UPDATE: For unkowns reasons DxO has removed the 90mm FE lens reviews from their site.
DxOmark (Click here) reviewed the new Sony FE 90mm macro lens. And the conclusion is:
With some innovative cameras in the range, Sony is beginning to fill out the E-mount system with some useful high-quality lenses, and the FE 90mm f2.8 macro is up there with the best in terms of optical quality. The only downside, perhaps, is that the lens is at odds with the perceived benefits for buying into mirrorless systems: sure, the bodies are smaller, but this lens is not significantly smaller nor lighter than rival options. Be that as it may, there’s little wrong with the optical quality of the Sony FE 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS, and if the size or weight isn’t an issue, then it can be easily recommended.
The lens even outperforms by one single point the $400 more expensive Zeiss 10mm macro lens! It will be hard for the new Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens to outperform the 90mm FE lens!
90mm links:
In USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, [shoplink 37938 ebay]eBay US (Click here)[/shoplink].
In Europe at [shoplink 37991 ebay]Fotomundus[/shoplink], Amazon Germany, Sony Germany, Sony UK, Sony FR, Sony IT, Sony ES, Sony NL, Sony BE, Sony AT, Sony CH, Sony SE, Sony FI, Sony NO, Sony PT.
In Asia at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
Batis links:
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens in US at Adorama, Bhphoto. In Eu at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 lens at Adorama, Bhphoto. In EU at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
124 Responses
I guessed that it would turn out good, but I didn’t expect it to get that awesome. Nice!
While “outstanding” is fairly relative- this lens deserves some praise. I’d pick it up over the Batis 85 from what I’ve seen.
Someone please comment on the tactile feel of the manual focus ring. Is it direct mechanical connection or another fly-by-wire incarnation?
It’s really hard to buy a bad quality macro lens these days. I defy anyone to point out the differences in real world images. If others are close enough, then handling, precision, and ergonomics are important factors to consider beyond math chart IQ.
Tempting to adapt Olympus OM 90/2, smaller, lighter, a stop faster, better for portraits, and a real focus ring for precision tuning. This new Sony is about the same weight as the Voigtlander 125/2.5. Where is the envisioned compact advantage that Emount was supposedly created to satisfy?
Good question, as that’s pretty important on a macro lens.
It is fly-by-wire, but it doesn’t have the biggest con that other lenses have. What it has is a linearly working focus ring, which is not affected by the speed you turn it. This means that you can reliably refocus to certain points by turning the ring back to the same position. It also features a focussing scale and hard stops at MFD and Infinity.
Smoothnes of the focussing ring was never a Problem of the E-glass, so that focussing should be just as satisfying as with good manual focussing glass, even though it’s not mechanically coupled.
Thanks Merlin. Your insight appreciated… However, fly-wire may be smooth, but that’s not the issue for lacking satisfaction compared with “good manual” focusing glass.
The fly-wire problem is two fold. I sold my FE55/1.8 because the slowest turning of ring for precision focus had no reaction to lens movement at all. Slowest turn equals no change. Turn a little faster and the lens jumps past desired point with accelerometer kicking in. Sure it’s smooth. But it’s non reactive and/or jumpy.
I would reconsider fly-wire if it were programmed linear, as you suggest the 90 macro is. I have no problem with fly-wire. I loved it on my old Olympus OM88, and that required spinning control on rear of camera engage lens focus. It was very linear and predictable for precision manual focus.
I became disenamored with my A-mount 100mm f/2.8. It had lots of CA and took years to focus, with the barrel moving around and causing problems.
This is true, the long throw is long and there is CA, but for under 250.00 it’s a steal and extremely sharp. I’d still suggest it over this for all but the most hardcore macro photographers.
If you can find one for $250, buy it.
I got mine for 230.00.
I sold mine for ~$360 last year 🙂 The A-mount glass is deprecating so quickly, pretty much like Zimbabwean dollars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbabwean_dollar!
Some lenses have depreciated fairly heavily. The 24mm, 85mm and 50mm Zeiss can all be had now for 700-800. The 50 was overpriced to begin with. The others have been on the market for quite some time- so to be expected. However, at 700 bucks each used they are a steal.
Other lenses? 200mm 2.8 Minolta, 300mm 2.8 Sony, Zeiss 24-70, Zeiss 16-35, sony 70-200 2.8, 70-400 G…nope and nope and nope, etc. the used prices haven’t budged one bit. Any of their glass worth having is still priced high even on the used market.
Even the weird offbeat lenses still remain similarly priced. 500 reflex, 135mm 2.8 STF, etc. I think the depreciation rumor is more a rumor than anything. We should expect some fall in value with the market the way it is. However, if you got the good stuff, you really haven’t lost much. That might change depending on what Sony does with that A99II. We’ll see.
Yep, the A99II should definitely help the A-mount glass to retain its value, and I really hope it will be released sooner or later!
There will be no a99ii. The a7rii has made it pointless. Sony mirrorless cameras now af & stabilize better than any of the A mount slt cameras
The prices are dropping every where except Sony’s online store. Good news for me as I might be able to get my 135mm F2.8 ZA back for a lot less, cool ;-}
LOL how much did you sell it for and what’s the current price? I sold mine I think around of $1350-$1400 or something about a year ago (the 1.8ZA, right? The 2.8 is the STF one). I would probably buy it now for the same price, but man, it would be hard to find one as clean as I had!
lol sorry yes the F1.8, typo. I sold it for $1400. I do not know the current price, I dare not look lol
You still can mount those old compact lenses can’t you?
So there’s the answer to your question, and stop whining.
It’s going to be by-wire as it uses linear motor.
The Sony fever, according to my observation, is quite common among PC DIYers. That’s a world that specs are the only thing matters. This probably answers to part of your question.
This post is jumbled, wonder when real users ones will be, at least on mods computer and devices…
My understanding was that it supports both focus by wire (in AF/DMF modes), and switchable mechanical manual focus in MF mode.
I doubt it. Linear motors are different from USM. My lens with linear motors have full time focus-by-wire. The coil is driving and locking your element in place.
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/common/images/technology_omd_vol02_ph_05.jpg
OK. I was under the impression that the reason for a sliding MF/AF focus ring was so the MF position could directly engage the helicoid. Seems a bit silly to make the whole ring slide just so it can act as an MF/AF switch, but, as long as it works well, so be it.
It just doesn’t feel good as there is minor lag before the motor respond.
Off topic, Sometimes i have weird feelings about this as my other bodies requires you to flip 2 switches to operate in MF mode.
Wow! Yeah too much lag for macro, gotta catch that ant running around!! Only the 1DX could track it!
No, MF is focus by wire, too.
I’d be extrememly surprised if it failed to deliver.
Their measurements have it easily besting the sharpness of the Sony SAL 100/2.8 macro, which is a darn remarkable lens, though a very old design.
I suspect for many, this lens could prove a preferred choice, making 85mm primes unnecessary, unless you absolutely need the razor thin DOF of 1.4 or 1.8 aperture.
A super sharp, low distortion 90/2.8 will prove to be an exceptional portrait lens, in addition to macro.
There is more to it than razor sharp DOF (which is a factor of subject distance, too. So if we are not talking about head shots only, f1.4, f1.8 comes in handy quite often in dim light.). A stop more light is useful for me, too, as is a possibly faster focus performance. The macros I owned where not the fastest to focus.
Fair points.
But yes — subject distance affects DOF, but that won’t be meaningfully different between 85mm and 90mm. For that matter, from the same subject distance, you’ll get slightly narrower DOF on the 90mm, if aperture is equal.
While 1.4 or 1.8 can indeed come in handy in low light — I just used an 85/1.8 as a short low light telephoto myself this weekend — I think those situations are generally limited, and better off with a shorter low light lens. If you are already in very bad light, it makes for very poor narrow DOF shots (as you’ll get lots of noise in the blurred areas). A 35/1.8 or 50/1.8 can give you the low light capability without having to resort to a super thin DOF. But yes, there are indeed times where a 85/1.8 would be useful for low light.
Fast AF performance might be an issue, but generally isn’t a huge issue for portrait type of shooting. The AF speed might prevent you from using the 90/2.8 as a 70-200/2.8, and unfortunately, there is no native 70-200/2.8 right now.
I definitely see the versatility in owning 2 different lenses (85 and 90 macro) for some shooters. And I shouldn’t talk, I own a 105/2.8 macro and 85/1.8. But I think there will be a lot of buyers who could just take the macro and be done. (On the A99, I used my 100/2.8 so extensively that I didn’t need anything else in the range).
I don’t understand the continued insistence by many on comparing this lens to the Batis. They’re two completely different lenses. Yes, they’re both in the same league in that they’re both within the common focal range for portrait lenses, but aside from that, I think one’s purchase decision here is going to be based on whether they need macro functionality or a very shallow depth of field; two very different needs. If you want a macro, there’s no choice – it’s the 90. If you want 1.4, there’s no choice – it’s the 85. It’s nice to have such outstanding options on both fronts, though.
If you want 1.4, the answer is neither!
Oops, I meant 1.8. 🙂
The Batis is f/1.8. Other than that, I agree with you. Different lenses for different needs. I’m still leaning towards the Batis.
Thats why 100mm makro planar is still the best lens imo. F/2 aperture is enough for shallow dof portraiture, and its extremely sharp wide open. Best macro- portrait combo in one lens.
im just here waiting for the canon people to start calling conspiracy and flawed test.
Lol get the pop-corn ready.
It’s awesome specs but resolution isn’t everything. I believe a mount zeiss users would agree to that.
For macro shots, resolution is everything. Sour grapes Chris?
I almost forget I own an A7 and planing to switch to an a7r until you reminded me. But no, I won’t pick up any lens just for resolution under any circumstances.
Chris you really need to get professional help with your inferiority complex.
anyway. I don’t plan to marry you so i don’t really care about what you think or say. maybe another time I have the mood I will try to convince you Sony is not all you can have but not now.
EM5ii with high res mode (full RGB output) is a tempting system for macro as well. Higher output resolution and longer distance between lens and object.
Any sour grapes Emph?
If the lens distorts badly, has low contrast wide open, or has heavy chromatic abberation, a macro shooter will not touch it with a 10 foot pole…
Any distortion correction will reduce resolution
A weird chromatic abberation profile may create problems in post.
Low contrast wide open will make you stop down, defeating the purpose of a moderately fast macro lens.
So no, resolution isn’t everything. It plays a key role, but it isn’t an only important factor as you make it out to be…
“Any distortion correction will reduce resolution” Yes that I agree with, in order to attain that high level of resolution all lens aberrations must be well corrected, my statement was correct as stated. I’m glad you agree Stan.
hey, that zeiss 100 makro lens is gorgeous in design and ergonomics and the images it produces.
ive almost bought it 10 times but was really holding out for an AF 100ish mm lens.
Now, where is the guy who ranted about fe90’s 20% higher price over canon?
As long as Canon lenses are tested on a 22mp sensor, it’s an unfair comparison. If you look at the sharpness tested on APS-C lenses they are much closer:
Sony 90 has:
18mp from 20mp (90% on A5000)
16mp from 24mp (66% on NEX-7)
Canon:
13mp from 18mp (72% on 700D)
Taking into account that Canon’s lens is 6 years old, it’s not a bad result at all. Nevertheless Sony’s 20% higher price is justified over Canon’s.
Then why you not comparing Canon EOS 70D vs Sony a5000 because both of them have 20MP APS-C sensor
But you’ll still get 13MP from 20MP with Canon.
As you know Canons APS-C sensors with 1.6 crop are a little smaller than Sony’s APS-C sensors with 1.5 crop. So the Canon’s surface size is only about ~90% compared to Sony’s-APS-C.
=> 18mp Canon sensor has equal pixel-pitch than a 20mp Sony sensor… that’s the reason I took the 18mp Canon.
And yes – 70D has an inferior result compared to 700D. 13mp out of 20mp are only 65% – it is about the same result as NEX-7 with 90mm.
The A3000 with 17 out of 20mp is also inferior compared to A5000. But don’t get mad about plus/minus 1mp – this can happen due to a measurement tolerance in combination with a rounding problem:
Maybe A5000 got 17.6mp and A3000 got 17.4mp, but numbers were rounded to 18 / 17 and the difference looks bigger as it is… AFAIK both cams have the same sensor.
Okay now can you explain to me the reason why Canon 5D Mark 3 even with bigger sensor, pixel-pitch & higher resolution can’t get better result than Sony a5000??
No – I can’t explain.
Nor can I explain why a NEX-7 with 24 mp scores 16 mp
and A5000 with 20mp scores 18 mp. And A3000 with same 20mp sensor scores 17mp.
It is a variance caused by the used camera itself. In general it looks like newer bodies score better than older ones – and 5D mark 3 is quite old now.
According to Admin…why is a non-macro lens is competing with a macro lens?
What sort of photo mentality do we have?
Surely if I wanted macro, I would get the macro lens and if I didn’t need it, I would consider the faster lens, no?
WTF?
Another reason why Sony is the best camera maker, I guess.
because price and focal range are similar. 90/2.8 on FF already renders thin DOF, so Batis doesn’t seem to have much advantage over the macro.
The Zeiss 100mm IS a macro lens! However, it is a f2.0, so still can not compare at all.
Can anybody with at least some technical background explain, why this lens has a T-stop of 2.8 on A7R and 3.3 on the APS-C models?
In general, a good article to refer to. The 3.3 is a bit confusing to me as well.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
ive wondered this myself abt the light transmission. i think i need a simpler explanation than that link. it seems to me if the sensor is smaller (apsc), then it would have MORE light available through the aperture as it closes because it would take more stops before the sensor is “eclipsed” if you will..
I think we can agree that the light transmission at the center is equal, regardless if the sensor is small or big.
On the FF sensor there is a vignetting of -1.4EV, on the APS sensors only -0.5EV. That means, that the FF sensor should falls off more than the APS-C models, when averaged to the complete frame.
But DxO stated the opposite – that is in my opinion physically impossible.
DXO measured their lens at a distance of 40 times of focal length away from test charts for transmission. I am not very sure that the “center of frame” they called has equal area on FF and corped sensors.
Sorry Chris, I asked people with “at least some technical background”. Refering to a long article that has nothing to do with my question shows me that you even didn’t understand my queston at all.
According to DXO, smaller T-stop value means more light being received by the sensor. I don’t think it is very confusing as it’s a similar concept to f-stop. A smaller sensor receives only part of the light coming through the lens.
DXO’s organization of their site is coming more and more confusing. They used to have a very good database that explains everything they do. Now some of those information is missing.
just multiply 2.8 by (35mm)/(apsc sensor size).
The bigger sensor will always capture more light due to it having a bigger area of capture. Think of the light a small window lets into a room compared to a bigger window.
Photographic lenses f-stop is NEVER equal to t-stop because you simply can’t make a lens ‘lossless’. For t1.8 you’d for instance have to build something that has a larger physical aperture than f1.8. but Sony would surely advertise a larger aperture as such. So the conclusion is that.
1. A7 bodies are pushing ISO with native lenses for some reason OR
2. DxO measurements are wrong OR
3. You’re seeing differences in sensor efficiency.
I think 2. is unlikely because you’ll see the same phenomenon with other FE lenses like the 55mm. 3. is probably a partial answer. For non BSI-sensors the amount of loss caused by wiring is relatively higher the smaller/high-density the sensor gets (which is why BSI matters so much for small sensors whereas nobody cared for FF). You’ll see this with many other lenses too.
BUT the difference is still too large. So it’s probably 1.
Great to hear. But – regarding portraiture – I’m really curious about that rumored FE 85/1.4!
Bring forth that darn lens roadmap already Sony! 🙂
Mine arrived last week a very good macro lens, the two things I didn’t like were the focus ring feels gritty especially compared to the 70-200 G lens, and there is a lot of flexing in the outer lens barrel if you grip it just behind the focus ring, something I’ve not experienced before. Sony UK are going to replace it.
First batches from any brand could have a higher chance of manufacturing defects. It’s not a bad idea to wait for a couple of month unless there are urgent needs.
That’s something the politicos ought to have picked up on, oh yeah, shucks, they hate photography and real relations. Don’t worry photo people, master photographer here who does it all despite and NOT because of them.
Hi Chris this is why I asked for a replacement, with anything mass produced there will always be a few that may slip through the net. The picture quality on the A7 ii was superb.
I hope everything went through well for you.
Problems with first batches could last several months… I have no experience with Sony but for Nikon and Fuji we are talking about at least avoid them for 3-6 month after initial shipment. Heard people getting several defective replacements from Fuji.
In this case Sony UK couldn’t of been better, explained my concerns and they suggested returning for a replacement unit.
Cool 🙂
I have always found Sony’s suppoert services to be excellent. They sorted out a problem with my A850 and a77 without question and reviewed my trio of lenses too. Happy days.
Reassuring – that’s what makes me nervous about buying from sites like Digitalrev
sort of like when you make pancakes, the first couple never turn out right, but if you’re really hungry you’ll end up eating the bad ones no matter what they look like
Gritty focus doesn’t sound good at all.
Interesting. Please follow up on here! I think a lot of us would like to hear if your next copy is identical.
I’ll have it also since 3rd of July. There is no gritty feeling with mine. It’s very smooth. So I’ll keep fingers crossed for you. It’s a great lense!
Hi Seb agreed about the lens, great to hear yours doesn’t have the same problem I think mine was just a poorer example. Do you get this flexing if the lens barrel if gripped just behind the focus ring. I wonder if my two problems are linked.
I’m at work. And only the 55/1.8 with me. 🙂
I’ll have a look at the evening. But I didn’t have any issues with the lense until now (only bad AF at low light, but thats an A7 issue i think) and used it in quite a lot of different situations. So I think, the 2nd problem is also no problem, when you get the replacement.
I checked your complains this morning.
No flexing, when I grip just behind the focus ring. Only the one from the bajonett, but it’s not different with other lenses.
The focus ring feels a little gritty, but only if you want to change focus from infinity to makro in one fast step (or the other way around). Normaly it’s very smoth and works fine, because the movement for focusing is very small.
Hi Seb thank you for the reply, it defiantly sounds as though mine was just one of those ones that slips through the net. Its heading back to Sony UK today.
That thing is sharper than the 55mm Zeiss!!
I’m a macro lover, I have 3 macro lenses: Minolta’s AF 50 and 100mm D f2.8 and Sigma 150mm f2.8 EX DG OS HSM. All with excellent IQ. I’d suggest Sony to develop a new version of this FE 90mm lens with MF only ( no AF but with electrical contacts for Exif data). That would allow a quite lighter, smaller and lower cost lens with the same IQ. As many macro shooters ( IMHO ), I rarely use AF for macro shots !
You should immediately trade all your current macro for the new Sony 90mm. For twice the price you’ll get 5% more quality that no one will ever see. Your range will be cut in half for no extra charge and bonus to get a clunky AF/MF switcher with all the finesse of a mid-1980’s Tokina crinkle finish lens.
Just think how collectible an Emount lens with hard stop focus and a real distance scale might become. A most rare bird indeed. Don’t see how you can pass this up.
You do not need Sony if you want such alens. Just look for a Tokina AT-X 2.5/90 Macro. I own this lens for 20 years. Now it is the perfect macro for my Sony FE camera.
Sounds like you’re waiting for a Loxia 100/2.8… (As am I )
I think there will be no 100mm loxia. Its a small bird, i guess lineup is reserved for small lenses. I expect some compact wides in loxia lineup, something like M-mount lenses, probably heliar-like ultra wide.
Yeah Loxias are based on RF lenses, so the longer they got is a 85mm f4
I’m level grinding Bulgarian dance music, now I found videos with dancing round and round. Its for weddings I think 😀 My consumer experience is too cool to be allowed XD
It irritates the politos into complimentary action. The key ingredients of a great photograph, similar to these videos, must be the way it engages the viewer with the subject matter 🙂
it doesn’t have to be extraordinary, but rather, engaging. That’s how the passive experience of TV operates, but I don’t watch TV much because of this. I prefer to seek and find. TV simply became too repetitive and meaningless, being exactly what it thought viewers wanted, and now netflix may eventually follow suit in a terrible cycle 🙁
We must surprise the viewers as well as satisfy their expectations. We have to surprise ourselves ‘:I To do that, we must always confound the limits of our own expectations.
I proved this with my test shots, now its up to you 😀
Don’t worry, photography is extremely challenging, but it resolves everything 😀
It surely rewards experimentation.
I have tried to read your post, it makes no sense what so ever. I think you need to spend more time out with your camera than on this forum.
What drugs are you on, my friend ;p
it’s probably endogenous, probably bipolar disorder
The police are likely watching you. As are all the common people.
If this is what anonymity means in their towns they might want you out altogether. No one disagreed regards liberty etc, and that’s complex, what you are doing is attacking someones liberty who has it most impinged, and believe me they are watching you and if they are smarter than you are they will understand that all. If you are so powerful in diminishing personal liberty, you are all enemies of it. haha
Peace this, bs evil that.
I know, lets attack a masters life because he taught us what we could never learn: hint, you haven’t learnt.
You can`t be real. You simply can`t. You are an amazing person. Are you a wizard?
Very good at art, apparently mostly photography, a new medium, and of that only really digital because its easy.
Great! I always knew that you are a great artist. You only make it seem easy, because of all the magic you have.
Now you grasp that, you can leave my life alone, mostly the personal of course.
Of course, of course, forgive us clueless fans, master… I will leave your wife alone.
Lost at the moral dimension.
Just answer me one thing; are you clinically insane, or just a lousy troll? If you are truly insane, i apologize for every reply i ever made to your posts. And i am deeply sorry for that. If you are a troll who thinks he came out with a “brilliant” idea of spamming forums with walls of nonsense, i recommend you to find something more productive to do. The amount of time you spend on writing gibberish is enough to become anything you want to become.
True story, history vs nobody, politics
I worry about your sanity (or lack thereof).
I’ve got it! You are either trying to develop an automatic writing algorithm, or you subscribe to such a program.
Unfortunately, the results are not successful…
10mm Macro?
$1,000 USD for a macro lens? Wow…
If you think of it in the form of pennies it isn’t so bad.
Only if you want the best
Any hint about a new sony flash for macro photgraphy with this new lens?
Filter Thread Size: 62 mm
Andrea can you limit comment length for certain users, like 150 characters?
Or discussion and concerns to be made by real people and most of all photographers with Sony gear. On WHICH device do the posts contain more than 1500? and not a ‘see more’ tab thereafter.
Floyd Summerhayes • 9 hours ago
Mine arrived last week a very good macro lens, the two things I didn’t like were the focus ring feels gritty especially compared to the 70-200 G lens, and there is a lot of flexing in the outer lens barrel if you grip it just behind the focus ring, something I’ve not experienced before. Sony UK are going to replace it.
320 and presumably with that lens, or Sony gear, like me.
How about no incendiary names?
Or politics?
Sony Alpha Rumors
Dmitry Anisimov Larry Templeton a month ago
btw IIRC homosexual acts still not legal in Uzbekistan, surely they won’t like Apple
Dmitry Anisimov The Truth a month ago
Do they teach this in humanities for taxpayers money?
Dmitry Anisimov Bo Dez a month ago
it’s called duckling syndrome.
Dmitry Anisimov There_Is_No_Spoon a month ago
Take your elitism to your therapist.
Love your endless typos Admin. At first I thought I’ve wasted 3 grands on the Canon 11-24 for nothing if there is a 10mm Zeiss macro available…
i don’t really need a af-macro lens. i still using my old af-d 60mm nikkor
On a portrait macro, I find AF more of a curse than a blessing…
It’s a beautiful lens, certainly more than capable of competing with the 90/2.8, but I’d love to see a version with Zeiss microcontrast.
Closer to 3x the price of the Bokina…
I’ve worked out a new process. I dreamed about photography and thought about it while looking just now, and solved the problem with that new information I found yesterday which had made the matter objective. I also want the macro because it would be easier with that. It might help to have more fine control over that thing in the camera and perhaps a touchscreen/pad too 🙂
The process of making photography better is ‘Towards objectivity’
Working this way I will learn a lot too, and can apply that to make all my photography more accurate. I leveled up my photography AGAIN XD
24 hours is all it takes. Incredible isn’t it.
I just bought a Canon mount Zeiss 100mm Makro 🙂 No regrets though, I had a huge credit with a local second hand camera shop and they had no FE mount lenses in so it was an easy choice. Time will tell if I want the 90mm macro later on.
It must be 2.
if it was 1 or 3, that would proof in terms of logic that there must be a measurement mistake. If camera-ISO or sensor efficency was the reason, then the lens isn’t tested, but the camera. And that is not what T-stop actually means.
To measure T-stop you simply have to record a defined light source in manual mode (ISO, aperture, shutters-speed) and compare the recorded picture with a reference-picture.
To get the reference-picture you can shoot with a reference-optic and the same manual camera-settings the same light source.
Maybe the reference-optic is just using no glass at all and you are taking a picture of a equally light wall, or your camera is inside a lighted-bubble. Or it is an optic that is just lab-measured without attached camera. I don’t know.
But I think DxO has somehow managed to make for each body and each-Fstop a reference-picture and stored this inside a database. And maybe with the reference-pictures something went wrong. Maybe DxOmark did a firmware update to their test-body the firmware-update is interpreting the ISO-value a little different. This makes the old reference-pictures invalid.
Note: if a f1.8 lens is in reality a f1.6 lens, but labeled as a f1.8, both APS-C sensors and FF sensor would take the same advantage of that. There is no reason that a FF sensor (with more vignetting) gets better Fstop results as a APS-C sensor.
Now that would be a first lol. Admin IlluminatedObservers posts are making it very hard to follow threads and a large portion of them are not even directly related to the thread or photography.
It still can be a mirrorless in a bigger body, just to keep the A-mount alive. There is still a pretty big fan base, and if it helps Sony to make some extra $$, why not to make another “large” body if people are willing to buy it?
If they come up with a Loxia 85/2.8 Macro I’ll be ready to get it!