Image on top: The current 500mm f/4.0 G lens.
A new source told me that Sony plans to launch a new 400mm f/4.0 A-mount lens by end of this year. No info about pricing and lens design yet!
Oh and please Sony. Make it be a tiny bit cheaper than the $13,000 500mm f/4.0 G lens 🙂
—
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
For readers: Subscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream and the Facebook fan page (Click here) in order to not miss any news!
—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
0 Responses
Surely that lens will be less expensive than the 500mm f/4, but don’t expect it to cost less than Sony’s 300mm f/2.8… It has to become at least as hefty.
With the 500mm you were able to buy a Nikon FF and 500mm f4 and still have money left over. Crazy prices.
Purely compared on price level you are right.
But you have to consider that Nikon (or especially Canon) are selling a lot more of those lenses than Sony does. Considering the demand on the Sony 500/4 the price difference is not all that bad.
A G400/4 would be welcome if not too expensive, however I would assume a minimum at around 4k$.
You make sense, but as a consumer why should I care?
I just noticed that my point could be misinterpreted. It was meant from a Sony economical point of view.
Of course you are right if you say that this price difference may not keep you away from purchasing the other brand – however in my opinion a consumer being able to spend 12k for a lens is well moneyed.
As Sony is partly dealing well with Tamron, they are stupid to design a lens specifically for themselves. They should order Tamron to design a G alike lens and make it available for the two big brands as well (maybe slightly different outside) – higher selling numbers = lower selling price.
The fact that a HQ tele prime can be “cheap” (in comparison) is shown by Sigma – the 500/4,5 is available around 5k€.
Exactly as I have been saying, Sony should be getting Tamron to do their lenses!
In that case I would simply dump my Sony gear, switch to Nikon and enjoy the benefits of a fully supported “pro” system.
See the point?
Don’t worry, there are almost no sports shooting pros using A-mount except for the few sponsored by Sony. No one’s gonna switch.
There are a handful using the Alpha, but more will likely convert when the Alpha 1, 400mm f/4.0, 400mm f/2.8, 600mm f/4.0 arrive and Sony Pro is offered to Alpha users
There’s no way a Sony 400mm f/4 will be cheaper than $4,000. I desperately wish this wasn’t true but keep in mind good copies of decades old Minolta f/4.5’s are selling on FleaBay for roughly $2,500+. Not sure it’s a good indicator but I probably could pick of a similar condition used MInolta 300mm f/2.8 a few hundred dollars less. Point being I expect the new Sony f/4 will be priced in the ballpark of the 300 f/2.8 which is $7,500 (currently on sale $100 off ;^0).
I’ll pull a number out of a dark area of my anatomy and speculate $5000 will be the price. I can’t tell you how much I’d love to own this lens but not $5000 much. ;^)
I’ll stick out my neck here and say at $3,000 I’d probably buy one but I’m choking even on that price – realize I’m a hack amateur, not a pro.
I’m guessing 4k. It’s not a f/2.8 so it can’t priced too high.
THAT ””will be a price one …..:'(
Any info on the number of 500/4 sold so far? This would be very revealing.
For E mount users, there are always a variety of EOS lenses.
The EOS lenses don’t count for sports. Or do you want to pay thousands of dollars for a long tele on a body/adapter with unusably slow AF and longer-than-mirror-flap EVF blackout?
Cheaper to get an EOS body. That is what a lot of people have done. 🙂
Exactly.
Why not E-mount?
haha you really want to see the world burn huh?
If it was E-Mount, then you’d cut out what is probably be the majority of the current customer base for this sort of lens. Also, it will still work with E-Mount of course. You just need an adapter.
There wouldn’t even be any significant saving in bulk of native E-Mount over E-Mount + adapter as lenses of this type, focal length and size will generally have an exit focal length which places the bulk of the lens about the same distance from the sensor. In other words, it would have to be longer than the A-Mount version by something about the length of the A-Mount adapter.
Of course, unless this comes with (switchable) OSS, it points out one of the issues with E-Mount, and that’s lack of IBIS. Personally I would want to see a new EF mount camera more suited to the sort of wildlife/sports/action photography for which this lens is appropriate.
People who generally buy 3 – 7K lens can afford a 3K camera. They picked the right Target Audience. E-Mount users generally buy adapters A-Mounts users buy Sony lenses.
What’s the point of a 400mm F4, when they have a 500mm F4 ?, surely a 400mm F2.8 would be a better option. I’d expect it to cost twice as much as the Sigma alternative as the current Sony 300mm F2.8 and 500mm F4 do anyway.
Please don’t make it in that horrid silver color.
The current 500mm f4 isn’t silver. Admin pulled a prototype from the web but the current 500mm is white without orange ring. Don’t be afraid, Sony just changed their single silver lens (70-400) into white.
That Silver colour reflects light/heat better than the white. I prefer it.
The 500mm is so expensive because it is made to order.
Chicken and the egg? Almost nobody is going to buy one at $13,000 (currently on ‘sale’ $100 off – please don’t stampede the Sony store!!! ;^0) and because nobody is buying them they have to charge a fortune to cover costs.
I get how much manual labor, materials, specialized equipment, and precision goes into making a 500mm. Canon made a really nice marketing video of manufacturing their 500mm I’ve linked below. However, it’s obvious lens makers have to make runs of materials. Maybe Sony makes runs of 500mm components then leaves them in the parts bin for made-to-order assembly but Marketing 101 is cover your variable costs. Sony has a lot of money sunk in specialized equipment (e.g., stamping machines good only for big glass) so why not price their lenses accordingly? Seriously, I find it impossible to believe the materials and labor materials going into a Sony 300mm f/2.8 or Sony 500mm f/4 are that high factoring in a standard mark-up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovxtgj4SsiI
Well, I didn’t say it is worth it. I suppose having the option if someone / some organization really wants a 500mm a-mount for sports, etc., (and can pay) is better than not having it at all.
I didn’t know about that hot $100 discount…I may have to run to the Sony store after work…
Oh my goodness! Sony has been reading my rants on SAR. They’ve actually gone and done it! ;^)
Too bad it’s not the fine old Minolta 400mm f/4.5. It would have a chance – remote, I admit – of being something I might actually be able to afford because it’d be presumably cheaper. A new f/4? I’d have to make a choice between the new 2016 Camara SS (late 2015) and a Sony f/4 (late 2014/2015). No offense to Sony but…. ;^)
A 400mm f4.5 would be lighter too (under 2kg).
A missed opportunity.
That’s the reason Minolta designed the 400mm f/4.5. It was a light weight, cost effective option, at a time when the competition were selling 400mm f/4.0 for almost twice the price.
if we take the old minolta af 400mm f4.5 hs as reference, it should be way smaller than sony 500 f4 and similar in size to Sony 70-400 extended to 400mm f5.6 right? not going to buy it as the 70-400 is a great lens anyway.
But having weathersealing and ability to extend the range a little bit with the sal14tc seems nice. 400f2.8 makes more sense in the lineup but I hope that Sony going for it is a way to put a nice price tag instead of another built to order overpriced lens
And please SONY, add OSS to the lens. Then all LEA-4 users can use this fantastic, compact lens, too 🙂
Yeah. Right. Good idea.
Then it will be $14,000 instead of $11,000.
Why can’t Sony just make an E-mount Full Frame with IBIS? that way we will be able to use our A-mount lenses. If youre using an FE lens w/ OSS then just program the camera to automatically switch off the IBIS.
Imagine the possibilities of using endless legacy lenses and Canikon lenses.
RTOFL……….
The 400mm is designed for cameras that aren’t slow.
Isn’t it hilarious? E-mount fanboys are obsessed with small and light which is the entire point of the mirrorless bodies. Sony (and others) realize this and produce lenses which make sense for this market segment: slower glass, focal lengths fit for a smaller lens. What ensues? Massive diaper filling Sony isn’t making crazy fast glass and long primes/zooms for e-mounts. ;^)
They haven’t a clue. The A-Mount earns Sony a ridiculous amount of cash, and it’s users can afford glass like this.
This will look nice on the A77II.
I would loooooooooooove to have a f/4. Seriously. I’m watching a bunch of old Minolta f/4.5’s on FleaBay. I’ve been screaming loudly here on SAR for Sony to re-release the Minolta 400mm f/4.5 with obvious updates like modern lens coatings. All that said and as much as I lust for one, I’m realistic Sony will price this like a good used car and will be completely out of a league of an amateur like myself. :^(
I have had one for fifteen years, I bought mint at a pawn shop in Halifax. It’s taken everything I’ve thrown at it. It’s worth every penny. I recommend it 100%
Hilarious! Having huge lenses on such a tiny camera is such a nonsense! What would be next? Adding internet browsers to phones with those tiny screens? Crazy people!
Your analogy is a false equivalency but let’s run with your silly example. What’s the current trend in smartphones? They keep getting bigger and bigger because browsing on teensy tiny screens really, really sucks. In fact, phablets are an emerging trend. I’m shopping a Nokia 6″ 1520 to replace my 4.5″ Nokia 920.
But I guess your analogy isn’t so bad after all. The ergonomics in teensy tiny smartphones sucks for internet browsing and the ergonomics on the Sony APS-C compacts really suck. So never mind! ;^)
Yes, ergonomy is also why they’re squeezing 4k resolution in those tiny screens. Because you need 550ppi resolution… I know that small interchangeable lens cameras are primarily meant for mobility, but that mobility for me means that i can put 4 lenses in the bag that could otherwise carry only 2. And it’s OK to release slow, small lenses first, but totally ditching good lenses just because of their size, is moronic…
Sony compacts are unpopular where I live and I’ve only seen 1 in my wanderings used by a guy doing nature photography. He normally uses an a77 but once tried out his NEX-7 with his 70-400mm. Mind you, I only saw him try this once and the results were almost comical. Ergonomics on the Sony compact APS-Cs suck but they really are awful with a ‘great white’ attached.
The problem with Sony’s compacts ILCEs is the sensors are too big to make the bodies pocketable and the resulting bodies don’t handle as well as a DSLR. Sony could scale down their DSLRs a bit like the Canon SL1 or discontinued a3x’s but they’re not as comfortable to handle, IMHO.
“Because you need 550ppi resolution”
Where is my 550ppi 27″ computer monitor, gief nao plz 😀
I’d love that too… But it seems that this guy got it first: http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_g3-6294.php
You get it upside-down, it is a small camera on a huge lens. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that!
What you and others fail to see is that e-mount isn’t just limited to small lenses. It’s main advantage is flexibility – that is the key. You can mount a small pancake onto an A5000 and have a light, pocketable camera (that can’t happen with A-mount), or you can mount a large telephoto. It doesn’t really have any limits, and there so there is nothing to stop Sony releasing larger e-mount bodies and/or lenses in the future.
You have bigger pockets than I, dude. ;^)
Sony isn’t going to make a 400mm for the e-mount. Their share of the Imaging Division’s Revenue stream is small compared to the A-Mount. The A-Mount system (lenses, bodies, flashes, and even filters) is growing rapidly based the A77II presentation. I also had a chance to talk with someone in the organization who confirmed this.
Alpha A-Mount users buy more expensive native glass., and more frequently. whereas the e-mount users buy adapters and use other manufacturers glass.
No, we are not obsessed with small and light, thought it is a great goodie. Compared to Canikon I have real live view. Compared to A-mount I can mount all the other brand lenses. No other mount offers a full frame like that. So why would you limit E-mount to any kind of lens? The more powerful the better.
E-mount fans are always crying for the death of the a-mount and telling me to pack sand, buy what they like and buy an adapter. As you boast, you can mount anything with an adapter so buy an adapter and be happy with your ‘flexibility’.
They keep on whining, while the A-Mount continues to grow rapidly. It now appears that the Fuji XT-1 is now dominating the high end of the CSC market. The segment the A7 was designed for.
Personally I’d like to see an A6. Give it the A7s weather-sealed housing, and the 24mp sensor of the A6000, and I’d buy it it immediately.
I think allot of us would buy it immediately.
Well ye actualy .The A7s dont have the speed or the IBIS or the buffers to handle a sport or the battery stamina wether seals to endure a wildlife shoot .I dont know if you have notice but sony have made individual niche for all their products .Their is so no all in one cam .You buy diffrent lenses to do diffrent jobs right ? the all rounders are never as good as the nich lense ect well guess what the camas are the same .Their will not be a IBiS with 12 fps and FF E mount as it will damage the sales of the other cams thus sony loose money .Just like cannon inhibit or down spec new stuff to stop it competing hi spec stuff see it happen all the time you know thy have the tech but thy want to make their other product relevent for as long as thy can to profit from the Rand D cash invested .
What you fail to see is that Sony is a business, and not a charity. Business decisions are made in a cold, and calculated manner.
What you fail to see is that Sony derives more money from A-Mount lens sales than A-Mount camera bodies. The average A77 user owns 5 to 10 Sony lenses, A99 users generally own much more.
The A-Mount will continue to receive the upper echelon of lenses because Alpha users (A-Mount) actually buy them (native Sony lenses). They don’t have the option of buying a Meta-Bones adapters, in order to use other manufacturers lenses.
What you fail to see is that Sony may begin to decrease investments in the FE platform if users are not buying native Sony lenses. If the overall (lens and body) revenue steam isn’t viable the FE will be cut loose.
Crazy Idea but Have a 7 handy for you street and family portrates and the A77IIwith a wopping 400mm for sport .If you can afford the 400MM at 10K you can get the A77ii to match and not miss your sports shots with the lousy AF and FPS on the A7 .You dont have to thank me iv had common sence a while .
Damn stupid … 400 F2.8 would be the only worth … cause as a sports photographerI am not very happy with 500 F4. It’s an awesome lense, but still price-performance does not fit together.
and for the others who don’t need every stop, the 70-400 G SSM is amazing!
Well, look at the Sony 300mm f/2.8 and extrapolate the cost/size/performance use case for a Sony 400mm f/2.8. I’d guess it’d cost ballpark $10,000 and stress a typical tripod. ;^)
As a Pro, the cost of 10grant is much, but paiable … what I want is performance, performance and performance 😀
So if the Sony Zeiss 400mm f/2.8 G has an outstanding imagequality, I’d order it today.
Exactly, just for the paper, offer a 2.8 400mm, the king of lenses. And then Sony can at least theoretically start to compete with the Canon and Nikon’s alike in the sport arena business. Won’t sell much, but at least the amateurs then get a feeling that their equipment is also used by real professionals ; ).
I’d like to point out Sigma has already tried to produce a 300mm f/2.8. Pictured is the results. I’d expect the Sony ‘great white’ version swapping metal for plastic to be even heavier. ;^)
http://www.cameraegg.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/sigma-5000mm.jpg
The use of Magnesium, and 7071 aircraft aluminum would cut the weight,and price down nicely.
Perhaps you should switch brands?
I’d like to thank SAR for this rumor – my favorite in months – and Sony for allowing me to dream about this lens I really, really want. Now back to the reality that it’ll be too expensive and impractical so never mind! ;^)
you know what it would be really cool? FE LENSES!!!!!!!!
Have you noticed this rumor is the rare instance of SAR mentioning a new a-mount lens? Meanwhile, there have been numerous FE mount lens announcements suitable for that system.
The A7 hangover is upon us.
I’m beginning to think the FE didn’t sell in the numbers they were expecting, and now Sony is shifting resources to segments where it will likely make much more money.
Alpha A-Mount users have a tendency to buy big expensive native Sony lenses, and Sony knows this.
what if one thing has nothing to do with the other?
I would love to see the number of 500 f4’s actually sold. I”m guessing I have just about enough fingers and toes. 😉
They’re in stock on Sony’s USA site and if you buy one you’ll about double their sales of 500s for the year.
Well, at least there is some A-mount lens news. There has been no APS-C E-mount lens news since FE came along.
Death of the e-mount APS-C? Sorry. Couldn’t resist the irony. ;^)
you are right. ANNOUNCEMENTS. YET, NO FE LENSES AVAILABLE FOR NO ONE!!!!
Ding ding ding…we have a winner! The light bulb went on!
We already know it is designed by Olympus. I don’t high hopes on a competitive price considering what they want for the 500mm f4.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-the-400mm-f4-0-lens-will-be-the-first-designed-with-olympus/
This thing will be around 5-6k is my guess. Something absolutely ridiculous.
I generally drop it on the business LoC and look away these days.
Why is it ridiculous? I am kinda tired of those here that think everything must be affortable for hobby photogr. and be in a price range they like to pay. Ppl, this is business and if you are not part of this business stfu! Seriously for hobby photogr. just go for 70-400mm lens. It is superb, but a zoom.
I’m tired of arrogant pros telling amateurs whose purchases make much of the equipment you use affordable to pack sand. So you STFU.
Thank you Earl. If Sony brought out a 400/5.6 at $2000, or even a 400/4.5 at $3000, they would out sell this thing by 20-1. Sorry df, us hobbyists out number you pros 1000-1 and our money is the same color as yours.
I agree. The Advanced Amateurs, and Semi-Pro drive the majority of Sony sales. They should be catering to first. The “Professionals” are a very small portion of actual A-Mount sales.
Only the Canon 400mm f/4 is directly comparable at $6500. If we compare lenses with similar maximum apertures (absolute) the Canon 300mm f/2.8 is $7300, Nikon 300mm f/2.8 is $5800, Sony 300mm f/2.8 is $7400, Sigma 300mm f/2.8 is $3400. The Sigma 500mm f/4.5 is a little larger aperture and is $5000. 500mm f/4 and 400mm f/2.8 are in a different class. So if the Sony is cost comparable with the Canon then the rough price would end up $6600.
I’m afraid you’re right and you just ruined my day!
My guess is $8500-$12000. Depending on what they do with the lens. If it is indeed a “G” lens, plan on the high end. If it’s cross branded with Olympus (Olympus sells an OM mount version of it, Sony sells a A-mount) I can see how it would be cheaper, as Olympus has more to gain from it.
But it certainly wont be under $8500. That would absolutely blow me away.
Interesting idea about the ‘cross branding’. +1
The brand new Nikon 400mm f/2.8 is priced at 11’999.95. 6K for this SONY lens would be a steal, even though it is a stop slower.
Would never happen. Sony would charge much more for the same spec’d lens. Perhaps double.
What’s up with f4? If this is going to be a Sports lens imho, it needs to be f2.8 and as sharp as a Canon or Nikon wide open and at 36mp , and it needs to AF Fast : http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1368/cat/10
There is a $6000 difference in price between the canon 400/2.8 and the canon 400/4. That’s a good reason.
F/4 might be a sweet spot on price/performance plus it should support Sony teleconverters.
Exactly! +1
If Sony made a 400mm f2.8 lens, it would EASILY be north of $20,000.
They would never sell any.
That’s why.
I need 16-200 f/4 lens…
400 f 5.6 might be affordable. 400 f4 does not sound as a cheap lens. I believe price will be substantially lower and still boutique.
With the newest sensor technology being 1, 2 or 3 stops faster than the sensors of a few years ago, the 1 stop difference between f2.8 & f4 is of little consequence if you are going to use this on the latest, (maybe yet unreleased), camera body. The size / cost advantage makes a lot of sense if you look at it that way.
Why this? Will be good for video with zeiss glass…. or A-mount for A7s.
Laughingly assuming Sony has been paying attention to my re-release a Minolta f/4.5 SAR rants, can I please request you include a clear protective filter like some versions of the Minolta 300mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/4? Thanks!
you cant afford a filter but a 10k lens? LOL
I guess the request is more from the perspective of getting more for your money, just like how one would expect to get a lens case and in some cases, a tripod collar included on the expensive telephoto lenses. I did actually laugh a bit though when I read your comment, but I’m assuming that’s where EarlFargis is coming from. At least I hope haha.
Nobody makes a 114mm (I think) filter used by the Sony/Minolta 300mm f/2.8 and 400 f/4.5. No, I don’t have a problem buying a filter if I can buy one aftermarket.
I agree with you, but I dont see it happening. If anything, it will be an optional filter, for another $250 or something.
Sony (and all companies) are getting cheaper and cheaper…trying to cut costs and increase margins. Product boxes are only single ply corrugation now, manuals are in PDF format, lens mounts are being made of plastic (A58), new hot-shoe flash adapters are not being released free with new cameras (A77II)…they’d never just ‘throw in’ a freebee.
Here’s the thing. I can go without a protective filter thrown in. It might even be better if they sell this separately so I know I can buy replacements and I realize many photographers prefer ‘naked’ glass. I just want Sony to support me by offering filters in their store. If they’re $200+ so be it. I paid close to $90 for a UV filter to protect my budget Tammy 200-500mm so you know I’m going to want to protect a lens costing over $3,000.
Sony can dump the metal trunk case and drop-in rear filters, too, for all I care. I’ll take the savings up front and decide later on accessories. Just be sure to stock them in their store.
I’d even go further on cost-cutting (if savings passed onto me) but people here would go nuts if I suggest stuff like dumping focus limiters and going more plastic. ;^)
I guess a better question is why would Sony design a pro-hearty lens of metal and weather sealed plus include some drop-in filters like NDs then not give you a filter to protect the glass on your many thousands of dollars purchase sporting an odd filter size?
Funny!
I hope the release of this lens doesn’t devalue my Minolta 400mm f/4.5 too much.
Why are you worried about value? You mean….you’d….(gulp) ever consider parting with such a fine lens? 😉
I know I wouldn’t ever part with mine!
Personally I’d love to see a 200/400 f4 with inbuilt 1.4x teleconverter (yep, like Canon) or a 70/400 f4 that doesn’t extend, exactly like the 70/200 f2.8.
Sure it will be kinda long, but not longer than the 70/400 f4/5.6 G fully extended, with a slightly bigger front lens.
I feel like, if they won’t release nice tilt-shift lenses and 400/2.8 600/4 they will never fully join the battle.
They cant fully join the battle when their army is so small. It’s a catch 22.
Canon and Nikon have enough of a customer base to make such lenses viable. Sony does not. If Sony developed such lenses, it would be an absolutely abysmal failure. A money pit. They may sell a dozen of each over the next 5 years. The reason; because they only have 5% of the market, they would have to charge an insane amount of money for them (not to mention they are SONY and feel they’re a premium brand). All of this would add up to a massive financial failure. You will never see this happen with today’s Sony.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t matter that Sony’s products are better and more forward thinking than the competition. The ONLY way Sony will ever join the battle is if Canon or Nikon screw up majorly and lose customers in high numbers, leaving an open void. Innovation and serious effort just wont cut it.
This lens (along with the 500mm f4) is a prestige lens. Something to show that Sony is capable of designing very high quality lenses.
Ultimately Canon and Nikon make tons of money on the consumer segment. People see pros using Nikon and Canon and because of that they buy the crappy beginner cameras of Nikon and Canon.
Agreed.
You know…I think you’re right. Unfortunately.
Not that you would ever by such a lenses, but an easy issue to make a pointless complaint.
I have the 400mm f/4.5, which is a antique by todays standards, but it delivers the goods even after 15 years of solid use.
Agree 100%. And I doubt any new 400/4 lens will have faster AF. The screw drive paired with the modern SLT’s is just lightning fast. You can feel the torque!
I comes with a price (noise), but they’re very durable. Its one of the few that hasn’t let me down. I recommend if for any A77 user.
They’ll likely be launching others. Sooner rather than later. The A77II should have sent a clear signal where Sony’s DSLR are headed in the next couple of years.
Sony doesn’t need to earn significant revenue from these lenses, as they are clearly, “HALO” products that generate more advertising/interest for the entire product line rather than profit.
Sony’s has the potential to succeed in Sports because SLTs don’t suffer from the restrictions of a reflex mirror. An even more advanced version of the A77II AF system will probably be integral to all future SLTs. The EVF, and fighter jet like lock-on flexible AF will ensure they can deliver the frame rates to succeed.
Sony SLT have the potential of being the fastest DSLRs on the market. Ideal for the Sporting environment. Sony is probably going to ensure that all FF Alpha A-Mounts deliver over 12fps burst rates. Even the entry level ones.
Now we just have to do is sit back and wait for the other two big lenses.
I disagree. With on-sensor phase detection autofocus, the SLT tech is no more relevant than reflex mirrors. Looking at bodies like the Canon 70D, that is the future and that is where Sony is going. It’s just a matter of time before the on-sensor AF for Sony surpasses SLT. The A6000 is almost there already.
You are comparing apples with oranges. The A6000 has lenses that focus different than A mount lenses (or any DSLR lens for that matter).
A better comparison would be the A99 which has 102 on sensor AF points. These points can’t help gain focus. Focus must be attained by using any of the 19 phase detect points. Only then the 102 sensor points help track focus. This tech works on a small fraction of the lenses available for the Sony A mount.
The A77 mk II on the other hand has 79 phase detect points. They work perfectly with almost 99% of all lenses ever designed for the A mount.
I would be more than happy when SLT tech goes but sensor phase detect points still have some way to go in the DSLR scope unfortunately.
SLT AF technology, is also evolving rapidly, and will likely remain well ahead of mirror-less, and will always remain the better choice for sports/action photography.
That is nonsense in light of other bodies on the market. I’ve shot both the A77mk2 and 70D, and while the A77 is shiny, the AF speed isn’t any better.
Really because I have used both and the A77II is a 21st camera that is much faster, and makes the 70d look like an antique.
A camera without an EVF is called obsolete.
And clearly you’re telling a fib. You’ve never used the A77II, or you’re insecure about the results of that test. There is no comparison between the A77II and the 70D.
I know, I HAVE used both. At a rally car event two weeks ago. Fast cars, tracking AF. The A77II AF speed absolutely demolishes the 70D in real life situations. My keeper rate with the A77II and 70-200/2.8GII was around 80%. The 70D and 70-200/28LII was round 50%.
Do I like the 70D? Sure, it’s a solid piece of kit. Just like the D7100 (which I’ve used more than the 70D). But I keep going back to the Sony – it just has it all.
” I’ve shot both the A77mk2 and 70D, and while the A77 is shiny, the AF speed isn’t any better.”
You clearly have not done so. Coming from the 7D and using both the 70D and A77II I know what I am talking about!
Your post has no point. My L glass works perfectly with the 70D. Sony can (and I believe will) produce a full frame sensor-based phase detection AF SLR-style body optimized for A-mount. It’s just a matter of when they acquire/design the tech. I’m anxiously awaiting that, as the A7 series is useless for action, and I need the depth of field of a FF sensor.
ROTFL……………
The 70D doesn’t have a EVF. Maybe we should go back steam engines too.
Other than shooting in the dark, exactly how does an EVF help me? Is it worth trading off the superior low light AF of my 6D and 70D for? And in low light/extreme dark, I’m perfectly fine shooting with the rear LCD on my 70D, especially for video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmgrSCJw_8s
Keep trying with those cheap shots. You come off as just a fanboi with no cross platform experience. There are lots of things I don’t like about my current gear. H*ll, I don’t much like Canon at all. But SLT is a dead end, and Sony has said as much.
Troll, your wrong
The A77II just hammered the 70D and D7100 in every review.
Troll
The A88, and A99II are going to extend that lead.
Clearly, you’ve never used the A77II or it’s EVF. Try it…and then come back and tell us what you think.
The 7D, 70D, and D7100 have been made obsolete by the A77II, in specs, performance, and image quality (including high ISO) whether you like it or not. The facts are the facts.
Manual focusing is a dream on a Sony EVF and a nightmare on a canon OVF. I regularly use both.
Minolta never made tilt-shifts, so it’s grim Sony will. However I have used the a7r with canon 17 and 24 ts- e lenses and it was much better than using them natively on a Canon thanks to focus peaking/magnification, higher res and built in wifi.
Schneider Kreuznach lenses can be bought fo A-mount with Tilt/Shift if you really want one.
PC-TS 2.8/50MM SONY ALPHA $4,192.00 EA
PC-TS 4.5/90MM SONY ALPHA $3,962.00 EA
https://www.schneideroptics.com/ecommerce/CatalogSubCategoryDisplay.aspx?CID=1822
a tiny lots cheaper that the 500/4… the price on that lens is nuts!
now you are talking .. need more of those super tele .. wish it was a 2.8 so we can use teleconverters on it better than f4
Personally I’d like to see Sony release a 105-600mm f/4 – 5.6 G. It would make a great addition to the G-Series Zooms, and build upon the success of the already excellent 70-400mm G or G2.
The 400mm f/4.0 sounds like a great idea but Minolta originally choose f/4.5 to keep the cost to their customers down.
If they were able to keep similar relative sharpness at the long end as the 70-400, such a lens would be an absolute winner, just like the 70-400. Even if they priced it at $3,500.
Really nice idea! +1
Minolta 400m f4 is selling for about $2,500 .. I expect this baby to be in the $6000 – $8000 range .. I will stick with the minoltas until I see a 400mm f2.8 maybe
I’m curious. Would you seriously consider a 400mm f/2.8 and much would you be willing to pay?
Well, now I have both minoltas 600mm f4 and 300mm f2.8 , if I have a 400mm 2.8 with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters it would be 560mm f4 and 800mm f5.6 that would make me sell my both lenses , i would pay aprox. $10,000.. What do you think the price would be ?
I’m impressed. Seriously!
I suspect it would be at least as much as the Sony 500mm. I base this on the fact it would be even bigger – likely over 10 lbs. – and even more specialized thus lower volume than the Sony 500mm. But I could be wrong about the volume because it would have fewer peers and could serve to attract new customers Sony’s way.
I’m outside looking in but I still can’t believe Sony can’t cheaply refresh the old Minolta great whites like you own and do limited runs – heck promote them as limited time offers and call it the classic line – and profitability cover their variable costs while offering them at prices mere mortals can afford.
updating the minolta line would be great, with better lens coating and focus motors.
having a Sony 400mm 2.8 is still a dream not even an (SR1) :/
I hope a 400mm f/2.8 is in the pipe, but its a little to early to tell.
I think the new FF will tell us more. If its burst rate is 12fps or better, with a deep buffer than the A77II then we’ll know Sony is getting serious about Pro Sports for once.
If Sony offers Sony Pro to North America and/or Europe then we know they intend on supporting a more professional cliental user base which normally includes Sports Photographers.
If the above two items (a very fast camera, and Sony Pro) arrive at Photokina then Sony is probably readying more large G-Series lenses.
I agree. I’m still using the 300mm f/2.8 APO (original and ancient), and the 400mm f/4.5 High Speed APO, and will continue operate both until Sony decides to sell lenses are realistic prices.
Sometimes I think they (Sony) don’t realize they are the incumbent, and their prices should be lowered in order to attract people to their platform (A-Mount).
Well, you make an interesting point I’ll give you that. If cost is key you can pick up an a7 and a canon 400mm 2.8….some not so expensive ones out there and pretty dang good. No one mentioned that option. Sure AF won’t be the best, but half the time I go in manual anyhow.
I already have Sony a7 , I need the 400mm for birds only and having a slow AF speed is not a very good idea for shooting birds.
I prefer using a Sony 70-300mm G with SSM than using a 400mm 2.8 with slow AF.
I was thinking to get a Canon or Nikon body with a super telephoto lens for birds only and keep my Sony gear for everything else, but I’m a spoiled Sony boy, I’m used to have EVF where I can make fast decision without taking my eyes away from EVF, I use focus peaking a lot , and many more reasons made me stick with Sony.
What’s the point? Just put a 1.4X on your 300/2.8
some people may want some reach…for ”less money” than a 300 f2.8. And I’m quite sure, you can put the same 1.4x tc and get af working while the 70-400 f4-5.6 can’t get af with TCs.
I’m not going to buy it since I already have the ”new” 70-400g2 but If I didn’t have a long telephoto, I would consider it over the 300f28g2 if it’s priced accordingly.
Now…if it is a 400 f2.8, that would make sense to some pro photogs. But for general consumers, the 400f4g seems like a nice option. Would like to see the 300f4 in production too.
I have no interest in the 300 f/4 but a quick refresh of the Minolta version would be a ‘budget’ option if your idea of budget is about $2,500.
I think the general idea is Sony is weak on teles. The new a77II is begging to be a sports and nature body but needs the glass. I’m glad Sony is developing a new 400mm but Minolta offered a big range of outstanding great whites which would be wonderful refreshed and boasting a Sony logo. I think its a cheap way to boost the Sony ecosystem to attract fresh blood.
I want a new 400mm because with a 2x teleconverter I’ll have an focal length of 800mm, and when mounted on the A77 or A77II I can squeeze and effective focal length of 1200mm
Its a pretty sweet focal length, and pretty popular because of its versatility, and low price.
That’s why I recommend the Minolta 400mm f/4.5 to all A77 users.
Because then I could put my 1.4X on my 400mm. ;^)
Darn this discussion thread is so much fun!
Where the heck are these lenses for the E-mount?? We’ve literally been waiting years now!!
And you’ll be waiting years more.
Sony has stated mulitple times they’re not planning on large primes or zooms for E-mount. 3rd party manufacturers are not either. The longest/largest native E lens that exists is the 70-200/f4 and the Rokinon 300mm mirror lens. You are expected to use A-mount lenses with EA adapters.
If you dont believe me, just wait a few years and you’ll see. They’re not going to make big honkin’ lenses for their compact camera line. Aint gonna happen.
I can’t see that happening either. Sony is clearly pumping out the wide to mild tele lenses for the E-mount, and completely avoiding anything longer than 200mm. So I tend to agree with you – we wont see long lenses for native E-mount anytime soon. Adapters and imagination is where it’s at…lol.
Yup. The biggest market for GBLs (great big lenses) is A-Mount owners, and to make them in E-Mount would cut out most of the customer base. On the other hands, E-Mount camera owners have the option to use adapters.
After all, Leica don’t exactly major on massive lenses for their compact M-Mount cameras.
maybe when sony ready to make big body mirrorless camera with good AF speed and tracking, they will make long tele lens for it
You mean like the Leica APO-Telyt-R 1600 mm f/5.6 for $2M and 60KG thats massive enough.
Thought its probably special order =)
That lens wasn’t made for the M-Mount, but for Leica’s R mount.
I’m fairly sure that anybody with $2m to spare could have a similar spec lens made for E-Mount although, like R-Mount, it’s most likely going to be fully manual.
Maybe A7 series owners might want to fit this lens (if they can get an adapter), which is 1700mm at f4. I wonder if there are any on eBay?
http://www.gizmag.com/go/6147/picture/26997/
It has nothing to do with Leica. It wasn’t an option for Leica before the new M because nobody could focus such a long lens on that viewfinder, and large wides would obstruct too much of the viewfinder. Now that Leica’s turning luxury it would focus on street, again neglecting the need for telephotos. That’s why they didn’t make “massive lenses”.
Sony is different. I could see a camera like the a7s shooting Olympics with the proper optics, doing at least as good a job as the competition. I’m for Sony dumping A-mount and focusing on E-mount in the next few years.
Fortunately for A-Mount owners, Sony are unlikely to undermine their current investment in the way that you would so in such a cavalier manner.
nb. such a think would be disastrous for customer relationships. I Sony were to treat customers in such a manner, they I’d see a lot of people moving because could they trust Sony for future support?
Sony “undermined its current investment” by dumping VAIO. It’s called asset optimization. Sony can’t afford to split its resources on old dying tech, or it’ll ruin the imaging division like Trinitron ruined the TV division. Of course for current investors they could come up with a better adaptor that works much better than the current ones, even without the mirror, it’s only electronics after all, but I’m saying that in the end, they dump the bodies and the mount. E- mount can then have IBIS.
There’s a world of difference between a company pulling out of a market completely and writing off its own investment (sunk money anyway) and doing so to customer’s investments. Those TVs and laptops will still keep working until they are due for replacement. There’s no “systems investment” by the customer. They just replace the item with something newer when the time comes. No big deal.
I’ll agree that most development will be on E-Mount, simply because it’s virtually impossible to supplant Nikon or Canon in the DSLR market, largely due to the customer investments in those systems.
If/when Sony come up with an attractive migration route for A-Mount users, then there might come a time when A-Mount lens development can be ceased. However, for the medium term it makes no sense to develop large lenses for E-Mount only as optics dictate that such a lens will be virtually the same size as the equivalent A-mount lens with adapter (such big, long-focal length lenses can’t exploit short flange distances to any advantage).
I need a portrait lens on a 85mm E mount and not 2.8
All lenses on E are dark and not worth the money that they ask for
I’m ready to demand that every topic,….
…..until Sony give me normal portrait lens on E 🙂
Keep dreaming, the best you’ll see on the e-mount is a f/2.0
pump your ISO, it will be no dark anymore :p
ISO does not change the depth of field 🙂
I just don’t get why very expensive lenses are coming out that is out of reach for most of the consumers. Why not upgrade some of the old but reliable lenses such as SAL-1118 or SAL-70300G, both of which were created more than 6 years ago…
SAL 11-18 have to be upgrade, 10-24mm/4 apsc or 14-24mm/2.8 full frame would be great. and 35mm/1.4 and 85mm 1.4, 135mm/1.8 need upgrade too with SSM and weather seal.
I’d like a 70300 with weather sealing, and SSM II. The optics don’t need to be messed with, cause they’re already outstanding.
The 11-18mm is a joke, and should be buried and forgotten. A weather-sealed and SSM equipped 10-18mm f/3.3 (or better) lens should be designed for the A77, A77II with a build quality similar to the outstanding 16-50mm
lol ive got the 11-18mm it might not be perfect, but its a useful lens on occasions.
That said an updated 8-22 or somethng would be nice =)
SONY PLEASE MAKE A-MOUNT LENS 200mm F/2.0 SSM AND WEATHER SEALED
Here is an example of what can already be done with an old used Sony 300mm f/2.8 and a 1.4 TC, when placed on the A77ii like it was for this photo. It gives an effective 35mm focal length of 420mm at f/4. I guess the rumored lens would provide more reach but at what price? Don’t need it.
[url=https://flic.kr/p/onDvXd][img]https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5577/14684815214_84c2b9b9d0_b.jpg[/img][/url][url=https://flic.kr/p/onDvXd]_DSC3299[/url] by [url=https://www.flickr.com/people//]david.debar[/url], on Flickr
Very nice Dave. Not sure about your math though. A 300mm lens on a crop body gives a 450mm equivalent. Add a 1.4X TC should come out to 630mm Equivalent. Am I wrong? Of course one way to save money is to buy a Canon 7D MKII (hypothetical) and a 400mm f5.6 and get a 600mm equivalent for around $3000. Hmmmmmm
or just buy a A77 or A77II, and a 70-400g or g2 like the rest of us
Your right James. I forgot to multiply by the APS-C factor. Wow, 630mm @ f/4.
Ya know, I did not do the math. I just pulled the data from the info tab on the Aperture program. I just looked at it again. It says it’s 630mm (35mm equivalent) @ f/4.
Beautiful photo. Puts me to shame. I get the 300mm + 1.4X works great as a combo and actually gains another 20mm (35mm equivalent) at the same speed of the 400 f/4.
However, I can use my 1.4X on the new 400mm f/4 and reach to 560mm. Maybe you don’t need it but I need the extra reach because my 200-500mm Tamron doesn’t cut it.
Not to mention the 300 f/2.8 will probably be heavier and, while this is all speculation, is likely to be more expensive (certainly not cheaper with a Sony 1/4X teleconverter priced in the mix).
Great phot but you can also say this is possible with a 300mm f4 tokina and a teleconverter. The 400 is appealing because it’s not to big and used with a teleconverter offers quite a. It more reach than the 300.
I’m not familiar with that tokina lens. When I want both long reach and a light load, I mount my old trusty 500mm f/8 Sony reflex lens on my A77M2. It’s so small the NFL lets me bring it into the game and I take photos like this. Talk about a choke hold. “I can’t breath!”
https://flic.kr/p/oTgcfN
Hi Dave,
Hopefully you’re still following this thread. Do you get fast/reliable AF performance from the A77ii with 300 2.8 + 1.4TC? Could you, say, track that hummingbird with that combo?
I just bought my A77ii, and now I’m trying to decide between getting a 300 2.8 + 1.4TC now, or waiting for a 400 f/4 to materialize. I’m going mostly for songbirds and kingfishers.
Forget about tracking with lenses that long! You must spot the bird when it’s still, or better yet anticipate an area where the bird will fly through. You can use “AF range limiting” built into the camera or this particular lens. I find the AF range limiting built into my 300mm f/2.8 lens works better then the same function built into the camera.
I have recently read that with the new Firm Ware ver. 2 upgrade to A77II this lens focuses twice as fast! I have no idea how one would measure that?
A couple months ago I was photographing wild ELK using that lens and the 2X TC. I was surprised how well it worked. I was with two friends, both using Nikon cameras and long zooms. They were both excellent photographers, but gave up because the game was out of range. I captured very good images.
The vignetting in the Elk Photo was added in PP to draw the eye to the topic.
https://flic.kr/p/pcZdpt
Forget about tracking, eh? I was afraid you’d say that! Perhaps the issue is less relevant than I thought anyway, since any small bird I frame up while he’s perched will usually flick out of my viewfinder faster than I can push any button.
If the best approaches are combinations of prefocusing, single-AF, and MF, then I suppose it’s meaningless to fret about differences in AF speed between a 300mm + 1.4TC combo and an as-yet hypothetical 400 f/4?
Loved those last 2 hummingbird shots, by the way! I assume they were also made with the same camera/lens combo? The detail in the last image is especially nice. Is it cropped at all?
If by “tracking” you mean moving the camera to follow the bird in flight with a 300mm lens mounted on the A77M2 body, and focusing, yes forget about it. I’d also forget about manually focusing on a bird in flight. The auto-focus can focus much quicker than I can, but once focused the camera can track the bird for a short distance. I never know what part of the the camera will focus on. I just hope the DOF will encompass enough of the subject. Yes the bottom two photo are full frame. Both hummer pics were taken with 300mm 1.4 X TC combo.
I’m attaching another elk photo taken with just the 300mm lens at f/2.8 shutter speed 1/200, ISO=3200. I squatted on a log and rested the lens on my knees. The light was very dim, late in the day. No TC used this time.
https://flic.kr/p/oQ3j4m
to keep the overall form factor small for an A7, the max aperture has to be relatively conservative, otherwise, you will have such a large lens on a tiny body, you might as well keep the larger DSLR and have the more capable lenses you desire for full frame.. it’s the trade off and the science and limitations to optics.. you want fast for full frame, you’re going to get a bigger lens, want to keep it smaller and more manageable, you’ll have to step down in max aperture.
there are options out there, just adapt what you want to the A7 body and you’ll have the lens you want, but don’t kid yourself into believing it will be smaller than what is possible.
I think rangefinder lenses for Leica (and the sort) are the best options to get a fast lens that is small as possible, but you will not have AF nor will zooms be possible.
This is wrong. A save is a save. Even no reduction on the size of optics doesn’t necessarily mean there can’t be a reduction on the size of the body.
Besides, shrinking the maximum aperture isn’t the optimal way of size reduction for Sony’s optics. You already see that the FE55/1.8 is the size of some 50/1.4s from other brands, and the FE 35/2.8 is the size of Contax’s 35/2. What needs shrinking is the electronics and housing. More integration, more chips and less PCB, less plastic and more metal.
Good thing this is coming before World Cup 2014… I mean 2018…
I think 9/10 grands will do for this lens.
The positive thing about it, is that I do not have any use for such a lens. 😉
Sony needs to create a low interest loan program (financial stimulus program) for Sony’s Professional Sports Photographers (similar to car loans). It should be integral part of the Sony Pro program.
It would provide photographers an accessible low interest route to lenses that would be normally out of reach. Maybe a hand full of Canon or Nikon users would switch to the A-Mount due to purely financial reasons.
It would kick-start the Sony Sports Photography program, and get these lenses into the hands of those who make a living using them. The exposure alone would make the endeavour worthwhile.
Sony would sell more of these lenses, and their price would drop substantially. All of us would be better off because of it.
If Sony Pro offered low interest loans, I’d enrol, and immediately pick-up the 500/4 (providing the price dropped due to more being constructed). Full support, and preferential customer pricing would be key.
Plus they should really provide upgrades. So if a new AF (SSM III) motor is developed then all of us paying off the previous models should be offered an upgrade.
I’d do it. The company I work for gives me an allowance for equipment, so I’d just apply it to the “notional” Sony Pro Program.
Sony should go a step further and offer lens rentals. So even if you couldn’t afford a 500mm then you’d still have a chance at using one. Cause some jobs call for lenses none of us can afford outright.
Sony pro sports photographers wear Sony vests and use Canon cameras and lenses (see the football worldcup).
Where is the officially annouced but not yet officially announced e mount 16-35 f4!?!?
The reality is the perfect lens but it kills me knowing I just can’t afford that. I could do a few thousand but that is it.
They should have kept the Minolta 400mm f/4.5 in production. If they managed to put it back in production it’d probably out sell this lens 10 to 1.
It (400/4.5) is an outstanding lens that provides excellent performance levels at a price that was manageable. It was also much lighter than a typical 400mm f/4.5.
The lens was very popular, and should they ever return it to production it would probably sell well.
I still own one, and I doubt that I’ll be upgrading to this newer 400mm.
A 400mm f/4.5 would be worth about two or three thousand less than a 400mm f/4.0. A 400/4.5 would likely have better IQ (like the original did), they’re lighter, and the original was very popular.
A 400mm f/4.5 (based on the Minolta 400mm f/4.5 HS APO) should also be sold alongside the 400mm f/4.0 for those of us who would prefer a less expensive, and lighter lens with better IQ.
There is zero reason why a 400mm f4 will be less sharp than a 400mm f4.5. In fact the converse is probably true.
The issue is considering used Minolta 300mm f2.8 sell for about $2500 which is what the 400mm f4.5 sells at the Sony version is probably going to cost about the same as a Sony 300mm f2.8 which is anything but affordable.
I basing my opinion off of the 15 years of experience I’ve had with the 400mm f/4.5 I currently own. Here’s a quick review on the lens to keep you busy.
http://www.mhohner.de/sony-minolta/apo400.php
I have already read that. Do read this one too if you haven’t already. –
http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/comparision-test-sony-70400-vsminolta-400mm-f45_topic46212.html
Any real differences between the two lenses are minute. One may prefer the softer rendering of the Minolta 400mm but otherwise they are very comparable lenses.
And the Sony 70-400mm works fine with AF using a Kenko 1.4x TC.
I’ve always wanted one, but the going prices on ebay are outrageous. 2400.00 seems to be the norm. So, I went with a Tokina 300mm atx pro f4. Tried the 500 reflex but it didn’t do it for me. The fact that you own one is impressive….not a lot out there.
I like the orange ring, much prettier than Pentax’s green.
Not gonna happen! Should be SR 1 😉
Not-So-Stellar
Olympus broke the news along time ago. On time for the A99II launch. I can hear the e-trolls, already whining/squealing.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-the-400mm-f4-0-lens-will-be-the-first-designed-with-olympus/
He’s just another victim of A7 denial. It must really hurt knowing the A99II release date is just around the corner, and the A7’s time in the spotlight is officially over.
The new Flag-Ship is Coming and it is definitely not mirror-less
The upcoming releases of the A88, A99II 400/4, 85/1.4, 135/1.4 should send a positive signal to all Alpha users.
What launch??? Did we not learn on this site that the A99 will continue to be sold (until kingdom come presumably).
Well, it’s only rated an SR2 so aren’t we really quibbling?
The reason for excitement isn’t some out-of-the-blue anonymous dribble but because it revives an older, more dependable SR4 rumor regarding a collaboration with Olympus.
Sincerely I prefer an f4,5 like the old minolta or better a great f5,6 like the canon lens, sharp and light and so expensive.
With the 500f4 the 400 f4 has no sense (too much expensive)
I believe the Sony 70-400mm is about as good as the Minolta 400mm f4.5 (but of course 2/3rd slower). So a 400mm f5.6 prime is not really going to make a whole lot of sense.
This is unfortunately a niche lens in Sony land. 🙁
I like the idea of Sony producing a 105-600mm F/4-5.6. It would essentially be an
unscaled version of the current 70-400mm.
Unfortunately such a lens would be terribly large. 🙁
The current 70-400mm f5.6 already has a 77mm filter thread.
A zoom lens ending in 600mm will be really really large.
Should be somewhat similar to the Canon 200-400mm f4.
http://www.cameraegg.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Canon-EF-200-400mm-f-4L-IS-USM-Extender-1.4x.jpg
I’d be comfortable with that. The 105-600mm f/4-5.6 would probably only end up being only a pound or two more.
It would sell very well.
Its a Sony lens. If the Sony 300mm f2.8 or 500mm f4 is any consideration such a lens will be pretty expensive.
The 70-400mm f4-5.6 is already $2500 or so. This lens offering 200mm extra focal length while keeping the max aperture at 5.6 isn’t going to be very cheap to make like the Canon 200-400mm f4. Any lens selling for around $4000 or more isn’t going to sell well at all at least in Sony land.
400f4 DO will make sens 😉 2kg 23cm like the canon 😉
No IS, no point. Who are they aiming this lens at??? People with more money than sense!!! Sigma will show them how to do it, soon. Unfortunately not in A-Mount.
Hi, how long must I wait? No news since 2014 :S