[shoplink 300350 ebay]
[/shoplink]
Multiple sources told us Zeiss will announce new lenses in mid-October (that’s a 100% reliable info)
[poll id=”238″]
–
To not miss any rumor quickly subscribe our social network:
RSS feed: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/feed/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sonyalpharumors
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SonyAlphaRumors
GooglePlus: https://plus.google.com/104216500156717934391/posts
And if you have some “rumor” to share just send me an anonymous messages here:
[contact-form-7 id=”14822″ title=”Share”]
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!
93 Responses
F2.8? So, even the Loxia line won’t be kept small?
if it a LOT lighter than Voigtlander Ultron 21mm f/1.8 it’s a winner.
Otherwise my Ultron is nearly perfect
I remember it had crazy field curvature?
Acceptable for what it is – a very fast UWA lens with a 58mm filter thread, all metal and 412 grams.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/08/some-m-mount-field-curvatures
Where is the wide angle Otus that was supposed to be announced?
It may, but is that really a problem? I mean I always thought that for landscapes it is used stopped down with infinite depth of field so FC is a non issue. For close ups you would want just a portion of the image to be sharp anyways and the rest will be blurred out. I may be overlooking something though.
Well, if you do a close-up and your subject, as well as the two sides of the frame…is in focus, then you know you have a problem.
You’re totally right, mentioned first in 3d-kraft.com.
I am OK with this “problem” , it has beneficial side-effects, many times I need the center focused AND the corners focused far behind !! (I use it for filming dances in Low-light).
Also at f/2.8 the problem is almost disappeared.
So when I need perfect sharpness I just close the aperture a little.
When I need Low-light performance I open it.
Simple, isn’t it ?
Check these photos I just made, 1st at f/2 2nd at f/2.8
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/pn4bxdxktiiryqh/AADts7M48gNOl9pGuT3KxJ4Ua?dl=0
You sure it’s field curvature? Looks more like corner smearing, wich starts at the edge already…
Doubtful. Zeiss always make relatively big lenses.
Maybe, if they fix that vignetting…but considering the biogon design that would probably be wishful thinking.
———–
I mean the natural vignetting of the lens, not the sensor problem, biogon has bad vignetting as it is.
The new version is going to be chipped so they will correct vignetting in RAW xD
Yes i heard VW is hired for this
That is only for the Diesel version (Canon..)
Jesus Christ Sony enough with the Zeiss!!!! You haven’t even got your own affordable 35 yet!!
This lens has nothing to do with Sony.
Jesus Christ either
the 35 2.8 is no affordable?
Its also too slow.
Sony should ideally come up with a cheaper 35mm f2 lens which is bigger and slightly less corrected than the Zeiss.
Something around $450 where the 28mm f2 lies is good.
If the performance is similar to the 28mm then that’s all anyone can ask.
https://fstoppers.com/originals/irrational-reasons-buy-800-35mm-f28-lens-86428
Thats a pretty good article and honestly I am not badgering the 35mm on its price. I am badgering it on its speed.
I shoot weddings in low light and currently I am using a Minolta 35mm f1.4 with an adapter.
I frequently shoot at f1.4 and ISO 1600.
Stopping down to f2.8 means I need to bump up the ISO to 6400 which is really the max acceptable IQ i can get from my A7.
I can live with an f2 lens and I am seriously considering either the new Tamron 35mm f1.8 A mount lens or the Sony 28mm f2.
I find the 28mm a bit too wide but I know its stupid for Sony to come out with a 3rd 35mm anytime soon so mostly I will bite the bullet and get the 28mm f2 only.
I agree that Sony should bring out more cheap lenses like the 28/2 but I understand why that is not their priority right now. 99% of the budget shooters will go for a 6D or D610 with Sigma lenses anyway.
And tbh I’d push for Sony to release more lenses like the 35/2.8. Sure it is expensive, but is also tiny (like a m43 lens) and IQ is top notch.
Where did you get such data from ? 😛
I know a lot of A7 users who bought it when it went to $995. However they are using only MF lenses as they simply can’t afford any of the Zeiss lenses.
If there were a cheap 50mm f2 for $400 it would sell well I feel and provide a good bait to bring people into the system. RIght now aside from the very slow kit lens and the very wide 28mm f2 there are no other affordable lenses.
H*ll no! For a 35/2.8 it is outrageously priced. Any 35/2.8 I have had my hands on was great optically and all of them, except the Leica Elmarit and the Zeiss ZM C-Biogon, were affordable, most in the lowest price range of the manufacturer. The price for the Zeiss 35/2.8 (both, FE and ZM versions) is insane.
So why the elmarit and the ZM is fine? this lens is better.
I disagree, read this.
https://fstoppers.com/originals/irrational-reasons-buy-800-35mm-f28-lens-86428
He thinks RX 35/2 lens can be adapted to E-mount. How ignorant… No, it cannot, just as E-mount design cannot be adapted to DSLR
Exactly as the others have said, what would make this system appealing to me is more affordable Sony branded fast primes like the 28mm. I would get the 35 2.8, but only because there’s absolutely no choice.
They did the same thing with APSC, if you want a 35mm equiv you need to get the overpriced Zeiss which has no OSS. Why anyone would think that lens is worth $250 more than the 35 OSS is beyond me, and it is irritating that Sony think that premium (overpriced) Zeiss lenses mean they are off the hook at that focal length.
Nice article. If you like that lens for the described reasons, you have ZERO alternatives. There is no other compact 35mm with AF for Sony FE. So, if you want it, you have to pay that price. But that doesn’t change the fact, that this price is insane.
Austin Rogers admits that in his article:
“…But the idea of paying north of $800 for a f/2.8 prime that has exactly zero bells or whistles is bordering on insanity….”
Nothing else I said.
And yes, a lens developed in 2014 should be optically better than all the other 35/2.8 lenses developed decades ago, WITHOUT skyrocketing the price.
BTW: My next camera will almost certainly be the A7S and I will definitely buy the Zeiss 35mm/2.8 for it.
A7s and 35/2.8 – perfect everyday combo.
Have it with me every day 🙂
No it is not, 700 for an f/2.8 prime is not what I call affordable. Canon 35 f/2 is 550, Nikons 35 1.8 is 600… Without having first hand experience with either I would bet they beat the sony stopped down to 2.8.
you can get one used in mint condition for about 500.00 or so and I doubt those lenses are sharper even stopped down.
Ah yes, the ‘you can get one for’ price.
Again, read it slow: a 35mm lens with a zoom like aperture of f/2.8 for $500… used…
it must be a joke right? 😀
All of the sony FE lenses are overpriced by 15-20%.
Are you saying that Jesus would shoot Sony? Are we talking about the historical Jesus or the biblical figure?
WWJS- What Would Jesus Shoot.
Price?
Where is my batis 135
To be honest. I was hoping for a 18 mm f.3,5/4,0 instead. Mainly because 21mm is to close to 25 mm Batis. And if i get a 21mm, then i need something wider. If they released a 18mm, then i did not have to think about a wider lens.
Was thinking the same thing, it would have been nice if they went a little wider on this lens
They will complement the line later with Voigtländer 15, I guess.
I wish Voigtländer would launch a Loxia-alike FE-mount line. Those lenses would sell.
I’m eyeing their development, with VM adapter those lenses are even more interesting!
This is what i call interesting
Gigg….a…tty!
It has corner issues, at least on the A7r.
we now have a moderate wide angle 35mm, wide angle 21 mm and there will still be a place for a future super wide angle, maybe a 16-18mm.
There might also be a space for a 24-28mm Loxia, regardless of the Batis 25, which is another target group and it’s 3 times the size and weight of the Loxias.
In long term the Loxia selection could be as big as the Zeiss range for Leica Mount. The order of release might not satisfy everyone, as everyone has different taste
Actually, the Batis weighs the same as the Loxias and is not even twice as big.
Dont agree with you here. To close to a 25mm. Ofcourse if you then only think about Loxia lenses. The 21 mm is a good choice.
But me. I only use manuell lenses up to 25 mm. So i was hoping of this line up.
18mm, 25mm,35mm, 55mm, and 85mm.
Instead i now has to go for 15mm, 21mm, 25mm, 35mm, 55mm, and 85mm. But then again. I may then drop the 25mm. Because 25 and 21 is pretty close when it comes to focal length
Exactly!
Photoberger, my thoughts exactly. I too was hoping for a ƒ3.5 18mm for the same reasons you give. Hopefully an 18mm will come later.
That would be nice!
For such high price points, reliance on In-camera or post correction is not a mark of great optical design. These new lenses are regurgitated designs as it is, not improvements or advancements per se with classic aberrations and other faults ever present. I’ll stick to my legacy glass that equals the speed and often has less corrections needed.
Zeiss is opening the door to competitors for offering good alternatives to their premium lines. Something will have to give…
18mm would be nice, but the Loxia line (and Batis for photogs) is one of the best reasons to buy the Sony E-Mount system for videographers.
For any kind of grapher !
Agreed! Though, I heavily favor mechanical focus (over fly-by-wire) for video – not that many options for mechanical focus in the native lens lineup, so Loxia is my jam.
The ZM 21 2.8 Biogon is like $1500, makes me worried about the price of the Loxia. They are usually $200-300 over ZM prices
I have a hunch the Loxia 21mm will be priced the same as the ZM. To be honest, I think we will see few if any new ZM designs in the future. The Loxias and the Batis’s are the new “rangefinder” lenses in the Zeiss catalogue.
That’s…cheap.
I hope so, because I intend to buy it. 🙂
lolol
I agree, leica is pretty much a thing of the past… i don’t think there is growth in that market anymore
Man I love being right. 😀
I think I will wait to get my batis lenses before I think of buying any more Zeiss lenses. Backordered since July.
They are worth the wait. I pre-ordered them a few days after the announcement and received them at the beginning of August.
I am glad to hear that and I hope to get them soon.
Good news!
The tiny 4.5/21 C Biogon would be equally nice. If the Loxia is meant as a hiker’ camera, such a lens would be all a landscape photographer wants. Extreme resolution and IQ.
I hope the Loxia-line will be completed over time as an equivalent to the ZM-line. Good times for photographers!
*Yawn*
17
18?
25/2, wish they wouldn’t limit themselves to just ZM designs.
Absolutely. The batis design in Loxia would be awesome.
Hmm…nah, I have this thing for 17. I think for wide it’s about perfect. Tried 14- to much . Tried 18-24….17….ahhhh…..just right.
Could we settle for 17.8?
I could do 17.5 but it would stretch resources a bit…
Indeed…
21/2.8 ZM is only 258 grams. If they put more plastic into it it could be about 200 grams.
The 35mm ZM and 50mm ZM are respectively 240g and 230g, while the Loxias are 340g and 320g. There is clearly some optimization going on and the materials and special aperture also prob add to it. I would imagine the 21mm would be easily around 400g. Very nice, but same as the other Loxias, kind of heavy.
For comparison, consider the Voigtlander 50mm 1.5 (lighter version) with the close focus adapter at 220g+125g. Or, the 35mm 1.7 Ultron (lighter version) at 238g+125g. Similar in weight and price, but faster (and more flexible thanks to the adapter).
Oh, and the CVs will prob be better.
I didn’t know the Loxias are so much heavier than ZM versions…. puzzled.
21mm Loxia = instant buy.
21mm check, f2.8 check, manual focus check… This one is mine! Pricetag and preorder button nex, then: click… ?
I also hope Zeiss sticks with the same 52mm filter size like they have for the other two existing Loxias.
Only 7cm long or so. Not bad at all, actually.
Indeed the 25/2 Batis is sized quite nicely. Spectacular IQ too.
Unfortunately Loxia is yesterday already, Batis is the first true response to Sigma’s challenge.
Better on thin glass camera or Sony A7? The Loxia designs are modified to take account of Sony sensor cover glass in account, but not CVs.
On both.
Here’s a test of the 50mm on the a7r.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52816324
And the 35mm on the a7 (and there is a newer version of this lens, but I don’t know if it is any different).
http://phillipreeve.net/blog/voigtlander-ultron-11-7-35-mm-review/
https://www.talkemount.com/threads/2665/
I hope sony release a wide FE lens (16-18) like FE 28 and FE 55.
this should have been a 15mm or at least 18mm
i bet half those 8 fe lenses are just niche lenses like this. I don’t need or want manual primes. Got enough of those. Want some supertelephotos, fast zooms, faster primes
what about the otus wide angle?
Might not be a Biogon. I’m guessing its a new design to optimise for the short flange in the A7 series. That is important for digital sensors.
I like this. I had this lens for M mount but didn’t work as well for Sony so I traded it in. No distortion, perfect sharpness. I don’t like focus by wire because it’s useless for video so I’ll buy this. super 35 mode in 4k means I lose a lot of width, so 21mm is better than the 25mm Batis. Also, 21mm is better for interiors and architecture, something I still do a fair amount of.
Was this a failed rumor? Was it the Milvus that came out instead? I sure do hope a 21mm Loxia is announced.