(Image Source: DC.watch).
If you were wondering about the new Zeiss 16-35mm f/4.0 FF E-mount lens I have some news: A source told me the new Zeiss wide angle zoom would be released in late August/early September. And like I already told you before price range is the same of the other Zeiss 24-70mm FE lens. Price check in USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. And in Europe at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT (Click on country name to see the lens site).
—
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
I hope this lens is really up to scratch as a landscape shooter combining my A7r with a good 16-35 could be a major winner. I must say I have my doubts so far we have one excellent prime the 55mm , one decent prime the 35mm F2.8 , and some distinctly mediocre zooms . I have been quite disappointing in the 24-70 OSS that I paid near a £1000 for.
The 70-200mm FE is a very good lens!
Compared to the Nikon 70-200mm F4 {on D800e } it
has significantly lower sharpness, a bit poorer transmission, vignette and CA while having a tad better distortion. I think previous tests compared to lower MP
cameras have flattered to deceive.
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-70-200mm-F4G-ED-VR-on-Nikon-D800E-versus-Sony-FE-70-200mm-F4-G-OSS___1071_814_1246_0
Just use the lens and stop reading Dxomark tests…
Lol, well said. The FE is a great lens – I challenge anyone to consistently pick the Nikon from peeping pixels, let alone a printout up to 24″ by 36″. I wasn’t happy at all with the 24-70 and sent it back, but the 70-200 is sweet.
Spoken like someone who reads too many reviews…..It is an excellent lens!
And shipping in 2015
And still no product photo of the lens?
It is there. Since it uses folding optics, it is so tiny that it is masked by the blue Zeiss logo which is the biggest selling point. 😉
Thanks admin 🙂
So, we’re halfway 2014 already and Sony still has to churn out 5 lenses due for this year? Either these lenses must be spectacular or there’s a shortage of optics engineers…
Everything not being announced yet will likely not come anymore in 14.
Only chance would be if they wait to announce with a big-boom-bang together with a new high end body.
Just my opinion.
Crosses fingers that optically it’ll be at least on par with the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8
And how much are you willing to pay? WATE price or more…..
Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 is no where near WATE price, and this is a 16 at widest and f/4, why would it be priced at WATE or higher?
there is a reason for the WATE to be at that price beside being a Leica…
small
nice build quality
nice image quality
and its like three prime lenses made in one
Considering the same factory and the same team designing it, I doubt that it will match the Nikon 1424. Besides its proneness to flare (and for UW expected distortions at the wide end) it has minimal flaws.
With uwa lenses extreme corners certainly have more significance. So if Sony does not get proper quality here, they will disappoint FE owners again.
I own the 1635ZA, and its not perfect in this cathegory. But at least stopped down the corners become more than acceptable.
Lol, yes on par with the best one out there. I wish Carmelo Anthony would play at least on par with LeBron James.
Nikkon 14-24 is junk compared to this new Super Sony Zeiss! I know, because I am the chief of the local Sony photo club.
where is my OSS FE prime lens? they don’t care prime lens for video shooters?
You’re only going to get oss on Sony primes, unfortunately – Zeiss has said on several occasions that they won’t include oss in primes…
He didn’t mention Zeiss. Learn to read.
A Metabones smart adapter allows use of Canon stabilized lenses, though I’m not sure there are many prime options with IS below 200mm.
Released or announced in August or September? I gave up on Sony and just picked up the new Canon 16-35 f4 IS, which is brilliant, but a bit large, now I’m wondering to return it and wait?
Yes, me too, same situation. Now Andrea tells us that the Sony UWA comes right when I fly into vacation start of Sep. I guess I keep the Canon + Metabones. Better to lose 200 Euros on the slightly used Canon at Ebay’s than have no UWA at all, that’s what I say. And the Sony would still have to be as good as the Canon for me to keep it – the Canon is really the best zoom with that range I’ve ever used.
I believe that it will be only ANNOUNCED at Photokina…
I guess release at the end of the year…
Every time I see these F/4s my heart sinks a bit.
To be fair, Sony’s approach has been very consistent with e-mount – they’re prioritising size over speed, with adaptors if you want to faster zooms and primes…
I really can’t see the point of making big lenses into 80% of their size and losing valuable stops in the process.
A lot of people, including pros, are using uwa zooms for landscape photography where 2.8 is not needed and stabilization is a more useful feature. Also modern sensors are very capable of compensating the single stop loss in aperture with a stop increased iso when shooting people or moving subjects (2.8 vs 4).
The A7 must remain compact otherwise there is the A99II for those who want fast 2.8 zooms.
http://photobyandrei.wordpress.com/
It’s the A7 that should remain compact. And some lenses where compactness is desirable as a lens+camera combo. Not all lenses need to be small. 24-70 doesn’t have to be small.
If you are perfectly fine mounting a 3 pound lens on a 1 pound body then you can use a 300g adapter to use such lenses.
Well the lens + camera will not enter a jacket pocket anyway, so why not making it f/2.8 then !
some people do other things than landscape and what Pro’s do, don’t you think so?
Then the A7 family is not for you, go with A-mount 😉
You don’t need a lens to be large for it to be fast. Look at a lens like the M-Rokkor 40/2 which works splendid on the A7 – tiny. No AF but that would just add girth, not length.
Any educated guesses how big/heavy the lens will be?
If it’s around 600g and has decent IQ this would make me buy into the FE-system…
Ive been very critical of the video performance in Sony’s DSLRs in the past in this forum. Congratulations Sony for finally getting it right – getting it way,way right with your groundbreaking, gamechanging camera – THE A7S – that kills everything else out there including the venerable Blackmagic Camera. DSLR video has NEVER LOOKED THIS GOOD before or anywhere else. Even the guys at RED need to take notice, who needs a Scarlet with the A7S out there, WOW! You got the world’s attention now. If this camera is you foundation for the future count me in!!!
“DSLR video has NEVER LOOKED THIS GOOD”, that’s what the low resolution A7S sensor is made for, isn’t it. It would be sad if it was not doing the job the way it does. In the future it just can get better. But, this does not excuses Sony to not “waste” time on doing hyperfast primes, 7 and 7R and APSC sensor exist as well. This F4 game gets annoying.
so the large aperturze zeiss priem and the sony g macro and the unknown lens will be released/abnounced in late decmeber or what???
Tume is runnign out sony we need lenses, lenses, lenses…..youre buyiyng not one or two cmas …youre buying into a system…..
oly, fuji, pana, nikon and canon looking much much better despite less innovating, the latter big two at least…probably too big to fail….;)
still no overall leading cam system out there….within every system you have to take a pill at least….;)
What? Did you count the lenses Canon released for the EOS M system!?!? There are 4 lenses available – after two years!!
And did you count how many lenses Fuji released initially for the X system? 3!
It is completely normal that NEW systems need to be built in years, and that is the case for all those you listed.
Seriously? How many more wide angle F4 zooms do we need. Very boring lens announcements following on the heels of exciting cameras.
What sense do huge F2.8 zooms make on a small camera? If you want that, there are great A mount lenses out there that work in full effect. It is good and correct that Sony and Zeiss not just copy the DSLR/SLT lens market.
Visually, they don’t. But for imaging needs, an F2.8 on a small camera makes a lot more sense than a F4 on a small camera.
I am a nikon user waiting 2.8 and prime lenses to jump in. If hey dont, they will loose a lot of customers.
I hear that. For me to totally switch from Nikon to Sony, I’ll need comparable Nikon lenses. I see too many overpriced slow variable aperture lenses, as well as a lack of primes. I like my A6000, but I want to see Sonys with better builds and more lens and flash options at competitive prices.
Never heard of mount adapters? Keep your Nikon lens and use them on Sony with the adapters.
Yes, if course. But aspects of functionality are typically lost in the application of adapters.
The A7 is compact and it should stay that way. 2.8 zoom big guns must stay away. For those there is the A99/A99II.
http://photobyandrei.wordpress.com/
“It should stay that way”?? Are you serious?? Your CPU should stay quiet, so you’re not allowed to use it more than 25%, because that’s when your fan kicks in! If you want compact camera, use selp1650, and let me have a 70-200 f/2.8
Go ahead and mount the 70-200 2.8 II, given the size of the lens, the la-ea4 adds a negligible amount of length or weight. Or do you want a 2.8 70-200 with OSS for an e-mount price? Sony would have to charge well over 3k for that lens since the same lens without it is 3k. The FE 70-200 f4 OSS is a good deal by comparison.
Yeah, so it’s better to buy another $2500 camera in order to use fast lenses… I know that fast zooms are not priority for e mount, but “it should stay that way”?? Come on! That’s so KimJongUnish!
The la-ea4 adapter is about $350, no additional camera needed and opens up an a7 camera to about 100 Minolta or Sony lenses.
If Tamron is able to produce a very good 70-200/2.8 VC for 1200 Euros it should be possible to have one for 2000 Euros form Sony. As it is not clear whether the A-mount has a future I would like the opportunity of having fast zooms for EF-mount, too. I don’t care whether it’s compact or not. People who want to stay compact can buy the f4 version. But an adapter with mirror inside is no option for me, as it increases size and adds manufacturing tolerances. Only because the A7 is small does not mean that fast lenses are not allowed.
1 – I agree that Sony can sell their 70-200mm lens for much less money. I have stated before that the pricing is absurd. However if Sony does produce an FE 70-200 2.8 with OSS, logically they will / should charge more than their 70-200 2.8 without a stabilizer. Do you disagree?
2 – If you are mounting a 70-200 2.8, the increase in size the adapter adds to the complete setup is insignificant. As for the tolerances – I cannot speak to this yet but I will be testing out an a7s with both an laea4 and a Metabones EF adapter next week.
It would be interesting to hear your opinion about this combo. It could work better in combination with the A7s due to the lower pixel density when compared to an A7r. You have a point on 1)
Does Sony own a piece of Tamron, or is that Tokina?
To make f2.8, Sony would have to reinvent optical formula designs to make it compact and since Sony isn’t an optical company, sadly I don’t think that’ll ever happen unless someone in the optics department is super ambitious
This is Zeiss lenses, not Sony. There is indeed a lack of ambition with all of these F4 lenses to use on A7 bodies.
If you’re referring to the f4 lenses, it’s designed and manufactured by Sony with Zeiss authorising the quality to be “Zeiss standard”
Actually Sony-Zeiss lenses are made by Sony. The Zeiss brand is there for the T* coating and the quality control process, the design are made by Sony’s optical engineers.
If you browse an SAR you can find an article with the interview of the japanese Sony’s engineer who made the FE55
too bad, FE35 and FE55 design are made by Sony (with “Zeiss standard”)
Sony Zeiss lenses are Sony lenses and Sony produces a great many lenses for not being an “optical company .”
Why? How many f4 UWA’s do we have?
Andrea, When will the 5 or 6 FE Zeiss manual focus lenses be available and do you have any information on what they are, or do we have to wait until Photokina?
You can pretty much mount every manual lens there without loss of functionality.
You call lake of AF “without loss of functionality”?
Re-read Andy Pandy’s comment, which I replied to and get back to me…
I guess that admin’s sources mainly evolved around Sony and not Zeiss. These lenses had nothing to do with Sony they are pure Zeiss work so we will probably have to wait until Photokina to find out.
Anyway when Zeiss admit the existence of these 5 lenses they also said they will be available for the end of 2014.
I’m beginning to question this roadmap. It clearly shows FIVE lenses to be released in 2014. We now have almost August and for a full THREE of these lenses, not even the most basic specification such as the focal length has been published. It’s almost sure by now that it will be 2015 when any of these three lenses will hit the shelves…. so why call it “2014”?
Uhm because they don’t need to leak the specs for the lenses to still come this year? Previous road maps were not updated with details, they just launched the lenses.
It’s a roadmap. It’s not set in stone. This is what Sony want to achieve. Whether they can or not depends on many factors. Cut them a little slack.
Where is the mid tele prime and the tele macro they need to release it now. It’s more important than the wide angle
Zoom.
Its more important to you and a lot of other people. However landscape shooters will be rooting for the CZ 16-35mm much more than a tele prime or tele macro lens.
There are still 2 more unannounced lens to come this year or next. Hopefully it is something you will like. 🙂
Standard lens options – ultra-wide (16-35~), fast prime (or wide-tele, 50mm or 24-?), and medium-tele (70-200). Beyond that everything else is just “exotic” – fisheye, macro, prime-tele. The ultra-wide tele is the missing lens from the FE native mount lenses from Sony – so pisses me off its taking so loate to deliver this stuff. But hey … adadpters have been my way to survive w/ cheap(er) lenses. I have a Rokinon 24mm TS, Rokinon 14mm f/2.8, Canon FD 50mm f/1.2, Canon FD 300mm f/4, 28-70 FE, and a slew of other adapted lenses. Those suit me just fine and the Canon 50mm f/1.2 never leaves the lens now. I prefer the native Zeiss wide, because the quality … but I’ll survive if its like $1500. But if its like <$1000 its a given that I'll buy it for what I do in photography. Its a MUST HAVE though and I just wish it was here sooner. http://www.flickr.com/_zprime/ <– samples of my Sony A7 w/ everything listed above.
Quote – “I prefer the native Zeiss wide, because the quality”.
The two FE primes are excellent, but so far, the zooms have not been great. I’ll be very surprised if this Sony Zeiss 16-35mm matches your Rokinon 14mm for sharpness.
Of course, you can live in hope, as I do. 🙂
Extremely interesting lens announcement, since UWA for FF Mirrorless so far is the biggest problem but also contains the most chances to reduce a lot of bulk compared to former (D)SLR solutions. ƒ/4 with OSS should do fine here – nothing to complain.
BTW what happened to these rumours about SEL-20F28 Mark II?
I’m beginning to believe that once the APS mirrorless systems have matured, no one will care about FE anymore. For obvious reasons, 3rd party manufacturers will also concentrate on APS. The savings in weight and size won’t be enough to justify the premium prices one has to pay for the lenses.
At some point (just when the mirrorless market has grown enough to be profitable) CaNikon will introduce their serious mirrorless bodies with reasonably priced glass and Sony won’t be able to do anything.
I totally disagree, since I’m pretty sure FullFrame Photography will stay as standard and and also Super35/APS-C as traditional Video FullFrame.
No. By pure numbers, the standard in general photography (or ‘taking photos’, if you wish to differentiate) is the phone.
The standard in enthusiast photography interchangeable lens camera is APS.
I was talking about Photography, while you were talking about something “maturing” to photography. APS-C photography developed while sensor technology has been extremely expensive and FullFrame sensors were a huge technical challenge. With their α7 line Sony’s pressing this devolopment back, simply because they can with their advanced sensor technology and by minituarising cameras. Therefore I’m still sure professional photography will stay with fullframe, those who are usually called “amateurs” will follow and the rest will stay with SmartPhone photography.
I think it’s a reasonable bet for enthusiast a-mount bodies, as most people will have ff lenses anyway. Could be an issue for apsc e-mount though, given that most e-mount lenses aren’t ff compatible.
I totally agree with that. But how many of those people using imaging devices today are professional photographers? Without knowing numbers I can say with confidence that it’s way below 1%.
And the other problem is, that Sony seems to lack expertise in the optical domain. The sensors and bodies are great, but the lens development just isn’t as consistent as with CaNikon.
when FF become cheap, people will go to full frame instead on APSC. for people who want a high quality image, DR and DOF they will consider to FF, but there still APSC market too for people with a very low budget 🙂
I agree, I would not change to FF for general use, I stick to APS-C. This format offers me enough DOF with super fast lenses, and enough depth of field when I need it, an overall sharpness in depth that FF can not give me. Despite that, for some works it is an interesting option, if I was going for FF I would go in the A7S direction since APS-C gives me enough pixels to work with anyway.
seriously, Canikon’s fans need to stop their fantasy.
“Canikon will introduce their serious mirroless bodies”. So what, the Nikon 1 serie an Canon Eos M are jokes that cost millions just to try.
They have a solution for mirroless system in their pockets but they hold on it right now and instead they launch a failure system to mislead the market, really?
Have you consider that these 2 systems are serious attempt to adress the mirroless market and that Canon/Nikon just doesn’t understand it unlike Sony/Panasonic/Olympus and Fuji.
It’s the “to big to fail” supriority complex that is speaking. Sony is biger than Canon+Nikon but it doesn’t prevent Sony to fail if they continue to bleed money like that (same goes for Panasonic).
I don’t believe in a breakthrough of Canon/Nikon in mirroless market because they probably believe that it will never overcomes DSLR. They could be right and mirroless will stay as a kind of a niche market but if they are wrong, believing in a last minute solution that will flip up the market in their favor is dillusional.
There is nothing delusional about that. CaNikon make profit. None of the leading mirrorless manufacturers make profit.
What else is a meaningful indication of success for you?
For instance, it’s not hard at all for EOS M to catch up with NEX. All they need is a body with Dual Pixel AF and and EVF (which they don’t have to develop themselves). The lens lineup looks small but it’s a lot more meaningful than the weird mess that APS E-mount is. All that it lacks is a 50 equiv, macro, portrait and a high-grade standard zoom, in numbers not more than what Sony will release this year for FE.
And btw. “It’s the “to big to fail” supriority complex that is speaking.”, yes, except that I don’t own a single CaNikon body but multiple Sony bodies.
I’m not deniying that Canon and Nikon are making money, they are with the DSLR market and it’s a big success, no argue.
What I find delusional is the belief that Nikon and Canon have a killer solution up their sleave ready to overtake the market when they feel it’s mature enough.
believing in that means the 1 serie and Eos M was made for fun. I know they make big money but not enough to waste that kind of money in those systems just for toying with Sony and the others players in the mirroless market.
I think that 1 serie and M are serious system and Nikon and Canon put effort to make them work (Maybe not Canon) but they just failed. Look how much Nikon invest in advertising the 1series with TV /magazine adds and billboards at least in Europe.
Don’t get me wrong I’m not one of those who believe that DSLR will die and Canikon are doomed but I don’t believe that because they master DSLR means they will do the same in mirroless.
Nokia mastered high end phone with lots of functionalities at the verge of the smartphone but they lack that little step and they were hammered by Apple and the smartphone market.
while you’re speculating things based on fantasy and whining about things, people are shooting out there right now. Better tell them to stop.
APS-C besting FF? Let me guess, your main camera is an iphone.
A future APS-C system will be the go to system for 90% of your imaging needs.
Smaller cameras and smaller lenses than FF but delivering over and above image quality to your client’s expectations..Stills or video
i think with the a7 ‘fullframe’ has never been so attractive (especially pricewise)like it is today. so why go with apsc?
First, even smaller sizes of both bodies and lenses. Secondly, smaller file sizes of either stills or video. when shooting RAW. File sizes make a lot more difference than the size of the bodies and lenses,
The file sizes of FF and APSC or m43 are similar with most cameras (only A7r and D800 boast 36MP), as 16Mp or 24MP are now standard. I use both, but equivalent lenses are of similar size (consider a hypothetical 16-50/1.8 for APSC to match the 24-70/2.8 on FF for total light, AOV and DOF). If you can live with more DOF you are of course able to stay small.
Maybe you know or have seen some small time MWAC/DWACs and thought that’s what pros do but I’ve never come across a pro who compromises other than by using zooms. Even if they have an APS-C DSLR (small time pros) they’d have another FF DSLR… more importantly, the APS-C DSLR won’t be a small palm sized DSLR made for kiddies… doubt you know but the 7D is actually heavier than some FF models.
Why speculate? Just ask.
I didn’t say pros don’t have another or multiple FF DSLRs. And I didn’t say APS-Cs need be small palm sized DSLR made for kiddies. And I didn’t say I will use it all the time. As a matter of fact, until recently, I have carried everyday, 7D and Canon 24-70, in my bag. I walked days with it on a trek. Knowing the 7D so well is the actual reason I believe in the sufficiency of APS-C, especially if it has 4k.
Also in my top comment, i was speaking about a future advanced APS-C
which I am guessing will be serve “most” needs.. And just to make it
clear, the 7D and 24-70 USM1 combo feels heavy to most photographers I have known.
Again, people have been saying it all along.
The more I read your comments, the more I see the extent of your assumptions You’ve got it wrong owing to your assumptive nature. I do work at the highest level, in visual effects. And so, have friends across the imaging world, at the most pro level.
You must be new to all this… people used to say what you said years ago… nothing has changed. In fact more pros are using DMF now.
What % of pros do you think are using DMF and for what % of their work?
Haven’t you seen? There are more people using DMF now because it’s more affordable. Both used high end bodies and new Pentax bodies.
The A7 series has made FF also more accessible to the masses and there are more people buying it. APS-C is also cheap now. People are upsizing.
My question above is very specific.
I own both ff and aps-c. Loving it.
all that means is you need two FFs but can afford only 1 😀
As a matter of fact, APS is outselling FF several times. What’s so hard to understand about that? Only pros and a few enthusiasts use FF. That’s not even close to 1% of people who are actually buying cameras. What do you even mean by ‘besting’? Of course the image quality is better so what? If that was the only thing that mattered everyone soccer mom would be buying the new Pentax digital back now.
Here’s a tip for “mr. grandmaster artist photographer of the century”: your needs aren’t everyone’s needs. Not everyone is like you. Realize that and your art might actually improve (btw. please don’t link images to some boring flickr album with BW ‘street photography’ shots to ‘prove’ your point, thanks).
Totally useless for astrophotography, guess I’ll have to get a good copy of the Rokinon 14. Wish this zoom was f2.8 or they had an f2 or faster prime coming
No self respecting astrophotographer would use a zoom and much less a fast zoom.
The Nikon 14-24/2.8 is one of the most used WA-zooms in astrophotography. And it’s considered one of the best ever, too. Even Canon guys adapt them.
They must not know what image quality is then
I would prefer a prime, but I did get very good results from a Tokina 11-16 on my D7000.
Tried the Sigma 8-16?
no self respecting astrophotographer uses a UWA lens. most roll with focals around the 600 to 1200mm and the real astrophotographers spend tens of thousands on their gear and don’t worry about a cheap UWA.
I love/hate people calling the sham of wide field single shot photos as “astro photography” .. it’s no where close to the real discipline. it’s just pretty shots of the milky way anyone can do that.
Exactly… typical star trail shots aren’t astrophotography. And proper wide-field astrophotography is done with lenses around 45-degrees which is “normal” by regular photographic standards. Before lenses like the 55 Otus and 50 Art came along, there were hardly any options in the 35mm format and people resorted to medium and large formats.
Even 30-50mm wide field astro photography is pretty easy. you need very little tracking and setup to handle it a cheap 200-300 manually guided mount can handle that without a problem. most UWA astro photos when zoomed in have tracking trails, something that is unacceptable to most that take this seriously.
this lens is not for the niche astrophotographer….get the zeiss A mount 16-35mm f2.8 if you are a serious astrophotographer
The 16-35 is nowhere near good enough wide open for astrophotography. Check the corners on wide open shots. 🙁
The Sony Zeiss is superior to the canon 16-35.
just get the nikon 14-24 2.8 and call it a day.
a serious astrophotographer uses ccd sensors and not dslrs with filters and cmons sensors that detriorate hugely the image.
the Rokinon is an excellent “night photography” lens with very little coma and issues. I’m not sure why anyone would complain when Samyang has excellent 14 and 24mm options for this style of photography that are inexpensive and manual focus which is better anyways.
saw this same “whine” from canon when they issued out the 16-35/4L .. and it’s like .. why on earth wouldn’t you use an already available $300 lens that is better for it than a zoom would be anyways?
Can anyone tell me- will there be a 135mm F2..F4? It’s the sole reason I still have A mount. I guess I could adapt but not quite ready. It’s great to see a wide angle Zeiss zoom. For what I do the e mount is almost there.
Unlikely in the near future, from what I’ve seen… Losing ibis has always been the deal breaker for me, especially for macro and telemacro. I’d settle for oss primes, but I don’t see a comprehensive FE oss lineup coming any time soon.
‘especially for macro and telemacro’
T.R.I.P.O.D!?
I would love to see an E-mount version of the A-mount Zeiss 135mm. Surely it can’t be that difficult to adapt, but maybe they’re just scared of making such a big, heavy lens for the A7.
F4, is that a disease or a virus? Where are fast primes, in 18, 24, 35, faster than 2.8. The 55 is a real banger, but unfortunately 55, not 35 or 24, and the 35 is 2.8 only.
At a guess, I would say they are still being developed. Unless you can come with a plausible explanation as to why Sony would deliberately hold them back?
Because of the size, Sony already explained this.
u don’t need a faster uwa!
The only thing that is stopping me from switching to E-Mount FF is the lack of native 24/1.8, 35/1.8, 85/1.8 and 135/1.8. Until these lenses come around, I’ll be happy with A-Mount. And i’m getting IBIS in a more comfortable body.
Sure, i might not need all the lenses that I mentioned, but I’d definitely want a 35 and 85 or 135 to get me started.
I just gave up and bought the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 v2 and a Metabones adapter.
Best decision I’ve made. At f/1.2 it’s really only good for very low light or very shallow DOF (which I made use of at a very dark wedding I attended as a guest; the bride and groom were ecstatic over the photo quality), but the lens reaches peak center sharpness at f/2, and at f/2.8 is sharp across the whole frame, matching or exceeding the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8. As for being MF-only, the focus peaking on the A7 series is so good that I’m tempted to go MF-only even with my Zeiss 55mm f/1.8.
Why do you need them so fast? For me there is no point switching to E-mount if you don’t care for size and weight.
I hope this lens is my key to A7, FE24-70 has failed!
I don’t understand the advantage of a faster UWA lens. Can someone explain to me the applications? if you do get it in 2.8 or even 2.0 over F4.0? How would you be using the faster aperture and what effects are you getting?
Not much advantage in UWAs. But in midteles it’s an advantage.
I guess that’s what I don’t understand, why many folks are looking for faster UWA. Not sure about the application and how this would affect the picture, what is the desired effect using F2 in an UWA for example.
Well if you get ISO 1000 instead of ISO 2000 thanks to a faster lens, I guess it’s useful !
UWA has become very common in wedding and event photography. In these scenarios, more light and shallower DOF is a plus. For anybody using UWA for landscape or architecture, F4 is good.
So if using A7S with super high iso performance it’s not too much an issue? For me A7 was quite good with iso up to 3200 and that’s good enough for most but of course I prefer Iso100
Sorry glina, but I need to disagree with you on the shallow DOF. A true ultrawide (15-18mm) or so has so much DOF that even at f2.8 you will have trouble getting bokeh unless you are incredibly close to the subject which is generally considered unattractive because of the perspective it gives to people. In rare circumstances you may shoot this angle but realistically it won’t be very often. The only advantage of the faster lens in this case is low light capabilities and even there it is only 1 stop. I’ll take the small physical size of the f4 over the 2.8 as long as I save an appropriate $ vs the 2.8. Theses days it is becoming easier to just take my iso up a stop than worry about a fast UWA. My current UWA is a legacy Tokina 17f3.5 and since we are talking FF grabbing another stop via iso is no biggie.
Astrophotography for me. Need at least f2.8 for good results (untracked). Would like f2 or faster prime if possible.
ok I see .. I never tried much astrophotography, thanks so much.
For that purpose only it’s too niche….Sony wants to cater to the general masses for the uwa so f4 is definitely good enough given it has image stabilization and smaller in size….. for astro-photographers you can use the zeiss A mount 16-35mm f2.8
im all for fast primes, and WANT, and have yet to buy any of the zeiss zooms simply because of the f4 and have stuck with the primes (fe + apsc)..but isnt an autofocus lens pointless for astrophotography? not to mention theres no hard stop at infinity..i have been playing with the voightlander 21mm 1.8 for astro stuff..and find it pretty great..
seems like older (nice) manual focus lenses are better for that?
Yes, but if this 16-35 for example was 2.8, I could sacrifice a bit of performance for astro to have a very nice landscape zoom as well. Would make it more dual purpose. Where I wouldn’t spend the $1000 for just a landscape zoom for example.
I think it’s unrealistic to expect a 2.8 wide angle zoom for a $1000, from any manufacturer.
Actually Tokina has a very find 16-28mm f2.8 lens for much below $1k. Unfortunately not available for the Sony A mount you will need the Canon version + adapter.
Sorry, perhaps I should have been clearer. I was referring to camera manufacturer’s own lenses, not third party ones.
same here, those are the kind of pictures I like to take and f4 is too slow unless maybe your using A7s and crank up the ISO
Nice! Finally something about the uwa! They really announced it too early if they aren’t going to launch it until autumn >_>
minipixels.net | Automotive Photography
Sony FE needs to have a reference 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 set. Those should have been developed from the start. That 28-70 kit lens is really horrible garbage compared to the Canon 24-105L.
They’re both kits, but 24-105L costs more than 1100 bucks while 28-70 costs merely 300 bucks. Nice comparison???
It’s about $700 street price, but the bigger question is why Sony expects us to use a cheap lens on the A7. FF bodies should be developed with reference lenses. Sony knows it can’t put f/2.8 lenses on the small bodies so it settles for f/4. Cameras should be about good optics not just tech for the sake of tech. As the other commenter said, the A900 was superior as a photographic tool.
A7 is uncomfortable to hold so you can’t put heavier lenses on it. I took my now 5 years old A900 to compare with new A7 in a store, to make hand to hand and shot to shot comparison. First thing that amazed me was how good is A900 compared to A7 in almost any photographic aspect, especially having superb OVF, built in stabilization and tons of great lenses to put on. A900 with 2,8/24-70 is a pleasure to hold, while A7 yet with 3,5-5,6/28-70 kit lens is front-heavy, quite uncomfortable. Pictures aren’t any better. So I left the store with A900 that is for me much, much better camera than new ones. Of course, that would be nice to have nice LV and video mode, but I won’t trade it for excellent A900 ergonomy.
I got a grip for my a7. Love it.
I LOVE front heavy.
And back heavy means nothing to me unless it actually means an improvement in feature, say a tungsten mount or a larger battery.
I use the grip on my a7R 100% of the time and it balances out the handling nicely. Case in point. I shoot my macros and portraits using an A-mount Sigma 105mm f/2.8 HSM macro. Heavy, long lens, but not a big deal on the a7R. Plus, I don’t have to fuss when shooting in portrait orientation and I can utilize the two batteries.
You know, you’re absolutely right. As amazing as the A7 body is (I have on), the lenses are such a disappointment that I’m considering switching away (possibly even back to crop E-mount).
The A7 with the kit lens gives you more or less what you get with a cheap NEX and 18-55 (the 16-50 is inferior). Very slightly shallower DoF, but not that much either. If Sony had come out with a great 24-70 or 24-105, it would showcase the reason to go FF, and the 28-70 tells me there’s no point to stay there. As we all know the 24-70 Zeiss is no good, and at f/4, no point being on FF either.
The Sony APS-C sensors are pretty freaking close to FF in terms of dynamic range and colour bit depth. There is a difference of maybe one stop of noise performance (not one full stop with A6000, less), and then there’s the difference in DoF.
My main reason for getting the latter was DoF. 35mm is my focal length of choice, and I wanted to see a really good 35. But at f/2.8, the prime they came out with gives me no advantage over the 24mm f/1.8 prime for APS-C… in fact the latter can blur the background ever so slightly more. The 55mm is good, sure, but I don’t particularly care for that focal length and so don’t want to spend $1k on something I won’t use much. Other brands have dirt cheap 50mm fast primes, Sony has exactly zero.
Sony has decided to make smaller aperture lenses for FE cameras to keep the weight/size in check, but that also negates the point of getting FF too. Might as well stick with the cheaper, lighter crop options. The one thing I think I’ll miss is the metal body with the controls.
Wonder why Sony has not replaced the very old DT SAL1118….
Because it’s an A mount lens.
put a fixed adapter and it becomes E mount len
I agree..The 1118 is a old minolta rebatch and performed below par. Sony need to replace the lens to match the current high resolution camera
Since they haven’t even showed a prototype, the SR4 here is a pipe dream IMHO. They will likely show the prototypes at Photokina and ship October/December – that I would buy as an SR4 🙂
I’m seriously afraid this lens will be a bust. I want to believe – but the 24-70 instill little confidence about wide angles.
You know if the brands made speedboosters for their own glass that enabled autofocus on APS-C then you would get double purpose and an extra stop of light too! Go get A6000 + metabones speed booster + Tokina 16-28 F2.8 and now you got 24MP w/o AA filter and the tokina becomes 16-28 F2 .. sounds like a quick fix for manual focus astro photography
If I need wide angle, I put Sigma EX 1,8/20 on Sony A900 and that’s an ultimate combo. It’s that great I won’t trade it for any FE camera that is simply very, very uncomfortable to hold with any lens heavier than 2,8/35…
a7 and a7r produce ‘better’ images than the a900 – less noise and more dynamic range. and they both have a ton of usefull functions your camera doesnt have.
Yes functions like IBIS, a huge OVF, a far better grip and the ability to take far more native lenses without an adapter.
ibis is good. but slr ovfs have their own issues. critical focus is never guaranteed. the a900 is the worst in this regard because it doesn’t even have live view. AF calibration is also an issue. Even if calibrated, AF is limited to fixed points on the frame. I don’t see what the issue with the adapter is… especially when it comes to Sony’s system.
The issue is a) The adapter at $400 is a pretty expensive proposition especially if you have more than 1 body.
b) An adapter adds two more points of failure to the camera system.
I shoot macros very infrequently and yet I have had 2 Kenko extension tubes fail on me. Contact issues.
Never had adapters fail on me. Maybe you had a bad batch
Well they were bought on two separate occasions. And in any case the cost per adapter is still a significant expense.
If the adapter was some $50 or something I doubt many people would still complain.
Don’t Sony adapters come with a warranty? But seriously, this is the first time I’m hearing this happening.
Uncomfortable to use any lens bigger than a 35/2.8 boo hoo. Why take pictures at all, precious?
“Zeiss Wide angle zoom to be released in late August/early September.”
OF WHICH YEAR???????????
the world is fucking waiting for months and all they do is to release new stupid cameras instead of lenses.