many affordable lenses for the average Jo – Development on lenses for the E – mount APS-C seems to have stopped – so my suspicion is that Sony will not produce more APS-C mount bodies after the A6100 or whatever they will call the A6000 successor – and they have said they are going to focus on FF FE mount –
So you want a cheap FF body and cheap lenses to go with it. Since Sony does not currently provide that (apart from selling previous generation cameras and couple “affordable” lenses), you would be far better off buying these from other manufacturers rather than asking Sony to change their strategy.
They do sell an affordable FF A7 /A7 m2 body – so why not affordable lenses to match like Nikon and Canon do ?? I did not say cheap – but affordable –
I just think it is a trick with Sony to offer an affordable body then have consumers looked in to expensive lenses – I just think they would make more consumers happy and get more buyers – but if their intent is to just market to the Pros and wealthy then that is fine – I am just saying that they are making many unhappy consumers as it is now –
I would not mind more affordable lens options either, but obviously there is a reason why they have chosen not to produce anything beyond cheap kit lenses and perhaps a 28/2 which can be called “affordable”. They are very well aware of how happy or unhappy their customers are with the products they offer. It might seem silly to mostly have expensive glass, but that is obviously a deliberate decision, perhaps intentionally moving up-market considering the rapidly declining camera market in general.
I am glad to hear that one more person would like to see more affordable FE lenses – You mentioned that Sony is well aware of weather customers are happy or not – well I am not sure how many surveys they do – but how many have called on Sony to put Touch LCD and Touch Shutter on their mirrorless cameras – I am sure a good number has – and it is something that can be turned off with a menu option for those who do not want it – most Sony camera owners carry a smart phone with Touch LCD 🙂 so very Ironic why Sony does not implement a Touch LCD – I suspect they are very aware that many are calling for it but they have chosen not to listen – same with Fuji –
Sometimes I wonder if the designers and those in power really take time to talk to consumers – We know what happens in politics – politicians say they do but their actions do not reflect that 🙂 – and often the designers come out with designs that just are not what the consumer wants – like the NEX5n – No Mode Dial – horrible menu etc –
so did not Sony know what the consumers wanted?? I honestly think that sometimes these large company’s do not often consult with the consumers enough – or sometimes at all 🙂
The Sony RX100m4 with 4K as a marketing ploy is an example –
yes it has 4k but only for 5min and if in warm weather country 3 min – how can that be something that the consumer would be happy with?
I think that was/is an example of Sony not listening to the consumer but listening to their marketing management – I rest my case 🙂
‘Make what I want, damn the design constraints and make it cost peanuts… Thanks’.
That’s what I heard.
it’s because your brain works different
That’s right, I have an IQ of 160 and yours is 40.
then you have a good image quality ^^
sure – you pay high prices for the lenses !
Anyone who talks about their high IQ on forums is normally taking s***. It also makes you look like a loser.
Just wait a year and most of the lenses will drop in price. I never once paid full price for any lens.
This is one of the big reasons why adapted Canon glass is so popular.
EF50/1.8 STM – $125 – Yeah not the quality of the Zeiss FE55, but it’s quality for the price is spectacularly good.
EF85/1.8 USM – $370 or so, again – spectacularly good price/performance ratio
Sigma/Tamron zooms – All excellent performance for the price.
Both of these lenses are around 20 years old. Any development costs have already well and truly been absorbed.
the 50mm stm was announced early 2015. If you don’t know the facts, stop trolling here.
*sigh* Check YOUR facts expert. It is the same lens in a new housing with new focus motor. Big deal. They also launched a II version before that. Still the lens design gas remained unchanged.
Source digital picture:
“7 rounded aperture blades vs. 5 non-rounded (no more pentagonal bokeh)
Metal lens mount vs. plastic
Improved overall build quality (my original 50mm f/1.8 II broke in half for an unknown reason)
Super Spectra Coating
A much improved manual focus ring
STM vs. Micro Motor (smoother and quieter)
FTM (Full Time Manual) focusing (as long as shutter release is half-pressed)
13.8″ (350mm) MFD (Minimum Focus Distance) vs. 17.7″ (450mm)
0.21x MM (Maximum Magnification) vs. 0.15x
49mm vs. 52mm filter size (though not much of an advantage from my perspective)
Narrower f/22 aperture available vs. f/16
Accepts normal bayonet-mount lens hood vs. threaded adapter”
The shorter minimum focusing distance implicates that the optical design is changed. I looked at the comparison pictures wide open and the STM is much sharper in the center while corner sharpness of the old lens is better, then stopped down the new lens puts the old one to shame… http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=989&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=105&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
My conclusion that the STM is much more than just a new focus mechanism as you stated
So… The only optical change is a new coating? Cool, a very long winded way of saying new body and AF motor (oh and new aperture mechanism, which I didn’t mention).
Sharpness is likely from new coating, perceived sharpness at least from increased contrast.
Minimum focus suggests a greater range of movement from the focus group. Again mechanical / updated AF system.
Min aperture, mechanical updated aperture.
Focus ring and filter threads.
So we have new mechanicals and a new coating. Oh and they charge more for it to have these things. Not really surprising.
If you want cheap cr@p then Canon is your man.
And it has another filter size and a shorter minimum focus distance. But if I had the same IQ of 160 like you I would recognize as well it is the same lens. Both have 6 elements in 5 groups. And there is the same brand name printed on !!!
Well their strategy at the moment is to go high margin, that’s one thing.
But the main one I think is that even Nikon and Canon can’t manage to put out more than a handful of new lenses a year. And if Sony wants to be taken seriously at the top end, it needs to complete its system at the top end before producing budget ones. It’s done one as a kind of promise that they’ll get back to it…
I’m in the same boat. I love the 35/1.4, but I carry the 28/2 more. I’d like to see more lenses like this. I went Batis 85 over the gargantuan 90 for the same reason and my be consolidating the 28/35 into the Batis 25. The 55 is a gem, but I’m in the “its overpriced for a 50/1.8” camp. I’d be perfectly happy with the current 24-70 if it wasn’t so mediocre, I have the much cheaper (used) Canon 24-70/4 and its really good.
A new APS-c camera would be welcome too, my a5100 is lagging behind the A7rII.
Cool, so where are the cheap f2.8 zooms from Canon and Nikon? I might adapt them being they are so cheap.
Not from Canon and Nikon – for Canon and Nikon:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/845339-REG/Tamron_SP_24_70mm_f_2_8_DI.html#!
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/596258-REG/Sigma_571306_24_70mm_f_2_8_IF_EX.html
And? You can’t say Sony needs to compete with both 1st and 3rd parties, that’s kind of nonsense. I can get those for my Sony anyway… So?
AAAAnd??
Now re-read the satement of Jón. With your IQ of 160 I am sure you get it. haha
Sony have never said they are going to focus solely on FE. They have said they were focussing on FE lenses at the moment… that’s not the same thing.
I’d really like to know about a 70-200 f2.8!
24-70 f2.8 & 70-200 f2.8 on the radar?
Sounds a like A9 is here at last. I guess that is what the San Diego meeting was about.
The question is when. Admin, any SR1 or 2 about announcement?
This will likely be a very expensive lens, because Sony’s A7 series mirror-less camera system is in high demand, and users are willing to pay. This lens will easily fetch between $2499.99 to $3099.99, and it will sell well because it will like be a solid performer and the only native 24-70 f/2.8 option for a very long time.
Or it will be panned because of decentering issues that seem to plague FE lenses and destined to be labeled as crap, like the current 24-70. Sony’s QC is awful. My second 35/1.4 is slightly soft on the left side and the two 16-35’s I’ve owned were so bad in the corners I just got the Canon version with an adapter.
@SAR_Admin
This one of the most important issues where they have to work/improve on QUALITY CONTROL (beside other things more lenses, better more durable battery, dual sd xc uhs II slot,usb 3.0 ports, wifi ac/bluetooth 4.0, competitve flagship flashes (system)) its is even slightly worser than Nikon (i never thoght this would be possible because Nikon is already a shame see body and lesn recalls d800,d600,d750, nikon 300 f4 pf etc.) and canon (canon is still the best here imo)!!
And esp. that the premium lenses are more affected than the cheaper ones is hardly reasonable/ made it even worser, they are more expensive shpuld be better and more thourougly proofed before leaving the factory!!!!
My personal ranking
35 1.4 probably the most, followed by 16-35 f4 and the 24-70 f4 is simply a design faulty completely its a shame that this lens has the zeiss tag on it!!! Not noticeably better than the kit lens 28-70!!!
At least you could argue this might be due to the fast development and introduction/release of lenses but despite this fact it should be manageable for sony(big player, image of brand, premium lenses of all things!! pay a lot of money and you should get an lens with no imperfections!!!)
So Sony please more money and more quality officers and controllers in to the factories!!
MADE by Sony should be nearly as good as Made by Zeiss!
These tags could get a brand by itself higher reputation/recognition for products wihtout any imperfections, you could easily justify their high (er) price tags!!!
What was the problem with your 35mm 1.4? A close friend of mine owns an FE 35mm 1.4. he’s extremely happy with that lens.
The price of these Sony/Zeiss lenses alongside the QC issues are a very serious concern. I’m left adapting Sigma Art lenses and hoping for on sensor PDAF DSLRs with tilt screens from Canikon to come out soon.
Yep. Your dealing with higher copy to copy variance which is disappointing. I think Fuji has better QC and all things considered- outside of say the A7R series- the IQ isn’t all that much different.
I hope Canon does jump on that wagon. That would be fantastic.
Hmm.
Photo zone has sometimes commented that Fuji is the only QC worse than Sony and Olympus.
Interesting. I’ve read mostly the opposite. I’m off to lensrentals.com- I bet they have an article of this very thing.
I don’t think LR have tested Fiji on the bench for the same reason it took so long to do Sony; they need a powered mount..
Yeah, I also think it’s going to be at least $2500. For the target group, that’s OK, if the lens is any good. The existing slower FE zooms have design issues due to the size restrictions. These design issues will likely increase with a larger max aperture.
Sony ppl know they have a line in with the pros and they obviously need to prioritise the mandatory 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 lenses.
But as an enthusiast shooter, I am beginning to question my choice to jump to Sony. When I shot Canon, I was spoiled with lens choices. I could trade off traits such as sharpness, bokeh, stabillization, contrast, colour, focus speed, price etc and choose the optimal lens for my needs and budget. Competition from Sigma and Tamrom meant Canon hade to improve their lenses and make them cheaper. The law of diminishing returns was in full effect, so it often made little sense to buy the most expensive pro grade lenses. But as an exclusive Sony shooter, I’m really struggling with lenses. For me the lens is No 1, the shooter is No 2 and the body is No 3 in order of importance.
When I look in the crystal ball, I see myself shooting Nikon next year… Sony sensor goodness with lots of Nikkor goodness on top.
Maybe admin can do a poll for what we think it will cost. My guess is $2499.95
3K+ for a 24-70 2.8 is excessive to say the least.The best one (Canon) is $1800. Charging nearly double will give Canon users little desire to switch.
The flange distance is more important that size, cost, weight, or anything else. Ever Sony photographer knows flange distance makes or breaks the lens. I use Sony!
The image above only shows an empty search result, how can this image proof this lens is coming? Just curious.
The 24-70/2.8 is included as a choice in the roll-down menu.
Yes. And I just added the image to proof this.
Dropdown form fields usually are no free text fields. So seeing this in an employee only system as a preselection looks like it was published accidently by the editors that feed the information to this tool.
> New Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 FE lens gets listed
What competitor(s) does it have to beat in IQ
to be undisputed best lens of its kind??
Did nobody notice that it say l says “No result found for your search”? Someone typed in FE247028G into the model number box for that search and got back NO RESULT!
I got more images. It shows coming up as a drop down list. I just updated the post and added it.
No results means that there are no relevant documents for the lens, but supposedly the lens model is in the drop-down list on the page.
This will cause explosions in the photography world. Imagine a a7rII with a fast focusing native 24-70 2.8 lens. Canon will have to produce a duel-pixel censor 6dII or something to keep me from switching.
the high mexapixel monster that is a7rii won’t cause any explosion, but the more practical and full-sized a9 with this lens might
How big will it be?
The new Nikon is over a kilogram.
And it’s more even than the Canon II (which is not that much lighter or smaller and has no VR) but not as centrally sharp.
To beat these two it probably has to be 1.2 kilos with at least an 82mm filter.
So a dilemma for Sony.
Either they make it really good, and get slammed for size.
Or they make it more compact but at the price of some poorer corners, and they get slammed with people saying “OH NO the FE 24-70f4 again! Why can’t Sony make zooms!”
I guess it is smaller than 70200Gf4, and weight can be between 800 an 1100 g. And if the quality is on thew level odf FE70200f4, everything is okay. But I am afraid of a too high price
Canon 24-70 2.8 USM II is listed with 805 grams
Yes; the canon doesn’t have stabilisation maybe that’s the difference> also the Nikon is meant to be a bit better in the outer field (though not quite as good in the middle) and that usually comes at the price of size/weight.
I hope they decide to finally put “compactness” aside for this one, if they really believe mirrorless has outgrown its NEX roots.
To compete with DSLRs, they will have to release lenses that would be far larger than 24-70 can ever be anyway, like all the long telephoto primes and such.
Agreed. A 24-70 f2.8 FF can never be small, so why not go the whole way and make it class leading, even at the price of size. I’ll never buy the beast, but it would add a ‘halo’ the system if was class leading…
The A7 series is an alternative to the rangefinder, the Loxia’s make so much sense as do the Voigtlanders. The A7 series is not an alternative to the DSLR (mirrorless far too laggy) and big fast zooms. Big fast full frame zooms will always be big fast full frame zooms regardless of whether they’re mounted to a mirrorless or DSLR.
Not according to Sony. They officially present FE as “the next generation of DSLR” and a direct competitor to DSLR systems.
I don’t think it’s anywhere ready yet either, but that’s what they claim they want to do.
So long as it is no longer/heavier than the FA 24-70 + adapter than that is fine.
It is more
than glasses good and different!
If the lens is listed in the list – its name is unconditional entered into a line of search after that it appears in a drop-down menu of search. And only.
So search engines work at all servers …
Sony should go for quality here. We see the contours (may be) of how mirrorless is developping. FF goes to Sony, NEX/A-system is dropped. Smaller mirrorless with appropriate lenses is going to be mFTs. It already is actually, look at that line up. Nothing compares.
Sony has a firm grip on this market as a sole developper of mirrorless FF (let’s not look at the Leica beast, as it is no competitor). They need to make the base as solid as possible by providing excellent lens choice so no new competitor will have an easy way to get in.
The pros’ adoption of the A7-series is important. Initially it leads to sales an credibility.
But it’s not enough business in the long run. Pros get a few really good lenses and upgrade their bodies when there is a significant improvement available.
The big money is made in the enthusiast camp, where users have serious GAS.
So, pro lenses are needed but so is the reasonably priced stuff.
But, the enhusiast will hardly be hanging around for long if there aren’t any reasonable options.
I doubt Sony will for drop APS-C mirrorless for a while… it’s still the entry level for their system cameras.