Digicameinfo spotted an official Sony lens name registration in Russia. Sony named the lens “SEL2470 GM”. This is likely the first f/2.8 Full Frame E-mount zoom lens! And “GM” could define the new line of fast Sony zooms.
Usually once registered the new product will be announced within the next 6-8 weeks.
Sony already confirmed on previous interviews they are working on faster FE lenses.
149 Responses
This would be very welcome. And anything below 800g weight would be welcome.
Although I suspect that similarly to the 35/1.4 and the macro many will start to complain “lens is ok, but the size blablabla…”
Forgot the price “for that price I can buy Canikon”
And if it is cheaper “where’s the pro IQ lenses”
I rarely use lenses in that focal range, so having them all in a single lens in my bag ” just in case” would not be a bad thing for me.
What I really would like to buy though is
300-600mm f4.8, 5.0 or 5.6 with these important features
Built in 150mm barrel extender for close up/ macro mode,
And dedicated 1.8x drop in teleconverter.
To be priced in mid $3000. range.
This was really my only hold up to not jumping on the sony full frame. It would make the A7II worth while.
Same here. Let’s see how big and heavy it is. The 24-70/4 is not very good but nice size and handling. But if we end up with the SAL2470Z, I’ll continue feeding my A6000 with nice (FF) primes.
same here, hopefully the price won’t be so high- between the kit lens and the Zeiss zoom.
Yea, 99% of the time i only use 2 lenses on my Canon Full frame. The 24-70 f2.8 and a sigma 50mm Art f1.4. If i’m doing a wedding, i’ll rent a 70-200 f2.8. Which is the next lens sony needs even if it’s big. Professionals will use the best tool for the job, and so far all 70-200 f2.8’s are big.
Most likely at 975g and 79x130mm.
So does Russian text have a cool factor now?
Indeed, товарищ!
Физкульт-привет!
What does the rest of the Russian text say in the original post? Thx.
It doesn’t provide any real information. Says stuff like “lens,” “mass production,” blah blah blah.
What does “GM” mean? I know of “G” (like SEL-70200G) and I know of “Z” (SEL-1635Z) … But “GM”?
That’s going to be one humongous heavy lens. I don’t know what others think, but I personally would settle for a narrower zoom range in exchange for a more lightweight lens.
For instance, Nikon used to have a 24-50 zoom. I’d settle for that zoom range if it meant the lens would be more compact and lighter.
A lot of working pros are looking for exactly this type of lens, though. A lot of wedding photographers, for example, live by the 24-70 f/2.8.
Exactly – this is about catering to expectations…
does this mean, G series and Macro? thanks
It could certainly have some macro functionality. The Canon 24-70/4 has a 0.7x macro mode.
Made in a collaboration with GM. Most likely will have a 13MPG sports / 17MPG in-city rated V8 focusing motor.
I hope it doesn’t have any recalls. I’d hate to be at an event taking pictures at 60 miles and hour and the air bags fail to go off.
I wonder if “GM” means it’ll be a G series lens instead of a Zeiss. Might make for a cheaper lens, I’d be interested in a 24-70/2.8 for 1500, no matter how big it is…
This lens produce by General Motor 😀
No Zeiss no buy…
To be fair the 90/2.8 is incredible and I’m very pleased with the 28/2. You don’t necessarily need to pay for the blue box…
The Tamron SP90 is legendary, once used it on an APS-C as a 135. Super sharp. But I rarely use it these days
You mean the former SP90, or the current SP90USD model?
Because I used to work with the latter one on my A99 and also on my A7R and A7II, and found the color rendition a little bit – let’s say pale.
The good old original SP90, never tried the newer USD version.
There is 6 versions of 90mm Tamron macro, four f2.8 and two f2.5
F2.8 from oldest to newest, model # 72E, 172E, 272E and F004 (USD)
F2.5 from oldest to newest, model # 52E and 152E
Haha, I meant the E272 model~=D
I have same lens in A mount, great lens.
My first ever lens on my A300. Awesome lens~=D
I did the same on my a580 – beautiful lens! I tried the adaptall version on my a7, which is very sharp but suffers from purple spots at f8 and above…
I assume his Zeiss addiction is related to color rendition and contrast.
The A mount 2470ZA beat all other 2470 in that discipline (for my taste).
Even the FE2470Z is not able to produce similar results.
So a 2470G(M) will for sure be of excellent built quality as every G, but it to bring more than just 2.8.
–> that’s my very personal mind
And I agree – the 90G28 is indeed incredible.
I’d rather a 15-21 mm 2.8 Zeiss and a 135 2.0 Zeiss.
But I suppose if Sony means business the 2.8 zoom will get a lot of attention from wedding and event photos.
We’ll need a big body for that big lens. Why would this lens be any less expensive then the A mount 70-200 2.8?
I don’t think it would be and it might be more expensive due to using stepper motors.
I don’t think stepper motors are more expensive in production, but I believe stepper motors are more expensive for customers!
Exactly! 🙂
Well, at least stepper motors are more reliable than Super Hyper Ultra Sonic Wave Drive Motors!
the current price of that is really high, so everyone gets the sigma or tamron and arguable better lenses, and much cheaper. probably slower af though
Because it’s a 24-70
Typo error on my part. Less than 2k though?
Hmmm… Nikon announced the 24-70/2.8VR for $2.399…
Aaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh!!!!
Wait…
On B&H canon charges $1.900 for non IS
Old non VR Nikon is $1.750
and Sony-Zeiss A-mount is $2.100 MSRP
Maybe without Zeiss label $2.000??
The current FE24-70 is the weak link in the premium full-frame E-mount lenses. I’m glad Sony is addressing that hole.
Yep.
But besides its significant sharpness drop to the borders, the F4 FE Zeisses are missing the typical Zeiss colors in my mind.
The 1635 too?
Directly compared to what I was used to get from my A mount planars and vario-sonnars especially the 1635 is a bit disappointing in that discipline. The FE2470 does much better but is still behind the vario-sonnar..
GM= G series Minolta? Sony reviving the minolta brand name?
G-series / Massive Weight
G-mini
It has more chance of being branded a Walkman. 😉
limited native e mount lenses preclude e mount from becoming a pro camera. even with adapters, the e mount body is too awkward for handheld when lenses are way bigger and heavier than the body.
Nonsense. Not every “pro” photographer needs every kind of lens that has ever been made. The 4 FE lenses that I own are totally enough for my profession.
The lack of a 24-70 and 70-200 2.8’s are keeping me from buying into the Sony system. Despite the outdated sensors of my Canon system, i always nail the shots in any event/wedding with Canons 2 benchmark workhorse lenses (mkii versions) with its excellent optics and lightning fast focus.
I think if Sony does this, take away in lens Steady shot to keep the weight down. A 24-70 at < 800g would be great and a 70-200 at 1200g would be nice too. The 70-200 does not need a metal construction.
I have a feeling that it will be a bit cheeper then the costly Zeiss – Sony needs to come out with more affordable Sony branded lenses – Zeiss and G branded is fine for those who have the money –
it has g in the name, and is new, so unlikely to be cheap :/
True – but hopefully few hundred dollars cheaper then the F4 Zeiss – so will be interesting to see if it will have IS ( OSS ) – as now IBIS in newer models of bodies – so ideally it should not have IS and be higher smaller and cheaper 🙂 and of course it is F2.8 which is nice – but you are true most likely it will cost around $1300-$1500
That’s some unwarranted optimism. I think it’ll be at least as large as the a-mount 24-70 f2.8, and probably at least $1999. G lenses and Sony Zeiss lenses are usually pretty close in specs and price. E mount lenses are typically larger than their a mount equivalents. I assume for the optics required to correct for the short flange distance.
$1500 for this lens ? Dream on. It will be $2k + easily.
See the Sony 90mm f2.8 G macro lens price. Canon and Nikon sell their 24-70mm f2.8 versions for $2300. Expect Sony to match their price or hopefully come a bit lower.
Heck even a 3rd party company like Tamron makes a 24-70mm f2.8 VC for $1299. So expecting this Sony branded lens for $1500 is highly optimistic IMO.
yes you are right – I was just dreaming 🙂 that one day Sony would come out with a FE lens under $1000 🙂 I guess the rumor is that Sony will now just focus on FF – so Sony needs to start producing some more affordable lenses for their FE mount as that seems to be what will be the only option once they wind down their APS-C mount cameras –
Canon and Nikon have their consumer and their Pro grade lenses – but for now Sony is just producing Pro priced lenses ( except for kit lens ) –
I am not a Pro so do not need Pro grade weather sealed sturdy and expensive lenses – now my A7 just collects dust as I mostly use my A6000 and M43 gear – M43 just has awesome glass – yes some around $1000 and a bit more but also many way sub $1000 which are just fantastic like the Oly 45mm F1.8 – the 50mm F1.8 E mount lens is also a great lens for $248 – yes the Zeiss 55mm F1.8 is a bit sharper but also around $1000 – how about a Sony branded version for $600
How the hell do you use m43 on apsc sensor ? Natural vignete m man 😉 ?
100% agree with you ! A few friends picked up a Sony A7 as they got it on sale but were stunned to see the price of the lenses.
They are using adapted lenses now which isn’t the best option. But with just two lenses below $500 Sony needs more more of them to draw people into the system.
Brendon, you’re implying the FE 90mm Macro lens isn’t cheap.
Consider the following: It’s currently the world’s sharpest lens according to DXOmark.
It has 15 expensive glass elements.
It’s far sharper than the Zeiss 55mm, and it’s far shaper than the 4000 USD Zeiss Otus.
And here you’re saying the world’s most sharp lens is too pricy at just 1100 USD.
EHD – I have no doubt its a fantastic lens but you seem to be relying on one site – DXOMark too much.
Someone I know has the Sony f2.8 and a Canon 100mm f2.8 IS and he says he can’t see much difference in the output and he has been shooting macros in the field for many years so I trust his judgement and the Canon is a slightly cheaper lens.
On test charts the Sony might render a little sharper but in the field the differences are not big enough.
In any case my point was NOT to disparage the 90mm performance. Not at all !
My point was that at $1099 it is the most expensive AF macro lens on any system out there. And its a G lens. So people shouldn’t expect G lenses to be any cheaper than Zeiss lenses. I expect this new 24-70mm G lens will be one of the sharpest 24-70mm lenses around but I don’t expect it would come pretty cheap. 🙁
Your friend shouldn’t be trusted. I definitely do not trust your friend, and I hope you understand why. Because I hope you wouldn’t trust my friend either, just because I tell you to.
Neutral third parties are all we have, without these we would have to trust each others’ friends, imaginary or otherwise.
Here is why your friend shouldn’t be trusted:
http://i.imgur.com/N9sqIrn.jpg
The Canon lens is lower resolution, it has slower T-stop and significantly worse CA.
Either way, it’s the worlds sharpest lens as of right now, A 200 dollar premium for that is hardly unfair, but you certainly make it sound like it is.
I trust that you post 4 times the quantity of criticism towards the Zeiss Otus since it’s 4 times the cost of the FE Macro lens, because that’s the only way I can make sense out of you. Or else I can’t assume you and your friend are unbiased in your opinions.
If all you require is to shoot test charts and crop at 100% then yes the Sony is for you. I would give higher weightage to real world comparisons than some computer generated tests.
Is the Canon and Sony 90mm tested on the same camera body ? At what aperture is the lens at its sharpest setting ? Is the lens sharp stopped down ? Does chromatic aberration increase or decrease on stopping down ?
None of these are answered in that DXO mark test.
And for your information the Sony is not the sharpest lens tested on DXOMark.
Both the Otus lens tests sharper on the D810 as well as the Nikon 200mm f2 and the Zeiss 135mm f2.
http://i.imgur.com/TG1QXMY.jpg?1
I have not used the lens personally so I cannot comment on it but the Canon 100mm f2.8 L is so incredibly sharp wide open that its sharpness at f2.8 is about as sharp as my Tamron 90 mm f2.8 at f4 which is also an incredibly sharp lens.
If I want real world comparisons, I would rent the lens and shoot with it, instead of trusting the friend of a random person on the internet. That would be the best way.
There is some inconsistency in your comparison and question. If you’re worried about the Canon and Sony not having the same body, then you should be worried about the Nikon body and Sony body not being similar as well, but you aren’t.
If you are worried about the bodies being as equal as possible then you should have compared D800 with A7r.
See, when the bodies are rated equal, the Sony FE 90mm Macro beats the two Otus lens. These two each cost +4000 USD.
– Its not a random friend. Its someone who shoots a lot of macros and uses both lenses on the same body. Its a better comparison IMO than a single website which gives vague results like DXOMark and tests the lenses on two different cameras making any comparison less than helpful.
– Its not about inconsistency. You said the Sony 90mm is the sharpest lens on DXOmark. I just told you that you were plain wrong. Thats all.
– The D800 has an AA filter which is lacking on the A7r. Hence its not a fair comparison as the AA filter reduces sharpness.
But you are a random person to me, and your friend could be imaginary as far as I could know. That’s why it’s unreasonable of you to expect others to take your friend as fact. 3rd party reviewer > your friend.
I said the FE 90mm Macro is sharpest lens, and it is.
See the cameras you listed, the D800 and A7r are both 95 rated cameras, so they are equals for these comparisons. The D810 is a 97 rated camera, so you only increase your hypocrisy when you demand a better camera body for the Canon lens, yet use a better camera body for the Otus lens.
Guess what will happen when the FE 90mm Macro is tested on the A7r mark ii, it’ll blow the Otus out of the water again. But we all know you would complain because the the A7r mark ii will be a higher rated camera body, and you only want to use higher rated bodies when comparing against Sony lenses.
right, compare the output from a 36Mpx camera against a 22Mpx camera. If you rely too much on DxOMark, you should know by now that every lens tested on a high resolution camera yields a higher score than a lower mpx camera. Compare any other lens from E-mount and compare it between A7R and A7 or A7S.
You should know there exist no 36Mp Canon camera. And DXO had no options for the A7s, or A7 in the mount selection of the FE 90mm Macro.
EXACTLY! Since you don’t have an option to test the results from similar resolution test samples, you can’t compare directly one lens against another one if there is no resolution match.
To see how much results changes, look for a lens that has been tested on the a7 and put it against the results from the a7R. See what I’m talking about.
It wasn’t my comparison, it was something DXO selected:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-FE-90mm-f2.8-Macro-G-OSS-lens-review-Outstanding-optical-performance
Look at page two.
That configuration was probably the best they had.
Anyway, the FE 90mm Macro lens beats the zeiss Macro lens equipped to D810 (it should been equipped to D800 for fair comparison), and it beats the Otus lenses equipped to D800 as well.
I don’t understand why you’re doubting it’s beating the Canon lens.
I don’t doubt it will be better, but by how much? If you’re going to throw numbers, DxO comparison wasn’t even a good and you should wait til there is a fair comparison.
Sony < Sony-G < Sony-Zeiss/Zeiss
It will be neither cheap nor Zeiss-ish expensive
I think you need to look at the G line again… Aside from the 70-300, those lenses are pretty much just as pricy as the Zeiss lenses.
Cheaper than a 24-70 f/4? Not in a million years. It will be at least 50% more expensive and probably as much as twice as expensive.
you are right – G branded stuff should be a bit cheaper or in between the plain Sony branded and Zeiss branded although closer to Zeiss pricing but of course this is a F2.8 so most likely around $2000-$2300
“G” is a Minolta’s “Zeiss”, and it’s not cheaper. Same as Canon’s “L”. If you look at the price of the 70-200G II – it’s around of $3k 🙂 The best in class Canon 70-200 f/2.8L is ~$1900.
Why should G branded stuff be cheaper when the G lens is the best in the world?
Look at this: http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses#yDataType=effmpix&viewMode=graph
Check out who is at number 1 spot and who is at number 3 spot.
I hope it will worth the price at least. The 24-70 f/4 is a disappointment.
The 24-70 F4 is a Zeiss. it is not only the numbers that count!
Nikon recently announced an upgrade of the 24-70 VR…
$2399
Guess what Sony wants to get for it…
All manufacturers went insane with their MK2 pricing.
Although I can understand Nikon – their 2470II is more of a complete new design.
Our recent A mount lens MK2’s got improved AF speed and coating to an “old” design.
As I assume that design is the most expensive part of a lens making the pricing is ridiculous.
Although assumptions based on market analysis has been proven as being not being mandatorily reliable – I would assume 1.399 € for the FE2470GM2.8
More like Ni- con.
Did you mean: Ni-coin?
I am hoping for a 70-200/2.8 FE lens. The 24-70 is not that important to me. Here I prefer a 35/1.4 on a second camera.
Yes, 24-70 is not that critical for a event/wedding photographers who shoots with dual cameras. One would typically have 85mm or 70-200mm on the other camera, so fast 35mm makes more sense. This is probably what Sigma recognized and why they created 24-35/2 zoom, which due to a very short zoom range can provide wider aperture and provide prime like image quality. I just with that lens was available in native E-mount, or at least A-mount to be used via LA-EA3.
If they drop the big guns, then why the A mount update of these lenses?
Then Sony can say they really are still developing A-mount.
This is SEL, has nothing to do with A mount
bought themselves time…
so they can delay a little bit the PR mess they will get when they decide to say A-mount is being discontinued.
They are never going to say that A-mount is being discontinued. “Our short term focus is on E-mount”, “we continue to support both product lines”, “we see future in both mounts” and stuff like this will continue, while eventually there will be no one left waiting.
In fact, this tactic has worked for them. If they announced they are dropping A-mount year ago (I believe the decision was made shortly after A77II announcement), far more would have switched to CN. Instead, they bought some time to fill the lens line-up, add A7II and A7rII.
I will hate if they actually announce FE 24-70/2.8. They already hurt the resale value of ZA 24-70/2.8SSM by releasing second generation at the same price. Creating similar lens in E-mount will completely kill the value of those old lenses.
g=G-Serie m=Macro
But 90mm Macro’s code is SEL90M28G not SEL90F28GM
Sounds good to me 🙂 Then i dont have to adapt a Tamron 24-70 VC to my cam. Good news. Now sony, make a 70-200 f2.8 AND something like sigmas 120-300 f2.8. Thats a must have! Its still so sad, that this lense isnt aviable for a-mount 🙁
FINALLY!
GM is the new Gold Mount. lol
A gold plated mount developed to make rich customers even happier and happy Sony even richer. 🙂
GM = G manual focus lens, without oss
yay! they need this so bad. Can’t get it to market fast enough. The difficult part is it’s probably going to be priced like Canon’s 24-70mk II or Nikon’s version both very dear and 2x the price of the Zeiss F4 model.
GM must stand for Giant Monsters
Why the e-mount hate?
Where is an indication that it is f/2.8? Although it would be more logical than anything else with this range at this point.
Twice the price of the f/4 “Zeiss”?
They had a perfect opportunity to make it a little wider on the wide end, 20-70 or even 22-70 would make it a reason to have it over a DSLR version, and much more economical to make it such on a 18mm flange distance of E-mount compared to 44-46mm.
It’s never enough.. is it?
There is absolutely no harm in asking for more. Otherwise we wouldn’t have lenses like the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 or the Sigma 150-600mm Sports
i think sigma 18-35 is an aps-c lens..the fastest FF zoom is sigma 24-35 f2.0 (i think)
It is more like why waste a perfectly good opportunity to leapfrog your competition? Repeating same old same old is certainly never enough.
As long as it does not have a label “Zeiss”, it may be affordable.
If it has the quality, it doesn’t matter what it will be called, it is still going to be expensive.
Just take a look at SAL1650 vs SAL1680z. Both are very high quality lenses. One is Zeiss, another is a great f2.8 kit lens, and yet, prices are very similar to one another.
It does matter. Zeiss label will up the price more than you will be comfortable with.
Its a mid tier 24-70 with a variable aperture or it may be F4 at the best and some macro capability . Seems to be a competition for Canon 24-70/4L IS USM which has macro mode with 0.7x magnification.
Don’t care how expensive it is. Just make it internal zoom and smaller than Canon 24-70 2.8
Not going to happen.
^^ You want internal zoom AND smaller size ??? 😛
Good luck ! Though I fear you may be a bit disappointed. 🙁
External zoom is employed to make the lens smaller when retracted. You cannot have both.
If that were true, Sony 90mm macro would have used the same naming convention. I would like the manual focus theory if it were aimed at the cine market, hopefully keeping the body to a more compact size.
If it’s marketed for cine, it will neither small nor cheap, even if it’s manual. The optic design will be much more complex than your typical stills lens to not shift focus while zooming and do no or little breathing while focusing.
The manufacturer product code for 90mm macro actually contains both M and G, it’s SEL90M28G. Note that Sony often omits the aperture in lens product code, especially for zoom lenses.
My bet would be 24-70/2.8 with close focusing (hence the M), marketed as G series. This is likely to compliment the upcoming event/wedding camera, which supposedly is where Sony is focusing short term, according to interviews.
The 90 macro is a prime, the aperture is listed there, whereas in zoom there is not.
Maybe it is a new 24-70 f4 lens, but non-OSS. Cheaper and smaller and more lightweight than the existing Zeiss and it should be no problem to achieve at least the same image quality, if not any better!
Has Sony stopped making a mount lenses?
No, why?
I’ve been out of the loop for a while and I’m trying to decide which route I want to go. It appears there hasn’t been a new a mount camera for a while. I like the features on the a7RII but I don’t know about the size of the camera. It seems small to me. I wish a local dealer had one to try out.
I’m thinking of buying the a77II and just wondering about future support.
give me an FE mount equivalent to the canon 24 – 105 f/4 that isnt a super expensive cinema lens!
if they made this lens a g series lens with no OSS that would be perfect. OSS isnt super necessary on sny bodies anymore because IBIS and the lack of OSS and a zeiss badge could keep cost and size down
but, but…Steve Huff says mirrorless lenses are smaller than DSLR lenses…and since Sony FE I am lost and confused…now mirrorless big like DSLR but slower and need so much battery….
unfortunately this lens will probably cost well over $2000 USD. When the hell is Tamron going to come out with an FE 24-70 f2.8 for $1200. FE lenses are way too expensive for less quality than the lenses on canikon.
SEL 24-70 G Lens designed by Minolta, in short 24-70GM! I miss the Minolta colour tone
Sony need fast zoom lenses, but i would rather prefer 3 other lenses. 15mm, 35mm, and a 50mm. All Batis lenses. And off course. A good compact IF 24-105 zoom lens, that dont change length when I’m using it
sony already have one of the best 50(~55)mm and 35 mm lens available..and for superwide angle,we can always use the awesome samyang 14mm (as its wide angle-auto focus is not that important)-and its cheap..But FE definitely need cheap primes,hell i think aps-c also need cheap primes(with no oss)
The 55mm Sony is fine. The 35s? Hm, they either have a small, slow one, or a fast huge one. So far Batis have walked a perfect line between size and speed. I too would love that lens line fleshed out.
That said I think some stellar 2.8 constant zooms (or even f/2?) are essential.
24-70mm f2.8 is the wedding photographers lens, i hope its not OSS and hence be a bit cheaper..if its affordable then sony will sell tons of this lens
by affordable, you mean like the SAL2470Z2 that sells for 2000USD?
i dont think anyone who is in FE system wants to buy an a-mount lens.they want native lens
I think he was just stating that this lens might cost the same as the A-mount one.
Im hoping theyve gone the opposite way and its a 24-70 f/3.5-5.6 collapsing lens that is super compact. Like the SEL1650 (of course a pancake might be too much to ask for). The only affordable budget lenses so far are the 28-70 kit lens and 28/2. Sony needs to offer more cheaper and compact lenses to beef up their lens lineup and further expand market share.
Why nobody produce something like a 24-70 f3.5? Should be a good compromisse between fastness and weight 😀
Then people will complain that it is heavier than the f4 version with very little low light advantage over the f4 others will complain that it’s not a f2.8.
Aside from that, no one has ever made a 24-70 constant f3.5 lens before, probably because its easier just to produce either a f2.8 or f4 lens instead, 24-70 f2.8 isn’t an exactly new optical concept and designing one is merely using improving on previous designs however a 3.5 is a new concept and developing the new optical forumula will be costly with little gain.
A lens that is one third stop faster than F4 is not really worth being produced. Too small difference.
Yes, but for zoom lenses Sony omits the aperture in the product code.
Well spotted.
Less quality? Dude do some research before you spill ignorance on the net. Look at the top ten lenses on DXO. It’s made up of Zeiss, Sony, and a few Nikon lenses. The sharpest lens on the planet is the 90mm by Sony. This is what, a two year old system by Sony?
GM = Get Money….
It could be a new standard zoom for A7-II cameras (with IBIS), which do not need OSS.
I’ll buy it… if it has internal focus. If it doesn’t, it’ll need to be comparable with the Contax Zeiss 35-70 f/3.4 – Please don’t compromise character for “surgical precision” CZ. MTF charts are for brick wall shooting gear trolls. Real photographers appreciate and want lenses that have soul.. and you’re (or at least were) very good at that. Here’s lookin’ at you C/Y mount lenses.