In an interview at Dpreview Sony said they are working on:
1) Telephoto FE lenses
2) Fast FE primes
3) f/2.8 zooms
So, let them now on out comment system what are the three FE lenses they should come up as next! I will sum up your suggestions in a POLL to be posted in 1-2 weeks.
I will be the first to start with my three suggestions:
50mm f/1.4
150mm f/2.8
24-70mm f/2.8
699 Responses
Sony/Sony Zeiss Primes
21/2
18/4
15/2.8
135/2
200/2
Zooms
24-35/2.8 (compact zoom)
35-70/2.8 (compact zoom)
70-135/2.8 (compact zoom)
The lesser the magnification, the more compact the design.
Canon used to have this 20-35mm L lens which was pretty compact for a 2.8 zoom.
Loxias could do with:
28/2 (if similar characteristics to the Contax 28/2 C/Y)
25/2
21/2
85/2 (if similar characteristic to ZM 85mm/2)
135/2
Batis could do with:
35/1/8
14/2.8
100 Makro Planar (similar to Contax or ZE version)
cheaper Sony 85/90mm 1.8/2.0 instead of the Batis Zeiss for those with less pocket money.
400f4 and 15mm macri
im not interested in zooms since sony is going crazy in megapixel, unless they can make a zoom can resolve more than 40mp of resolution
but F1.2 large aperture prime would be so nice to see
a 135 1.8 or something around the focal and aperture range
a good ultra wide lens is missing as well, I’m thinking 14mm, and please, make it 2.8
We need 400 f4 or 600 f 6.3
35mm f/2 AF, 24-70mm f/2.8 AF, 70-200mm f/2.8 AF.
– And I agree with @The Truth: Compact f/2.8 zooms with narrower zoom range, e.g. 20-35 and 35-70.
NO narrow zoom range, 20-50 2.8 at least and 35-135 2.8.
Tilt shift lenses. 24mm as a starter and then build from there.
300mm f/4 or 400mm f/5.6 both with OSS
24mm f/1.4
70-200 f/2.8
Oh one more important thing, for the 24-70, 70-200 2.8 zooms, I’m sure everybody would like to see them with internal zoom and focusing.
that would just make me feel a lot confident to zoom them in and out in the rain
I, for one, would not want that. It would make them hugely bulky.
How often do you use them in the rain and not have access to a camera cover or plastic bag? I’ve used lenses WITHOUT weather sealing in monsoon rains in Japan, or even in snow storms in the arctic; and they’ve all held up. The most trouble I’ve had was water drops / spray / snow on the front lens element.
85mm/f2
There is already the Zeiss Batis 85/1.8. With about 1300 USD it’s not cheap, but I guess a Sony 85/1.8 would also have a price tag of at least 600-800 USD and the Batis seems to be extremely good.
a Sony 85mm 1.8 for those who can’t afford premium Zeiss would be great
Any lens that has:
– Internal zoom (length of lens stays constant while zooming).
– Supports AF but NOT fly-by-wire.
– No focus breathing
– Close focusing distance (equal or better than traditional primes)
– Keep it small and under 475 grams
– If a zoom lens, keep the focus ring closer to the camera body
Sony G 24-70/2.8,
Sony G 24-100/4
Ultra wide angle zoom (like Sigma’s 12-24)
180/2.8 Macro 1:1 (or even better a 2:1!)
24-105 2.8, BETTER lenses than Canon he said.
Resurrected 200mm HS APO in white
Resurrected 135/2.8 or better 2.5 STF
All native for FE of course
Then some WA anything from 18-21mm
100-400mm or at least a 70-300mm. With diffractive elements (like Canon DO lenses) it is possible to build such telephoto lenses in a compact body.
The Zeiss 24-70 is not really that good for a f4 with that price. So please give us a mark II with better optical performance.
With a good standard zoom, a good telephoto lens and the 85mm Batis for portraits I would be perfectly equipped for all my needs (mainly travel photography)
300m f4.0 will be very nice, as small as the new Nikon one! Or a 400mm f4.0. I think it’s important to have focal length bigger than 200mm. The 70-200mm f4 is awesome, so I think a 2.8 version won’t be necessary, otherwise let’s use the A-Mount one…
Sony Zeiss 35mm/F2.0
Doesn’t make sense to me. We have already a 35/1.4 and a 35/2.8. There is much more need for e.g. a longer telephoto lens than for a third 35mm in the Sony range.
I, on the other hand, would be happy with a 28 f2-like 35 f2. The 35 f1.4 is huge and very expensive. The 35 f2.8, although compact, but is also more expensive than the 28, and darker. 35~40 is my favourite FoV, so I’m quite disappointed that there’s still no viable 35 alternative.
Why need 2470 f2.8 if the lens size near to sal2470z, and I think their back-illuminated full-frame sensor of the a7r ii is bright enough and also future sony camera will have this tech…
I would like to see a 85 – 135ish Macro with Tilt-Shift for product photography.
135mm + 50mm Batis
I’d like to see them continue to expand the “small, good and affordable” range that the FE 28 sits in. Include an 18mm f/3.5, 135mm f/2.8, 200 mm f/4, all with great optics and a nice compact size.
+1 Everybody asking for $1k+ lenses forget that Sony has no real inexpensive lenses for someone who wants to get into the system. A Sony A7 user will buy the Camera for $1k and find out that a simple 50mm which costs $200 on Canon/Nikon costs $1k on Sony (better lens obviously but the point is no cheap 50mm).
Sony needs a 50mm f2 lens which costs around $350 as an entry level lens. Need to be as good as the 55mm f1.8 but match the Sony 50mm f1.8 SAM which works great on my A7 camera without using crop mode.
Exactly! They need equivalents to nikons inexpensive 1.8 prime range.
70-400 f4-5.6 G with OSS
why OSS? My feeling is that they won’t do so much OSS lenses in the future since IBIS is no in the game… that might be disappointing for A7/A7s/A7r users, but companies usually look in the future and try to make you buy a new camera…
IBIS is probably limited with long lenses. The reason is: You need a much bigger movement range of the sensor, to compensate shaking at 400mm or 600mm than for 35mm. So OSS is probably a good thing for lenses with more than 300mm.
Maybe do your research first?
For starters, Sony IBIS works in tandem with OSS. It has been tested and shown multiple times that on the A7m2, lenses with OSS get better results at the same focal length than those without OSS.
Secondly, the longer the focal length, the more movements and shakes are amplified, so the more stabilization you need. Even with the OMD’s IBIS, which is said to be performing better than Sony’s, Olympus is planning to release the 300 f4 with OIS, and people say that at the focal lengths of the Panasonic 100-300 (equivalent to a 200-600’s FoV on FF) the OIS is better than the OMD’s otherwise stellar IBIS.
and a tripod is said to be even better for long focal lengths.. so why not using one?
I know that IBIS works in tandem, but given the points that a OSS lens is more heavy, more expensive and has more parts inside to break, I would prefer to “only” have IBIS and better glass
Why OSS? Because of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rymFZxA6kEk#t=2m45s
I have no problem with lenses up to 200mm or maybe a little longer without OSS, just relying on IBIS. But at 400mm lens OSS would be my choice. I can not tell you the break-even point. Maybe it’s 250mm or 300mm.
I just hope Sony does tests (e.g. existing 3rd party OSS-lenses) and consider lens OSS instead of following a general paradigma.
I agree that in-lens OS is better than the IBIS in A99 for telephoto lenses.
But we all know that the A99 is using a 2-axis old Minolta IBIS design which use piezoelectric motor, it is really not so great according to current standard.
But the newly design 5 axis IBIS which use powerful magnet & coil design from Sony, does proof that it is whole lots better than the one in A99. I guess the difference between the OSS & IBIS will be very small.
Agreed.
I want like to see a test with A7Rii and an adapted:
Tamron 150-600, non-VR – A-mount vs
Tamron 150-600, VR – EF-mount
and do a comparison between lens-OS vs IBIS at all relevant focal ranges.
If the Tamron-VR lens has an advantage of only 1/2 stop at 400mm, I would definitely prefer the non OSS-version for a FE 70-400.
SonyZeiss 24-105G F1.2
f1,2 is too slow. f0.95 or no buy
24-105 f/2.8 as opposed to 1.2 ever, instead useful in almost all shooting situations
use m43 Pancanikon for oversized lenses with bad quality and expense, and wheres Sony in your name anyway?
seriously? Hopefully they will also provide the monkey.. I won’t carry that amount of glass and metal….
Or any lenses, like other random posters~ not being a photographer.
Zeiss 2470 2.8, Zeiss 135 1.8, Zeiss 1635 2.8, FE 70300G
You think that re-designing these for EF mount will be any better than the A Mount versions with LA-EA3 on the new A7RII with Phase detect AF? The size would have to be about the same so I don’t see much advantage.
Current A-mount versions are not weather sealed. This is one problem. LAEA3 is also not sealed. Using both contrast and PDAF points all together would be an advantage too. 135 1.8 cannot be used with LAEA3 because it is a screw driven lens. Focusing is pretty slow with LAEA4.
I forgot about the screw drive. I have the 85 1.4 with the same problem, but don’t have the 135, although it has been on my list for a while. I do believe that they will have to replace both of those with SSM versions soon. I have the EA4 and I have ordered the EA3 for my pre-ordered A7RII. I have never been really impressed with the AF on the EA4. I am hoping that Sony has an EA5 with screw drive and no mirror in the works. The one lens I have that I’m sure won’t be getting a replacement is the Minolta 200mm 2.8 which is a really lightweight & sharp lens.
I had 85 1.4, and then I switched to 135. To be fair, 85 is a more usable focal length than 135 but the photos taken with 135, blows 85 out of water. You should get one. How is 85 on EA4? I am trying to decide to get one 2nd hand 85 or wait for Batis 85. What do you think?
I will definitely be getting the Batis 85. In fact I am thinking about selling my A99 along with the 85 1.4 to help pay for all the new gear coming. I don’t really like using any A mount lens on the EA4. Just feels slow and cumbersome. I have the Zeiss, 24, 50 & 24-70 as well, but those are all SSM and I am hoping that the experience with EA3 on the A7RII will be a big improvement. If & when an A99 replacement comes along, then I will look at the 135, although there have been rumors that it may be updated to SSM to be released along with an A99 replacement. On the other hand I may just find that the A7RII is so good, that I don’t need an A99 replacement, and in that case I won’t buy any more A Mount lenses except maybe an updated 135mm. From all of the hands on reviews of the Batis 85 it is a no brainer, as they are throwing around names like Mini Otus Etc., so it must be a great lens. Don’t need the Batis 25 as I have the Zeiss 24 2.0 already.
What I felt with EA4 is, as the focal length increase, the centered focus points won’t be a problem any more since the subject is usually coincides at least one of the focus points but when going wide angles (let’s say 24mm), you have to focus and recompose, focus and recompose… distracting and annoying process. I switched from A99 to A7m2 4 months ago. I sometimes miss my A99.
Sony FE 24-105 f/4 OSS
24-105 2.8: new
We need a long zoom that takes us to 400mm. Maybe 70-400 f4 or 200-400 f4 to compliment the 70-200 (if it would make the lens smaller than a 70-400mm), also 135 f1.8 or 2.0
Right. If Sony want’s to fight the Canikon duopoly, then Sony
needs to build longer telephoto lenses. Canon offers even 5 different
70/75-300mm. Five! Guess why? These lenses are extremely popular. Sony
has not a single 70-300 for E-Mount. All in all Canon offers 15 lenses
with 300mm or more. Sony has not a single lens for e mount with 300mm or
more. This is currently the biggest gap in the sony range of FE lenses.
Like JordanCS13 said: “small, good and affordable”. I don’t like the idea of investing more than 1000$ per lens!
16-70mm mark II would be great
FE lenses. APS-C E mount is dead.
that’s not a FF lens..
I´m interesting in very good and small Prime Lens like Batis
21mm/F4
28-90mm/F2,4
100-400mm/F4
I want to buy the Tamron 150-600mm but not sure if I should get the A Mount (No built in IS) and use the LA-EA3 or the Canon Mount with IS and use a Metabones adapter. It will be for use mostly with the A7RII. Anybody have any opinions on which way to go, I would like to hear them. I think it will be a long time before we get something like that from Sony.
I would say you can go for the A-mount since IBIS should be fine…
stabilisation is a much more complicated thing for 600mm then for 35mm. So far there not many experiences, if the IBIS work well with such long lenses. With the metabones adapter maybe the focus speed is lower, but at least stabilisation wil work well. Resale value for the Canon version will be higher than for A mount – if Sony start to build long lenses for e mount.
I often asked me the same question:
You should wait until A7Rii is out and there are reviewers testing adapted A-mount AF vs EF-mount AF. If EF-mount AF is as fast as A-mount-AF I would go for EF version because of lens-OS.
TheCameraStore did a comparison between Sony 70400 and Nikon 80400 and found out that Nikons-lens-IS is better than A99-IBIS @ 400mm. I think at 600mm things get worse.
Next thing: If your choice if EF-mount, you can consider Sigma 150-600 C as well. Slightly more expensive than the Tammy, but it is said to be sharper at the long end. And I guess if you want a 150-600 you buy it because of the tele-range 🙂
=>IF adapted EF-mount autofocus is fast enough, I would take Sigma
Yes, but this IBIS is more advanced than A99.
IF you remember what the Sony engineer said in the interview, then you know that OSPDAF will always perform poorly on long telephoto zoom.
So if really belief that canon lens on EF adapter can perform better than a-mount lens with EA4 for BIF,
Good Luck ~!
I have the Tamron 150-600 in a-mount, it focus / track perfectly on A77ii.
I’m leaning more towards the A Mount anyway, as I suspect Sony may even bring a LA-EA6 with the A77II focus points to market sooner or later.
Yes, I agree,
Sony is smart in making money,
they keep tell people that canon lens can works perfectly on Sony camera,so they can attract more users to switch camp,
but do you think Sony will happy that everyone use Canon lens on their body? Selling lens has more profit than selling body.
Once, they gain more market share or when the sell of camera body stop rising, they will think of other way to make money.
They will make some new feature that don’t work in 3rd party lens, so they can make people to use their lens to increase profit.
IMO, if you have canon lens already, it is fine,
But if you are planning to buy new canon lens for e-mount camera, I won’t suggest it.
Just illogical. ‘That’ lens may be proven to work, so until a new body which had something cool that was unique to E mount but didn’t preclude it you would be better not shooting at all? ‘thats’ non photographers idea.
I would love to see more Sony G lenses, like a 24-70/2.8 or a 180mm/f2.8 macro (1:1 or even better 2:1). Also highly appreciated would be a 24-105/f4 like Sigma’s never-to-be-released-in-A-mount lens…
Also a fast prime 24/f1.4 would be nice
agree. need to develop all three lines, no special coating for entry level lens like 28mm f2, 28-75mm. then G lens for mid level user, i would like to see a ultra wide with G coating, and Zeiss lens for top end workhorse (better yet, just give the zeiss lens back to zeiss, then people will stop complaining sony-zeiss is fake zeiss….).
simply and low development cost: re-mount the 85mm F2.8 from A mount.
it was a sonnar design (copy of the old contax lens), so all it needs its a faster/queiier motor and Zeiss coating.
then you have a truly go-everywhere super portable portrait lens that is super light and sharp enough most flashed portrait work.
That simply won’t work. The 85mm f2.8 is a DSLR lens and needs a completely new design in order to work on E mount.
Optically why wouldn’t it work? The AF system would need to be addressed, a spacer the size of the la-ea3/4 adapter but that’s about it.
The spacer is the problem. You need a hollow gap or air which increases the size by 100% negating the size advantage.
If it looks like longer version of the 55/1.8 I see no issue with size. I guess they will not be able to make shorter 85mm unless they use some weird optics like DO
True it would be longer but still a useful cheap lens option
there’s not much difference between 50/1.4 and existing 55/1.8, better skip 50/1.4 and make 50/1.2
other than that: fast 135 portrait lens is a must (135/1.8 or 135/2), and a range of f/2.8 zooms for sure
Instead of going for exotic fast speeds, they should focus on filling slots.
Like a real normal lens huh?
Pro weather sealed 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8
Do we even have to ask for those? why not something actually interesting, and useful and with thoughts towards a NEW system not relying on having only TWO good but overpriced lenses and only TWO ‘pro’ lenses and only TWO fast lenses and instead ONE mid range covering with extension 2.8, such as 24-105 2.8 as thats NEW.
I’m asking for those because those are the two lenses that I personally use the most on my D800 and I want to switch to Sony. I’ll take the rest as they come, but those are essential to me. Without those there is no need for me to go Sony, no matter how good or innovative their cameras are.
Switchers need not apply. They need to be made to switch, NOT at the cost of desire within the Sony user bed. Sony’s system is already unique.
The Sony man said BETTER lenses than canon, that’s serious talk.
If Sony really wants to be a serious contender, than they should absolutely consider luring everybody, including people such as myself. Therefore my opinion does matter and that is what this is about, our opinion on what glass we want and need. And as soon as those two lenses are available I’ll buy into the system and that includes the A7rII, some accessories and those lenses. Which is quite a bit of money, that I’m sure Sony will gladly accept.
haha the ‘serious’ lure. Yes with a serious camera system differentiating confidently Sony’s best assets they will win in time.
Since you a D800 guy I presume bulk isn’t a problem. The Zeiss A 24-70 2.8 and Sony A 70-200 2.8 are both SSM. This means that they will auto focus on the a7rii with LA-EA3 adapter. With lenses this size the extra 20 something mm probably wouldn’t annoy you.
Hopefully the a7ii will receive the fast AF SSM update, but unlikely.
No, neither the size norbthe wait would be an issue. But if I can get a smaller camera and smaller lenses that do the same i wozld gladly take those, even if I have to pay a bit more for them.
I don’t like to use adaptors. I want native glass, otherwise I could use my Nikin glass as soon as the recently announced Nikon F to E-Mount Adapter will be released. But I assume the speed won’t be close to as good, that’s why I’m waiting for native glass.
If Sony would release a bigger, but faster or wider version of the 24-70 and 70-200, I would definitely buy those.
Honestly, I don’t think Sony needs to impress anyone anymore. I think they need to give the people the possiblity to do the same or more than with Canon and Nikon Equipment. And even though the cameras can, their lens line up is lacking for quite a few people that have already invested into other systems.
A 20-70/2.8 or a 24-105/2.8, as mentioned by some others, would be nice, but I really doubt it. That’s why I asked for something that I know is possible.
24F2.8
40F2
50F1.4
105f2.8 or 135F2
24-105 F4
70-200 F3,5-4,8 (compact)
A decent, economical pancake lens, or even a compact set of pancake primes. Not because I want one (I don’t) but just because the demand for such a lens seems high, and it might serve to silence the people who continually moan about the size of E-mount lenses.
I would love a auto focusing pancake 40 2.8 like Canon has.
That, the Panasonic pancakes and the Nikkor AIS 45/2.8 are exactly what I had in mind.
They have the 35/2.8 already.
That is a very good lens I already own.
A low cost pancake prime lens, between 24~40mm, F4 would be fine.
Second
Many like primes. And thats starts @8mm. A compleet series like 8-10-12-14-18-20-24-35-50-85-135-200. And with that the affordable (?) f/1.8-f/2 and premium f/1.4-1.2 range. Long zoom: let’s wait wat the Canon-adapter brings with the 400-500-600 lenses. And wat about a short and long macro (50 and 180 or 200)?
High quality 100mm f/2 or faster, preferably a compact design like the 55/1.8. See Canon FD 100mm f/2 for reference on desirable size (but yes I get that it has no AF, blah blah, we’re making wish lists here)
100m?! I would never have thought of, or even considered that! Good idea.
That would IMO be the ideal ‘small’ longer prime to go with 28/2 and 55/1.8.
why, i know why I prefer to 85/90, why do you think it is ideal?
50mm f1.4
40mm f1.8
85mm f1.4
24-70mm f2.8
70-200mm f2.8
35-50mm f2.0
35-50, f/2? and why would you want that instead of two better primes, you wouldn’t. 20-50 2.8 of f/2 obviously.
1. because I don’t want to mount and unmount 55.8 and 35/2.8 too many times.
2. 20-50/2.0 will be too big. 20-50/2.8 would be good.
And you know this? because sigma already made something at 24-35mm f/2, but ALL sigma lenses are big for other reasons. 20-50 2.8 will NOT be that bad at all. ONLY a serious lens in a seriously useful range for photography.
I know it. still better than switching 2 lenses 10 times in 5 minute. Actually I believe Sigma would make it after 24-35/2 but native lense will be always welcome.
Make the first instance useful and keep making it having expended resources to design it, like canikon, exploiting it for years to come because its STILL relevant.
IMO:
Currently the tele side of the system is much weaker than the wide-side. We finally got an 85 prime from Zeiss, and there is also a 70-200 f4 G (and of course there’s also the 24-240 “tourist-zoom”, but it’s performance is weakest on the tele side), but both are expensive, there are no lower-priced alternatives if anyone needs a tele.
So I’d say:
– a budget 70-300 f4-5.6 tele-zoom first;
Then continuing the prime line-up with more lenses like the 28: sharp, contrasty, compact, moderately priced; only compromising on CA and distortion which can be corrected in post.
– “28 f2-like” 21 f2.8 and 135 f2.8, and perhaps 200 f4 (and later more moderately priced 28-like Sony alternatives of the existing Zeiss “trinity”: 35 f2, 50 f2, 85 f2)
Wishlist: a moderately priced and sharp 24-85 f2.8-4 or f3.5-5.6 OSS to replace the disappointing 24-70 f4 Zeiss.
In parallel, to attract more professionals, starting the f2.8 line as mentioned in the interview: 24-85 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 16-35 f2.8
Ditch the pointless tele side and make it serious, 24-105/135 2.8, for users who DONT need 200mm and DO need wide end commonly or even NORMAL at all. Stop disappointing at 24-105 range lenses with a GREAT and serious 24-105 2.8.
The “pointless tele side” is just your opinion.
There are lots of options for normal and wide (21, 24-70, 24-240, 25, 28, 28-70, 28-135, 3×35, 50, 55), whereas the same cannot be said about tele (a mediocre tele-performance 24-240, an expensive 70-200 and an expensive 85). There’s just no moderately priced tele option in the system.
I would like something akin to the E 16-50 for FE. Something that collapses in with a good range for everyday use and travel. I hate lugging all my big A and FE stuff around.
you use 16mm? with distortion. DONT, make it 20-50mm 2.8 and prime level image quality throughout.
Mate i just want a basic lens with a normal range (24-75). Compact and light which doesn’t take much room up. I can live with the distortion, vignetting and other problems that can be fixed in camera. I still have the FE 35 2.8, Fe 55 1.8, FE 16-35 4, A 24-70 2.8, fE 70-200 4 for when I want killer quality, something’s I don’t care
‘Killer quality’ You don’t know what you are talking about, Sony man said better than Canon and you are depreciating e mount potential by assuming ALL new Sony lens be worse not better than before.
No follow up nonsense, you said: 24-75 with faults and after ‘but not killer quality’ like your A 24-70 2.8.
You’re really depreciating your potential. Why you push others so much?
Your assuming that better than Canon only covers image quality. I’m not aware of a collapsible full frame 24-75 with power zoom made by anyone. By offering a range of options not just those aimed at the high end consumer or pro, you get more people on board. My my case better is a the existing 28-70 made small
The already narrow aperture zoom lenses, like those used on APSC also, but which are especially slow too, and might collapse, like the pentax example you most likely refer, however this is full frame and 2.8, how about instead of collapse a lens length, make it more useful so you need fewer lenses with you at once: 24-135 2.8 AND fast. For that flat a camera and slow: like f/7+ equivalent, why not just use APSC or m43.
I don’t need it to be 2.8 for the situation I’m describing. A 3.5-5.6 would be fine.
2.8 zooms are just to big and heavy. I have the Zeiss 24-70 2.8 and it’s a pain to use.
A 24-135 2.8 would be massive. Have you seen the 28-135 f4 PZ? I know it’s a power zoom and a video lens but it’s huge. 24-105 f4 would be nice or a 24-135 4-4.5
Do you want the lens to be parfocal? Its ok, no non photographers actually answer.
Prefer but not required
Not required, thanks. Now about the size, how about it DID get used for video too in convergence and was parfocal unlike even some Canon zooms of longer range and further had an aperture control unlike ALL new canikon, not for you? well not for you, but serious users may want THAT range fast and with high quality, can you even give an example of a superior quality zoom existing, if slower at these ranges? On a par with the best of the TWIN zooms, actually those are no standard either are they? Better, than Canon…
Well, you can still use the E 16-50 in crop mode 🙂
Something up to the size of the 28 would be nice to have (even if it was only just over 2x zoom range, e.g. 28-60 or 24-50 f4-5.6)
Set of Tele Convertors. The 70-200 is just too short and I already own it. A 1.5 teleconverter would be great
There is a 1.5x teleconverter already. They call it A6000 🙂
Yer I have an a6000 but it’s another camera I have to carry :(. I would love to have an teleconverter for when I need that extra reach.
I do carry A7ii and A6000 usually. Weird is I find tracking with 70-200 works better on A7ii. May be I need more practice. Not sure.
A6000 is not much bigger than a TC in small protective case
I’ve only had the a6000 a month. Works pretty good. AF isn’t nearly as good as marketed. The a7ii tracking works well if you can keep the subject centred.
On A7rII it’s called crop mode
You can just set the A7 series camera to APS-C crop mode, and you have your 1.5 teleconverter.
an 50 1.4 glued to a Sensor and EVF… I mean a RX2!
Start making AF lenses with focus clutch and proper MF. Just make 3 and see how they sell.
They already have two.
Both are specialized though. Don’t they hear requests for improved MF?
50mm 1.2
70-200mm 2.8
85mm 1.4
28-135 f/4? with the new Sony cams 4K video better at APSC crop why not assure that the video lens is wider like 24, or better still 20 and up to not so far like instead 105, in fact faster too, and thus 2.8, if this IS heavy, make it a video also lens and EVERYONE happy. With aperture control too obviously. Remember, this video will improve at APSC for several things still faster than 35mm sensor, global shutter anyone? High dynamic range output?
20-105 for FF? Hardly possible.
If you only want to use it for APSC crop, why not use the E 18-105 or 18-200 PZ?
I would consider switching to FE mount, especially after the announcement of the A7rII, but I NEED a decent FE mount wildlife tele-zoom like 70-400!
The A mount version works well with EA4 adapter on A7ii
I know that, but I want a native FE mount lens. I am in general not an adapter guy ….
It’s kind of what the system does the best. I have two LA-E4 adapters, well built, auto focus works great. Best used with the battery grip because the adapter extends beneath the camer base. Not sure it its just the tripod mount or there is the AF motor in there for older Minolta lenses. The LA-EA3 adapter is more compact, lacks the additional AF motor and the SLT mirror
Might work better on the a7rii using the LA-EA3 adapter, larger auto focus frame coverage.
Larger AF coverage does not mean better.
OSPDAF will never work better than dedicated PDAF on telephoto zoom lens.
A statement about AF, that only took 48 hours….
Far point but when you compare a larger spread to the limited point offering of the LA-EA4 adapter you get more flexibility and hence better to me.
– 1.8/135 Zeiss Sonar for FE would be lovely (A-mount upgraded with SSM is also ok)
– 2/105 Zeiss Sonar or 2.5/105 high quality compact portrait lens longer 55/1.8
– 300 f4 or 400 f4.5 at decent price with teleconverters
24-70 2.8, 70-300
Variable aperture tele zoom with long reach – e.g. 100-300 / 4-5.6 or 200-400 / 4.5-6.3
UWA prime – e.g. 18/3.5 or 15/4.0
Short tele prime – 135/2.0 (2.8 is fine if 70-200/2.8 isn’t already planned)
Pancake (use software correction or whatever) – 45/2.8
a decent ultra wide !! 11-24 or 12-24, there is nothing that comes close to Canons 11-24 or Nikons 14-24
24-70mm f2.8, 85mm f1.4 and 70-200mm f2.8. Lots of A mount equivalents, but would be nice to see a slightly smaller FE mount version.
The 85mm desperately needs SSM update. I tried Sigma and Zeiss 85mm lenses on EA4 and the Sigma was always spot on with AF using all focus points of the adapter while the Zeiss missed focus far too often with anything but the center point.
May be they will be bigger, 😛
because they have to add extension tube at the end of the lens.
or
May be they will sacrifice some image quality to make it smaller than a-mount eqv.
While we are at it…perhaps a 50mm F0.95 with a minimum of 16 Blades and Autofocus should seal it for me 🙂
300mm 4.0 small like the nikon one
1.4x and 2x Tele-converters to use on 90mm macro, 70-200mm and future 300mm + primes
12mm 4.0
135-300 f/2.8 🙂
Now, if we only had a zoom to match around 100-135mm…hmmm like a 35-135mm 2.8 INSTEAD of 70-200mm that is just heavy and expensive with no use of sub 70mm available when mounted….Serious users need serious lens selections. Tele end is good and lets move it further and faster, seriously, but keep mid range multi use across normal range too, and with VERY HIGH quality so all our shots look amazing.
There is no Telephoto option for FE.
I currently use the Sigma 50-500, but it doesn’t work with my Commlite electric EF adapter. I use it with physical adapter – no iris no AF no IS, but still it’s useful for video photography. It’s a must for video photography !
I wish there was such a lens with native FE mount.
It might actually be usable. I have the Sigma 70-200 and the 120-400 and at first they didn’t appear to work at all. Here is what you need to do. Flip the manual switch on the lens before you power it on. When you turn it on, the screen will be black for up to a minute. You’ll assume the lens doesn’t work. Eventually, you’ll see an image on your monitor/viewfinder. If you press the shutter button, it won’t take a picture. Wait another minute or so, and eventually the shutter will start working! No aperture control, but very usable. Just set the auto-time-off to a longer value so that you aren’t stuck going through this long sequence again.
From a ‘mate’ to a lot of guys suddenly ‘interested’ in photography, but are they serious?
What are you videoing, birds? Can’t you just use the APSC crop in cam to make something equivalent. What we learn from this is that meaningful posts are a lot more effort than endless meaningless ones.
The great Sigma 50-500 on full frame (A7S) is very close to the f/1.4 zooms of 2/3″ system, but much cheaper. Those who used these shoulder camcorders can appreciate the advantages of extreme closeups in video photography. Not just wildlife. It can be useful when filming shows, sport etc.
You used shoulder camcorders, want to film shows/sport, or just a made up avatardentity? You want to converge camcorders of old with larger than common film sensor sizes… who wouldnt? nothing to lose…the inexpensive and shoulder carry with the best sensor available and interchangeable 35mm sensor covering lenses of any make….and equivalent to lens focal lengths that cover ranges better suited to small sensors and lenses for those frame sizes, yes i can see no problems with that yet. A smaller video crop mode? could actually be useful? you research or answer now:
https://youtu.be/IQ-IxT-CWSg
dont worry people, its an avatexample and not actual videographer 🙂
The great Sigma 50-500 on FF (A7S) is very close to the f/1.4 zooms of 2/3″ system. Those who used these shoulder camcorders can appreciate the advantages of extreme closeups in video photography. Not just in wildlife. It can be useful when filming shows, sports etc.
As for zooms 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 would be nice. But since I’m a prime shooter I would like to have 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 both planars. I know we can have that with an adaptor but it would be really nice to have something new and high end like 35 1.4
15mm F/4 or 12mm F/4 or sonething, which can accept filters!
A range of f/2.0 lenses:
• Sony 24mm 2.0
• Sony 35mm 2.0
• Sony 50mm 2.0
• Sony 85mm 2.0
• Maybe also a 135mm and 200mm 2.8
These should have similar build as the current 28mm 2.0, be reasonably priced, and size should be as small as possible. I personally don’t use zooms, but if they also make G or ZA f/2.8 24-70 + 70-200, I think a range of lenses like the above could lure a lot of the Canikon DSLR crowd over to Sony FE.
Now, what I personally really really want is fast ZA glass with aperture rings:
• 50mm 1.2 ZA
• 85mm 1.2 ZA
• 135mm 2.0 ZA
• 200mm 2.0 ZA
24-105 f/4 !!!!
I would forfeit the f/4 if f/3.5-4.5 or alike will mean top Image Quality. The downfall of the 24-70 is that the IQ is compromised as to keep size in check while aperture is kept constant.
Now, for simplicity alone, constant aperture is really nice, lets just make it 3.2 or the whole 2.8 first time. 2.8 is a nice standard across even primes.
70-300
18-300mm f/2 🙂
Or even a long range zoom that actually had good image quality, even though slow.
Serious lenses for serious photographers.
if that lens ever exists, it will be so huge that your camera looks like a lens cap
Why not?
switch from high-res 42mp to high-iso 12mp!
Just by changing the lens-cap!
priceless – haha
A few additional small, lightweight AND affordable primes (like the new 28mm F2.0). And maybe a good quality 24-105 or 28-105 F4 (non Zeiss) to offer an (affordable) upgrade to the cheaper 28-70mm kit lens. (Maybe starting at 28 instead of 24 to “protect” the 24-70 ZEISS sales – Would make sense.)
Sony/Zeiss are in the unique position of actually competing to make a superior system all round for us, with unique new quality levels…
Exactly, something like the Easy choice line for A-mount. Cheap but optically decent, light and small primes to get you started while you save for those 1000$+ goodies. Affordable options for 24mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8 and a 135 2.8 would encourage me to migrate to FE.
24-85mm 2.8,
135mm 1.8
14 to 17mm rectilinear prime, either 2.8 or 4
24-70mm f/2.8 and it must be high quality or don’t even bother. Just as good or better than the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 MII. Would also love a fast ultra wide prime, like a 14, 15 or 16mm f/2.8, and it needs to be able to accept screw on filters. Maybe there will be a Ziess Batis like that first?! 🙂 Also, a 70-200 f/2.8 please. The f/4 is great, but sometimes you need the speed.
On all future wire focusing lenses, please alow for the degree of change in focus to NOT vary by the speed the focus ring is turned, or at least allow a toggle that will allow you to make the change in focus NOT based on speed when that option is preferred. Also, the focus rings should react right away when turned. The lag and variable wire focusing make it difficult for filming movies in particular.
A refresh of the legendary Carl Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f/1.8 please 🙂 Thank you!
Please don’t change a thing with its lens design. The original lens is already spectacular! Just add a fast autofocusing motor and extra hold button for portrait position please and maybe an OLED too haha.
You have the only autofocus telephoto prime lens in the world and it has the Zeiss Sonnar design and it’s the ultimate portrait lens rightnow. It is sharp, colorful, the bokeh is so ridiculous (in a good away) and it’s only available for Sony users. Maybe improve on the best thing that you have and give it its long-awaited refresh? 😀
Correctomundo! 🙂
“only stabilized autofocus telephoto prime lens in the world”
Nope – there is also the EF 200mm F2.0L IS USM (an incredible lens btw) 🙂
Hi and I’m sorry lol, what I really meant to say was it is the only 135mm portrait lens in its category that’s capable of autofocusing w/ added stabization from the IBIS. The Nikon 135/2 and Canon 135/2 version is not that good for portrait work due to unstabilized focal range and the quality is not that good. And the better quality Zeiss APO 135/2 EF and F version is only manual focus :/
The Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 that I have fits in my bag and I can bring it anywhere I want to go. I can hold it for a long time w/o requiring a monopod, I can shoot faster w/ it in autofocus and get less blurry shots w/ the IBIS.
And I’m not really sure if anyone can work w/ that almost 6 pounds Canon telephoto prime lens you have mentioned. I know for sure that I won’t be carrying something that massive and heavy around with me lol. I like to travel light hence why I opted to go mirrorless system 🙂 Thanks!
most needed 70-400 – 4.5 – 5.6
I have a question, form a technical perspective, how much smaller can sony make the exact equivalent of an A mount lens for the E mount.
EG how much smaller would the Sony 24-70mm II 2.8 (A mount) be if it were made for the E mount, while keeping all the specs the same.
10%, 20% or more, less the same size?
Bearing in mind that the Sony 70-200 FE f4 is a little smaller and lighter than the same 2.8 version for A mount, I’m not sure that the equivalent f2.8 version for E mount would be any smaller at all.
Thoughts and opinions welcome.
Cheers,
P.
It will be the same size and money +/-10% 🙂
No smaller, really. In some cases, larger. The FE 35/1.4 is larger than the a-mount 35/1.4.
Notice the smaller FE lenses are usually slower than the a-mount equivalents.
It’s pure physics. That is how DSLR were invented. If you need at least 45 mm distance from lenses back to 24×36 mm focal plane to achieve good resolution, any lens for small E-mount body must be longer than it’s A-mount counterpart.
600mm bird lens please ! !
WANTED: fast ultrawides (18mm/14mm/12mm).
Just improve all or add new FE lens like 12-24mm F4 lens, new 50/55mm F1.4, 135mm F2.8 & a better 70-200mm F2.8 will do & you will see all dslr users jumping into Sony ship.
Nikons 12-24 is good wide open at 2.8, there are lots of 50/55 1.4 at the top end of all lenses, 135 2.8 is step back from 135 1.8, 70-200 zooms are pointless/expensive/dead weight pigeon holes for non serious photographers/non photographers
“70-200 zooms are pointless/expensive/dead weight pigeon holes for non serious photographers/non photographers”
And you are a “real serious photographer”? Because any photographer worth his salt would understand that teles do have their place in any manufacturer’s line-up. How’s about you stop spamming your erroneous agenda?
Says the non photographers commission. teles have a place beyond 100mm
500/4.5 or 5.6 with fast focus so we know that it can be done native for e-mount. Same for ultrawide.
• 135/2 or 1.8 in style of 35/1.4 (aperture ring)
• 85/1.4 same style
• I second that 50/1.4, or even 1.2
Thats just my personal preferences.
Of course the system needs 24-70/2.8 non-OSS and an ultra wide prime as well as longer tele lenses for our wildlife guys.
85mm 1.2 AF+ weather sealed
135mm 2.0 (or 1.8!?) AF + weather sealed
50mm 1.2 AF+ weather sealed
70-200 2.8 AF+ weather sealed
24-70nn 2.8 or something wider and shorter: 21-50mm? AF+ weather sealed
21mm AF+ weather sealed
Booring, apart from the 21mm weather sealed 2.8? no, f/2? 2.8 isn’t good anymore, Nikon have 20mm 1.8, Sigma 24mm 1.4, proper focus action and aperture? 135mm 2/1.8 has alooot of competition already. 1.4?
REAL lenser talking. I’ve even got a vintage 21mm already that is neat…from the first round of Sonification with my A7R.
No man, some of the lenses Douglas suggested are definitely needed before anything else is considered…
85 1.2? 50 1.2? or the twin zooms…you can use canon zooms already.
or canon 1.2’s. Don’t unless you really want that, Sony may make something better.
A solid 135 would be a good start. I understand that you could use the Canikon mount lenses with an adapter, but that is a good solution only for people who already have those lenses. Sony should have their own full range E-mount lens lineup and not rely solely on their competitors to fill any gaps.
It might be boring, but it’s exactly what’s needed first.
no its not, there are canikosigma variants already. What would you use 200mm in zoom for? No answer of course. No photographer at all.
Totally agree ultra fast primes and 27-70 + 70-200 2.8 with at least same quality as the canon ones.
Song now makes the best cameras, they need to have a good lens system if they want people to clearly become Sony users for long term.
Because now people still keep their canon lenses.. So if canon release something better than a7r2 anytime byebye…..
Give us stellar lens like canon 70-200 2.8 II, zeiss 135 1.8, and so on and we will be happy
Don’t forget the cheap ones
28-35-50-85 all 1.8 with canon price …
12-24 2.8, 135 1.8, 300 2.8 70-300 f4
50mm f/1.4, or f/2 (but NOT the same size/weight as 35 f/1.4)
35mm f/2 (smaller and lighter than the f/1.4 but still very high IQ and fast enough, with AF)
21mm f/2.8
24mm f/2
70-200 f/? Smaller/lighter/slower than the f/4, but still nice and sharp/good bokeh quality
Tilt/shift lens lineup.
All the above should be smaller lighter than equivalent DSLR lenses – think Leica/rangefinder size/quality.
A 70-300 options is needed. Maybe get Tamron to turn their 70-300 Vi DC into a Sony mount. Or maybe Sigma will save the day here? 200 is not long enough.
18mm T/S with a filter thread.
Would like to have compact primes which have F1.8 aperture because the lenses now are too big for travel and carry. Maybe without the Zeiss mark and just regular FE, like the 28/2. Affordable and high quality.
24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm
Lenses for customer should be affordable!
Pancake Lens or Pancake Zoom and compact 100mm f/2.0
50mm STF
85mm STF
50-100mm f/2 OSS
Tilt shift lenses. A 24mm for wide landscapes.
Sony you have to make a BIG E-mount body first,
Otherwise there is no reason to make a BIG large aperture Zoom lens.
May be Sony should focus in it only advantage “SIZE”
16-35 F5.6
24-70 F5.6
70-200 F5.6
85mm F2.8
135mm F2.8
70-300 F5.6-8
70-400 F5.6-8
you must be joking
Yes, I am joking
24-70 F2.8, 70-200 F2.8, 300mm F2.8
are the only lens I am interest in.
But Sony don’t have a e-mount body that fit these lenses.
Until then I will still stay in a-mount.
I mean 24-70 5.6, 70-200 5.6 and 70-300 5.6-8…These would be the worst financial investment for Sony forever.
You will stay in A-mount forever then, because to achieve good resolution the lens has to be far from focal plane. As it’s physically impossible to do anything better than put A-mount lens plus LA-EA adaptor to achieve F2,8 zoom, that’s how new E-mount lenses look like – just like A-mount lens with built-in tube to add more distance from focal plane. FE cameras look proportional only with these darker standard fixed focal lenses… It’s dead end street, Sony has to go back to A-mount DSLR form to compete with DSLR market.
I use the 2KG Sigma 50-500 on A7s. I use a strap attached to the lens instead of the strap of the camera and it’s perfect.
Well, they have the FS700 and FS7. They are pretty large 😉
Although they don’t really need full frame lenses, many people (like me) use them in combination with an A7s. And many film makers are using the A7s rigged up so the size of the lens is not so important.
For example, for filming (my main gig) the 24-70/f4 would be good enough on the A7s but a bit on the slow side on my FS700. If they had a 24-70/f2.8 I could use it on both cameras…
Especially 24-70 / f2.8 would be a nice one. At 70-200 I am not sure if I would prefer the f2.8 over the f4 because a f2.8 is a monster.
At 24-70 my choice would definitely be f2.8 and have additional the cheap 28-70 kit lens as a lightweight combo.
I don’t want to say, that 70-200 f2.8 is unnecessary – I want just say the 24-70 is more important and should be out first.
Say it, 70-200mm 2.8 is unnecessary. there. I only want to shoot people and I dont want it, I want a medium range zoom with wide 20 and 2.8 across normal range up to tele preferably. Sports can have their own and I will use that, from 100mm on.
No – 70-200 f2.8 is necessary. It’s only for me personally not as important as a 24-70 f2.8, because my personal use-case is shooting people indoors at dim lit dance-floors. I won’t go longer than 70mm indoors, but I have the demand for big apertures.
There are many serious photographers, that have a demand for 70-200 f2.8. But I am not a serious photographer 🙂
Do you want 20-70mm at least instead of 24-70mm at 2.8? Why are you arguing? Not serious? then how is 70-200 2.8 costing the most of any lens not a serious consideration, and unnecessary one at that evidently.
Couldn’t care less because I won’t be buying any.
Thank God you commented, then.
You don’t think it’s a valid comment? Sony’s in business to make money. If they want to know what e-mount lenses will make them more money from my perspective, I just told them. If size and weight were the “problem” they tried to solve by introducing e-mount, they succeeded. Unfortunately the physical size introduced its own set of problems that didn’t exist with a-mount. Personally I don’t give a damn about size and weight. I actually LIKE a larger, heavier camera, so if Sony wants more of my money they better pay attention to a-mount. If they don’t they’ll probably loose ALL my money.
If they don’t pay attetion to A-mount, does “probably” Sony loosing your money also mean that we “probably” loose you around here?
If so…then F! A-mount, man!!
Good riddance!
PS: Just kidding…but you walked right into it with so much frustration and anger. Obviously this SAR post is not for you.
The problem is that this list is no longer sonyalpharumors, and hasn’t been for quite some time. It’s really sonyemountrumors. I’ve tried to convince the owner to fork the site into two because there is so much hatred expressed by e-mount converts towards those of us who still believe in a-mount. It is hurtful and goes way beyond jocularity. After all, both platforms have their advantages and disadvantages.
Of course it is alpha.
What’s that letter there on the front of the camera above the 7r?
Looks pretty alpha to me.
this rumor site it the official reason, why sony re-named NEX brand into alpha-brand “_(°°,)_/”
Haha, I was mostly joking about how your comment was so unconstructive. You basically just said “no matter what lens they make I’ll never buy it”. They certainly aren’t going to just stop making E-mount because you think it’s too small, so give some constructive criticism, like ” make great lenses regardless of size ” or something. But, all that being said, your opinion is certainly valid.
Give us new E-APSC please..
60mm OSS macro
24-150
100-300
…
How about some decent lenses for the APS-C cameras?
We still don’t have a reasonable, affordable walkabout zoom equivalent to the A-mount 16-50/2.8
All this ‘cheerleading’ for the A7rII and FE range and Sony lies about ‘listening to the customer’ is very frustrating for those of us invested in their APS-C E-mount and A-mount products
Decent G or Z: 16-50mm 2.8 APC.
Can be a little bit bigger (16-50pz availible…)
Price: < 700$
400 mm or 100-400mm, f4 preferably.
And shorter primes without noticeable distortion; I don’t like correcting that in post. And for the prices Sony (and Zeiss) charge, that should well be possible.
500mm f5.6 or 300-500mm f5.6
Of Course, I want all high grade optics with great wide open performance and I am willing to pay for it, even if it means I can only get one lens at a time, so they should all be truly G or truly Sony/Zeiss Quality even if just as or even more expensive than the f/4 lenses:
16-35mm variable aperture
24mm-120mm f/4 (possibly f4-5/6, and it could start at 28mm, 67mm filter size or smaller)
70-300mm f/4-5.6 (or f/6.3 or 70-400mm, 67mm filter size or smaller)
125 or 150mm f/4 Macro lens
50mm 1.4
135mm f2
15mm rectilinear
20mm f2
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
24-105 f4
And I would love to see a full loxia series, but I suppose that’s Zeiss.
Simple answer: smaller AF based lenses. The current FE designs still rely on DSLR lens constructions. The big advantage of having a smaller mirrorless camera body is taken away with a bulky lens. As long as most FE lenses stay large, I continue to use my SLR and some rangefinder manual focus lenses.
I’d opt for some of the common choices listed here too, a few more fast primes like a 24/1.4, 135/2.8, a few slower/cheaper primes like a 16/2.8 and a 85/2.8, a longer/slower zoom like a 70-300 and maybe a UWA cine lens to go with the 28-135 like a 17-50/4.
If those roadmap mystery lenses are coming by the end of the year, they’re well into the development phase and most of the specs are pretty much worked out.
The large aperture prime listed on the chart? I think it’s a 50/1.4.
16 f/2.8 isn’t slow is it.
I think so too. On the other hand there was a rumor about a cancelled 85/1.2, maybe that was the LA prime.
A light f4 24-140mm lens, please, the 24-240mm is too big and heavy for daily use.
I would buy that.
if a 24-120 is constant f4 aperture, I doubt it will be much small or lighter than curren 24-240.
24-70 f2.8
70-210 f2.8
24-105 f4
16-35/2.8
50/1.2
85/1.4
135/1.8
Clearly, they need to make the lenses that have the greatest demand, as Sony is a business. Individuals might have endless specific needs, but that can’t be a guiding principle.
So, the question to ask is where is the greatest demand and what can’t be achieved with what already exists?
I know that some feel limited by the f4.0 aperture of the existing zooms (although I’d love to have genuine data for the number of successful shots people take at f2.8 and wider with this type of lens…). However, I tend to agree with those who want longer reach. 200mm is a severe limiting factor for many spheres.
Of course, my view may be a minority, but I hope that’s where Sony concentrate. They can then look to ‘speed’ the range up when there aren’t too many gaps.
As to size, I think the suggestion of possibly reducing the zoom range to keep them compact might well be worth pursuing, so have a 24-60 f2.8 and a 70-150 f2.8, perhaps.
ah yes, and yet by fulfilling only the current generally greater demand for canikon lenses they cannot differentiate, what will they do? make BETTER lenses than Canon, and more interesting and useful ones to boot? The number of shots at 2.8 is immaterial, and may be based on standing still and shooting as if with a prime with some loss of focus on subject, but the shallow look will remain and THAT’S whats so great about the 2.8 side of it, they wouldn’t get that with primes either? and most ALL primes get similar stopped down at f/4+(the ones starting faster and reasonably sharp wide open get sharper at this point than some others later at 5.6-8 which is easier to contrast OOF with in focus) why bother to have any faster primes than that either? consider it: DIFFERENTIATE from canikon….have you got research to demonstrate that f/4 zooms are sharper at f/4 so making focus easier to snap in? If not those 2.8 zooms may focus better than your 2.8 is futile gesture suggests. Yes i’m that good. I think you have lost focus on photography with politics. Incidently, lesson of the day, a lens out of focus ISNT the same as soft focus. Somewhat softer wide open but well rendering lenses WILL flatter nicely so lets have those not just overcorrect the nature and life out of our glass.
It is a curiosity that you ask for differentiation and yet most commentators criticise because Sony does not yet match Canon and Nikon!
I’m pretty sure that there will be many discussions and much hand-wringing done before each lens is developed. There may well be some thinking about ‘differentiation’, but only to the extent of producing a better product.
Ultimately, these are lenses and have a focal length and aperture; no more, no less.
commentators who aren’t great photographers and don’t understand actual quality because Sony has of some lenses the best of all time in any system unlike canikon who are surpassed by third party on quality and price. You don’t understand what differentiation is as shown by lens commentary. Lenses such as sigma 30 1.4 can almost be used on 35mm sensor and some lenses are made to cover beyond the image circle, therefore you don’t know anything at all about lenses. I want naturally rendering and sharp lenses (beyond image circle rather than just over corrected) which is not something a non artisan would understand but any real photographer would appreciate.
You don’t negate fast lenses because you HAVENT negated them at all in any way, you haven’t proven that at f/4 they are as good.
Differentiation is not from canikon, its from the better third party lenses and people like you who aren’t photographers only armchair politicians.
Sony cannnot only mnake the lenses wpiyith the most demand nor can they fullfill everyones specific needs, bit some lesser demanded lenses MUST beo in the line to provide the appearence of a full lens line up. A long lens lens, such as the example I describe in my other comment is an absolute necessity.
I think that what pretty much what I said!
Yes, you said ‘if you cant differentiate factors for shooting objectively, do photography but don’t have the makers make any of the most useful lenses for it’ gotcha
No, I didn’t, even in meaning. The quotation is completely wrong.
correct totally false. And then you said, ‘add a safety lock at f/4 to stop them using it without Peter Kelly’s Photography advice journal weekly code.’
Are you taking medication, or have you been drinking?
Are you sponsored by a multinational to ruin photography and meaning?
Who said f/4 was limiting? noone you made it up along with all you post, whereas the real problem is f/4 zoom being made for serious use.
Perhaps you better go and lie down in a darkened room. Then, when you wake up, perhaps you won’t be suffering from the delusions.
f/4 is limiting to your understanding of photography and aperture in use for it.
I have an excellent understanding of both, thank you, having earned a living doing it full time for many years. I have hundreds of weddings, many thousands of portraits, inumerable editorial assignments, and endless product shoots behind me.
You, on the other hand, don’t seem to comprehend English. Perhaps you’d be better writing your drivel elsewhere?
Which f/4 zoom has better resolution and image quality than the 2.8 equivalent at 70-200mm? or 24-70mm for that matter, with all that experience you should know, having weazel worded that it could be the case. You dont which means you shouldnt even talk like you do, never mind try and criticize a real photographer who considers the lens in question before using such ‘evidence’. Such evidence would suggest that photography is dead.
I won’t be replying again, as you are clearly an idiot but, for the record, I have never said, nor implied, that an f4 zoom would be better than an f2.8 zoom in any respect of performance.
I did effectively say that not having an f2.8 aperture zoom was not the most limiting aspect of the current FE lineup, so felt Sony might be better to concentrate on other lenses before returning to look at the possibility of providing faster zooms.
Where on earth you got any idea to the contrary, or suppose I have used ‘weazel’ (sic) words, I can’t imagine; part of your overall stupidity I presume.
I see you have friends in high places, however it is YOU who is the weazel. EVERYONE wants 2.8 zooms~ Sony are making them also now confirmed, and I know what everyone would use better, being a master and real photographer, unless you have something otherwise instructive to say about those matters.
What do you think of the 300-600 with barrell extender?
It could be useful, although I suspect the size and performance in certain areas might mean it wouldn’t appeal unless they could keep the price down.
Unfortunately, the better the performance, the higher the price. So, if they were to produce a lens of this range and keep it relatively compact yet perform well then the price would be in orbit!
My idea is to split the differrence between primes and 150-600mm zooms
Size, wieght, price, performance,speed, would all be in between.
The barrel extender would alloe it to double as a super long macro..which no lens currently does.
Buitlt in or drop in TC would further increase its versatility, while providing higher IQ than a generic TC.
Modern technology should allow lighter wieght and better IQ than an older desighn, and this would be an in demand lens that no one else has.
It might even tempt new users to buy Sony just to get this lens, knowing they can still put their existing lenses on the new Sony camera.
f/2.8 and wider with sort of lens? as in a 2.8 zoom or just all 2.8 and wider lenses beyond a given focal length, heard of in body stabilizer or are you camping a little far away from Canikon tent? You wont notice missed focus in 42MP images at 2.8 even with long focal lengths, and it gives you faster shutter speed to stop movement, oh no!!!!
I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about!
17 and 24 tilt shifts
18 f2.0
400 5.6
Make them smaller and lighter, even if slower. Suddenly, we have a bunch of huge lenses for a system that is supposed to be flexible.
I suspect the FE system is going to remain aspirational for me for some time yet. What I would like to see is increased development of the APS-C E-mount lenses. To start with:
1) a competitively priced, decent quality and well QA’d walk-about zoom,
2) a higher quality (than the 55-210) long zoom without needing to buy an FE lens
3) decent wide angle primes with OSS.
I know the FE system is where Sony’s focus is atm – and I would love to be a part of it. For me though (and it seems quite a lot of others!) the a6000 represents a more affordable solution. Please continue the lens development…..
A 24-70/f2.8 with OSS and I’d Buy immediately!
I’m considering the 24-70/f4 Zeiss, but as I want to use it on my FS700 as well as on my A7s the f4 is on the slow side. It’s pretty much the only lens I want at the moment.
Please, Sony, Please! 😀
24-105 f4
135 1.8
15 2.8
24-105 2.8 stopped down to f/4 would be sublime. Lets not accept anything less than sublime lenses.
12 mm f.2,8 , 50-135 mm f.2,0 , and 200 mm f.2,0
For sure something like:
50 f1.4
24-70 f2.8
120-300 f2.8 (like the wonderfull Simga Lense <3 )
11/12-24 f4 Ultra Wide (also like the Sigma/Canon Lense)
Sigma, its time for you to produce some FE Lense 🙂
120-300 F2.8 I hope they make one in a-mount
TIlt-shift for the Gods Sake!
Next lens to make is an excellent optical quality in the range of 24-105 F4 & the other is the 100-400 F5.6
A 21mm F1.8 prime that performs like the current FE55mm.
135/2 + 24-70/2.8 = system complete for me.
A 24-100/2.8 would be a nice lens for weddings and events.
50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 but cheap like we can find in Nikon and Canon lenses
180mm f/2.8 macro
24-105mm f/2.8
I would like to see
1. 24-70mm f2.0/2.8
2. 15-40mm f2.0
3. 70-400+mm f4
4. 70-200mm f2.0
5. 50-300mm f2.8
Zooms! Give us high IQ zooms. We have lot’s of primes already. The yare not as convenient as zooms anyway. For the last year my primes are collecting dust, while zoom 24-70 f4 is 99% on camera glued. It’s just so convenient. We need higher IQ zoom, this FE24-70 is so-so.
24-120 f/4
35 f/2
50 f/1.8
24-70/2.8 ZE will be really good bu it can be to big and heavy for a7x small bodies
24-60/2.8 ZE (with quality of 24-70/2.8 ZA but no heavier than .6 kg) can be better idea
Focus rings that can be used with a follow focus. A firmware update to turn off the variable speed focus ring that many of us hate.
85/1.8 and 25/2.8. Yes, I know there are the Zeiss Batis but we should also have some more affordable options, right?
Also a 11-24 and a 17mm Tilt Shift.
And something very long, like 400mm. Prime or a zoom which goes there.
1) 70-400mm G
2) 50mm f/1.2
3) 24-70mm f/2.8
70-200mm f/2.8
60 or 70mm affordable macro. It can be (or should be) aps-c only to keep it small. It shouldn’t be fast. F2.8 is perfectly fine and I would be happy even with f3.5 if they can make it cheap. No stabilization to keep the cost low. 1:1 is a must.
Right idea, but no chance. At least not within a year, Sony already said that all new lenses in the new year will be FE.
I can keep dreaming. Such lens would be fine from tamron. They could simply adapt their DSLR 60mm f2.0 macro, or sigma could redesign the excellent 70mm macro for sony mirrorless. They should also support the aps-c platform. I guess there are still more aps-c than FF users.
yes, but most aps-c users go with kit zoom only or very few number of lenses whereas ff users buy more lenses
Tamron already has an excellent 60mm f2.0 apsc macro in all mounts includind A mount…its as good as you can get and modestly priced.
The lens is so good that there is no need for a Sony made version.
A modestly priced supertelephoto is desperately needed.
Here are two choices that would be sure winners
300-600mm f 4.8 or 5.6 at max focal length.
Lens should be specifically formulated to give highest performance at 600mm and wide open.
Focal limiter of course. A valuable added feature would be to include an additional 100mm or 150mm barrel extension, with multiple click stops.
Lens would operate normally without extension and in close focus mode with extension. Highly usefull for getting closer without switching lenses. A teleleconverter can be built in, or dropped into a slot, and a click stop on the barrel extender could be matched to the extender..this would provide higer quality because extender could be placed at the optimum location in the lightpath.
Drop in could be 1.4x and 1.8x and sold seperately or as kit, to keep the cost down.
This lens should sell for $3000-$3500.
Another choice would be 300-800mm with f6.3 at 800mm
Again desighned for optimum performance at 800mm f6.3.
Features and price similar to the 300-600mm version.
Price should be reasonably close to 300-600 version since they would have similar amounts of glass.
Either of these lenlses would fill the gap between the new very popular 150-600mm lenses, and the very expensive 600 or 800mm primes.
And certainly they would provide the E mount system with a currently totally nonexistant supertelephoto.
Currently wildlife people will not consider E mount because it does not meet thier most important needs…long lens, and macro.
The new 90mm macro addresses the macro issue superbly.
This lens will address the long lens issue, and with the barrell extension feature also function as a super long macro, enlabling close up photography of subjects that cannot be approached close up.
The 600mm version will probably sell better thn the 800mm version.
Please Sony consider building such a lens asap…
Sony should use the advantage of shorter flange and lack of mirror and make standard zooms starting WIDER than 24mm, like 20 to 22mm. 24-70/2.8 would not impress anybody. 20-70/2.8 would mean than many could leave their UWA home (or in the bag) when shooting events for example, and would be a huge selling point for the whole system.
um yeah…and add impervious weather sealing because Sigma dont.
Sony so far does not either (just empty claims without actual rubber).
Anyone like vignetting? I do, and could we have that and natural rendering with low distortion and as said, weather sealing if the range is even worth getting, NONE in the canikon lineup are so please can we have 20-105 2.8. With new aperture controls on lens and much better focus interaction.
20-105/2.8 for FE would be very big, although without doubt desirable.
I’d prefer lower size and price to optical distortion correction any day. Why bother about something which could be easily automatically corrected on a system which does not have OVFs anyway? The ability of mirrorless to correct distortion (or even LaCA, which is separate correction of ditortion in 3 color channels) without a user even noticing should be used to the advantage of the system.
They’d better worry about things which are not easily and losslessly corrected, like LoCA, spherical aberration, astigmatism and vignetting (the latter just in BSI applications now, i.e. vignetting in the lens itself, as opposed to angles of light on the sensor – no sense to worry about old tech anymore when it is more profitable to push new).
Roger Cicala on Canon 5ds:
“The bottom line is this is standard weather sealing. Would I take it out in the rain? Hell no. But I wouldn’t take any other camera out in the rain without plastic bags over everything, either. I don’t trust ‘weather sealing’ and neither do the manufacturers. Otherwise their warranty would cover water damage, and it doesn’t.”
And 10-20/4 to complement 20-70/2.8. If Canon can make 11-24/4 for their LOOOONG 44mm flange distance and huge flopping mirror, Sony should do one better for their 18mm flange. And make it smaller too. Even if it would mean excessive vignetting on the old (non-BSI) sensors.
its the focal lengths that are so important and not even the apertures so much and noone really knows how apertures will be effecting things, so what we must do is DEMAND better focal length ranges before its too late and of course FASTER apertures until we get what we want.
I love you. You bring some spirit here mate. Dont listen to them 😀
And 13-20/2.8 to beat Nikon and Tamron f/2.8 zooms. No OSS necessary. Could be smaller again due to shorter flange and lack of 24mm end. That 20mm end on standard zoom would enable UWAs like this, making them smaller and cheaper and thus more desirable.
You hit the nail on the head with this one. I think offering something none of the other competitors have would be a great way to push Sony forward. Either a wide prime or a wide zoom. Fighting Canon’s 11-24 and Nikon’s 14-24 zooms would be a great place to start. As Sony and Zeiss are like PB and J, I think a Zeiss badged 15mm would remind buyers the way the 85mm Batis does the Otus.
Thats why I repeatedly suggest
300-600mm f4.8 or 5.6
Built in barrell extension for close up mode
Built in or drop in teleconverter..higher quality because it could be at optimum location in lightpath, plus a clickstop on the barrell extender for use with the telconverter.
No one has a lens like this
Price should be $3000-$3500.
Give wildlife enthusiasts a real reason to switch to Sony.
This is neither pricey nor pocketable any more.
If you are real interested in wildlife, this one may be the first choice:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?atclk=Zoom+Focal+Lengths_300-800mm&ci=274&N=4288584247+4261208145&origSearch=300-800
And if it is just a hobby: take existing 150-600 of Sigma/Tamron for 1000 bucks.
The Sigma 300-800 is a very old desighn and in need of updating.
The lens I suggest is lighter, more versatile , and less than half the price of either thth 300-800 or current 600 and 800 primes.
That is why the current 300-600 is not a big seller.
At the same time it is of higher quality, faster, and more versatile…becase of improved macro and teleconverter capability…than the current 150-600mm tjat are selling very well.
Many people are torn between those two classes of supertele lens….this is a new class of supertele that combines mant of the advantages of both
People are not requesting this lens because nothing like it currently exists, so they dont know to ask for it.
But a 300-600 with built in macro and teleconverter capability would be a wildlife dream lens, especially in the mid $3000 range.
I am with you, animals.
Currently I am looking forward for a Canon 500/5.6, but if Sony was to produce your lens, I’d not only buy the A7RII (which I will do anyways, but even totally move towards Sony. So far I am still relying on a 300/2.8 and 500/4.0 but that is mainly for the optical quality. I would prefer lighter weight in a Zoom, but on a 42 MP Camera, it would have to be optically competible with a fixed super-tele. Personally, I’d pay even up to 4.400 $ for a 300-600/5.6 if it was optically near perfect and if the autofocus was able to follow a bird in flight.
for 3x zoom, shorter backfocus doesn’t help as much as for prime
They still don’t have to make it retrofocal if they don’t want to, especially if they target only their new BSI sensor for image quality (which they should for sake of weight and cost).
Virtually all zooms contain strong negative group — which is forward at wideangle position — so it essentially makes them retrofocus.
24-105mm / F4
24-70mm / F2.8
150-500mm / F5-6.3
Sony must take its time to produce these lenses without making them so large and heavy and without compromising image quality. Also, Sony must develop the 24-240mm.
16mm / F2.0
50mm / F1.4
We need a 200mm 2.8
135 F2
18 F2.8
21 f2
28 1.4
50 1.4
We could use a 70-200 2.8
24-70 F2.8
Biggest need is wide and long, so the 18,21,135 and 200 would be very handy indeed
We need a 200mm 2.8
135 F2
18 F2.8
21 f2
28 1.4
50 1.4
We could use a 70-200 2.8
24-70 F2.8
Biggest need is wide and long, so the 18,21,135 and 200 would be very handy indeed
You’ll never win the wedding and event photogs over without a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8. Not the sexiest lenses in the world, but tons of utility (which is important to pros!)
Also, a 135 prime. I’m using the SAL 135 1.8 right now. Phenomenal optic. Slap an fe-mount behind that and call it a day.
20-105 2.8 would be perfectly good alone, and negate the switching between paparazzi lenses so you could be inconspicuous and placed better. You can then switch to a favourite tele prime for other purposes.
An optically good 20-105 or 35-135 2.8 would be massive, even with the savings with the shorter flange distance
Calculate it and put it to scale with Sony A7 cam. Whats the problem? How many kilograms? Camerabag could be 5kg with other equivalent? this lens 2.5kg? and cam not a lot…Who says it would be heavy, as in compared to an f/4 NOT serious lens made cheap at the BETTER ranges, except never allowing for wide to compel yet ANOTHER even more pointless ZOOM expense in all. No, you are just wrong.
Grammar, and paragraphs are your friend. I have no idea what you just said
Stalinists and Na”’ great… all the better for real photography. As smug as you are, you know this is true.
Not trying to be smug. I seriously can’t make sense of what you’re saying (here or otherwise). And still can’t. Not sure if this is a language barrier or not
Im English and true to Englishness, you are not, fake, an attempt at internationalist, or just nothing, a nihilist.
Lol ok whatever buddy. Take care!
If you’re shooting a wedding, you’ve got two camera bodies on you, so you’re not switching lenses very often.
Take advantage of the a7’s cheap price with a line of cheaper primes targeted to newer entry level buyers with hopes of joining the Sony system. When I joined the system there was only the 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8 demanding premium prices for Zeiss badged glass. My first thought was “Nikon or Canon has cheaper lenses that I want”.
50 f/1.8 or f/2 Sony (entry entry prime at ~100~200$, come on it’s a nifty 50.)
35 f/2.0 (entry 35, I know, we have too many 35’s, but we need this one)
85 f/2.0 (entry portrait lens, f/2 for reduced size and price, no image stabilization please)
28-105 f/3.5-5.6 (Updated Kit-Lens)
24-120 f/4.0 G (“premium Kit-Lens upgrade alternative)
50 f/1.4 Zeiss or G or Sony (anywhere between 400~800$)
135mm f/2.8 G
200mm f/4 G
120-400mm/ f/4-5.6 (advertise sports & wildlife here)
24-70 f/2.8 & 70-200 f/2.8 (Professional Zoom Line)
Lenses except the Professional Zoom line can be slower, hence slower primes and zooms.
A series of cheap and light f/2 non-OSS non-Zeiss lenses, pancakes where possible to complement 28/2. 20/2, 35/2, 50/2, 70/2, 100/2.
Don’t even bother, they are already making those. We are not predicting Sony, we are asking for what is best and better than canikon.
Sony, whatever future FE lenses you are making, please eliminate OIS from them, as this feature is now redundant since the new A7 II cameras have IBIS in them. This would reduce the size, weight and prices of the lenses.
Correct apart from fact it is useful and better than in body alone for some lenses like teles. As you know. Not fit? or not Sony.
24-70 mm f 2.8
70-200 mm f 2.8
pancake lenses
16-35 f/2.8
20-70 f/2.8
24-240 f/2.8
something small.
primes with 35 2.8 or loxia size would be nice, i am too old to carry heavy stuff
135mm F2
17mm 3.5
SERIOUS BUG ON THE DISQUS!!! I Logged in with facebook and im with a user named Pinnoch0. Email romamor369@hotmail.com. BTW THAT ACCOUNT ISNT MINE! WTF?????
a. 10-18mm f/2.8
b. 40-75mm f/1.8
c. 60mm f/1.2
a. There are very few lenses to make proper use of the A7Rii’s ability to produce beautiful landscape renderings. Sony has never produced anything that wide and fast and I’m sure a lot of people are pining for one (myself included).
b. Sony is a company that innovates, so how about a lightning fast medium zoom? I can’t think of a single lens from anyone with the aperture of a fast prime and the versatility of a medium zoom.
c. None of the lenses in the current FE lineup qualify as a “bokeh monster”, which is why I had to buy a Mitakon 50mm f/0.95.
Generally speaking, I think that people don’t much care about how big lenses need to be in order to perform at the right price point. Personally I would buy lenses that are bigger than the camera itself if they had the functionality I’m looking for.
Seriously?
1) I have high doubts about Sony producing 2,8 WA zoom for the FE mount… 10-18 f/4, why not, but f/2.8, I don’t believe it at all. Although I own the stellar Nikon 14-24, on a mirrorless I would prefer if it was f/4 with stab instead of f/2.8…
2) The first f/2 zoom for FF DSLR, by Sigma, is only a 24 35 f/2 and seems to be a beast, and you ask for a 40-75 1.8 on A7?
“Generally speaking, I think that people don’t much care about how big lenses need to be” To be honest, I think that you don’t think like the majority. Maybe it’s your needs, but IMHO : you have absolutely no chance to be in the target of Sony…
it would be nice to see sony producing FE 400 F5,6 OSS
18 or 21mm f/2.8
135 f/2 or f/1.8
200 f/2.8 and teleconverter
Tilt shift lenses : wide angle with a filter threat (18mm or 20mm), 24mm and 45mm although its the last thing Sony will think about as you can use Canon or Nikon glass via adapter.
STF lens, either 85 or 135.
100-400mm f4-5.6
and of course make them cheaper… soyn bodys are cheap but the lenses cost a hefty extra over the competition. an no…. they are not better. the price often is not justified.
For the people wanting to switch to Sony but still hesitating to do so because of the lack of available f/2.8 workhorse lenses in the FE line-up. Well, hesitate no more because here is a list of their high quality f/2.8 lenses that can cover your 16mm up to 200mm focal length requirements:
Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8 SSM II: http://bhpho.to/1KpKbbE
Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 SSM II: http://bhpho.to/1KAeuQ6
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 SSM II: http://bhpho.to/1cGlMyK
These f/2.8 lenses should be wide enough and fast enough for working environments like low light indoor event photography and they are also fully weather sealed for outdoor photography.
These lenses will be capable of on-sensor phase detect and contrast detect autofocus on the new Sony A7RII via the LAEA-3 lens adapter: http://bhpho.to/1coljSg
And if ergonomic is an issue, you do have an option to attach a battery grip on the A7RII: http://bhpho.to/1GxavNd
If you are a Canon user and looking for the equivalent lens in the FE lineup from what you currently have but it doesn’t exist yet, and the Sony A7RII features are so good that you can’t wait any longer for Sony to make the lens that you need. Well, you can always get the Metabones EF to E lens adapter and it will autofocus as if your lens is mounted on the Canon 5DmarkIII: http://bhpho.to/SOclrB
And if you’re a Nikon D800/D800E/D810/D750 users, I think it’s better to stay Nikon for now since these cameras are using the same Sony A7/A7R sensors anyways and you’re just missing out on the EVF, focus peaking, face recognition, movie autofocus, IBIS and more awesome features lol. Canon users will benefit more from transitioning to Sony sensor because of the high dynamic range. Having a high dynamic range raw file is always a big plus when working in post production. I’ve edited wedding photos from Canon raw files and they’re not that good compare to Nikon/Sony because there are no shadow and highlight recovery and the file is noisy in higher ISO. I think there is a good reason why Sony is world’s #1 sensor developer/manufacturer right now and I hope they will continue stay strong and be more innovative as an electronic company 😀
Im not sure what all this is about, but I have a question for all photographers: do you consider a compromise the 70-200mm 2.8 and 24-70mm 2.8 in any way in getting one. yes? now do you consider any compromise on face value of 35-135mm 2.8 and 20-105 2.8 instead…no. We all want wider at 24mm and consider that the ultimate compromise of that ‘standard’ lens. We all want wider on 70-200mm and few will want 200mm at 2.8 weight/quality bias-all that time, so with another even more fantastic tele zoom on horizon imagined from 100+ any compromises found in these or would you snap them up no question?
They dont match up? no, and you dont have to swtich at exactly 70mm range which is apparently very useful to some shooters, and also you get normal range so you dont need to switch lenses while other is on, given a tiny depretiation of the other extent. Doubts? None, I really think its time to make zooms ideal…
this
16-35
24-70
70-200
is an etablished DSLR-lineup. But honestly I am asking myself if the 24-70 would be a better choice if it’s range would be 24-85 instead. There is a reason why so many photographers want 85mm for portraits. And why not having this focal length on both lenses?
I think, many people want the lenses you listed as native FE.
Spending this amount of money and having only adapted stuff – with AF slower than native glass? Not an option!
And from that many people wanting this lens-lineup, only a few will buy it! Too large – too expensive! It was a good move from Sony to start with f4.
24mm f/1.4 !
24-70mm f2.8 os
Everyone wants fast glass. So much for small- might as well just get the fast glass we already have in A mount and call it a day.
Yes whatever, but nothing to do with switching or what Sony A7 is about, because small compact cam and potential to be small doesn’t negate larger and faster at ALL. You are just WRONG. Not everyone can afford faster glass. Will you be getting all of that up to your beloved tele zooms? no you aren’t even a photographer with cameras, of course not. Small, as in compact relative=higher quality in case you are just incapable of understanding the basics of photography and lenses. As in Zeiss 55mm 1.8. Best system 50mm type lens ever, forgoing manual focus and aperture dial for instance? And not expensive for that in the slightest: with AF. Best AF 50ish lens? Call it all a day. Together looking and holding much like an old film camera, which i never used incidentally but wanted the form factor and frame size of more than anything. I’m the most critical of modern lenses but also the most objective about the results in a given selection.
I don’t want fast glass. I want small and affordable but relatively good quality. I want aps-c glass.
And the A99m2 to go with those A-mount lens.
Fast glass doesn’t mean “so much for small.” It means having a camera system that can be small when size is your main priority, or can go larger when optical quality and low-light performance are the priority. A DSLR dryi[ can only get so small — a mirrorless can start of smaller, and go big when needed.
First of ALL, Sony MUST change the design for 24-70 F4 OSS FE lens … as a simple fact the optical design for this lens is default – as you can see in many situations on the field.
Second … they must create a zoom lens 70-200 with various aperture and a small price. 70.200 F4 OSS is a good lens, but is not as sharp in F4, special in 200 mm, where the sweet spot is in 5.6.
In the third part of the game …. the live battery must be solved. When the viewfinder is activated the battery will go straight to 0 in short time. In bright condition the EVF cannot be used, or it can be used in some condition (reduce luminosity from menu). I prefer SONY A7 with optical EVF witch is better than the OLED EVF.
and lot of other things …. maybe
Small lightweight and relatively cheap primes / pancake 20mm / 24mm would be fab.
Bright 50mm and 85mm – say f/1.4.
A decent 24-70mm F/2.8 (I currently use the Tamron with the adapter which is excellent but would prefer native)
Not so essential but nice to have…
Something similar to the Canon MP-E for close macro work
Top of the list
24-70mm f/2.8
24-105 f/4.0
50mm f/1.4 (similar to FE 35mm f/1.4)
135mm f/1.8 (similar to a-mount)
70-200 f/2.8
75-300 f/4.5-5.6 (cheap lens)
70-300G f/4.5-5.6
70-400G
300mm f/2.8
24mm f/2.0 (cheap and similar to FE 28mm)
In order of most interest:
50mm F1.0
50mm F1.2
50mm F1.4
Or if they wanted a prime that differentiated itself even more from the already available 55mm F1.8 they could do the following:
45mm F1.2
58mm F1.2
45mm 1.2 would be an ideal lens obviously, if the rendering was perfect too.
For 58mm F1.2 feel free to pick up that Minolta lens.
Or countless others you can try and establish which is actually superior wide open…and therefore relative to 1.4 counterparts worthwhile.
AF? Critical sharpness in the centre? The Minolta has not these things.
Time for medium format interchangable lens system for these sort of shallow depths of field?
What they Should do is re-release some of their old e-mount glass but with improved speed, quality, optics, etc.. (ex Sony e 10-18 f2.8 OSS with better optics)
I agree with Admin.
My wish list would be:
1. 135, 150 or 200mm prime. F2 would be nice with high quality in IQ and build.
2. 14, 16, or 20mm prime. F2.8 with high quality in IQ and build. Threaded filter mount. Keeps it small as possible.
35-85 f2
135 f2
Real good quality teleconverter (between the lens and body) would also be fine.
21mm f/2
15mm f/2.8 rectilinear !!!
16-35mm f/2.8 (exists on A mount but still)
135mm f/2
135mm f/1.8, with some sort of Zeiss logo on it
300mm f/2.8
400mm f/4
500mm f/4
And native 15mm f/2.8 fisheye.
I have a suggestion: real suggestions from real photographers and users of cameras and owners of lenses.
1424 f2
2470 f2
70200 f2
yes, and 4000€ and 4kg per lens !
On A mount the 70-200 f/2.8 costs 3000 euros !!!
None of these lenses exist on any system, PERIOD.
70-200 f2 would be similar in weight and dimensions than Sigma 120-300 f2.8.
If it’s Sigma-made: 4000 EUROS
If it’s Sony-made: 9000 EUROS
Anyone even consider such? of course they do.the focal lengths are all wrong with that one clearly however…Now lets have a useful range in ALL our zooms at just 2.8 to start with. And make that uber lens a camera bag replacement, not dead weight and cost and preclusion of useful focal lengths and immediate zoom range. Or excuse for nothing LIKE the 120-300mm 2.8 from canikon themselves…again we are talking about third party yet the argument is construed as follow canikon, not absurd: stupid.
just got to have unnaturally fast 14mm…and what about a 20-50 2.8 for USEFUL wide angle in used range, or 20-105 covering two ranges and crossing them perfectly over normal MOST useful range without correction for tele costing, limiting overall image quality and weight gaining. What about a proper tele zoom from 100mm up and no limit at 200mm necessitating a prime or slow second zoom on top of that. REAL photographer speaking, not time waster and worse, if Sony end up doing half of what i consider ideal you would save years in your photography, in fact do what you would never have done with canikon et al. Unless of course someone has real justification for the accepted standard precluding these evidently ideal choices?
Real AF fisheye lens. (Not just an add-on lens)
What a joke! Everyone saying they want these massive lenses, then when they come out: ‘too big, too expensive, defeats the purpose of small camera. I expected them to weigh less than 100g and cost a fiver, not this overpriced blue label’.
What an absolute laugh.
Nope, no one ever said that. You lose outright.
Bahahaha!
What are you, a political historicist researching discontent among those who failed in photography to express themselves? Or just nihilist like all the labels.
You can change your username but you are still a psychopath.
You cant change the fact i am THE master of photography aside of acting like Stalin to defend own nihilistic ideology once my beautiful creation has been shared with the world. Another will follow…
I wish 135 STF f2.8 (bokeh machine, SSM, weather sealing, modern optics/design) just to offer something the competence can´t do…
I want Zeiss to bring the whole lens lineup they made for Contax G system, gorgeous lenses quite compact.
200-400mm F4 (to kill my battery in, maybe, just a few AF shots :))
For me in priority :
24-105mm F4 with OS, internal focusing
135mm F1.8/F2
Eventually 24-70mm F2.8 with OS
Macro 150mm/180mm F2.8
I have an FS7 which is Super-35 and find the full frame 28-135 to be far less than ideal.
Sony, please make something like an 18-85mm 2.8 Zoom for Super-35 with an iris and fully manual focus with gears for a follow focus! Please make it so that it will work in 4K without any digital lens correction too, (because the FS7 only corrects the optics in HD and not in 4K).
So you are asking for high quality APS-C lenses? (more or less)
Yes, absolutely, a bigger sensor is not always best for cinema for example.
More APS-C (Super-35) Lenses Please!”
I wasn’t sure if APS-C lenses cause vignetting in Super-35…
I hope too, Sony will bring some more APS-C lenses. But now it looks like Sony is doing a lot for FF-Emount. There is currently no competition in this segment and it’s a clever move to make its own System as strong as possible before another company enters this market.
One question:
Are you focusing manual or auto?
Because in case of manual you can adapt whatever you want!
500mm f4 prime – need it for birding! Less than $10k
And for Ultra-wide and Super-teles I don’t see why not just use an adapter, those lenses lives on tripods anyway…
Sony should do a internal filtered LAEA adapter, like the ND Throttle.
We haven’t got anything like enough 35mms yet… Seriously though, I’d take an affordable 70-300 (f4-5.6)
24-70 f4 mk ii
look on competitor,in last topic i think Leica Q is not competitor,
but incoming Nikon D5 is real competitor on term hybrid camera.
they use new DX 20mp image sensor / signal processor on Single-Chip and i do not think that is Sony’s sensor.
To make the A7rII a small package they need a 40/2 pancake lens, as good as they can make it.
Also a very good 24-105 f4, smaller and lighter than the Canon version.
These will provide good telephoto capabilities in a smaller size than the 70-200/4 lens.
200/2.8 OSS
1.4x TC
A wide prime to complement the Batis 25 would be nice. Maybe a 14/4 to keep it small. The combination of the 14/4 & 25/2 are a prime alternative to the 16-35.
Realistically, a higher quality normal zoom is a priority.
A series of tilt-shift lenses would be nice too! At least one wide & one normal or short tele.
14mm prime f2.8 for landscape with threaded filter mount.
yes! instead of f2.8 I would prefer f4. Would be comparably compact and much cheaper.
Furhter a compact Loxia 21mm f2.8 or f2.
85…55…35…21…14mm is the lineup I long for.
Compact 85/55/35mm FE-mounts I own already. Now I would like to accomplish with 21 and 14mm lenses. Compact, please – Zeiss welcome!
The non photographers have ruined another day, Sony please consider the better zooms that are actually useful in 2020 and not same…and any real photographers consider demanding such instead of same. Invest in this new way, because for a start, the demand for the mid range to wider and higher at 2.8 is total…Ultimate lens ‘toy’.
“The non photographers have ruined another day”- You’re inferring that those who don’t want fast glass are non photographers- way to go. I think we know who the non photographer is here.
Canikona-mount can NEVER follow such an advance. That’s all you need to know ‘thinking in the result’.
And yeah i’m the real photographer, fast glass for shallow depth of field and not always higher cost and not so wide aperture for quality of rendering but not smaller because: it doesnt always render better that way from wide open or otherwise, actually honestly? it almost never does on that basis and without more or same cost…I’m the real photographer. I will use a wider aperture for stop down of course, and a better but presumably more expensive slower lens in similar resulting aperture (Zeiss 55mm 1.8 like Otus, which don’t have even), for the most compact body: MORE expensive and likely more corrected (sharp m mount sub 1.4 lenses exception? Loxia, on Sony spoilt for choice) with resulting loss of rendering quality, you however not only know nothing, but preach politics in place of photography. You know nothing at all about photography: you are not a photographer. I just know all of the photography you don’t, and a lot how Sony A7 relates to it.
Being practical…
At the high end:
24-70mm f2.8
135mm f2-2.5ish. Just make sure it’s in the same class as the 55mm while being no more than 2/3 the size/weight of the 135/1.8.
At the low end:
A CHEAP ~50mm. As much as I personally love the 55mm, we need a “nifty fifty”.
A couple of cheap and cheerful small or even pancake lenses to go with the 28/2 in the 21-85mm range.
A cheap telephoto in the 70-300 range to pair with the 28-70.
Misc:
1.4x and maybe 2x teleconverters.
Wide angle zoom 2.8, normal range zoom 2.8
Affordable primes with aperture wider than f/2, and finally a cheap telephoto
If future models will essentially be universal mount, then 2.8 zooms are not the highest priority.
I’d concentrate on long compact primes, like the new Nikon 300/4. It’s size would be a nice compliment to the a7 bodies, giving telephoto options while keeping the system a bit smaller.
Model lenses after:
The Minolta 200/2.8 — still one of my favorite lenses of all time. (No truly equivalent lens in any current mount system)
The Nikon 300/4 (no adaptable a-mount equivalent)
A 400/4 or 400/5.6
A 1.4 teleconverter to go along with these long primes.
Either Remake the CZ 135mm 1.8 with SSM or a new native mount 135 prime with at least f/2
200mm f/2.8 or faster
400mm f/2.8 could be A mount adapted to E mount
24/28-105/135 f/4 that is for stills and cheaper/smaller/lighter then video lens there already is
Folks, I think it’s obvious who the “EnglightenedObserver” is. Shall we go back…say a few months ago…Hulksmash ring a bell? Hmm, let me see:
1) Degrades other users as non photographers.
2) Machine gun posts in every thread.
3) Rambles on with a wall of text insinuating there’s some fight between Sony, Canon and Nikon.
Go away.
Any real users know you post contradictions and that you are the above warning bell.
I am instructive of photography, even if i don’t have all the lenses I want. you have none or rather you got other systems irrelevant to this and irrelevant to my learning of the matters beyond those ones limitations.
We shall see. Play nice now….
You have m43, or rather you don’t. You have A mount or rather you don’t, I have Sony A7R and proved it, you can’t. Why are you still attacking me.
Now I know why you don’t want another 70-200!
Shutter Shock !!^^
Sony new cam has shutter dampening but regardless fast shutter is important for most shooting, and better high ISO, not sure why i’m capable of understanding all this from months ago and you are still not with it in front of you.
Yeah – A7Rii has shutter dampeing.
But you own A7R with a shutter-shock like a tumbling station 8)
I’m making a photography business so major that its like my life depends on it. Sony A7R is like step one, and you? nothing. I’m calm cool and collected with my choices through many manual focus vintage items, even negating all AF, and suggesting some optimal future ones.
I read reviews before I buy garbage – ROFL
Again, you missed the point, i got my cam a long time ago and have a full set of focal lengths, the problem you are talking about and improvements in new cam don’t change why i got, and as it was and is and in future cams will be, it is superior to all others, as is my understanding of photography part through it. Jokes on all such as yourself. I get duds, its part of process anyway, and i get gems, you don’t get photography, now that’s really funny. I have grasp of ideal camera system and demand it, you follow middle aged men with nothing better to do than poke modern technology developers who actually have to make money from these investments in research and development to continue it for our benefit as users. Or photographers like me, who really get ahead in photography and can pull it all forwards.
He’s even more annoying than that guy who keeps ranting about Sony’s 11+7 bit lossy compression. I mean the guy is right, Sony has a real issue there but to post about it everyday until an exec at Sony is forced to recognize the problem and admit Sony is going to finally fix it. Well that’s just over the line.
Sony wants to know what users want, you are spinning that politic, my idea is novel and photographic. Sony say they are working on it, and its obviously related to pipelines or whatever else it would have been done sooner, are you even reading the new pertinent information? No, spin off. I knew Sony could make fast cams and ruin your nonsense and i used that understanding, i was right and now I am moving onto lenses, no one has all lenses either, so speculation and objective reasoning are well in order and actual photographers…actually i have a lot of lenses so I can base much on those too, and the process of selection involved.
You are speaking about Anton Berlin.
But if this ranting all the time did really cause we can choose between lossy and lossless RAW (- for free) I am very happy this guy exists 🙂
Katsu is Anton Berlin, or Max or whatever. Just another of the psycho’s we get to read from daily.
No, not Hulk Smash, who was that other psycho, the one who wrote poems and nonsense about Devon or wherever. Can’t remember the user name, but it is definitely that particular nutjob.
-Ultra Wide compact Prime (low distortion), F2.8 or F4
-35mm F2 (low distortion)
-135mm F4 (compact, light)
-Compact Telephoto (70-200 F4 is way too big)
24-70 /2.8
70-200 /2.8
18-35 /2.8
Compact set
Sony FE 18-35 F3.5-5.6
Sony FE 28-70 F4-5.6 (existed)
Sony FE 70-300 F4-5.6
Sony FE 28f2 ( existed)
Sony FE 50f2.8
Sony FE 85f2.8
Sony FE 135f2.8
that’s enough
Like Sarge013, but just one:
28-135/4 (just for stills) better than Nikon`s 24-120/4.
or one that has the wide angle range better than Nikons OR ANY…and doubled with a 135 of your choice…f/4 wide open at 135mm is surely not going to be all that great anyway…
Primes for 135 and 200. But in 2 years. I’ll allready bought or will buy 4 lenses and 1 cam this year. 🙂
Better yet, since they have a partnership with Zeiss, and Zeiss made some amazing medium format lenses in the past how about a Zeiss/SONY branded Contax 645 to A Mount speedbooster adapter that supports AF for all Contax 645 lenses. Such an adapter could work on A Mount bodies natively and on E Mount bodies like the A7rII with the LAEA3 provided that there was a screw drive motor in the adapter, as the LAEA3 doesn’t have one.
Presto, medium format look on digital for the fraction of the cost of a digital back! The readily available Contax 645 80mm F2 Planar would become approximately a 50mm F1.4 with the distortion characteristics (i.e. no distortion) of an 80mm lens, the brightness of an F1.4 lens, and the shallow depth of field characteristics and bokeh of the highly elusive and much sought after 80mm F2 on medium format!
On the SONY a7rII that’d be a dream come true.
Actually, the 80mm/F2 Contax would become an 80mm/F2 lens with the bokeh characteristics of an 80mm/F2 lens on a FF camera. All your math is wrong. You’re calculating like your actually using a medium format sensor, which you are not.
You don’t understand. He’s talking about focal reducer, not simple tube adapter.
What about sharpness? Medium format lenses need to provide less lp/mm to get to the same lp/ph. Unless geometric aberrations are well controlled wide open it may be those lenses won’t live up to the expectations of the photographer.
Lenses designed for a smaller sensor have typically more lp/mm.
But still less lp/sensorDiagonal.
The difference is, as far as I have checked measurement results, small. There were threads at dpreview comparing various lenses and both, m43 and FF were very close in lp/ph (checked at f4 and f8 for similar DOF, for example). Only if you used the Otus and Zeiss 135 or similar you could get a larger difference. There are even publications dealing with downsizing the same lens to a smaller format: http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/CAVE/publications/pdfs/Cossairt_JOSA11. Now, using a higher MP number on the larger format you can always improve on that, as the total MTF is the product of sensor and lens MTF.
as focal reducers compress image, lp/mm increases (if reducer quality is as good or better as the lens before it)
There is too little space to fit 645 to A-mount reducer.
Really? Hmmm. Well I’m sure a Contax 645 to Full Frame E mount focal reducer would be possible…
It’s possible, sure. The problem is market size.
Lenses are no longer the weak link for Sony. It’s still the 11+7 bit lossy compression.
It’s just a pity that life is the weak link for you.
I know exactly, if anyone wants, one day, this can change.
You’re a poet? So much talent wasted here.
…and lIke clockwork, here’s Katsu Nakamura’s Troll post about lossy compression.
16-28 f/2.8-2 ( F2.8@16mm getting wider to F2@28mm)
very compact 100 f/2 non-is, not a macro. just simply compact, fast af, decent quality.
are all i want.
16-35mm f2.8
70-200mm f2.8
200-400mm f2.8
135mm f2.8 macro
200-400mm f2.8… bahahaha!
With a monster like that, the insecure DSLR guys won’t have to worry about not looking like a pro! 😉
16-28 f/2.8-2 ( F2.8@16mm getting wider to F2@28mm)
very compact 100 f/2 non-is, not a macro. just simply compact, fast af, decent quality (like 28 f2).
are all i want.
Zeiss Batis: 21/2 – 25/2 – 35/1.8 – (Sony FE 55/1.8) – 85/1.8 – 135/2
Zeiss Loxia: 21/2.8 – 25/2.8 – 35/2 – 50/2 – 85/2 – 150/4
Fast Sony Zeiss primes: 24/1.4 – 35/1.4 – 50/1.2 – 85/1.4 – 135/1.8
Compact Sony Zeiss primes: 24/2.8 – 35/2.8 – 50/2.8 – 85/4
Cheap Sony primes: 28/2 – 50/1.8 – 90/2
And a range of f/2.8 zooms.
85 can be a 2.8 as well. Doesnt have to be a 4 to be small. Just look at the A-Mount plastic fantastic SAL85F28
Cheap Sony primes: 24/2 – 28/2 – 50/1.8 – 90/2
Why is Loxia set at only 2.8? Batis deemed over corrected, or not compact enough?
Oh yeah, you are just predicting not choosing…
I predict a 20-105 2.8 XD on back of overwhelming demand. Of course..70-200mm is indeed also boring, heavy, expensive and useless…so they had best make something interesting in focal lengths such as this, or EXACTLY like it. 🙂
This is the bit where i say make cams fast i know you can and then ruin argument in future for detractors so i can move on directly with progress, and now its make perfect NOT canikon lens to do same again. {24}???-70, 70-{200}???? { () / () }
FE 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G
FE 135mm F1.8Z
FE 24mm Tilt Shift
All three without OSS to be a bit smaller and lighter.
70-200 f2.8
G-Lens FE 24-105mm F4 at price around USD 600-700, best for kit lens, travel and street photo.
135mm f1.8 AF, 24-70mm f2.8, 50mm 1.4
Nobody mentioned a 24mm tilt/shift yet. I do!
Good to have both a top quality series of lenses and a lightweight/budget series.
21mm is essential
135, 300, 600 yes (or Sigma or Tamron 150-600)
FE 16-24mm f/2.8
I’ll go with a compact size 35mm f1.8 The current 35mm choices are either slow (f2.8) or too large and heavy (f1.4)
You can never have too many 35mm lenses 🙂
Since when is 2,8 slow ?!
Its not quite shallow depth producing, which is a shame because that one has nice rendering too. Could in fact be a great lens, its another 35mm in the list of options 🙂 and so compact! If i had a lot of funds just for fun i would splurge on 35’s a ton. Its slower than the Zeiss 55mm 1.8 which is not much more expensive.
For me, it’s not even as much about depth of field not being shallow enough. I just miss the extra light. I shot with the Zeiss 24 on my NEX 7 and it was a fantastic all around lens. The 35 2.8 dof is almost identical, but I routinely wish I could open up more in low light situations. I end up carrying the 55 1.8 with me for this reason, but I really prefer the 35mm fov.
If they’d make a reasonably sized 35mm f/2 or 1.8, I’d sell a lot of stuff to get one and I’d rarely take if off.
Let’s sum up.
We have a 3 zoom-lens set with f4 (1635, 2470 and 70200) – the same in 2.8 appreciated.
As we have (including the Loxia and Batis) good choices of primes from 25 to 85. Here I would wish for a fisheye (max 16mm), an 18/2.8 and a 135/2.
You will be ruined if they make my lens for video f/4 update to 2.8 lol
Like i can take my this one or that one or that one, do i even need 200mm…or idk how much is that 2.8 i refuse to get as fourth option again? THAT DOES ALL IN ONE.
For the remaining seven slots I would like to see…. (a full range of f/4 and f/2.8 Zeiss/G zooms would be nice!)
*24-70/2.8 Zeiss (around $1800)
*16-35/2.8 Zeiss (around $1800)
*70-200/2.8 G (around $2200)
Since the 35/1.4 Zeiss is already here I would also like to see…
*85/1.4 Zeiss (around $1600)
*50/1.4 Zeiss (around $1400)
*135/2 Zeiss (around $1600)
*105/2.8 (non-G) Macro (around $700)
Once FE sales are up 5-fold…most of theses should appear.
300 F4.0
1xx-400 5.6
18 F2.0
20 F2.0
16-50 2.8 for APS-C
Think the e mount 16-50 f2.8 g lens for crop sensor is needed soon. Sony needs this to compete with samsung nx and fuji x series. Not every enthusiast can afford to spend $10000 on a full frame system
There is already SAL1650 in A-Mount, which you can easily use with EA4 on just about any body. It is a G grade lens in quality. Better than Canon or Nikon Equivalents. Highly recommend it. Got one myself.
Of course having such a lens in E-Mount would be nice as well.
An E-mount version of the 70-300G lens, and a small 24mm f2.8
35mm f/2, bright and compact. Would use it for 70 % of my shots.
I have one in m mount :p my favourite lens, though i don’t get to shoot AT ALL at the moment as I have no subjects…Also consider the Zeiss ZM 35mm 1.4…and if you are random and have a lot of money the 28mm 1.4 from leica just to make shooting a challenge XD
Loxia 35 f/2? compact and wonderful?
+1
16-35 2.8
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
200-400 f 4-5.6
Just put the A mount versions on your A7RII – or wait for the A7III.
Batis: 35 f1.8, 50 f 1.8, 135 f2
Loxia: 15 2.8, 25 f2, 85 f2, 135 f2
We’re talking Sony not Zeiss. Wrong thread.
I don’t know. Some small inexpensive primes would be nice. Especially a super wide angle, like 15mm.
Also a few essential primes with a leaf shutter… But that’s just me dreaming.
And extremely complicated to interface with cam without redesign around no? You mean you would like global shutter type operation, from leaf, but leaf isn’t even that fast…(how do i store all this stuff?~ PASSION)
It is even faster. My RX1 syncs with my generators at 1/4000. Way faster than any focal plane shutter.
Its made with cam and cam made with it if it involves things like that, so with this gen of Sony A7 cams I cant see it would be made in lens.
Ask Metabones for it in a canon adapter or something, if Sony somehow co-operated, wouldn’t that just make Sony cams indispensable for canon lenses? Having flash sync through that? Its more complicated than that but does the camera already communicate flash sync information to flash units such that it could use that?
Switching between leaf shutter lenses and regular lenses using the inbuilt focal plane shutter is quite common in the medium format world.
And it should be possible for Sony as well.
It might be possible to solve the shutter problem with a different sensor, and replace any mechanical shutter once and for all. In the past some CCD cameras like the Nikon D40 and D70 where able to sync faster because of that. And theoretically Sonys new rx10 and rx100 might be able to do the same…
A Metabones solution is very unlikely, and in my opinion, technically close to impossible to achive. Considering that Sony would need to offer firmware upgrades for all it’s cameras…
We all know what, that this won’t happen.
1. Sony likes to sell new cameras, but hates firmware updates.
2. Sony doesn’t care about Studio flash whatsoever.
3. They would not go through all the hassle just for a third party adapter.
Leaf shutter would be amazing. Don’t see it happening though.
Unfortunately me neither.
Why leaf? With even a7RII equipped with a full electronic shutter, all upcoming full frame E-mount cameras should have this.
Still just 1/250 X-Sync and still noisy.
Noisy?? You mean signal noise or the shutter sound? I don’t think any electronic shutter has any audible shutter sound whatsoever.
I was talking about sound. The focal plane shutter mechanism is still active for most parts. So the camera is by no means silent.
If it has an electronic shutter, it would be impossible that the focal plane shutter still moves during the operation of the electronic, are you sure you didn’t confuse this with EFC?
Umm, A Full-Frame A-Mount Camera.
The reasons I (temporarily) went back to my Canons:
16-35 f2.8
70-200 f.28
85 f1.2
135 f1.8
50mm f1.2
would be nice to have something unique as well, like 200 f1.8
why exactly do you want that 200mm lens? It could be cool, but why do you want it particularly?
Portraits. It can give you a very unique depth of field and amount of it.
Unique?
You been learning from the master ‘:I
Why not 300mm 2.8?
400 f2.8 – gives the same sort of bokeh, slightly different perspective. 300 f2.8 – gives you smaller bokeh.
“real photography”? yes sure, only photography that you’re into is real, no ones other is.
I don’t want to argue, if you don’t see any needs in that glass doesn’t mean that others don’t. Google for examples, if you’re not impressed it’s product not for you.
You need 24 f2.8? alright, no problem with that, but it’s a generic type of lens that market is full of.
more recent stuff a7s and a7rII pre-ordered. Sigma 35 f1.4 are my latest ones.
2
1
>>havent. oh ok, and the neck portrait? smart phone?
>>>Russian? BINGO
Your deduction hits the chart. Sherlock? Bingo!
Was funny to read that sh. about Russians, Politics and game companies from a person knowing a sh. about it :). Especially saying that to me who’s not related to that anyhow, except probably game companies but not Square Enix.
Now I know that you’re pretty limited person, and it doesn’t make sense to notice you anymore. lol, russian, politics, square enix bought by Sony hahaha
check your grammar btw.
Costly. The best therevis is otus and that os 1,4
So what? It’s better to have an option than do not.
I’d never buy any of these (too big and costly) but I agree that if Sony is going to make another ~50mm lens it should be f/1.2 not f/1.4. There really isn’t much difference between f/1.8 and f/1.4 unless you are shooting at or very near the upper ISO limit.
well yeah it’s all about it, depends do you have a budget for these or not, do you need them or not. And it’s not about iso, more about a DOF. A difference between f1.2 and f1.8 is pretty big imo.
Also my opinion that there are NO LIGHT lenses at all. A mount couldn’t have anything brighter than 1.4 could we finally have something from zeiss with f1.2?
I would be curious to know if the people requesting the f2.8 zooms would actually buy them. A common complaint is that everything is too big, heavy or expensive. The f2.8 zooms would tick all three of those boxes. FE f2.8 zooms would in no way be appreciably smaller, lighter or cheaper than the A mount versions. Furthermore, does f2.8 make that much of a difference over f4? I understand it’s good to have the option and am not against it; just curious to know the reasoning.
My thoughts exactly. Iwould rather see 24-105 f4, in a normal price range. Just like the most famous canon lens 24-105 f4 so many people has them and it is thr most sold canon zoom lens. They eere like hot cales with canon 5D. No wonder at that price. It would be the one i i buy. Others i can get from legacy glass
cough 2.8 cough and 20mm cough
I’d like a good 21-85/4, but that would seriously hamper the sales of most of the other lenses, it would really be something of an all-in-one.
Good idea, now make it 2.8 and watch it morph into donuts that get sold and more sold as they are consumed voraciously by even starved canikons in the ‘what you nilos asked for world’.
There are two reasons people are asking for these lenses. First, using 2.8 aperture can be important to getting a particular shot, so a certain portion of those asking are looking for the shallower depth of field (or maybe the stop of light. The other attribute that is often associated with 2.8 zooms are their increased optical quality. This is more in line with the reasons I’m interested in a high-end zoom. The current f/4 lenses are not good enough for professional use (IMHO). I would pay more for a higher optical quality – and would be willing to deal with the larger size and heavier weight to get a 2.8 aperture while I’m at it.
1) 70-300mm f4-5.6 (<600$) or 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 (<1000$) – a real TELEphoto lens, please!
2) 24mm f2 (or faster) (<400$) – maybe as a pancake lens
3) 85mm f1.8 (<500$)
I love your pricing!
In my opinion f2.8 zooms and fast aperture primes will always be big, so if you want them just use a/ef mount lens with an adapter, there’s plenty to choose from and a native lens will hardly be smaller. Where FE shines is small primes for travelling. My pics would be:
1. 18/20mm f2 sharp with little or no coma, for landscapes and astro. A small MF Loxia would be fine.
2. 28/35mm f2 pancake – smaller and cheaper than the zeiss 35mm 2.8. I don’t care about edges wide open, as long as the centre is decent and it’s sharp by f8.
3. 135mm f2/2.8 – again, small and not too expensive. If it can be used with a 1.4 t/c then perfect.
yeah, but do make TWO, one from 20-105 2.8 and another 35-135 2.8 for the still undecideds 😀 JUST for travelling purposes and not in any way to make me professionally unbeatable…XD 😉 Sony
I don’t think Sony would make a really small 20/2, with electronics it would definitely be bigger than the 28/2.
Olympus had a nice and small 21/2 though, but that’s Olympus who’s always had a thing for small lenses.
70-200 f 2.8, 24 70 f 2.8
A compact and light 200mm prime f4 lens, weather sealed and hiker friendly.
16mm f/2.8 prime lens
I’d like to see a very lightweight but stabilized (OSS) 21mm f/4 prime for aerial footage taken with the A7S.
24-105 (or 120) f4
Replacement of Zeiss 24-70 f4
Sony needs an improved version of their 24-70 f4. I purchased one, then returned it, due to softness anywhere with 1/3 of the way of frame edge. You can see my detailed comparison with photos at B&H. This is the most important range for many and they need a high quality offering.
Alright…all three of which are 99% not happening in the next 3 years, the second just seems impossible, a 135/2.8 or even 180/2.8 would be more likely, maybe even 135/4 and 180/4 since Sony likes to make slow FE lenses.
MAKE IT DIFFERENT, then others. Now that we can put any lens via adapter you need something that will force us to buy it. Like batis, loxia, 55mm…The high end has no limit. Likewise F 2,8 or lower zoom lens havevno limit (see sigma) but the system needs cheap lenses for enthusiasts and amateurs too. And a pancake of course.
Plus vidrographers need 24-105 f4 small compact. Not huge jlike the 28-135. Doesnt have to be perfect we dont need perfect lenses for video. Nor do the amateurs. Nifty fifty … Anf do on like the cheap kit zoom lens . constant aperture is plus.
Not perfect: meaning what exactly?
It does’nt need to be the sharpest lens on the planet, as it doesn’t have to resolve as much in video.
Not 55mm f1,8 perfect
Naturally, compactness is the key selling point for Sony’s E mount system. However, Sony needs to showcase that their FE line is capable to professional needs. But Sony and Zeiss can’t beat physics and the same lens with the same optics will have a similar size, both on A and E mount. Compare the new Zeiss Batis 85/1.8 with the Sony 85/1.4 ZA: The old Sony is just 80g heavier and 4mm wider, but also 2 cm longer – and it’s f/1.4 instead of f/1.8. Compare the 35/1.4 for E mount with the older G lens for A mount: The A mount version is even 120g lighter, 1cm less wide and 3,5cm shorter.
My point is, Sony needs to continue with both directions, compactness and performance, with two different series. They had good, compact lenses and excellent, large lenses. Now with the A7RII, with the new AF and quasi-A-mount compatibility, they can focus more on compact lenses. If you want large, excellent optics, just use your old A mount lenses or any legacy stuff. For that reason, I don’t need a 24-70/2.8 because I can just mount my old 24-70/2.8 ZA on it. Also with the 16-35/2.8.
I’d rather see compact versions of very heavy A mount lenses (FE 85/2.8, FE 135/4), performance updates where only a mediocre, budget or outdated A mount lens exists (<24mm), or completely new focal lengths (40ies, 60ies, 100 non Macro, 180, 200).
A 16-105/4 with the size of the 24-70/4 would be great for travel. It must have better IQ than the current 24-240 super-zoom.
24-105 F4 or 24-120 F4 with compact size an good IQ!!
21mm f/2.8 Distagon
15mm f/2.8 Distagon
100mm f/2.0 Makro-Planar
1. 135mm f 1.8
2. 50mm f 1.2/1,4
3. 105mm f 2.8 macro
4. 70 – 200mm f 2.8
5. 24 – 70mm f 2.8
Zeiss should introduce an Otus variant for the E-mount, eg a 50mm f2.0 something above the Loxia line with the best possible for the e-mount but still reasonable sized. I just returned an Otus 55mm I had for testing and the IQ really is addictive. I mean really really good IQ, no comparison with the Sony Zeiss 1.8/55mm or the Loxia 50mm. This Otus is so good in EVERY technical aspect from color to sharpness, bokeh, contrast etc. it is almost unbelievable.
High quality, high resolution, low CA 20 mm, 50 mm, f2.8 lenses. Otus like image quality, but in a smaller, more affordable offering. These lenses would appeal to those who want he very best image quality, but don’t need the 1.4 aperture and don’t want to carry the extra weight.
I’d like to see Sony Zeiss versions of these-
20mm f/2
35mm f/2 – Along the lines of the RX1’s Sonnar. I’m sorry but all these other 35’s don’t cut it. Too big, too slow, only manual focus. It doesn’t even need to be as small as the RX1’s lens.
24-70 f/2.8
I’d also really like to see them move toward aperture rings on the primes. Hopefully that’s not just a one-off thing with the 35mm f/1.4
Agree with everything except yet another 35mm, this time 35 f2? The thing is with A7RII and it’s really good ISO12800 – who needs f2? f2.8 will do it perfectly. I mean if you find yourself in a low light condition where f2.8 and ISO12800 is not enough (it should be a near complete darkness) – then I suggest using A7s.
Yeah, I get that. Basically, here’s where I’m coming from. I previously used the 24mm f/1.8 on my NEX 7. It was amazing…I never took it off and was always happy with both rendering and low-light performance.
I moved to the A7 and the 35m f/2.8 and though the dof and fov are almost identical, I routinely find myself missing the ability to open up the aperture. I’d rather not boost the ISO. I end up carrying my 55 f/1.8 though I really prefer the 35mm fov.
I have no use for a lens the size of the 35 1.4 and though I know it’s not likely, I keep wishing they’d put out something in the middle.
meh.
a double exposure feature with live preview…. would be awsome on a EVF, or is there something existing like this ?
21mm f/2
35mm f/2
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/2
135 f/2
300 f/2.8
25-100mm f/4
100-400mm f/4-5.6
35-85mm f/2.8
21mm f/2
35mm f/2
50mm f/1.4
100mm f/2
300mm f/2.8
We need a Zeiss 70-210 MM 2.8 or 3.5 with Macro focusing, weather sealed, depth of field marking or Oled
40mm f2 with 1:2 (half size) macro. Perfect lens.
HARD FOCUS STOPS!!!
How about a statement by Sony on the direction they are heading? Three incomplete Zeiss series with no roadmap…a one-off 35mm…an odd-ball 28mm with conversion lenses.
Lots going on but its like everyone at Sony is taking a turn without thinking things through.
Otherwise, I vote for keeping things unique.
100/2.0
21/2.8
18/4.0
A one-off 35mm? How many 35mms do we need? We already have two. The 28mm is nice and cheap, dunno what you are complaining about. A good 100/2 would be nice though. An MP-E type macro lens would be cool. a 135/1.8 successor would be nice too.
I agree with JP – too much randomness in Sony/Zeiss lens lineups. Why Loxia 35/50 in MF and Batis 85/25 in AF? Why a slightly too slow 35 2.8 and a massive/heavy 35 1.4 for what’s supposed to be a more compact FF system than DSLR? Why not just have a stellar, more compact, still fast enough 35/2 or 35 1.8 AF and have done? Why 55 1.8 and not 50? Why a mediocre 28/2 and even worse 21mm adapter when you have 42.2MP sensors coming and 36 MP already there which will show up their deficiencies ruthlessly?
Sony are producing awesome, awe-inspiring, groundbreaking bodies and sensors, but this randomness in the lens line up does put some of us, me included, off moving completely their way. It feels like they panicked. They need to stop, think, and be consistent and sensible about what lenses are actually good for this system. I held the 35 1.4 on an A7ii the other day and it was genuinely ridiculous. Bigger and as heavy as my old 85 1.4 Zeiss, and nearly as large as a Nikon 24-70 2.8G. That’s crazy.
Also, before someone points it out, if you are under the misapprehension that fast, small lenses can’t be built for 35mm ‘full frame’, look no further than Leica, Zeiss RF, or Contax G (for an AF lens).
PLEASE ZEISS 16-55 F/2.0 ( FULL FRAME ) E AND A MOUNT ( 4 ED , 3 ASPH ) COME ON SONY TELL ZEISS DOIT NOW NOT TOMOROW!
How about some tilt-shift lenses?
Or something really funky: a tilt-shift zoom cine! (yeah, I went there)
Or just some affordable cine lenses would also be nice.
Can’t comment on TS, but there are already affordable Cine lenses available – Samyangs. And all are available in a native mount too.
Next level up would be Zeiss Loxias, which are more expensive, but are also affordable if you look at Cine lens prices.
If you want something cheaper than Samyang, then the only way you can go is to buy a few Rokkors or maybe Takumars, de-click them and you’ve got yourself a set of very cheap Cine lenses.
I was more thinking of better quality than the Samyangs. Affordable in terms of cine lenses doesn’t necessarily mean as cheap as the Samyangs. I’m willing to pay more than Samyangs typically cost, but I can’t afford $3k/lens prices, either. Veydras would be very nice, but they only offer m43 coverage, not even Super35 as far as I know, much less full frame.
Also, not all Samyangs are available in full-frame coverage.
Sounds like Zeiss Loxias are pretty much your only choice at $1k per lens.
Hence the discussion about lenses we’d like to see Sony make.
I’d probably wind up using a SpeedBooster with my existing Canon lenses until Sony (or Veydra, or whoever) makes what I want. I’d like to see Sony make some nice yet affordable (under $1k) cine lenses with AF, but one takes what one can get and afford.
Also, there’s more to cine lenses than declicked aperture rings (most stills lenses don’t even have aperture rings to BE declicked).
Well, i know, but parfocal zooms and no focus breathing are features that automatically make the lens more expensive.
Tilt-shift zoom not much good with cine camera movements…and they don’t need it…
Run out of original things to say from the 6 months interlude already?
When they go silent they are all on steam…or the other political place…
Finish out some of the APS-C lenses also please!
23mm f1.8/f1.4 – a 35mm that’s not $1000 and not a pancake!
32mm f1.4 – a faster 50mm
16-35 2.8
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8
12 2.8 ultra wide
And 30mm pancake for travel phototherapy
Sony, don’t allow this cam system to become domain of the nihilists who aren’t photographers: like canikon, make these expertly selected choices and not listen to the politics. Its mostly about european issues, and they should really try directing it at each other for once instead of photography.
We need better users aimed at than those who are the easy target of such politics, a real photographers system will force them to confront their issues with each other, and face the fact they hate each other and just invert socialism and religion because they feel discriminated against XD If they thought for themselves in the first place they would be smart like me, like me at photography.
@sonysonysony:disqus: You’re suggesting that Sony does what Canon and Nikon are doing? I think it’s the other way around; Canon and Nikon need to take note of what Sony is doing; Sony (along with others, like Olympus and Fuji) are trailblazing the future of photography.
What is Canon and/or Nikon doing to push camera tech?
Yes exactly what canikon are doing. Two new standard zooms 20-105 2.8 and 35-135mm 2.8 with something akin to Sigmas 120-300mm 2.8 as well. Exactly like canikon and you in fact, not a persistent inversion of my original ideas and understandings that were correct 6 months ago and are apparent in new Sony cam, no not at all and not in any way in relation to lenses which i know a lot more about.
Pancake FE lens
Indeed
My wish list to finish off the Sony-made Zeiss AF series:
24mm/2.8 speed really isn’t an issue anymore. Rather have small vs depth of field for a wide angle.
100mm portrait just to be different than all the 85’s and not compete with Batis.
A version II of the 24-70 that isn’t soft.
24-70mm f/2.8. The 35mm 1.4 is to big for me. How about a more compact 35mm 1.8. a 24-105 f4 would be a good walk around lens.
24-70mm f2.8 NO OSS
70-200mm f2.8 NO OSS
85mm 1.4 AF
50mm 1.4 AF
18-35mm 1.8
135 f1.8/f2 with AF
I think that’s all I would care about, macros I don’t mind the Venus on an adapter. 🙂
Checking for any positive or even negative information about new camera i’m surprised to find none, I really haven’t thought about being some sort of ambassador of Sony cams, but its only me saying the truth it seems….This is kind of interesting so many months on!
For instance, this site i just found improvephotography.com lists features of Sony A7Rii from a table with disparaging comments in brackets! absurd given they are made out of context of the cameras use. It say then: ‘The lens selection remains the achilles heel of the Sony full frame e-mount line (well, that and autofocus performance).”
That includes the past in the present and ignores the present or rather the immediate future when he takes those features and realizes the cam in review is FANTASTIC for AF.
So is it so bad a system for AF? not all of the Sony cams are, in fact, that’s just wrong.
Lens selection? with the new AF capability with EF and previous A mount that’s a lot of lenses!
So its like looking down the list of a new cam makers lenses and pointing out whats missing instead of at how AMAZING some of them are.
Once it has lenses and AF? which it is already getting very good at…it will still have fewer FPS as his grumble in the features list made out of basic data…and gps? once it has these? He actually wants it small so now the new Sony A7Rii is too close in size to Nikon D810 to ‘switch over to mirrorless’. But this cam will have BETTER image quality than that cam.
However he only says incentive to ‘switch to mirrorless’ is less for size increase and cost.
They are all ready to jump ship aren’t they, why on earth would users of Sony pander to this when ‘mirrorless’ defines the improvement they actually want. Shall we start by beating all of their lens system? Or better still, make ideal system as we go. Losers!
35 1.8 – think distagon level with af, but a lot smaller than the 1.4
1.4x and 2.0x teleconverter
batis 2/135
diffractive 300/4
40 f2 with 1:2 macro
24-70 f4 non OSS
I think the FE line up should include as follows:
12-24mm F4 Ziess
16-35mm F2.8 Ziess
24-70mm F2.8 Ziess
24-105mm F4 G series
70-200mm F2.8 G series
70-300mm F4 G series
24mm F1.4 Ziess
35mm F1.4 Ziess
50mm F1.4 Ziess
90mm F2.8 Macro G series
135mm F2 Ziess
Si
The Name of the company is Zeiss
No, it’s Ziess! It’s the Chinese ripp-off with cheap plastic lenses and purple badge 🙂
24-70 f2.8 and 24-105 f/4 that has the de-click feature!!!
Clicks at 24, 35, 50, 70, 105mm.
50mm f.95
35mm pancake
Oh look, innovation, pay attention Sony. Why not just display the actual focal length on screen? um yeah..exactly…
Upvote for Simon’s suggestion of 24-105mm F4 G series. The 28-135mm is huge, poorly rated and seems aimed at videographers.
70mm f2.0 or faster. A 75mm prime lens would still be cool.
I want an all-in-one 24-200/2.8 🙂
jk lol
24-70 2.8
50 1.4 according the 35 1.4 would be nice too
Sony Zeiss or G series
. 24-105mm f4 OSS
. 135mm f1.8 OSS
Zeiss (Loxia)
. 18mm Zeiss Loxia Distagon T* 3,5/ 18mm
. 85mm Zeiss Loxia Planar T* 1,4/ 85mm
New mini Cine Prime Line…! like “Veydra Mini”Prime”
http://www.ducloslenses.com/collections/veydra-primes
I am as interested in the price of Sony lenses as I am about their offerings.
A slow telephoto is useless if it’s $999 as would be the 24-70 f/2.8 if it’s $2300.
For me the one lens keeping me from buying the system is the 24-240 at $1k. That needs to come down to $599. Or they need to make a cheap, slow tele.
I would love to see/have a lens with more reach than the current 24-230; maybe a 70-300?
A much smaller PZ (power zoom enabled lens) 24-70mm maybe, without all the other bells and whistles (OSS, declicked option for iris, etc).
The current PZ lens is much too big for casual use and doesn’t complement the relative small size of the a7 line at all.
Sony are rumoured to be developing two T/S lenses, I would prefer either a 24mm or 35mm but we could see a 50mm or 85mm lenses,
I think we will see a 50mm f1.2 in preference to f1.4 along with a 85mm f1.4, its a shame they stopped development of the 85mm f1.2 due to the large size of the lens.
With none OS lenses being easier to design I expect the f2.8 zoom lenses will not have OS except for the 70-200.
Finally I would love to see a 50mm f0.95 but it would be very expensive!!!
I’d buy all of those, if they weren’t the size of that silly 35 1.4.
F/2 might be a great compromise between speed/DOF/and weight for this system.
As I said: It depends. Sony should do both, more good compact lenses and more excellent, heavy ones. Both have their places. But we users and Sony should also consider that we now have the A mount-versions as an easy option. That’s why I suggest to look at all alpha lenses at a whole and look for sweet spots.
24-70- 2.8 zeiss please!
…and not AF
24-70 f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8. That’s the two main lenses used for events/reportage.
And please, no compromises for the sake of ‘compactness’.
After that, probably a 21mm f/4 or similar wide-angle prime
Primes for me. 24mm with f 1.4. An 18mm with the best f stop they can manage. And a 35mm 1.4.
Try looking up Sony FE 35 1.4, you might be surprised your wish already came true.
ZEISS 16-55 F/2.0 (5 ED, 3 ASPH) DO IT NOW COME ON SONY
Version 2 of the 24-70. Otherwise some more Batis lenses. My biggest bug bear is the flash situation though to be honest. To me thats more important then lenses.
24-70 F4 ver II – and you better do it excellent IQ this time Sony!
24-105 F4
24-70 F2.8 with OSS – best IQ and expensive
24-70 f2.8 without OSS (due to IBIS) so small and compact
24-120 f3.5-4.5 OSS
24-70/2.8 small and compact? Think again. Even without OSS this is impossible. Look at existing 24-70/2.8’s; all I know weigh around 900g, rarely one has IS (no Sony A, no Canon, no Nikon).
24-70 F4 without OSS?
That could justify having a v2
Landscapers like me are urging Sony for Tilt-Shift-Zooms, especially the midrange between 35 and 90mm.
If I was Sony, I’d go for the following set: Sony Zeiss 21-35/4.5, 35-70m/4.0, 70-140/4.0
Of these, personally I would start with the 35-70, get hooked, and buy the others little later.
1000mm F8 Reflex lens. Modern high performance version.
The only lenses I want from sony is cheaper ones.
The biggest problem with sony lenses is, they are either to expensive or mediocre. There are no cheap good lenses. Canikon have many more payable (for hobby shooters) attractive lenses.
So you go for a 3K body and put cheap lenses on it?
24-105 F2.8 OSS – the most awaited lens in my opinion;
18-105 F2.8 OSS (?)
135 F2.8
Yowser! most awaited lens!
And EVERYONE wants down to 20mm not 24mm too 🙂 if at all possible.
Zeiss 21mm prime 2.8 or lower.
f/2.8 zooms seem like the obvious first choice.
How weather sealed must they be, like literally? is it different depending on range and implied use? Z1 weather sealed? Or beer spill? XD
Here’s an example of really pushing an idea lol
Because my 20-105 2.8 lens is SO useful can it not be certain it should have best weather sealing and by way of that also become even more useful and desirable? As it is expected to be used a lot and of good quality with price reflecting this, and of course the tricky range to make.
And of course aperture control and somewhat improved focus action, certainly great AF…
300mm f2.8 fe oss
I do not think that I need ultra large aperture primes. It is unlikely that I will change my Zeiss 1.8 to 1.4. And the same with the 85 mm: I am going to cover this focal length with Batis 1.8. Perhaps I would like something little longer 110 – 135 mm and aperture 2.0 and thats all.
But what really would be interesting – it to get ultra large aperture zoom lenses. With aperture about 2.0. Sigma currently makes 24-35 / 2.0 and it’s cool! The problem of standard focal length (16-35, 24-70, 70-200) – their relatively wide range (3x focal length). As a result, there is no perfect 24-70 at all. And speaking about 70-200 I would say that I personally needn’t 200 mm. So it would be great if Sony took to make a high aperture 2x Zooms. Kind of 24-35, 35-70, 70-140 / 2.0. They could be a bomb with proper image quality.
16mm 2.0 (not fisheye)
24-105 F4 OSS
135 F2
Wishful thinking =D
WIDE angle landscape prime please.
A new Holy Trinity of zooms:
16-35mm/2.8
35-100mm/2.8
100-400mm/2.8 (or 4)
And:
135mm/2 Macro
Without OSS to keep size and price down (utilize IBIS)
100-400mm 2.8 cannot be going by the already excellent 120-300mm 2.8
35-100mm 2.8 I have in vintage already and its right time for longer 2.8 ranges NOW
16-35mm doesnt yet cover normal so its not much better than a really nice 35 prime favourite and sub 20 is increasingly specialized while 16mm is wide but perhaps not as wide as a lot of super wides are now, with 14-24mm 2.8 for instance, and we need better than canikon 🙂 So with 20-105mm 2.8 you could have literally widest possible 10 or something higher to 20/21mm almost sensible angles 🙂 without getting a lot of super wides handy and swapping IN THE ELEMENTS 🙂 a problem i face with a lot of non weather sealed primes say…actually why not go to 24mm or even 28mm, eminently useable? 15-28mm 2.8 = 13 range, one more than 12-24mm nikon, and more useful, 2 less than tamron 15-30mm 2.8 but more compact and not just off 35mm tantilizingly? so you feel ok carrying favourite 35mm prime with it too 🙂 Someone who uses superwides should instruct us on what range is most desirable.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. a 100-400 f2.8 would be a 25 lb beast. an f4 would be around 12-14lbs
Well… yeah… there is the weight problem… and, then you got the price problem. Alas, we can dream.
Okay… so maybe it’d be 100-300mm/4. 😉
or a really nice 70-400 f/4-5.6 G2. Just get the mk 3 adapter, you are welcome.
I want a lightweight Sony zeiss fe 35 f1.8 or f2 with OSS.
Yes, why can’t there be a 35mm F2.0 OSS of ~300 grams, a la Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM, with decent corner sharpness? I’d say this is keeping people away from FE system.
Totally!
Seems like a lot of guys are asking for this little gem. Even if it doesn’t have OSS as long as it has AF.
They could either modify the 35mm f/2.8 or the 28mm f/2. Preferably the 35mm. But to keep prices down, they should use the 28mm as template.
90-300mm 4
I’m the odd ball but aside from a 135mm and a ~20mm prime I’d like see some affordable variable aperture zooms like 70-300 4-5.6 and a non-OSS collapsible 35-70 or 28-85 (the former being very compact the latter less so). A 24-105 f/4 for under $1k would also be grand but I suspect it won’t happen with the FE28135 already out.
28135mm is a different class of lens.
Less studio gear and more extreme capable gear. I would like a weather resistant E-Mount body with new battery and full gaskets plus cold rating, distance scales in two zooms to match both @ f/4 for 12-24 and 24-70. I can use the rest of existing gear when conditions are favourable, but the build quality is very amateur so far on all e-mount that I have.
Extreme capable? would now be a good time to remind of how much Canikon weather resistant twin zooms fail and require weeks in maintenance and such?
Maybe, I don’t know about the failures you are speaking of, only the limits of my existing Sony gear relative to the other systems I am using. Mostly I will be photographing trolls, so extreme image quality isn’t the issue.
trolls..what is studio gear then?
A mirror.
What are the images for? There are cams made for that which aren’t that great for image quality but completely robust. Sony is more likely to make a fixed lens cam with something like APSC for that, anyone even know of a single tough cam that has APSC sensor yet?
And the battery power, will that be stored in your tent under the mirror when you are troll shooting? or hung in the trees?
Do you shoot trolls with guns too? rifles and the like?
Explosives?
My current lenses on Sony are TS-E 24 II, TS-E 90, FE 55, E 10-18 and none are particularly well sealed. I have another system that is serviceable when things get extreme, I can afford a one system solution, so let it exist.
TS 24mm correct one kind of distortion only to have the other…
Incidentally it would be cool to have a 45mm TS with all the independent rotation stuff and not too slow.
Fast lenses that people can afford!
sony 21/2,8
sony 24/2,8
sony 35/2,0(0,95)
sony 50/1,4(0,95)
sony 75(70)/1,8 (nicer field of view than 85)
sony 105/2,8(macro)
sony 35-120/4
Would probably by either of 35, 75 or 35-120 straight away without thinking twice.
In general, many of the FE lenses are “too heavy” – by that, I mean not much different to equivalent Nikon and Canon lenses, negating the benefit of mirrorless.
Specifically, the Zeiss 16-35mm is too heavy for many. We need a lightweight wide zoom, similar to the SEL1018, i.e. in the range of 16-28mm f4, narrower range to make it lighter.
Also, like Canon and Nikon, we need a low-budget range of cheaper lenses. The Canikons have the pro and amateur range. We need lots of cheaper Sony lenses. Far to expensive right now for many hobbyists.
If Sony really wants professionals to switch from Canikon, their top end lenses need to be equal to or better than the Canikon equivalent. The Batis lenses are starting to make a good argument for switching. Others are very disappointing, such as the 24-70 f4. In my opinion (and you know what they say about opinions), top end workhorse lenses such as the 24-70 f2.8 are a priority. Another mid range zoom would be the 24-105 f4, as noted in several other posts. The key here is that these lenses really need to be better than their Canon or Nikon equivalents. Sony depends too much on software to compensate for lens design shortcomings. Pros know that lenses are an investment, far outlasting the camera body. So putting an under designed lens on $3200 A7RII is not something the professional market will do.
So my list short: workhorse mid range zooms 24-70 f2.8 and 24-105 f4 with high end optics and maybe a Batis prime in the 50mm range.
Sony I’m still waiting for a A99 replacement with the new sensors! I couldn’t give a Flying fart for E-mount! I have 15 A-mount lens that belong on an A-mount Body!
your a99 replacement is called a7r ii + LA-EA3.
Yeah, and the day Sony looses interest in E-mount the answer will be: your E-mount replacement is calls CaNikon… Not the proper way to build up a customer base.
35mm f/2
24mm f/4 tilt-shift
75-135mm f/2
200mm f/4 macro
Like that fact that Sony is pushing innovation in sensor technology AND trying to add features that consumers are asking for. Canon and Nikon have been making lenses for far longer and clearly there are a few lenses those consumers have gravitated to. I’d like to see Sony come out with a 24-70mm F2.8, 70-200mm f2.8 and 50 mm f1.4. I think Sony would do well with those lenses.
A light weight 85mm or 90mm f/2, similar to the Sonnar T 55mm F1.8 ZA. There is the Batis 85mm at $1,200 of course… but Canon’s venerable EF 85mm 1.8 is just US$350.
If you have the money for the A7RII you might as well buy an adapter and use the 100mm f/2 from Canon.
Or get the Sony 85/2.8 SAM for just 200 bucks. It’s quite good, very small and light. The next quality step would be the Batis or the 85/1.4 ZA, both much more expensive.
A 135mm f/2 (and keep it under $1000), as well as a bunch of f/2.8 compact primes that are all under $400 (by compact think Voigtlander SLII sized primes, but with AF).
an automatic 135 stf
Bring back some of the classic Rokkors, like the 58mm 1.2! A good fast 40mm would be awesome to boot, make it at least 1.4.
24-70mm f/2.8, but it has to be top tier. At least as good if not better than the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 MII. This is the top lens that I want for E mount.
Also a fast ultra wide prime, around 14, 15 or 16 f/2.8mm. Zeiss may take care of that with a Batis version though.
There needs to be a f/2.8 70-200mm as well.
Sony already has a range of lenses for the low-mid range MM.
It’s about time they start looking at Sports and wildlife long range telephoto lenses otherwise they’ll never dominate that very large market of photogs who really need detailed bodies.
I can not wait for someone to scream how they feel these guys need D5 and 1DX because of speed! You’ll be amazed how many sports and wildlife photogs are shooting the D810!
Beginning the whine:
400 f4 OSS and a 1.4x teleconverter native FE mount
I’m with you. Long lens and teleconverters!
50 1.4, 150 2.8, 24-70 are all boring lenses >.<
I want more exciting lenses for mirrorless, they have the benefit or shorter flange after all! I want more lenses like Mitakon 50mm 0.95, the AF 50mm should be at least 1.2!
Absolutely obvious that the system needs 300 or 400mm prime. A-mount misses it too. How wildlife/sports cameras like A77-2 could exist without lenses like that ><
compact 35mm f2 with AF please!
a Zeiss Batis with DOF scale, or maybe a lightweight Sony like the FE 28mm f2.0 (amazing bang for buck, shame 28mm is not my go to length).
There’s 3 very good 35mm lenses for FE already – which is great, good work Sony & Zeiss! kicking goals – but they each have a notable shortcoming:
– Sony/Zeiss 35mm f2.8 compact and unobtrusive; especially handy in daytime but it’s a stop slower than it should be for indoors or at night; negates a lot of the ISO (and DOF control) advantage my A7S has compared to e.g. the Fuji XT-1 + 23mm f1.4
– Sony/Zeiss 35mm f1.4 great images but much too big and obtrusive esp. for a compact mirrorless system; whole reason I sold my A99 with Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art combo was the lens was too big, and the new Distagon is even bigger!
– Zeiss Loxia 35mm f2.0 is a great size & useful aperture but MF only, rules out single handed shooting, high/low shots of moving subjects, etc – need versatility to have AF & MF in one lens, like a Batis, or one of the Fuji or Olympus primes with AF + MF clutch & DOF scale
While I’m at it.. Sony, I’d really appreciate it if you would add a electronic DOF scale via Firmware for whole A7 / A7II family – that would be very useful for lenses like the little 35mm f2.8 or big 35 f1.4 that come with no DOF scale. Cheers!
+1000!!!
These are EXACTLY my own thoughts!
Sony should stop messing about at the 35mm focal length. Right now there’s the excellent Canon 35mm f/2 IS which will definitely find a home on a A7RII unless Sony wakes up and do something.
What so difficult about taking the formula for the 28mm f/2 and producing a 35mm f/2????
Are they fast asleep over there or just obnoxiously STUPID with regards to this particular focal length?
Very important: Super Fast Lens: f0,75 30mm or f0,75 40mm
Telefoto f4,0 100-400mm or f4,5 100-400mm
Zoom f3.5 35-350 mm
15mm f2.8 or f4
400mm f4 Phase Fresnel or 300mm f4 Phase Fresnel like the nikon version
1.4x teleconverter
12-600mm f/1.2 pancake.
17-40mm f4.0
21-55mm f4.0
and lighter weight are very great travel lens in my mind.
Remake the very compact Minolta RF 250mm And make it AF. It is ultra compact like an 50mm and would be a perfect tele lens on Sony A7 series. The 30 years old manual lenses are hard to find and very expensive 700-900$. So its a market for it.
I think you know the answer to most of these – use an adapter, especially with the A7RII you can use all that lovely Canon glass…..hopefully in dim light too.
Yes, that has crossed my mind and I totally agree with you. Would love to have a native version though.
Buy an adapter and the Canon 135mm – I’m assuming you have the money for the A7RII….?
Miracles, then, that’s all we ask of Sony.
And of coarse…like always. 90% of the comments are super unrealistic lenses….
A remake of the 24-50 f4 weather sealed would be nice. It would make a great hiking lens.
Actually a remake of alot of minoltas zooms would be great Imo…most are pretty small.
F2 primes…. 45mm f2 would be on my list. Just enough DOF control IMO.
Don’t care at all what Sony makes. Sigma is doing an excellent job of building a new series of both excellent and somewhat affordable lenses. Very competitively prices for the target market of consumers. No standard 3rd party lenses, no E-mount…
Try shooting and consider a 45mm with faster aperture than those available, 1.4 for instance, or 1.8 but sharp and great rendering like the Zeiss 55mm 1.8
Few if any 45mm are really sharp at such aperture, with great rendering and low aberration. Is that unrealistic too? Listing some vague interest in Minolta/a mount like you ever shot at all and proving no present interest amounts to 99% of comments.
Lmfao!!! What are you blabbing about.
You know…your right. A 12-1000 f1.2 for everyone!!!! Or a set of F 0.75 primes!!! Or a 100-400 2.8!!!
You really wasted you time with that response…
180mm f2.0 OSS
50mm f1.0
15mm f2.8 (rectilinear)
20-75mm 2.8
100mm 1.8
12mm 2.8
Loxia TS 21mm or 24mm F4
Batis 200mm F2
Thank you I cannot spell but you at least got the idea. Si
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8
Anything longer than 200mm or a decent teleconverter for the 70-200.
400mm F5.6 prime affordable telephoto for wildlife does not exist in the Sony world
I would like them to make more primes
50mm 85mm 🙂
85 mm FE 2.0 or 1.4 FE, 35 mm FE 2.0, not everybody need a brick 1.4 or a 2.8, 135 mm 1.8, shift lense 24, Batis is great but also the Prize okay they are original Zeiss lenses not to forget and outstanding quality.
a zoom 100-400 for safari shootings,
Faster glass would be more ideal. Apparently what’s stopping them is the fact they don’t want to make the lenses heavier. I know Sony wants to keep the cameras lighter, but I think they underestimate how much people care about lighter gear especially people who use their cameras for a career.
With that aside,
– more Loxia Lenses
– an FE Ultra Wide (10-15 ideally)
ZA/Loxia TS 21mm or 24mm F4
ZA/Batis 200mm F2 APO
ZA/Batis 45mm F2
What about APS-C lenses? Do you all shooting with A7x?
Why 3k? Isn’t the A7 the cheapest fullframe at the moment? With sonys apsc bodies it’s the same problem, there are no lenses I really would like to have.
Optically corrected 21mm f/2.8 would be really tempting.
Sony should take a break on FE lenses and devote more resource on APS-C lenses. The APS-C line is quite incomplete, lacking of decent lenses on many focal lengths. Overpriced Zeiss lenses are not a good answer to user’s demands.
Some new EE lenses maybe?? Or did they forget about them at all ??
Be bold if you dare
1) lens with f/0.95 and focal length between 40-55mm;
2) any prime lens with collapsible design, small size is the priority, aperture not smaller than f/4;
3) FE pancake lenses with IS and focal length about 40-45mm
4) Revitalize Minolta MD 24-35mm f/3.5 with AF, IS optional, small size first
28 f2.0 Loxia
A smaller PZ lenz (24-70 maybe). No OIS, manual iris, and other quirks necessary
135mm f2
28-105mm f4
Those two would round out my collection quite nicely thanks.
135mm f2
28-105mm f4
Those two would round out my collection quite nicely, thanks.
Well, I love mirrorless cameras – and I don’t care, if the lenses are big, but fast. That’s why I still don’t have any FE-Lenses, but attach all my A-mount glass via the LA-EA4.
So…
70-200mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.4 (though the f/1.8 is brilliant)
24-70mm f/2.8
15-30 f/2.8
200mm Macro
Fisheye lenses
35mm f/1.4
300mm
400mm
500mm
Super telephoto lens, as in longer than 200mm . The most sensible right now is probably 300mm f/4.
I want a cheap 50mm 1.4, like 400$ cheap if canon and nikon can do it than Sony can as well
135mm 2.8
24-70mm 2.8
a 16mm ultra wide adapter for fe28
a fe70200f2.8
Sony FE system really needs a couple of high end mid range zooms. My first two choices would be a 24-105 f4 and a 24-70 f2.8. The existing mid range zooms are ok for travel, but not for critical work that the new 42mp sensor will require.