[shoplink 33744 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Shenikon now unveiled the price of the new FE lenses through their eBay store:
[shoplink 33732 ebay]Zeiss FE 35mm f/1.4 for $1,729 (Click here to see it)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 33744 ebay]Sony FE 24-240mm lens for $1,099 (Click here to see it)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 33745 ebay]Sony FE 28mm f/2.0 lens for $459 (Click here to see it)[/shoplink].
[shoplink 33753 ebay]Sony 16mm Fisheye Converter for $319 (Click here to see it)[/shoplink].
Still missing is the 90mm macro lens price.
Not that all prices are in Dollars but sold by a Hong Kong store. US prices in US stores may be different! That said I even cannot confirm yet if those prices are correct. But we will know it very soon! Stay tuned on SAR!
129 Responses
Can’t wait to see the 90mm macro lens price tag…
I guess it’s also above 1.000$.
price for the wide angle converter ist also still missing 😉
At least the 28mm is affordable ^^
Even old, used 28/2 are expensive. So if this performs, it might not be crazy. But I doubt the build is that good.
It is probably crazy bad at this price. Canon 50/1.8 bad:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon50f18/ff/1blur-t.gif
28mm is the only small lens suitable for my needs. It’s also the cheapest, nice. I’ll stick to leica for the other focal lengths
you mean that good old 24-240mm Leica?
Yes, that infamous AF OSS 24-240 Leica.
I use primes, I’m fine with manual focus for the work I do
If I meant that, I would have said that. I’ve no need or want for a zoom lens
Almost double the price of the Sigma 35 1.4, which seems consistent with the rest of their lens prices.
The 55FE is a little more reasonable considering its performance–in-line with the 50Art. This 35/Distagon is 1800? That’s ridiculous. It had better be the best 35 of all time.
It won’t be. No matter how good the lens is – it’s still mounted to a camera line that kills 20% of resolution and 75% of color information.
https://sonyvnikon.wordpress.com/
>75% of color information<
Saying it over & over don't make it true you stupid boy!
And with a quality EVF you actually stand a chance of hitting focus on the 35 f/1.4 in low light where it’ll shine – that’s a win-win. Unlike Anton Berlin who’ll actually be shooting his OTUS at f/5.6 *hoping it’s actually focussed correctly* on his D810.
That Sigma is crap. Haven’t seen nice picture out of it unless everything is in focus and you don’t have to see any bokeh
We must be on different internets. I see many good pictures, and glowing reviews. Some citing the lens being sharper than the Sony 1.4 g. Sure, the bokeh may be more pleasing on some lenses, but to call it crap for that? That’s not logical.
Sigma sucks and you suck.
i want fast lenses for the nice bokeh and sigma doesn’t deliver there. The lenses are optically over corrected, which seems great if you’re after sharpness, CA and stuff, but compromise on smoothness on bokeh.
So it’s nice for landscapes or if you don’t care about bokeh
So buy the Sigma and stop crying about it.
SO-EXPENSIVE
Another perspective to think about. One can go out and buy a nice guitar that barring an apocalypse, will still be around for hundreds of hundreds of years and have brought millions of hours of creative enjoyment. Where will this thing be at that time.
You got a point there. Guitars will be more important in post apocalyptic times than E-Mount lenses I guess.
only the acoustic ones
A cheap diamond will survive for longer than a guitar. Where will its strings be in years to come? A diamond is obviously better. They’re both equally as functional as a camera and equally as interesting to a photographer
I’d rather just buy a gun. During the apocalypse if you have a guitar and an e-mount lens, but I have a gun. I now have a gun, a guitar, and an e-mount lens.
Never underestimate the damage a telecaster can do in the right hands. Guns are for sissies. A telecaster…now that is a true weapon….even more so if you wide the neck into a spear.
Alot of people who have themselves convinced they need 1.4 lenses are going to choke on that 35mm 1.4 price tag.
I am deciding between a refurbished RX1 or the FE 35. At the price quoted, I’d easily go the refurbished RX1 route instead. Yikes. $1,300 is as high as I go on the FE 35.
I’d go with RX1 unless you need the extra stop or more resolution from A7r. All the excitement around RX1 has long died out, but it’s still one of the best, if not the best 35mm on a FF combination IMHO. I’ve seen your work many times before, Sean, (which, I enjoy quite a bit, btw) and you seem to love your bokeh, so that 1.4 might be more important to you, but the RX1 is a cream machine on it’s own even at 2.0.
These days, when I’m out and about, I keep the 55mm on the A7M2 and bring RX1 for wide shots. Not that swapping glass is a chore, but I like having two bodies with different FL ready to go. Plus, based on the photos, the RX1 looks like it’s actually smaller than the FE 1.4 on it’s own.
Thanks Petrovich. I really agree with everything you’ve noted. You’re so right about loving the speed and shallow depth of field. I will surely wait for the actual price to be announced on the FE 35. I really like the extra AF speed that is rumored to be included inside of the FE 35. But the convenience of not needing to switch lenses to bring the RX1 along is appealing as well, particularly with the IQ of the RX1. Decisions, decisions. ;~)
I’d much rather wait for the RX2 with the curved sensor
Because they are all tight fisted tight wads who expect cheaper than 3rd party prices for OEM lenses and will spout how much cheaper m43’s ‘f1.8’ lenses are?
Hopefully the macro’s price will be under $1000… My guess is this is just initial price gouging, but Sony’s Japanese pricing policy doesn’t exactly help matters.
All of the FE lenses released in 2013-2014 are exactly the same price a year later. Sony doesn’t do discounts or sales on lenses (at least FF)
They definitely do where I am, 70-200mm is around $500 cheaper than RRP and the 24-70mm is $650 cheaper. 35mm and 55mm are above $300 cheaper etc.
I’m calling BS on that. The 24-70 MSRP is $1200. You can purchase it brand new (non gray market) for $550?
WHERE I AM… learn to read. HERE it has an RRP of $1499 (inc taxes) and you can buy it for $850 (inc taxes), not everything is about North America. That is local stock from local sellers.
Where is here? You listed it $ (USD)
Australia, where did I say USD?
Sorry, thought it was said somewhere. $850 is actually a really good price. It started out at $1200 here and it’s still $1200. Same with all the other lenses
I still call BS on this. People would have to be stupid to discount Zeiss glass. The best you will ever get is probably the usual 10%.
Did you miss the offer on the apsc e-mount Zeiss lenses? Retail prices are often lower than Sony’s prices in the UK, provided you’re willing to wait a bit. Sony wants £1,049 for the 24-70, but it’s £899 on Wex. Likewise the 70-200 is £1,359 from Sony but £1,214 from Wex. It doesn’t apply to everything (the primes and 16-35 are the same price), but Sony’s site is the last place I’d look normally…
I paid 900aud for 24-70…. 50 cheaper wouldn’t be too far fetched
“People would have to be stupid to discount Zeiss glass.”
It is not Zeiss, it is Sony. Not that there is a difference.
“It started out at $1200 here and it’s still $1200.”
BS, here is US seller, $950:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-Zeiss-SEL2470Z-Vario-Tessar-T-FE-24-70mm-F-4-ZA-OSS-Lens-3-Year-Warranty-/141557830117?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20f58111e5
55/1.8 goes for $750 now, not $1100 also.
Those are gray market items, not exactly the same thing. No sony warranty.
They give 3 years warranty. Outside of US, they are like $800-850.
3rd party warranty, that’s not exactly apples to apples. That’s like saying you can buy a used one too and get an extended warranty but that doesn’t exactly represent the price of a new authorized item does it?
Find a brand new 24-70 with Sony warranty for less than $1100 in the US. Good luck.
Same with FE 55 for less than say $950
Do you know what price gouging is?
$459 is nice, the converter is almost as much as the lens though? I bet you can buy a really nice 21mm or 16mm for $800
And then you will need to pay more for a decent 28mm.
Will this lens magically add in the missing color information to the Sony mirrorless line ? If not I don’t want it.
Only if your lover Anton gives it to you up the a$$.
Who’s Anton ?
Turn around and you’ll see him
Blue from the Zeiss logo will definitely be added in.
If you actually own a Sony mirrorless camera and don’t like it, why don’t you sell it and move on?
If you don’t own a Sony mirrorless camera, why the **** do you care?
1800$ for the 35mm I choked a little bit… The 28mm is not badly priced although I would have to see a comparison against the samyang 24 1.4 which is similarly priced. I am also curious to see how the adapters will perform.
The A-mount 35 f/1.4 is also ridiculous pricy even though it’s a looser in terms of IQ compared to Nikon, Canon and Sigmas 35mm lenses.
Let’s hope that is not the case with this one.
and how do you know that it is perform less than Nikon, Canon, Sigma? Have you tested it? NO..stop speculating
‘Zeiss-blue’ paint is expensive 🙂
that price is stupid! im in amazement right now… you can almost get an RX1 for the price of that lens… you can get a used A7 with CZ 24-70 for that price! im hoping its just a marked up ebay price…
About the same price as the Nikon I think?
you can get the nikon 35 f1.4 for 1300 on adorama right now
you can’t compare DLSR lens with mirrorless lens. Different inside out.
If you can’t afford stop whining
Current Adorama price for new lens – $1619 + State taxes
You can buy it used for $1300…
And?
Yeps. Sonys strategy is to make decently priced cameras and to ask high margins for the lenses. Why not make 35mm 1.8 Zeiss instead. (smaller and cheaper) here’s for hoping for max resolution (enough for 50mpix) small and decently priced wide angles to go along with the small FF bodies. portable landscape dream team.
I’m guessing they’re hoping/expecting the Zeiss will out-perform the Canikon f1.4’s (looking to gain some of that market share).
for that price of the Sony Zeiss 35 (1.4) I can buy the whole Sigma currently available art Series (second hand)
So you can buy a 19mm DN, 30mm DN, 60mm DN, 24-105mm, 30mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4 for $1700? Good luck with that.
Well I was naturally speaking about the FF primes here. 35, 50 and latest 24mm .. regardless what reads on the sides the MFT and -E mount lenses .. they are not real ART stuff.
But you need to buy a Metabones to.
I think I will buy the 24-240. Not very expensive, and very useful when I can grab only one lens with me.
I would recomend waiting to see some test results.
It will likely suck just like every other 10X lens.
They are what they are. I would love to see some of your amazing pictures that require the best of the best.
The recent superzooms have more than acceptable IQ. Many are more than happy to compromise a negligible hit in IQ for an extreme zoom range and sheer convenience. Don’t be such a snob. You can always switch to a prime when you want, that’s the whole point of having interchangeable lenses.
Well, you are right, but I’m not such a good photographer that an average lens will ruin my photos (or such a good one that an excellent lens will improve it).
A larger aperture always opens up options, while a large zoom range may give you so many options that it hinders your decision-making.
Could be a nice travel lens
I’m really looking forward to what’s next out of the Loxia lineup. Those lenses are a joy to use and the right size for the a7 series. They’re build quality is top notch and they render beautifully.
Oh yeah, if this price is real im gonna buy the loxia 35 instead. Zeiss should release a roadmap, but it would set back sony.
Yes because paying $400 more for AF and a whole extra stop is completely unreasonable.
Loxias are fantastic. Can’t wait to see which ones are next on the road map!
I bought my first Loxia recently and I love it. Since 50mm is my favourite FL, and I almost always focus manually, the Loxia 50 f2 seemed like a no brainer. Having used it only for a few days, I can say I did the right choice. Manual focusing has never been so smooth and fluent. I will keep the trusty old Contax Planar 50 f1.4 that used to be my go-to lens for sentimental reasons. I hope the next Loxia we see is a 24 or 28mm.
as usual sony set prices acording to expected demand (its like they wanted to not sells any product at all, if one product its wanted set price higher to slow demand and profit, if noboy want some product put a fair price in hope people buy them after looking all other high product prices)
i wont be surprised if the macro past the $1500, its a desired one
28 its a little overpriced but the fisheye converter, come on, sony dont know rokinon its selling ff fisheye at $499, rigth? $300 for an add on lense, ridicously, did it had dozens of elements/groups? did it had IS? did it had SSM? did it had moving parts? i think NOT!!!
glad no one want that 24-240 so i can buy it cheap (by sony standars)
the 28 is not over priced. the 282 by minolta still fetches 450-550$ on ebay… and its 20y old.
you look on the wrong place, I got mine for 123$.
If you were dumb enough to sell an a7ii to somebody for $10, that does not mean all A7ii’s are $10. Idiot.
Stop whining, if you can’t afford it get a better job or buy something cheaper.
You don’t like it, don’t buy it.
you realize you are comparing apple vs lemon? You buy lemon you get lemon dude
$1700 for the 35mm is ridiculous, considering the price of the Sigma 35mm Art lens.
buy the sigma and be a happy man/woman. its your choice.
but dont be angry afterwards when the sony lens is better.
The only issue is that Sigma do not make E-mount lenses…
But they do.
But very few and nothing that really fills holes in the system.
they did.
Or when you end up spending hours micro-adjusting the Sigma. That, I definitely don’t miss!
how much better?
Sigma lenses are 1/2 the price of 1st party lenses (canon, Nikon, Sony). And those 1st party lenses are 1/3 the price of Zeiss Otus or Leica Summilux. Get used to it.
you realize that sigma is 3rd party? Any 3rd party will be cheaper and that is why they are there for.
Yes, and they lack the metal skin;)
so, to your opinion, third party lenes are secondary crap and those manufactureres cook with different ingredients. 1700$ is just insulting. Sihma and Tamron beat first party lenses in many fields, including quality.
Does anyone know the weights of theses lenses yet? Looked and can’t seem to find any info yet.
Doesn’t look like any of the “hands on” reviews really go into weight. At a guess, 500 – 600g for the macro (going by the weight of the Tamron 90mm and Canon 100mm). Looks like the macro is IF though, which is a bonus.
At this prices I am glad, that I do not really need further lens at the moment. Lens budget will be redirected.
Official announcement for 24-240mm coming on March 4 according to digicame info.
I don’t understand why you are all so surprised by the 35mm 1.4 price.
The Nikon version is basically the same price and the Canon is only mildly cheaper. Just because sigma put out a good one for 1k doesn’t mean they’re all going to be that price. Knowing the Zeiss Sony pricing this is basically exactly what I thought the price would be. If the 55mm 1.8 is 1k then surely the 35mm 1.4 will be expensive.
Don’t get so butthurt if you can’t afford it. If you need it you need it and you’ll pay for it. If you don’t need it get the 35mm 2.8 or Loxia.
None of these lenses are what I’m looking for, but the if the 85mm I’m waiting for turns out to be about $1500-$2000 I won’t be surprised and I’m saving my pennies for it now
The 35 seems more or less fairly priced, but the 24-240 seems much too expensive, like 33% overpriced。
smartbutty conclusion, who could imagine that?
Looking at the pictures on the listing, they’re all from CP+. Doesn’t look like they’ve actually managed to get their hands on stock yet so I’m guessing it’s just going to end up being a very expensive pre-order.
28mm looks like the first “affordable” prime for fe
Already having 35 f2.8 and 55 1.8 ….I am interested in 24-240 for travels alot…but i am more and more interested in to 28 f2.
i am just wandering of it will retain f2 aperture with coverters or not.
I guess not……. at least 1 fstop will be stolen
Yes, at first I just assumed that aperture would remain the same without any doubt, until I saw the news that said it would be a stop slower…It doesn’t seem very good performance wise, isn’t compact at all(compared to the difference in size between the e16 and its adapters, the new ones are too fat), and actually goes slower while the old e16 adapters didn’t. This is very disappointing.
Well it does have to cover a significantly larger sensor and the higher resolution from future bodies are more demanding. Compromises have to be made. If you’re not happy, then stick with APS-C and be happy, or jump to micro four thirds.
I know, but initial tests say they still suck at the corners. If they really worked properly then we could put up with the size.
I’m in the same boat as you. I kinda want to wait and see a review on the 24-240 but so tempted to get one off of eBay right now. One of the users in the digicame.info forums mentioned the 24-240 being Tamron so I’m wondering about the overall performance.
f3.5 on 16mm fisheye converter.
f2.8 on 21mm converter.
Source? Front-mounted converters usually retain f-stop.
CAPA Camera reports from CP+2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajgo8ss9vec
Sorry, you have to understand Japanese…
Thanks. f2.8 on 21mm is still not bad, considering it is FF. If you don’t have to stop it down for sharp night landscapes.
Wow, sony has yet to announce any of these lenses and some shady ebay store claims to have concrete pricing and even shipping date?
Even more amazing is how many here seem to take this as fact.
now I have the 35mm f2.8 but the 28mm f2 looks very interesting… if performs well I might sell the 35mm and get the 28mm which is faster… also the 24-240mm looks perfect as a holiday lens, for travelling it should be fine… just wish was a little cheaper
That is a good price for the 28mm f/2.
Since these are over inflated, that should mean it’ll probably be around $300 in a years time.
No doubt this 28/2 will be the most popular out of the new lenses simply because it isn’t ridiculously overpriced.
“Zeiss FE 35mm f/1.4 for $1,729 (Click here to see it).”
For comparison, the stellar Sigma 35/1.4 Art, made for DSLRs (so it had to be made retrofocal to fit long SLR flange distances – more expensive construction), is $899 MSRP, half the price.