One of my very long time trusted sources had the chance to see the two new NEX-FF cameras. For obvious reason he cannot unveil specs but he shared two short impressions and also corrected some points of David Kilpatrick’s report. This is what he told me:
1) The two NEX-FF cameras are great and the camera he likes most is definitely the High End version. Both feature the same (new) sensor.
2) David Kilpatrick is not correct when saying the camera is an interchangeable lens mount version of the RX1. The NEX-FF are clearly based on the [shoplink 8454]Sony NEX-7[/shoplink] design. And yes, they are about 20% bigger than the NEX-7.
3) The cameras do not have a Fuji alike hybrid viewfinder.
4) All E-mount lenses will work on both, the NEX-FF and NEX-APS-C cameras (obviously APS-C lenses will work in crop mode on FF E-mount cameras)
5) He didn’t like the lenses. The zooms are to big and the primes not fast enough. The NEX-FF camera will appeal pro photographer but Sony didn’t make the right lenses yet (so he says). He hopes they do it in future.
Editor’s note:
A fast 35mm, 50mm and 85mm (all f/1.4) should have been made for the system right from the start. Instead we will get a 35mm f/2.8, 55mm f/1.8 and likely a 85mm f/1.8 Zeiss lenses. Good lenses but still not as good as hoped. We will have to use third-party [shoplink 19605 ebay]Leica M Lenses[/shoplink], [shoplink 19923 ebay]Voigtlander M lenses[/shoplink], [shoplink 16763 ebay]Canon FD lenses[/shoplink], [shoplink 19360 ebay]Zeiss ZM lenses[/shoplink] and more…on our NEX-FF get some more “interesting” focal length and aperture. Send me your third-party lens tests done on the VG900. They will be very useful to read now that the NEX-FF is coming!
P.S.: Can you suggest Sony a bunch of Full Frame lenses they have to develop? Comment this post and I will sum your suggestion in a soon to be published POLL. Thanks!
———
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!
469 Responses
IBIS?!
IBIS ?
My bet would be no IBIS.
But if it did have…and a .mov ALL-INTRA >100mbps codec…I would sell half my belongings for it.
Imagine that! stabilized ANYTHING!
It’d be a killer! But a 20% bigger body with a twice as big a sensor and IBIS? Even if they manage that, it would overheat faster than my NEX-7.
Sony RX1R is full frame sensor for same size than Nex-7. Do you mean they released two overheating camera yet?
Ian Toni, I don’t understand your question, could you clarify?
You said your Nex-7 is overheating yet and that you think that a full frame nex camera will be overheating more.
However I said that Rx1R are RX1 are already a full frame camera. Then it would mean that RX1 are RX1R are overheating lot more than your nex-7.
Do you think Sony would release them even with a such incovenient?
Just a question of curiousity from me :D, i’m in upset mood today
Sorry
Ah, got it. No, I meant that it doesn’t seem likely to me that an FF camera the size of a NEX-7 would have IBIS – it’d be difficult to pull off and the mechanism itself, combined with the big sensor will produce a lot of heat (I have no idea whether the RX1 overheats or not, but it doesn’t have IBIS). It is obviously not impossible and I would be more than happy to be proven wrong 🙂
The NEX-7 body is a cheap molded alloy that does not conduct (dissipate) heat well. I do not think that is the material used in the RX-1/r. Besides, one would hope that unlike the NEX-7 sensor, Sony would use copper (instead of cheaper aluminum)circuitary in the FF NEX sensor.
I’ve tried the RX1 and I have the NEX-7, so I definitely agree with you – they aren’t the same build at all. The RX1 is way better. But when you add that IBIS there, I just don’t see it. Obviously, I am not an engineer and, as I said, I would be happy to be proven wrong.
This Hendrick does understand a thing or two about electronics, sensors, glass and materials. 🙂
Ok, then, I am happy that “this Hendrick” is proving me wrong 🙂 I find IBIS very useful.
of course no ibis…otherwise the big sensor and ibis with small body, the camera will became to hot to handle in video mode…;)
and video will last 1 min max..;)
Ok. No IBIS. But the codec has to go too?
everybody is not a video freak, let’s have 2 different models !
we are plenty wanting IBIS 😉
It can have IBIS for photo and lock it for video.
Not fast enough in terms of aperture or AF? But FF NEX’s appeal is the ability to adapt any lenses out there. There will still be a lot of excitement.
Aperture.
NEX7 like body, so there is a EVF?
The slow-ish 35mm 2.8 is a downer for many (me included) but it is clear that pricing at launch for this lens would be competing with commonly found M mount lenses (yes AF vs MF) and fast interchangeable lenses -that perform outstandingly- will not only be larger (a clear objective of this 2.8 is to be small) but also expensive (perhaps not Summicron expensive, but more than Voigtlander 35mm 1.2 II)
So it is a bit of a compromised launch, but a clever one.
Besides, RX1 covers the 35mm/2 ground very well and the NEX FF would probably sell well with the 50/55 lens to compliment a fast RX1?
Obviously, all of this is speculative depending on market interest but a certain thing is that NEX FF would appeal to a broad variety of people thanks to its more flexible approach to completely take advantage of any M mount lens (which many would have already) as well as any SLR lens (think of Contax, Leica R, Olympus OM, Canon FD, etc)
I think Sony’s bet on the 2.8 is price, size and AF.
The zooms, however…
35mm f/2.8 is small size so that is a nice “walk-around” lens when
you don’t want to carry heavy stuff and keep the size small.
That depends. I would carry a 80% longer f2 35mm.
Besides, weight is already low for this category of equipment. Leica M and a 35mm Summicron weight around 935 (with black Summicron) to almost 1030g (with silver Summicron)
Imagine the FF NEX will be, besides 20% larger, 30% heavier (lets say a build similar to the RX1 in quality). That would make it 458g body only. I would happily carry a 400-500g lens if it meant that is has a fast aperture and performs at least as good as a Summicron (knowing the Sonnar is a better performing lens than the Summicron, I am willing to ‘compromise’)
Then again, that is me. Perhaps you wouldn’t.
I like to take the Leica M+summicron as my threshold for compact weight and size.
Now that I read Andrea is asking for lens suggestions I put forward:
1) 35mm f2
2) 24mm f2
3) 21mm f2
Oh, missed the suggestions part.
18mm F2.8 or F4
24mm F2
35 F1.4 (given that there will be a small F2.8)
85mm F2.8 (given that there will be a F1.8)
100mm F2.8 macro (something versatile like the Makro Planar, just smaller)
and a couple of zooms
24-50 F2.8
50-100 F2.8
and a 16-35mm F2.8
This is full frame. The obvious lens would be a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.7.
Those were the standard lenses on FF SLRs.
Those were the standard lenses when there weren’t amazing sensors.
I don’t know why people talk about RX1 body in comparison than Nex-7 because they have both same measurements
Rx1R body: 113 x 70 x 65 mm with CMOS Exmor Full Frame
Nex-7 body : 120 x 43 x 67mm with APS-C sensor
so how will Sony justify the increase of 20% of body while Rx1R with full frame is even smaller than Nex-7 body ( same thickness when one has an interchangeable lens mount and not the other one)?
It will have a better and better grip than the RX1 and NEX-7, that’s how. Plus you can’t expect a FF interchangeable lens camera body to be as small as a FF compact body with a tailor-made fixed lens.
Sorry, I meant bigger and better.
Better and better works too.
“how will Sony justify the increase of 20% of body” I don’t think Sony has to “justify” anything
If there are good f/1.8 prime lenses available as a compliment – then f/4 zoom lenses are OK.
“So it is a bit of a compromised launch, but a clever one.”
+1
The FF part was clever. The slow lenses was dumb. The nex styling over the RX1 also wasn’t too clever.
This is exactly why a 2.8 compact is the clever part. People like Freddo here will adapt fast lenses and wouldn’t pay more than the MF counterparts for AF benefit only.
So, secure sales of the lenses by introducing a relatively low cost 35mm competing price-wise with the already available Zeiss ZM lenses as well as those from Voigtlander.
Precisely. And RX styling with a bigger lens would become a pain to hold.
No more than the RX1 is a pain to hold. Plus you can use a grip or something if actually needed.
People want fast autofocus glass native to the system. The people using converted MF lenses are niche users. Again if Sony wants to turn the Canikon crowd, it needs to offer more than Canikon. Offering ‘value’ hasn’t worked so far for Sony.
People converting MF lenses are niche?
You have missed the reason why the NEX system originally took off!
When the NEX 3 and NEX 5 were around (being not the best at much) some people took them out and put some M mount lenses on them.
Sony saw and this and gave them Focus Peaking.
Then, the whole thing exploded. NEX became the most flexible mirrorless system not least because it was APS-C vs the 4/3 format (x1.5 vs x2.0 crop factor)
Man. MF lenses on NEX are a no brainer.
I did it and I bet many here have done it too.
You haven’t tried the RX1 with a fast 85mm lens, have you? Yes, a grip would help, but that would end up being the same size as the NEX-7, which, as others have pointed, has a very convenient interface.
I disagree that MF users are a niche. We are talking about an expensive high-end camera, so potential users will be aware of the existence of the plethora of MF lenses. And Sony’s are amazing for MF.
Sony will be offering more – it will be the smallest FF system.
It’s not enough. I thought Sony were trying to take on the big players, but they seem to want to cater to obscure niche low volume markets. Sony has missed (for now) an opportunity to cater to high volume – high margin customers.
They had/have an opportunity to convert thousands upon thousands of Pro’s who are looking to downsize but not downsize performance.
For me IQ performance is king.. I suffer for my art by carrying around heavy gear, just like thousands if not millions of other people. Give us the same potential in a smaller/lighter package and we will give you our money.. period.
What high volume? An expensive FF camera with expensive lenses? Again, this is simply the first lenses they are announcing, nothing more. IQ is important to everyone, but I don’t see how is that related to lens speed. They are indeed giving you a very small and lightweight package.
Well said Rhys. I am tired of carrying around a 10-15kg of cameragear all the time. I would love to be able to do certain assignments with light gear using a mirrorless ff with fast primes. I don’t see a point in wanting e.g. 24-70/2, 70-200/2.8, 200-400/4 lenses for such a camera.These lenses I mentioned work well with a regular dslr body and in that case the it’s not really a big deal if there’s a D600 oder Nex7 attached to the big lens. It’s all about size. Time to get in the ring with the Leica M!
The NEX styling is the best part. The NEX-7 with its TriNavi is a very functional camera.
It’s a fantastic camera to hold and operate. Actually, it’s a joy.
The more I try it the more I like the 7’s ergonomics (don’t own one). ‘The best ever’ kind of, including size.
This! +100 I hope they keep the tri-navi! It’s awesome.
I do not agree with those of you who call for faster NEX-FF primes. I trust SONY and ZEISS. They know well what they are doing. ZEISS does not want to compromise IQ. SONY understands NEX system ought to be more compact then A-mount system or DSLR FF systems of other manufactures. I personaly do not want to carry bulky lenses just for maybe 1% of occasions I would use for examples 85 at 1.4. If you want it regardless of size then use A-mount lens with an adaptor.
The Voigtlander 35mm 1.2 II is 200g. Add in a AF motor, say another 100g extra in weight to make a 300g lens. Fast lenses don’t need to be big and heavy with mirrorless.
I think it’s great that you are satisfied with the lenses being released, but I am not buying into the system until I get a fast 35 that can AF. I use the Sigma 35/1.4 on my 6D 85% – 90% of my shooting. I am not giving up a few stops of light to buy into a new system. And I have every intention of selling my 6D and lens collection to move, but not until I get my fast 35. I tried an RX1 for 2 months and the AF was too slow for me, so I was going to wait on the FF NEX to see if Sony improved much in this respect (I am just noting that a fast 35 isn’t the only thing holding me back).
It’s heavier, 471g
And it’s quite large
Rhys, you must be on steroids or you just want to make everyone believe you are smart.
From the Voigtlander website:
Focal Length 35 mm
Aperture Ratio 1:1,2
Smallest aperture F22
Lens construction 10 elements in 7 groups
Picture angle 63 ˚
Aperture blades 12
Nearest Distance 0,5 m
Diameter 60,8 mm
Length 62,0 mm
Weight 471 g
Mount M-Bajonett
Special extra Lenshood LH-8
Rangefinder Coupling ∞ ~ 0,7 m
Filter size 52 mm
Colour schwarz
200g what?
That Voigtlander is actually 471 grams.
It costs 1200US. Put AF inside and some more electronics and then sell it for more. How many will go for the more expensive AF version? I bet that is the question Sony are asking themselves.
The Voigtlander 35 1.2II indeed is heavy, but it’s not THAT big, it’s no bigger, if not smaller, than E24 1.8.
Assuming the rumored specs are correct the 35mm f/2.8 is TINY. It is the same size as the collapsed 1650PZ. If it has great optical quality then it will be worth it–basically the 20mm pancake but better (approx the same focal length, slight increase in size, etc.).
NEX users/reviewers have always complained about the SIZE of the lenses. At this size the 35mm f/2.8 should look and feel great on any NEX camera FF or APS-C and I think Sony knows that. I suspect the 55mm f/1.8 will not be much bigger and it will complete the range of compact primes for the APS-C NEX as well as usher in the new line of FE lenses.
Oh sorry…
IBIS???
I wonder will NEX-FF work in crop mode when:
NEX-FF + LA-EA2 + SAL135F18Z ??
or NEX-FF will work in FF mode?
I would assume using the LA-EA2 would work but in crop mode ?
The question of crop mode or not is kind of moot, as the LA-EA2 mirror is not big enough for FF use.
They already released an LA-EA3 for the VG900
Yes, but LA-EA3 doesn’t have a translucent mirror or a motor for screw driven lenses. If they don’t release an LA-EA4, then I hope Sony have put very good PDAF on the NEX-FF sensor – then SAM and SSM lenses might AF slightly faster than snail’s pace.
Andrea, thank you for your early report!! 🙂
The 35/2.8 is an excellent choice!
Lenses can evolve if the FF NEX turns out to be an useful platform. I hope Zeiss, Sigma and others will come with better lenses than Sony.
It’s not a good choice because the people Sony have been trying to attract for so long but failed miserably (Canikon shooters), won’t switch for F2.8 glass. Jeez the RX1 looks much more appealing at this point, but then I won’t buy that either because it’s a fixed lens camera.
A lotof people did not buy the cybershot for obvious reasons.
Sigma offer hope. A fast f2 zoom, affordable quality primes and such.
There was a mention (from Andrea) that the AF could involve moving of the sensor. If that gets implemented in the high end version then there will be little to complain about in terms of lens choices. One can use any lens out there and still get AF!
I really do not expect Sony or Zeiss to deliver the lenses.
This is not me…again.
What difference does it make? Understand that this place is not about you. It is all bout Sony stuff brought to everyone by Andrea. Get it? 😉
I would imagine you are the one spreading my name around other forums in typical troll fashion. Quite simply because there were not two Hendricks around here 2 days ago.
Granted, you have written far more sensibly this time.
You may still want to choose a variation of this name, if you want others to read your opinions apart from mine. Otherwise I would think you want to change readers perception of me or you want to perversely associate yourself with me.
Andrea, you seriously need to upgrade to a better message system so that there can’t be duplicate user names.
I support Lotus eater on this one. Please, Andrea, I fear that even if I was to change my name the troll would keep on following me.
What puzzles me the most is what is the state of mind of this individual that HAS to duplicate my name in order to…
I have a Nick for the Troll one: AnnoyingHendrick
You are talking like the 35mm F2.8 lens is the only one Sony would ever release. You are also forgetting that many people will adapt lenses. Sony would need to make fast lenses with AF for the same price as existing MF ones (or even cheaper, given how easy MF is on Sony cameras).
35mm 2.8 is a pointless release. people won’t buy into a system if they have to wait a year or two for the lens they want, thats if they ever get it.
Why not? If it is still the only such system, they will.
Sony is building a new system from the ground up. Can’t expect them to satisfy everyone with the first lens released.
I would quite happily buy a 35mm f/2.8 for compactness. It seems everybody is obsessed with either ultra-shallow DOF or low light performance. Do none of you ever stop-down your lenses?
Of course, low light is not such an issue with today’s high ISO sensors. God knows how some of you would have coped in the days of film.
A 35mm f2.8 will be a good choice for the sake of size and with a modern sensor you can always use higher ISOs without any prejudice! I’m sure faster 35s will show up later but will be larger and heavier. Anyway, for FF I prefer the 50/55mm as walk-around, I’ve already spent more than once a whole day street shooting in NYC with a 50mm and got many great keepers.
I agree – Sony knows people who want fast glass for their nex will adapt (either la-e or classic mf).
If they launched the nex 9 with a range of fast ff glass, they’d be inundated with complaints about size. I could see faster glass coming for the a9000 launch, if the demand is there (but bear in mind that Sony is still marketing nex as a compact system, so compromises to keep size down are inevitable imho).
Canon shooters will probably be excited to get the chance to use their 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 L glass on a camera with a modern high-DR sensor!
Not those lenses tbh as 5Diii is good enough for portraiture, but some may enjoy shooting some landscapes on a TS and high dynamic rage sensor. Again niche market though.
Yes, especially if the camera allows for AF!
My personal choice is manual focus, because it’s so much faster to hit accurate hyperfocal for landscape and street. But manufacturing E-mount adapters is a Chinese sunrise industry and good glassless AF adapters are a certainty given the demand.
They won’t be excited when they see the results.
Meaning?
* Maybe the 35mm lens is a pancake (pancake lens designs are generaly slower).
* Maybe the leaf shutter rumour is true for this lens (leaf shutter lenses are often a stop slower than similar designs without the leaf shutter).
* Perhaps they were having trouble achieving good corner resolution with a faster design
* perhaps they don’t want to compete with the 35mm f/2 on the RX1
Rhys, please have a look at the datasheet of the Zeiss C Biogon 2.8/35mm and tell me what you think is wrong with this lens http://lenses.zeiss.com/content/dam/Photography/new/pdf/de/downloadcenter/datasheets_zm/biogon_t_28_35_zm_ger.pdf .
IQ, size and price are superb for most photographic needs, the MTF is exceptional. I don’t know what compromise would be worth to get an f2.0 or f1.4 for 5% of all the shots I would take below f2.8 with a 35mm. There is the Leica 1.4/35mm FLE that is very tempting to own with good enough IQ @1.4, but the price…
“A fast 35mm, 50mm and 85mm (all f/1.4) should have been made for the system right from the start.”
This 100%. It wouldn’t so bad if the 35 was at least F1.8, but F2.8? No thanks.
Also would much prefer an RX1 looking body over the NEX. Something about the NEX just doesn’t look appealing to me.
I would have bought 2 of these & a 35 & 85 right from launch. Now I won’t buy anything until I see some faster lenses.
Sony you are shooting yourself in the foot here when you could be achieving greatness. Someone needs to give the guy in charge a good shake and tell him what people actually want. Bring out the big guns, get the pro’s switching camps, then entice the budget togs with some slower glass.
Looks like I’ll stick with my D800E’s and 24/35/85 F1.4’s for the forceable.
Funny how people likes to whine over not getting the dream camera. 2.8 lens may be disappointing but it wouldnt stop the sales of a fullframe mirrorless camera for sure
c’mon better a small 35mm F2.8 at the beginning
and later a bulkier 35mm F1.4
than right now a bulky 35mm F1.8 or F2.0
and later nothing…
Nope, the people wanting to spend a good chunk of change don’t want this kind of compromise.. might as well get a Fuji.
Nex 7 & OMD’s cater to the people who want compactness.
I wouldn’t call the NEX-7 compact, and this FF version will be bigger.
for me the weight is pretty much more important than the size.
even if i want it to be compact…
sony make it real light
and weather sealed !!!
So what’s with the slow glass?
What it boils down to, is a FF nex/rx1 with a 35 1.4 would be much more compact than D800e or 5d3 +35L/G.
Add in the magical 5 axis IS and sony would have an unstoppable combination. PEOPLE WOULD SELL UP THEIR CANIKON FOR THIS. ARE YOU LISTENING SONY.
Rhys, no they are not. This isn’t a Sony web site and they probably have disdain for rumor sites.
There are plenty of great FF e-mount lenses down to T1.5 in the Zeiss CP2 line. They just cost $4,000 and up.
meanwhile….
IBIS???
Low cost full frame E mount lenses :
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/896977-REG/Rokinon_cv85m_nex_85mm_T_1_5_Cine_AS.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/896967-REG/Rokinon_cv35_nex_35mm_T1_5_Cine_Lens.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/896985-REG/Rokinon_cv14m_nex_14mm_T_3_1_Cine_IF.html
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/896981-REG/Rokinon_cv24m_nex_24mm_T1_5_Cine_Ed.html
35/2.8 is ridiculous, but 55/1.8 and 85/1.8 are good enough on FF. I consider the latter a reasonable compromise of size, price and performance.
I agree. If the 35 was 1.8 I would have bought into the system.
Totally agree with you. 35/2.8 is a point and shoot lens is not really appealing. 55/1.8 is a perfect all-rounder. 85/1.8 is fast by any standard. 85/1.4 might be faster but rarely it is necessary given the shallow depth of field.
“35/2.8 is a point and shoot”
Wow, one can read all kind of stuff here.
+1
It’s kind of true. Why spend all that money on a full frame sensor to put 2.8 glass in front of it?
You would be better off with apsc and a 24mm F1.4 glass with a different system.
Its pretty obvious right? there will be future lens for this system. and with adapters, you can mount other lenses on it. You mean pros cant shoot without F1.4 lenses ??
Strawman.
I guess f/2.8 macros are a waste of time then, as well as f/2.8 zooms.
Have you got a link to some of your work, Rhys?
Well, that makes more sense than RX-styled-body-with-leaf-shutter-lenses. Let’s hope these cameras will be better featured than the NEX-7.
“A fast 35mm, 50mm and 85mm (all f/1.4) should have been made for the system right from the start…” I am fine with MF, and I already have these lenses, all Zeiss, all adapted to E-mount. So just bring me that camera! 😀
Zeiss and Sony thought of you.
How very nice of them! 🙂
+1 The folks that will pony up for this camera already own fast fullframe glass!
Yes but most pro’s who pony up for this system want auto focus, they want smaller fast FF glass what mirrorless can provide.
Your wish list is unlikely to be another’s, period.
Any info about proper PDAF for A-mount lens on FF-NEX with simple adapter?
I need it to work good with 70-200mm f/2.8
Lens suggestions… Easy… Look at the ze/zf zeiss lineup and miniaturize it. It can be done, you just have to actually try (just see what Sony achieved with sensors).
I don’t know man, but sensor(electronic) and lens(glass) miniaturization are two totally different things. Electronic gadgets are bound to follow Moore’s law, while glass not so much.
Andrea any further information on the sensor? 32 MP?
When it comes to lenses I think a wide angle is needed, something like a 21mm or even an 18mm. Doesn’t need to be superfast if the camera can handle high ISO. And then it is not only about speed 85 f/1.8 could be an ideal portrait lens if it is great qualitywise (e.g. like the A Mount Zeiss 85mm f/1,4 without the CA’s). I don’t need the extra stop f1.8 gives you a small enough DOF and again if the cam can handle ISO 3200 or even 6400 well who cares…
But anyway I will buy this cam for sure, the 35mm lens is fine and for the rest I will use manual M Mount lenses…
Cool! Sounds great! A 24-70 f2.8 would make sense, together with some fixed lenses. No sweat though since I have all this manual prime glass that will work on such body. IBIS would be fantastic, and this z-moving sensor even more, but I guess this will come later, maybe in one of these SLR-like DX bodies.
If they make a 24-70 2.8, that pretty much makes the 35 2.8 redundant.
However if they do release a good 24-70 and the bodies have 5 axis is then that would be a workable solution for me, and I can make do with the 85 1.8 for shallow dof.
why redudant: there’ll certainly be a HUGE difference in sizes !
+1
I don’t think you think like a photographer who carries gear around all day.
I am pretty sure, when Sony releases F1.4 lens, people like you would scream HUGE HUGE HUGE till the end of the world.
Mirrorless FF fast primes don’t need to be big or heavy, look at the M mount lenses.
No doubt Sony could release a plastic turd and you would apologise for them.
Angle of incidence of light, AF motors and lens design dependent on small elements to move for AF to work are factors that account for AF lenses being larger than their MF counterparts.
See all Nikon equivalents today to their own designs from back in the day.
My pick
21mm f2.8
40mm f2
90mm f2
“If they make a 24-70 2.8, that pretty much makes the 35 2.8 redundant.”
You are so full of crap.
If you want something the size of a 28-70/2.8 then just buy a D800!
Weird comment. I want a Sony and don’t like many issues about the D800.
Don’t be silly dude.. I got 3 D800E’s and a 24-70mm 2.8 and a plethora of F1.4 glass.
If Sony wants some of my money (and people like me), which I would think most businesses would as after all the high end is where the profit is. They need to give us a solution we don’t already have. Sony has the ability to offer pretty much everything Canikon can in terms of performance (and more if they include 5 axis IS) but in a smaller lighter package. What people like me won’t do however is sacrifice the quality of our pictures for a smaller package (F2.8 glass for example), because while our shoulders won’t be suffering as much.. our business would.
I guess Sony hasn’t heard of the Halo effect and how that would also impact the rest of their camera business. I’m only here because the RX1 got my attention, else Sony wouldn’t even feature on my radar.
If you’re a pro who has to haul around 24-70/2.8 or zoom trilogy for work, then you need a camera that will be balanced when mounting big-heavy lenses. You obviously understand this dilemma if you own three D800s!
For myself, I wouldn’t be caught dead at a restaurant with such ridiculous looking equipment. A mirrorless with large sensor and small primes is what I need. The fact that I can avoid compromising optical quality by choosing fast and small manual glass is what seals the advantage.
Also, what pros want is irrelevant given they represent a fraction of enthusiast spending. Fast AF glass will come to the NEX fullframe in time, but it’s hardly reasonable to expect a complete line-up at launch.
I don’t think you get it.
This full frame is mirrorless. The Lenses while still bigger than APSC E mount, should still be much smaller than A/F/EF mount full frame equivalents, zooms AND primes.
FF F2.8 does not compete with what Fuji already offers with APSC. Hence this is going to be a hard sell for Sony when it could have been a no brainer for a hoard of eager buyers.
If you have 3 D800s and need something much smaller additionally, you can buy the RX1 or a NEX7 with prime lens. All people who only want to use a Sony system need a fast prime standard zoom with AF asap.
I think they should have started with a f/1.4 trio (35-50-75) similar to newer asph Leicas.
Although Zeiss doesn’t have a tradition of fast rangefinder lenses, cosina voigtlaender does.
And they produce Zeiss ZM lenses already, so I knwo they can do it, if they want.
I expect lenses like this will appear when it looks like sales will be more than a couple of dozen.
Maybe the 35mm is a pancake? – that would explain the slower maximum aperture. Remember when the fist NEX cameras were realeased, everybody was screaming for pancake lenses.
Either that or they may be having problems getting good corner resolution with a faster wide angle lens.
According to the leaked tech specs, it is somewhere between the SEL35F18 and SEL20F28 in size, which, while not a pancake, is still quite small.
Makes sense. Some people are always whining that NEX lenses are much too big in relation to the body – so at least one of the lenses needs to be small. They probably also don’t want to directly compete with the RX1 with its 35mm f/2 lens.
For prime lens I prefer 50mm f1.4 but I can imagine the construction would be very complicated considering the design of the lens must be compact to suit NEX cameras, not to mention it is a FF lens as well.
+1 for manual focus 3rd party lenses
For me, and I presume many others, it will largely depend on how well they implement manual focus (which Fuji rules in mirrorless, at the moment).
55/1.8… too slow ??
20% bigger and in NEX 7 form factor, send me one asap, lol. I’ll live without the lens selection at first, it’ll hardly be worse than what we endure with APS-C NEX at launch, lol.
I’ll stick my excellent cherry picked MF lenses on it and be happy 🙂
AND I still want Sony to give us a refreshed 7 with fast AF, in case I can’t afford the FF baby yet !!
Body sounds nice. My choice for the first kit lense to come with a nex ff would have been a pancake 40/2.0. That would have shown the major benefit of a nex ff – size!
Personally, I’m in it for the M-lenses which cannot be beat on size and image quality! Lots of Leica fans will like this camera.
Well i like to see a 24-105 mm F2.8 and/or F4. Perhaps they also could make an A-Mount version of this lens 🙂
And good Pancake Primes would also be nice, but i think we will have to wait for them, because there are already cropped ones.
Admin: do you know if the SEL 70-400 II has OSS?
55 F1.8 and 85 F1.8 are fast enough…especially for full frame.
Please tell me that this 20% size increase means that I can’t use the Voigtländer M-mount lenses. That would truly suck.
Because of increased flange focal distance that is…
This is E-Mount. Changing the flange focal distance would mean that all existing E-mount-lenses couldn´t be used any more. And by the way M-Mount flange focal distance is 50% longer than E-Mount´s.
But nevertheless it will be very interesting to learn how M-Mount wide angle lenses work on the FF-Nex´s sensor. Even on some APS-C sized Nexes this is problematic.
Rainer
OK, 50% sounds reassuring.
In what way have wide angles been problematic on APS-C sized NEXes?
My wishes:
– 14mm pancake (can be up to f/4, I’d favor size over speed)
– 24mm pancake (can be up to f/4, I’d favor size over speed)
– 35mm f/2 compact (balance to find between size and speed)
– 50mm f/2 compact (balance to find between size and speed)
– 50mm f/1.4 or lower (yes, a really fast 50mm in addition to a compact one)
– 85 f/1.8 or lower
– 135 f/2
@ derdide
I’d favour IQ over both size and speed.
Sometimes pancake means optically not so good.
+1 even so I don’t need a 14mm could be a 18mm
100mm F2.8 macro
I think the same I thought about the first APS-C NEX models; why the hell want people to put huge lenses on a small camera?
Just taking the old C/Y line into account something like those lenses would make sense and keep system size small
Something like a 21/3.5, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 45/2.8 pancake, 50/2, 50/1.7, 50/1.4, 55/1.2, 85/2.8 (better f2)
All those lenses are small and would work great with the FF NEX; faster lenses are always nice but I would rather keep size small in exchange for 1EV speed
For zooms I would like a 24-60 f4 or 28-50 f2.8
Small camera, small lenses
People complaining about the 35mm 2.8 sure don’t know shit about it – the reviews of this lens on m-mount are nothing short of amazing
Please
25/2
45/2
90/2
for me! All f/2, sharp wide open. Sharp like the best of Sigma, not like an average Zeiss.
+1
add an 18mmf4 and 135mmf2 down the line and I am done with CaNikon 🙂
+1
Don’t have a problem with the rumored lineup and I don’t see this happening soon BUT what and Kobol have outlined would be better IMHO. A 25mm and even 45mm f/2 AF lens would not be small and I do think it makes more sense to prioritize size over speed (at least initially).
I would like to see wide angle lenses
A 24mm shift lens that has almost no distorsion and is much lighter than the canon 24mm tse. A wide angle zoom as well. That can’t come to fast for me.
A 28-135mm would be good to.
My wishes:
– adaptor for Contax G lenses;
– 16-24mm f/4.x zoom;
– Tilt-Shift Macro lens (60-90 mm);
– 135mm lens.
yeah, f/2 but compact & tack sharp wide open and all over the field is better than 1.4 and soft…
++1!! Exactly!
* 24mm, f2 or faster
* 35mm, 1.8 or 1.4
* if with a reasonable size: 24-70
All should be (very) high end, that’s where the market, the advocates of this system are.
For the longer lenses, I will use my a-mount lenses with an adapter. Size wise this will probably not make much difference. Eventually Sony will need to launch also native e-mount longer lenses, but at the start we really need those native wider lenses. Putting an a-mount 24mm with an adapter on a small and nice camera will make it bulky and it will look foolish.
Body sounds nice. My choice for the first kit lense to come with a nex ff would have been a pancake 40/2.0. That would have shown the major benefit of a nex ff – size!
will wait and see, the previous rumour got me all excited, this one is so so. rumours being rumours let’s wait and see 🙂 does just look like the start of NEX APS-C – great bodies and crap lenses
IBIS?
lol… 3000 bucks for the body looks to expensive for me, with slow lenses from Zeiss. And if you have fast lenses you lost the advantage of a lightweight camera. Lens & body overpriced! The RX-1 is cheaper with lens. Fool yourself Sony.
They are releasing two NEX full frame. No news for A-Mount? I am thinking of upgrading to full frame after using A55 for 3 years. It had serve me well. However, after reading all the Rumors and comments, it do sound that Sony is going to drop A-Mount sooner or later. I might be changing to Canon for Full-Frame and keep my Sony APSC for backup only 🙁 I am hopping that A-Mount won’t die.
I wouldn’t worry. The Alpha mount has been around for a long time and I doubt Sony is going to abandon them without giving them some sort of a viable alternative.
Sony has more money than Olympus so I doubt its going to be an adapter based solution like how Olympus has done for 4/3rd users with their EM-1.
As is painfully clear with this FF NEX launch, NEX has precious little lenses and currently the LA-EA2 adapter lacks FF A mount lenses support. So you get a grand total of 3 lenses for the FF NEX at the start.
So I would recommend to stick around with Sony for the time being.
Hey admin, do you happen to know about weather sealing and IBIS?
And, thanks for all the hard work dude 🙂 you are awesome
oh yeah, if it has SEALING & IBIS
and as long as the AF performs well,
the camera is definitely mine !
I’m so sad that they are going with the futuristic nex-7 design, and not with the retro-sexy rx-design 🙁
+1
+1
Retro is soooo yesterday.
+1. I’d go with Fuji if I wanted retro.
Admin / Sony … no matter what you do, what you produce, you can’t apparently please everyone with 1 set of products. Some people apparently prefer faster lenses (which makes them big & bulky), while others prefer small lenses for this portable system (but slower).
I suggest people here should be happy with whatever gets out because it’s priced way below the Leica stuff, and please be patient while Sony develops the complementary (in this case faster) lenses to please the other half.
Plus, with the movable sensor plane on whatever camera gets it, you’ll get AF on Leica lenses.
Correct. 🙂
Sony are making a bundle with the NEX. So, no need to pity them. Criticism is not bad and in fact better than blind fanboyism. 😉
Let us all hope that there will be good, compact and versatile flashes coming with the new FF NEX!
24-70 f2.8
16-35 f2.8
70-200 f4
35mm f2
50mm f1.4
Add a 85mm f/1.4 and you’ve got a solid working pro’s kit that covers 99% of situations that you are likely to encounter. Everything else is GRAVY!
“24-70 f2.8”
Huge.
“16-35 f2.8”
Might be OK-sized.
“70-200 f4”
Huge.
“35mm f2
50mm f1.4′
Actually, on E-mounts 18mm flange, you can make 35/1.4 smaller than 50/1.4. No need for 35mm be slower. 50/1.4 will be big though.
Let’s see what they come back with. Perhaps they will squash em up a bit. If the lenses are too big or too slow, people won’t be interested. Not everyone wants to mess around with primes, and to get the value out of full frame you need the fast glass.
Peevee,
The Sony zeiss 16-35 is longer than the sony zeiss 24-70 (with zoom retracted).
I think there are better lens that are going to be announced with the camera or a little later and be available next year with more of a MF feel. Is the camera being announced on the 24th, 30th sept, or as late as 21st oct?
20% bigger than Nex-7? …. Hope they will manage to not make the camera significantly and visibly bigger, coz size always matters :p.
It would be nice if only length and width increase but not too much thickness. I dont need of a hybrid camera which looks like a bridge one;)…
By the way I think that Sony surely gave up with Nex-7 successor or upgrade and focused on two Nex FF camera. Hope in novembre we will be fixed :p
Nex 7 have measurements of my Nexus One phone (119 x 59,8 x 11,5 mm) with more thickness and i believed it was a perfect size for a high end compact camera from 21th century :p…
Now with the FF sensor we will have a Galaxy Note alike camera ( sorry for the comparison 😉
If it has IBIS it will need to be thicker than existing NEX cameras.
Only a good 28mm 1.8 is needed for me
Admin said: “Send me your third-party lens tests done on the VG900.”
What I can contribute is a set of samples taken with the Leica M (Typ 240) and the following lenses:
– Leica Summilux 50mm f/1.4 ASPH
– SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 50mm T0.95
– Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH (V1)
– Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4 G
– Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 G
The last one produced the most impressive results. The article also explains why I sold the Leica M after a short time and started “waiting for the better M” (in fact the full frame NEX).
The article:
http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=143&catid=40&Itemid=2
It seems that FF lenses will suits my NEX6 APS-C E mount. What will be the pro / cons of using those FF lenses on a APS-C sensor?
“He didn’t like the lenses. The zooms are to big and the primes not fast enough. The NEX-FF camera will appeal pro photographer but Sony didn’t make the right lenses yet (so he says). He hopes they do it in future.”
That is simply unavoidable with that flat FF sensor.
i guess now the question is what kind of adaptor will we use for a-mount lens on that body.
and if the new adaptor will feature the same problems as that of the vg900. in that case i’ll stick to my 5n till sony decides to quit frustrating their loyal customers.
Let’s hope the AF is good. RX1 would be really tempting, but the AF is bad. Part of me is glad that the AF of RX1 sucks, because as it is, it is not a tempting camera. If RX1 had similar AF as GX7 for example, I think I’d own it already and be 3000 eur poorer 🙂
yes the 35mm lens could be faster but it does NOT ruin the whole ‘nex fullframe’ concept – at least for me. im very pleased that sony will offer more high quality ‘compact’ cameras and one of them might replace my bulky alpha 850. there is too much drama going on right now…
The 35 lens is an important lens. It should be a reason TO buy the camera, not a reason to NOT buy the camera.
Sony dropped a clanger making it a 2.8.
Are there any news from the Nex-7 successor or stopped Sony the whole project?
85mm f1.4 is a waste of glass. At 1.4 on that focal length your depth of field is going to be stupidly short…
I’m guessing the camera has the Oly 5 axis IBIS, and it will accept M Mount lenses via an adaptor, so you will have access to fast lenses but they will be expensive. Eventually I would like to see the following lenses
24 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 50mm f1.2 & 85mm f1.4 and I expect the lenses to be much smaller than A mount equivalents. They will be expensive even if they are not ZA’s. Yet again it would appear Sony are starting a new system with a poor selection of lenses, they haven’t learnt from Nex.
If Sony can make a mirrorless full-frame that is smaller than my 5DMKII, have IBIS (Olympus or otherwise), PDAF for my EF lenses, then smaller and slower primes is welcomed, in my book.
Most of the time, this camera would have small lenses attached.
Lenses that I would buy.
21mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.2 or f/1.4
90mm f/2 or f/2.8 macro
135mm f/2
I don’t think these would be too large or heavy. For example Leica has made small and fast full frame lenses for ages so it should be possible, since there is no mirror in this camera.
However personally I’m not too bothered if Sony/Zeiss does not release lens “dream team” right away, allowing that lenses from other FF systems can be easily used with adapters without severe vigneting etc. I already own a couple of old Konica Hexanons (40mm f/1.8 & 50mm f/1.4) that should be just the right size for this camera.
55mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 is fine ~ f/1.4 is only half a stop difference and the slightly larger minimum aperture should mean the the price will be a little less and the size a little smaller than if these lenses had been f/1.4. If the lenses have good IQ wide open is more important than if they have an f/1.4 or f/1.8 maximum aperture.
35mm f/2.8 does seem rather slow – perhaps they were having trouble achieving good corner resolution with a faster wide angle lens? Hope the camera is very good at high iso to compensate.
I meant “slightly smaller minimum aperture” – not slightl larger.
A FF 28mm f/2.0 and a super compact 20mm f/4.0 is a must have for the NEX-FF.
What an unsatisfactory solution if neither the camera nor the longer primes and zooms have no stabilization.
Excuse the poor grammar — double negative.
Suggestions for Lenses –
16-50 f2.8
60mm Macro f2.8 based on the same Zuiko design. Or maybe all Zuiko lenses might be available for Sony after their partnership.
Andrea, your source indicated that he didn’t like the lenses because the zooms were too big, and the primes are too slow.
Can we read into this that the zooms will be fast? Any further “hints” on this?
Taking comfort in the fact that they are “too big” and not “ridiculously huge” 😉
As they are described as ‘too big’, I’m hopping they F2.8.
If they are not 2.8 and are F4 or something, without IBIS this system in dead in the water.
Tend to agree. If zooms are f4, I’d probably stick with the 16-70mm on the APS-C (or in crop mode).
FF might still be ok with primes though ….
Interesting.
35 2.8 is about as dumb as it get’s. There is no reason why a 35 1.8 needs to cost the earth or be massive.
People looking to spend this much on a body usually don’t want cheap slow lenses.
Sorry replied to wrong comment
No IBIS will be to bad.
Since to compensate you will need fast lenses and that you will not have.
Maybe a future version. 🙁 Definitely not worth cca $3000
They should have made it sensor shift AF, IBIS and approach lens design based on that sort of body to keep them small as they can be.
I think SONY being clever here with 35mm f2.8
-good start lens
-not too expensive (as body will be…)
-can be easily bundled with camera for reasonable price as a kit
-still protecting sales of RX1 (for those who need f2)
-WILL be sharp
-I wish for 24mm f2 or greater and 85mm f1.8
..cannot wait 😀
I’m reading this and all i can see is: don’t buy 16-70! don’t buy it!
I guess Sony prioritizes image quality, price and small size over large aperture. My ideal collection of lenses for a FF Nex:
24mm/2,8 City -and landscapes
35mm/1,8 (2,8) Convenient walk-around – the first lens I would buy
85mm/1,8 OS Portraits and landscape
24-120/3,5 OS “All-in-one”
DOF is narrow enough on FF, and this saves cost and weight.
Camera must be responsive and have fast AF, best EVF around. IS would be great as well. 20% larger than Nex-7 sounds right.
If DOF is narrow enough on full frame, 1.4 (or 1.2) primes wouldn’t be so popular would they.
At least :
35 1.8, 50 1.8, 85 1.8
i.e. the 3 main primes every 24*36 system need, since decades.
35 2.8 is too close in DOF to the sony zeiss E 24 1.8, (even not far from Oly 17 1.8). However it seems compact…
Lens suggestions:
35mm f/1.8 or f/2
28mm f/2 or 2.8
24mm f/2 or 2.8
18 or 20mm f/2.8 f/3.5 or f/4 – (landscape)
105mm f 2.8 macro
Why not faster? Size, weight and price.
Sony are learning that when it comes to lenses the choice is between compact, fast and affordable. You get to pick two.
Physics will not be denied.
Why is SONY wasting resources on the compact mirror less cameras when consumer interest in them is falling.
Sony should be focusing/re-doubling its efforts in the APSC or Full Frame DSLR type camera market where there is strong and growing demand.
All of those lenses should have been produced for A-Series cameras where their is strong demand. Not focusing its effort on a niche market with relatively low sales.
The replacements for the A99, A88, and A77 (A9, A8, and A7) should have been released already.
Why did you decide that consumer interest in them is falling?
http://www.43rumors.com/camera-slaes-history-from-2011-till-today-mirrorless-hype-is-over-dslr-rules/
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/08/08/nikon-cuts-2013-sales-forecast-citing-poor-mirrorless-camera-sales
http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/08/09/weak-demand-for-mirrorless-cameras-hurting-manufacturers
http://investorplace.com/2013/08/nikon-and-cameras/
http://marketing-research-firm.blogspot.ca
I didn’t decide the market did.
The market is buying DSLRs.
Ah, yeah, those numbers. They can be deceiving, I certainly won’t draw the conclusion that interest is fading. Looks more like they overproduced and are readjusting. Also, one brand can be going up, while another down. Also, there weren’t many high-end mirrorless options until now and more specifically a FF one. To top that off, if you look at the numbers, DSLRs aren’t doing well either.
All the evidence you are sighting talk about Nikon’s failure. Does not necessarily mean Sony’s failure. Sony’s pushing for more mirrorless because they are getting good return on them.
True, but not Sony’s DSLR/SLT. Have you compared Sony DSLR/T vs Sony mirrorless? I haven’t, but I bet mirrorless sales are better.
You Three and the People who love the
Highly Proprietary SONY MIS Multi Interface Shoe
Right?
Mirrorless plus Highly Proprietary Ports
Winning Combination.
DSLRs are a safe option. People generally choose between Canon or Nikon – who pretty much offer the same thing in the same price band.
Choosing a mirrorless is a lot more confusing for people – there are more players, more formats, and a wider variety of cameras, and no clear long term market leaders.
Why is SONY wasting resources on the compact mirror less cameras when consumer interest in them is falling.
– IMHO the “high-end” mirrorless like RX1, RX100 and NEX is actually on the rise, and Sony is investing on that. The “SLR-like” mirrorless also seems to be promising, look at Panasonic GH series. Again, Sony just launched the ILC A3000 to probe the market, time will tell.
“Sony should be focusing/re-doubling its efforts in the APSC or Full Frame DSLR type camera market where there is strong and growing demand.”
– I believe that’s also what they’re doing now, in a different way by eventually replacing SLT’s with “SLR-like” mirrorless with both PDAF and CDAF on sensor.
All of those lenses should have been produced for A-Series cameras where their is strong demand. Not focusing its effort on a niche market with relatively low sales.
– I agree, Sony must do a quicker job in launching great lenses for A-mount, replacing the some of the older designs.
The replacements for the A99, A88, and A77 (A9, A8, and A7) should have been released already.
– The A99 is a brand new and fantastic camera, Sony should only replace it when they have a really superior “breakthrough” camera. That may occur on the second half of 2014 when OSPDAF is proven reliable and at least at the same level in performance as current PDAF. The A58, A65 and A77 replacements will come first to help better define and prove that new technology effectively.
Those figures and charts include a lot of the little toy crap that is getting usurped by cell phones.
It’d be interesting to see SLR camera sales compared to just “DSLR replacement” mirrorless camera sales.
Finally, it doesn’t matter. Mirrorless is still the smart play.
(1) A $1000 mirrorless is so dramatically cheaper to produce than a $1000 SLR that you need a fraction of the sales volume to be successful.
(2) Mirrorless hasn’t reached its potential. Lack of FF35 sensors, lack of professional lenses, consumer perception of the limitation of EVFs, actual limitations of EVFs, lack of “professional” bodies, there are plenty of ways to make mirrorless more compelling. DSLRs have peaked. Look at the 5D2 vs 5D3. It’s the same damn camera. There’s nothing left to add. There’s no reason for a 5D2 owner to buy a 5D3.
I’m with Lee on this one.
Mind you that America is such a big market that lack of interest in Mirrorless (because American’s like to look tough and ready) in America does reflect quickly for a worldwide statistic view. If you doubt my analysis of why America is so big consumer wise, see the pricing that American’s get for any product compared to the rest of the world. Thats the kind of volume we are talking about. Europe manages not as much, but for marketing and pricing purposes, every country is its own market so the prices are calculated at much lower shifting volumes than for America (even if the EU does have plenty of volume)
That DPReview article is a very cheeky pick. Nikon is the poster child (next to Canon) on how to half ass-edly enter the mirrorless market. It is almost insulting to the mirrorless revolution. They say: “OK, here…this is what you get from us…so much whining why we didnt come up with something like this before. Here, get some…get some…trust us, its got our logo on it, it’ll be great..NOT”
Mirrorless is solid and Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Fuji clearly show that this is the way.
Otherwise, we would there be 300+ comments here?
I must admit consider all the hype we hear about mirrorless sales success especially from the mFT congregation .That the detailed figures that monitor actual manufacturing and shipping numbers from CIPA link below. Show in the first 6 months of this year that DSLR accounted for 84.6% of the market leaving the remaining 15.4% to cover all mirrorless.
That is quite a small number when you consider the players involved even if we assume Nex and mFT account for two thirds of this that puts them both at around 5%,at its peak Olympus had 9% of the DSLR market maybe it is no surprise that the real financials of the imaging divisions from Sony,Olympus Pan sonic are doing so badly
oops forgot the link
http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/dizital.html
Though it doesn’t make for good reading, the future will be all mirrorless but we have a ways to go
According to those reports the sales of QX camera was ZERO in the past.
Haha, nice one.
I do not think that this is about the product category, but about the offering:
– The market for full format mirrorless is small, because there there are very few products in it, and none of them priced for consumers.
– The market for APS-C mirrorless has
* the NEXes, with their terrible UI and lack of fast zooms. The kit lens is worse than the APS-C offerings from Canon and Nikon, and the prosumers have been holding off because the update for the flagship model seemed imminent for more than a year. Only the Nex-6 is current and has a viewfinder.
* the Fujis, which are great, but a little limited in the lens-department, and not exactly cheap either,
* the slightly immature Canons and
* the not well established Samsungs
– The market for sub APS-C mirrorless is being cannibalized by smartphones and high-end compacts, because smaller sensors mean less shallow depth of field.
Thus, entry level DSLRs may be more bulky and clumsy, but offer the same image quality and more lenses for less money than Sony and Fuji. This will change: soon, mirrorless cameras with viewfinders will be priced right, have enough lenses, and DSLR’s will still be bulky.
If Sony created a sexy full frame system with sexy camera’s and lenses, Pros would switch in droves. When Pro’s switch, the amateurs follow as they get whatever they feel looks ‘pro’.
The perfect camera for functionality and tech imo is the latest Olympus OMD but sensor size is it’s achilles heal. The best aesthetically pleasing camera is the Leica & Fuji’s, but they lack in some areas of innovation and technological features.
If Sony created a system with the features of OMD, and the styling of Leica (Similar to RX1 styling but maybe with an EVF built in), Sony would clean up. They would literally dominate the market as there would not be a single competitor.
Most of the people here who are happy with the 35 2.8 lens just seem to care about size and weight like that’s the only metric that matters. I don’t know why these people don’t just get and stick with an Olympus OMD. This crowd of demand is not doing Sony any good. It’s diverting Sony away from a path that would bring them allot of success.
Look at the RX1, AMAZING camera. Photo blogs gave it high praise and some even called it camera of the year. All I heard people say was, “I hope this is a proof of concept like the X100 was for Fuji”. I didn’t buy the camera (although I nearly did) because I wanted to wait for an interchangeable lens alternative. What the RX1 did do however is put Sony on the map for me. Never would I have considered buying a Sony.
However instead of giving people a more technically advanced Leica like system, they seem to want to give us an ugly nex (not sure why Sony can’t make nice looking camera’s except for RX100+RX1) and mediocre glass. The F1.8 is good enough to start with before releasing F1.4 later, but F2.8 just isn’t going to get people excited, except for the people who should probably just buy an Olympus system.
If Sony makes a small, simple ring adaptor for a-mount lenses to use (with AF) on this camera then this will mitigate the small lens line-up for now. Given the price and Sony’s desire to sell more a-mount lenses next year, including this adaptor with the camera would be a smart move (precedent: they include an a-mount adaptor with the VG9000).
+1
I’ll be shocked and pissed if they do not provide such an adapter. With all the great Alpha lenses already available I do not understand why so many people care what new E-mount lenses are coming out?!?! When you consider we will also be able to use legacy lenses and Nikon and Canon this rumored new Nex will have more lenses available to use on it than and lens in history! Some might need to manually focused but that what “contrast peaking” is all about. It remains to be seen how well this Z-axis focusing works.
There are already two such adapters from Sony. LA-EA1 and LA-EA2. Though if they have on sensor PDAF working like Olympus does with the EM-1 (and you would think so considering that Sony developed that sensor) they could bring out an LA-EA3, like the 2 but without the SLT mirror (will need to focus motor for screw drive lenses).
With on sensor PDAF, LA-EA1 should work with all SAM and SSM lenses.
Bro yes, it’s the LA-EA3 as you describe it that I’m hoping for. It’s not clear to me if the LA-EA1 and LA-EA2 support Full Frame lenses, as they were designed to be used on an APS-C Nex camera.
I only own two SSM lenses (cz 24~70mm f/2.8 and a Sony 300mm f2.8) The vast majority of my Alpha FF lenses are older Alpha screw-drive lenses. I trust (hope) that Sony will provide us with a path to continue to use this great old FF glass.
Big zoom lenses + FF NEX 20% bigger than the NEX-7…I don’t see the point over the competitor’s DSLR cameras which have many advantages like already available good lenses, cheap lenses, good color rendition.
agreed with you
The advantage is the ability to adapt lenses from nearly every system while maintaining the full resolution of the lens and it’s true focal length (plus the other associated full frame benefits which have been discussed to death).
I am interested in getting one to supplement my a99 for interior, architecture & product shoots since I could then use Canon tilt-shift lenses (of which there are no sony options and a lone Rokinon option).
i think his comment was about the size, if everything becomes bigger then Sony Nex FF will compete against DSLR
A body 20% larger than the NEX-7 should still be smaller than the a3000 or Canon SL1 and it will certainly be the smallest FF interchangeable camera available. The competitors for this camera will most likely be other full frame bodies not other small mirror-less cameras.
So:
Leica M9
Canon 5d3
Canon 6d
Sony RX1
Sony a99
Nikon d600
Nikon d800
Some may purchase it as a secondary / additional body others in lieu of – thanks to the adaptability.
IMHO the lens line up mentioned is OK. It has the right focal lengths and the not-so fast 35mm will be small and light, which is good. You can always use a slightly higher ISO if really needed for low light and the DOF on FF at f2.8 is shallow enough to isolate a subject in most cases.
You say: ” Instead we will get a 35mm f/2.8, 55mm f/1.8 and likely a 85mm f/1.8 Zeiss lenses. Good lenses but still not as good as hoped.”
Given we have not seen production examples, in what way can you say these are not good. You seem to be confusing f numbers with quality. There is essentially zero practical difference between 1.4 and 1.8 in daily use, and the number has no direct relation to the image quality. True, 2.8 for the 35mm may be a bit slow for some use,but I think most serious photographers can live with it so long as image quality is excellent what we expect from Zeiss.
Personally I am much more concerned about image quality (and possibly saving a few bucks or a few ounces) than about fractions of f stops.
A large number of people buy lenses due to their aperture. A 35mm F8 lens with perfect optical quality is useless for me.
F2.8 at 35mm is just plain boring.
Wide angle lenses are generally used for shots that need plenty of depth of field. I have never found f/2.8 or 3.5 to be a limitation on a 35mm lens. It is much more likely to be used at f/8 or f/11.
For longer lenses such as 50mm or 85mm, a wider aperture may be useful, if you want shallow depth of field. I feel this has become something of a cliche.
+1 I don’t need a f1.8 when taking landscapes. I would leave faster apertures to a 50mm and a 90mm, being (at least to me) the fifty a perfect all round lens, and the ninety a portrait lens.
Of course you can use every focal lenght for many subjects, but usually that’s what I would consider them for.
(I took landscapes even on 150mm equivalent)
35/2,8 is a classic design. It has only lately become a high tech hobby to absolutely want thin DOF from any focal length:
When people were still interested in photography (not lens tech and test charts), they used a 85mm for portraits, 50mm for full body in environment portraits and 35 (or28mm) for wide angle scenes.
Thin DOF is not important with a 35mm lens, because you use 35mm to show MORE of the scene, not to fade out most of it via ultra large aperture.
F2.8 is too slow. I don’t need bokeh on a 35mm but do need the speed for low light. F1.4 to f2.8 is a huge difference. Also at f2.8 it is basically same speed as zeiss 24mm f1.8. so…why would I pay more?
Your logic is a bit skewed , you imply that you need DOF only when you shoot a portrait and that you don’t need it when using a wide angle lens. This means with a wide angle you always shoot only environment and never want to separate a group of people or even a few more elements in the scene. Do you see that you have limited use depending on the angle? Whereas with a wide angle and fast aperture on FF you can shoot more things than just backgrounds.
Take a look at some photos made using the Brenzier method
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=brenzier+method&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=p7cyUsO4GKTJiAeYi4GICA&biw=1680&bih=880&sei=qrcyUr28G8KxlQW4nIHYAQ
So are you Sir. How many times have you been beating this drum today?
So get a full frame 35mm F1.4.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8343/8194434390_dcb0dbdbea_k.jpg
35/f2 vs 35/f2.8 is a moot point as dof is so large you will not see a noticable difference in subject isolation. No doubt they are leaving room for a future fast 35.
This ‘fractions of f-stops makes no difference’ line is rubbish.
You may not use your lenses at the limit but many of us do. Noise matters. Depth of field matters. ‘Close enough’ may be how you operate but please don’t tell us what we need and what we can see.
Have fun with your mid-range zoom and let us worry about the other stuff.
I’m a little bit in the same case. I love night photography, and it would be the main reason for me to buy a full frame camera. I think that 35mm f/2.8 with a full frame sensor isn’t bad at all, but if I’m to buy a full frame camera with good and expensive lenses, 35mm f/1.8 (or faster if possible) would be more than welcomed. With that, I could get very dim shots handheld. I already can get some of these shots handheld, but the noise is a problem, and trying to stabilize the camera for half a second while taking a picture is hard and can take several tries before the shot is acceptable to me. When I can, I carry a tripod, of course. But there are many occasions where I just cannot bring a tripod with me all day long for the time when I’m going to go out and take pictures after work, per example. I read people asking in comments “why would you need a lens that’s that fast?”, or “you’re not into photography, you’re into gear”, but I think they should be reminded that there are many different styles of photography, and that some of these styles are made easier (or even possible) because of new technologies.
a full frame lens like the Voigtlander 12mm (though a little faster or a bit wider) would be great!
Is that a joke?
Why?
I just find it unlikely that Sony is going to launch a new mount with one of the first lenses being the widest lens on any system. Something more mainstream seems more likely.
Sorry maybe I misread it I just initially thought that this post was trolling.
Ah, I was just asking. Agreed, they won’t go for such a specialized lens.
Is there nobody interested in the sensor? Who cares about lenses when you can mount m mount lenses. You get the best setup one can buy for the system… 28 cron, 50 lux and 90 cron and you are done (at least I am). Yes some AF lenses might be nice but first and foremost it need to have a great sensor! Only then I would welcome some wide angles (18 or 21) and a tele like the Zeiss 135 for A Mount.
I am primarily interested in the sensor.
I do not want to have to accept a lower resolution ff camera than my c camera, therefore it should be 2.25 x the pixels as ths c camera approximately.
I want the same picture but more of it.
If this new camera is only 36mp I will definitely not be buying it.
“If this new camera is only 36mp I will definitely not be buying it.”
do you need this for image cropping or massive prints? as long as you are not planning to stick a lens like the zeiss distagon 1.4/55 mm on it there will definitely be no increase in ‘real’ image resolution because glass has a resolution limit. this is the megapixel marketing trap.
I routinely utilize tiiffs of 100+ mp which i need to creat by stitching.
I am often forced to use images that are lower in resolution than I want because it is very difficult to take stitchable images of living animals.
My oictures are used as reference and require enough detail to determine the strure of things like feathers scales eye structures etc,As well as showing the complete animal.
Your lens resolution limit argument is total nonsense.
As line pairs get closer and closer the lens continues to resolve then with gradually decreasing contrast.
A typical high quality prime is rated at over 300lp/mm (thats about 300mp for full frame or 100mp for c) but if the sensor has enough dynamic range to pick up lower contrast fine deatail could conceivably resolve double the rated resolution (4x the mp)
Since we are not talking about more than 32mp for c and 75mp for ff max lens resolution is totally not an issue.
Furthermore better nee lenses are introduced almost every day
Many mirrorless cameras struggle with wider angle m-mount lenses. We’ll have to see how the NEX FF handles them before we can say just go leica.
Assuming the full frame NEX is a ‘better’ NEX7 (already a very good camera), I’ll move to that.
Lenses: I’ll keep the 16-70 f4 Zeiss as my walkaround lens, recognizing that it will perform in crop mode and deliver a useful equivalent to 24-105. I hope to see a 70-200 f4 e-mount crop lens — I’ll buy that too. I don’t expect zoom lenses to replace primes, and for me better to trade smaller size over FF ability and maximum aperture.
As for full frame e-mount lenses, I’d like three primes — a 24 f2 (which would serve as a 36 f2 in crop mode), a 50 f1.4 (75 in crop) and an 85 f2. Those five lenses, a full frame body (I should say I expect it to have a 36MP sensor or similar), an EVF that is improved from the already good one in my NEX7 …. and I’m set. I have plenty of legacy lenses that I would use occasionally — my exisiting long teles, macros and super wides are all fine, but my personal usage of those lenses doesn’t justify buying them again in a new mount. Truth be told, I probably shouldn’t have bought them at all, but I did, decades ago, so they’re available if the urge strikes.
I never use AF, and I have OSS turned off 99% of the time, so neither feature will sell me one way or the other.
JMHO
I honestly could care less about the initial lenses coming out for the FF NEX. Ever since first confirmed rumors of the FF NEX, I have been collecting old Konica Hexanon and Hexar glass. I’ll have more than enough glass to keep me occupied.
This is what I have so far:
100 mm F2.8
50 mm F1.4
40 mm F1.8
35 mm F2
24 mm F2.8
21 mm F4
You are not alone 😉
I wish I had more money to start getting more lenses too… You guys are lucky! 🙂
Same here!
I have:
28mm 3.5
40mm 1.8
55mm 3.5 Macro
57mm 1.4
100mm 2.8
200mm 3.5
All glorious in their own rights.
I envy your wides for sure though… ;D
Lens envy…nice. On a serious note, I just check KEH and ebay once or thrice a week for Konica lenses. I just purchased the last 35mm f2.8 fron KEH for $50. 🙂
I skipped to the end, but what zoom lenses is the source talking about? I thought the system was supposed to launch with three prime lenses (35, 50, 85). I don’t mind 85mm and 50mm f1.8 lenses if they’re priced well and perform as well as the Sony APS-C primes that I have (35mm, 50mm). I guess this means the rumored 85mm f1.8 NEX lens is full frame.
I am just worried that being a Zeiss branded lens we would expect a sticker price of at least $700 or more for a slow zoom. If this lens was selling for $300 I doubt there would be too many complaints. But if its priced at a Zeiss level then there could be lots of detractors of this lens.
“I am just worried that being a Zeiss branded lens we would expect a sticker price of at least $700 or more for a slow zoom.”
You bet! I’d even assume they will not sell a (Zeiss) zoom for less than 850 or 900. If it is Zeiss quality, means: superior micro contrast and good colour rendition & sharpness, it is worth that money.
A good FF camera with a great sensor (which is still unvertain with the Nex FF) and a set of high quality lenses is a setup that one can keep for 10 years.
People just have to stop buying new cameras and lenses every 3 months, then they will be able to afford it. Just slowly, one piece after the other. Patience is a virtue.
How about the 5 axis ibis? Is that present in the new ff nex camera?
I need a 24mm or 28mm lens too. Can be F2.8 or even F4.0, it is for landscape.
A small and light lens would be perfect for me.
Obviously the idea is failing. Because a zoom or a fast prime to cover full frame is big and heavy. And they are struggling (sony) they figured out how to make camera smaller. But they figured out that a zoom would habe to be large or fast primes. They would habe to do slow primes to make it compact or even less remarkable zooms
Low light performance is getting so good that I think the obsession with wide apertures has gotten out of hand. Seriously? We’re upset that they’re making 1.8’s instead of 1.4’s? We’d rather have a giant 35/1.4 than an appropriate-size-for-the-camera 35/2.8 when there’s no getting shallow DoF at that focal length anyway? Come on.
+1 and a big thank you, you are so right!
+1
+1
+1
“We’d rather have a giant 35/1.4 than an appropriate-size-for-the-camera 35/2.8 when there’s no getting shallow DoF at that focal length anyway? Come on.”
Oh really ?
Sony RX1 R 35mm @ F4 :
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/download/2663190
Joe, Lee was being sarcastic.
Aaaand, I screwed up 🙂
Well, I guess you just proved that 35/2.8 is just fine for getting shallow enough DOF.
As Vlad said, I was being hyperbolic.
Also, that 35/4 can provide sufficient subject isolation is a pretty good supporting point to my argument that we don’t need 35/1.4.
We need at least a 35mm f2 . Yes you do get DOF when you are very close to your subject , but nothing compares to a wide angle shallow dof. Just take a look at some photos done with the Canon 24mm 1.4 and see what I meant.
The only solution will be to get some nice manual lenses.
If you have the patience to go through the almost 400 comments here, you will see that pretty much no one is actually arguing against fast lenses. The whole argument started with people explaining how a 2.8 lens is a “point and shoot”, decided that it will be crap because of its speed, said that Sony is doing the wrong thing and whatnot. So, it is mostly people defending slow lenses.
35mm f1.4 lens are large when on an SLR and needing a retrofocus design for the light to bypass the space the mirror inhabited.
With a small registration distance and the ability for light to hit the sensor at an angle, the optical design can be entirely different and a 35mm f1.4 can still be tiny (as is my Voigtlander)
The question mark might be whether Sony have designed the sensor to cope well with light that isn’t hitting it perpendicular – the NEX-7 certainly had some issues and a fullframe sensor makes the job harder
+1. Sensor capability is the fundamental issue. Whether small fast non-retrofocal lenses can be used follows from this criterion.
Mostly agree, however I still think the 35mm should have been a little faster, say f/2.0. Having that extra stop would come in handy in low light.
Of the 21 M-mount lenses Leica currently offer, only 5 are faster than f/2.
http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/
Over 50mm you cant get a Leica lens faster than f/2
Admin, here are my suggestions on what to do with the NEX-FF based on my experience with using the Nikon FX and DX lenses and cameras.
1. The Sony FF should give the user a choice on whether or not to automatically crop an image when using an E-mount APS-C lens on a FF NEX.
2 Sony should provide a 1.2x crop option on its Sony FF NEX.
The reason for these two requests are as follows:
a. APS-C lenses are smaller and more compact so there will be some instances when the user will choose to mount this on a FF NEX.
b. Some APS-C zoom lenses can fully cover a full-frame image circle once stepped down. For example, I can use the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 designed for Nikon APS-C DX cameras with the full frame Nikon FX D800E if the zoom is set at 16mm focal length. There is still vignetting but this can easily be corrected in post-processing or by stepping it down a bit. For many types of night photography, the vignetting will not even be noticed. I look forward to testing the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 zoom on my full frame D800E once this becomes available.
c. Some APS-C prime lenses have a bigger image circle than 1.5x and can sufficiently cover a 1.2x crop image circle. Case in point, I routinely use my Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX which is an APS-C lens on my D800E using the 1.2x crop. This gives me a compact, small lightweight lens that has an FOV of 42mm f/1.8. The 1.2x crop results in a 1/5 stop drop in Signal to noise ratio as well as in dynamic range but this trade-off is perfectly acceptable.
1) Agree. Let us choose between automatic and manual cropping mode.
2) Nice, but I highly doubt it will happen. If you are really mental about using the maximum image circel each lens deliver at each aperture value, just shoot in uncropped mode and do the cropping in PP. Then you will have an infinite (almost) number of crop factors to choose from.
The ability to choose between no crop, 1.2x crop and 1.5x crop is more for convenience to avoid having have to do this later on for JPGs straight out of the camera. For RAW, I almost invariably always do some minimal crop.
In addition to convenience, cropping to the desired crop size from the outset will have the benefit of a slightly smaller file size. This is not trivial when shooting hundreds of shots over several days or weeks.
The issue is that Sony may not even offer the option to NOT CROP an APS-C designed E-Mount lens when it gets mounted onto a full frame E-Mount camera.
On the A900, if I want to shoot with an APS-C (DT)lens for A-Mount, I simply put a little bit of tape over top of the contact on mount the lens that sends the signal to the camera telling it which lens is attached.
By doing this you lose autofocus, and your in-body image stabilization is likely reverting to its default behaviour, suitable for a 50mm lens (rather than compensating for the exact amount of sensor shift that’s required for the exact focal length that you’re shooting at) but…
You can at least take pictures! And they crop into lovely square images, as they do cover about 20x20mm of the sensor’s area and even 24x24mm in the case of some of the lenses!
Your “point 2” makes perfect sense.
But for some reason, I think most people would view this as a terrible flaw, as in “why didn’t they implement autocropping – bunch of lazy loosers!”
Alain
I wish that the Sony FF NEX will have an 90-degrees articulating EVF like the Panasonic GX-7.
I wish it would also have a touch-screen to enable touch focus when the camera is on a tripod like the NEX-5 series cameras.
Then it should have an IR port in front of and at the rear of the camera for convenient wireless IR remote shutter release whether the photographer is in front of or is behind the camera.
For IR release, allow a timer option as follows:
1. 2 seconds
2. 5 seconds
3. 10 seconds
4. 20 seconds
Option to set number of shots: 1 to 9
Option to set interval between shots: 1 to 9 seconds
Lol. I am truly happy guys like you are not the ones calling the shots at Sony. The menus would be like 5000 lines long.
These are all features found in the D800 which helps to make the D800 a better camera. I want the same in the FF NEX.
I am glad that you are not in charge of the FF NEX development as you do not understand the value of these features. =)
Yes, let’s just lump up all menu alternatives found on all of our favourite cameras and then demand Sony to put it in that new camera! Duh…
Please, can Sony activate the use of bracketing with the use of the timer or the use of the IR remote? It’s really weird not to be able to use a remote for bracketing.
+1
Instead of hoping on lens, it had better to have a new LA-EA4 adapter like the LA-EA2 for crop. The LA-EA3 is not a real solution as it just work with SSM/SAM lenses like LA-EA1. An ultimate adapter able to take up all A-mount lenses is a must.
Hmm, with 85mm at F1.4 you should really focus manually anyway, so you can use the Walimex lens, which is excellent for portraits.
My suggestion for Sony FE-Lenses (always thinking about a cheaper version, and a performance version and obviously, size)
16mm f/4 (and maybe two converters for Fisheye and Ultra wide angle FOV)
20mm f/4
24mm f/2 and 24mm f/2.8
28mm f/2.8
35mm f/2 and the already expected 35mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
50mm f/2 Macro
85mm f/2.8 and 85mm f/1.8
100mm f/2.8 (not necessarily a Macro)
135mm f/2.8 (that’s a lens missing in both E-mount and A-mount lineup, we just have a really expensive 135mm f/1.8 and another expensive 135mm f/2.8 STF)
24-50mm f/4
16-24mm f/4
Anything with more reach than 135mm, leave it to A-mount lenses with adapters, will make no difference at all.
Hope we have IBIS… If not, include OSS on all possible lenses.
Why do people say ff lenses will be bigger than apc-c lenses? Compare a 24mm f/1.8 E lens to the equivalent 35mm f/2.8 FE lens and clearly the idea that full frame lenses have to be bigger is wrong.
The idea is full frame sensor is larger to be filled.
And now the Phoblographer follows suit with more of the same crap: About the upcoming NEX FF:
“Word on the street is that the system might not launch with any really good lenses.”
Amazing!
What does he mean by good? Good means it has to be fast?
You can tell they’re gearheads first, photographers second.
Go figure what he means.
Actually, he probably means that almost the whole ZM lens lineup is crap, lol.
That’s a good summary, hahaha.
I kinda saw point 5, given the way Zeiss is bleeding Sony with the overpriced sub-standard glass so far…
Maybe for starters, Sony should just drop Zeiss.. Once and for all, before it does more damage to their brand and/or ambitions to challenge Canikon for the pro market.. Olympus Zuiko would be a better bet for glass.. Heck, even the 3rd party glass that Tamron makes for Canikon is more promising, considering price vs quality…
Don’t get me wrong.. I think Zeiss is good.. The vintage glass and what they do for Rangefinders and even Hasselblads that I’ve used are good… But then I pick up a Sony Zeiss lens, and I can’t help but question, “are you sure this crap is the best you can do, Zeiss..?”
seriously? What specific lens are you talking about?
+1 I’d like to hear that too.
well no answer is also an answer I guess….
“Olympus Zuiko would be a better bet for glass”
+1, some zuiko pro glass would be great !
+1 I didn’t think of that..
I agree. I think Sony would be better off these days working with Sigma tbh.
Perhaps maybe even voigtlander, at least Sony might get some decently fast AND compact glass.
In fact if I was Sony I would buy Sigma.
Sigma is privately owned and not for sale.
Sigma is doing such a good job! I really hope Sigma keeps making more good lenses for e-mount. 🙂
I really want that Sony start to use Ibis tecnology on these cameras. It’s time to take that partnership with Olympus to another level.
Is there enough place inside the NEX-7’s body to put this piece of precision mechanics?
This may be one of the reasons why the NEX-FF is about 15% bigger.
Hmm, indeed. And what about the cheaper version, will it be 20% smaller?
I can’t believe there are more negative comments here than positive.
What are Canon and Nikon doing for those of you who use them and are barking at Sony for more innovation, more lenses, more everything, and then when they innovate and bring something never seen before you complain it isn’t enough?
An NEX FF (or 2) with a smallish Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 (and 55mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8, and zooms) isn’t exactly a bad start. And if you can’t make it work then you suck (just kidding). But then just leave it alone without negativity, such as “Sony dropped the ball,” “it is dead in the water,” etc.
I haven’t been completely satisfied with my a700, a900, a99 or NEX 5n (or follow up support with firmware update, but they all have been worthy of my money and not one of them or any of the Sony Zeiss lenses has disappointed. Yes a Zeiss (or G) 35mm f/1.4 would have been better, but if you think the Zeiss f/2.8 isn’t going to shine on a new NEX FF sensor you most likely are mistaken.
Some commentators would probably complain if you they were dying of thirst and offered water b/c it wasn’t first run through a reverse osmosis filter. Would you then wait for the filter process before taking a drink? Or go without if no filter was available? Just saying!
As for lenses:
Sony FE 50mm f/2 Macro G (or 2.8).
Sony FE 180mm f/2 Macro G (or 2.8).
Sony 24-105mm f3.5 G
All weathered sealed with OSS (if no IBIS/SSI).
No offence but it isn’t Canon or Nikon who need the market share is it…
Also..
RX100 = Amazing
RX1 = Revolutionary
FF NEX Body = Potentially Revolutionary
FF NEX Lenses;
85mm 1.8 = OK/Good
55mm 1.8 = OK/Good
35mm 2.8 = Meh
Sony has the worst ambassadors.
+1
Why would I buy the FE 35/2.8 when there are plenty of dirt cheap equivalents on the market? A lens like this hardly needs autofocus.
The impressions of people that thinking 55/1.8 and 85/1.8 is not fast enough for NEX-FF system is not interesting from the begining.
I addition to 35 and 55 I suggesting 24/2.8 and 16/3.5 fisheye.
“…but Sony didn’t make the right lenses yet (so he says). He hopes they do it in future.”
I’ve seen that before, somewhere, I wonder where it was…
The reason I’m interested in A FF NEX in the first place is to have that kind of capability in a small & light package. I certainly don’t want to compromise that goal by carrying around a set of large & heavy, fast primes.
If I have just one normal prime that’s fast, I can switch to it in low light. The other primes can be slower in order to be more compact; they’ll get used in better light.
As a fast, normal prime the rumored 55mm F1.8 will do. Slightly faster would’ve been even more desirable, but if performance wide open is good, then F1.8 is sufficient. Any kind of stabilization will extend the lens’ usability in low light (static subjects).
The second rumored lens, the 35mm F2.8, is a little too close in focal length to the 55mm prime. I would’ve preferred a wider lens, but depending on how expensive the 35mm is, it might be useful when I need to put together a very compact kit.
The next lens for me would be a wide angle, preferably something not too extreme, say a 24mm lens. It could start at F2.8 or slower to keep it as compact as possible.
Finally, there should also be a portrait focal length of around 90mm. This one also needs to be fast: at least F2.0.
So this is the compact set of high quality primes I would want in my kit:
-24mm F2.8
-35mm F2.8 (maybe; if not too expensive)
-55mm F1.8 (would have preferred 50mm F1.4, but it’s close enough)
-90mm F2.0 or better
Just look at the old OM lenses(or the old Planar 35/2,or Leica), they tell you FF can be small and fast at the same time…Size is no excuse for making slow lenses, Sony screwed this. They could release a 50/1.2 at the start with perfectly acceptable size (again see the OM).
I honestly could care less about the initial lenses coming out for the FF NEX. Ever since first confirmed rumors of the FF NEX, I have been collecting old Konica Hexanon and Hexar glass. I’ll have more than enough glass to keep me occupied.
This is what I have so far:
100 mm F2.8
50 mm F1.4
40 mm F1.8
35 mm F2
24 mm F2.8
21 mm F4
IBIS is very important for me, and of course Sensor-Shift-AF would be groundbraking.
As for the lenses:
* 14mm 1:2.8 or 1:3.5
* 50mm 1:1.4 (T2.4) STF
* 135mm 1:2.8 (T4.5) STF
Maybe PDAF+ContrastAF can AF with the STF-technique.
I just need some small (pancake?) fast lenses that will allow it to fit in my jacket pocket still (like the NEX does).
The best hope for this is a 35mm and 50mm.
I’d love f1.4 (as many/most of the competition has this) but somehow I feel Sony/Zeiss isn’t likely to deliver anything faster than a 1.8…
You can have pancake or you can have fast, but not both ~ unless you care nothing for IQ.
I want both: pancake lenses with less IQ, and regular lenses with stellar IQ 🙂
No mention of autofocus speed or accuracy. This has been a let down to me with the present nex cameras. I want a second body and was hoping to get it in a smaller footprint. I am looking at Fuji and Olympus as well but I have high hopes for the ff nex. I would like to use it for some action shooting.
35/50/85 1.4 for FF Nex, and use 16-70 f4 in crop mode. FF zoom will be too big.
Hi guys.
Does any of you (specially andrea) know for sure there is going to be in body shutter in nex-ff?
I would consider this only for use with leica and voigtlander lenses.
So is this camera going to be useable with lenses missing leaf shutter?
I think the NEX FF will be delicious. I cant wait for it to hit the market.
To me, the NEX full frame is making the NEX 7 look very good. I’d rather have the NEX7 / Zeiss 24mm f1.8 than the NEX FF / Zeiss 35mm f2.8 for 2-3x the price. There must be an issue with the lessor/lens design, or the 35mm would be faster/smaller – consider that it is much larger than the CV 35mm f1.4 (yes, you need room for motor, but not that much room).
Note: I have the NEX 7 + 24mm Zeiss (and 35mm and 50mm SONYs). Just waiting for the new NEX 7 and a SONY 85mm f1.8.
The CV is a good lens in its own right BUT it is a “classic” design meaning there’s a lot of distortion and flare and relatively low micro-contrast (AKA “character). Can you take good pictures with it? Absolutely! BUT if Zeiss released a lens like that, even at that speed and size, as the first NEX FF lens they would be crucified.
Whereas if the new 35mm is on par with the ZM 35mm f/2.8 (which looks to be a different design) then it will be lauded by reviewers and many pro-users coming from the rangefinder world (who I believe are the first target market of this body–the A9000 or whatever will be geared more towards DSLR users) who will just ding it for a being a tad slow instead of dismissing it outright. Then Sony/Zeiss/CV can come out with a faster variant later if they think it will sell better.
A 35mm f/2.8 may not be the most exciting choice but it is a good, safe option. Honestly with the M-mount adapter the CV 35mm f/1.4 is not really any smaller than the leaked specs for the new 35mm. In fact my guess is the CV+adapter will be ~2mm bigger.
While the current E Zeiss E 24mm will yield similar noise performance on the smaller APS-C sensor as the new FE 35mm will be able to achieve at F2.8 on the full frame sensor, that’s only relevant in low light and in terms of minimizing depth of field.
In other shooting conditions, like during the day and when you’re not after razor thin DOF, the full frame sensor offers other advantages when it comes to image quality. I can certainly see the difference in the files between my RX1 and my NEX-5R.
Yes, full frame sensors offer image quality advantages. For my money, though (since NEX FF would require a lot of it), I am now thinking I stay with the NEX7 for small mirror-less, stay with my Canon full frame (which I hate to use anymore, but have 20 years of lenses), and wait to see what happens with mirror-less alpha full frame.
And as far as quality of 24mm Zeiss, it’s great, with the exception of fringing. But I admit, I am not a lens fetishist, just a working (and demanding) professional.
admin, do you have any idea about the zoom lens that will be offered with this camera? so far i’m not too excited about the primes.
I can accept a 2.8 zoom lens if it stars at 24mm but i’m not sure i’ll bite if the only zoom is an f4. If the camera comes as a kit with a 24-anything f2.8 i’ll probably pre order, otherwise I may hold off. I can definitely be happy with a 2.8 zoom and 55 1.8 prime off the bat, but if the only zooms are slow, i might lose a bit of my enthusiasm.
Is there any chance for a 24-70(or even 24-50) 2.8 for this thing?
Yes, ZA24-70/2.8 on an A-mount adapter. They won’t reengineer the zooms for E-mount when they can’t be made smaller anyway. It’s only the retrofocal primes that can be made much more compact for mirrorless.
There is a good reason why a 35mm f2.8 lens isn’t exactly the bee’s knees. A FF sensor has the potential to provide three main benefits over smaller ones : resolution, DOF control, lower noise. Of these three, the latter two (DOF control and lower noise) are only valid insofar as lens aperture remains a constant variable. Let’s say we agree there is a two stops improvement over APS-C sensors (I’d say a bit less so, but let’s tip the scale in favour of FF sensors), then there is little difference in DOF control and noise performance between an APSC camera with a f1.4 lens and a FF camera with a f2.8 lens. And guess what ? other mirror less systems already feature f1.4 35mm EFL lenses in their lineup (ex : Fuji). For a cost that’s likely to be a lot less.
Remains resolution. The new sensor may very well have north of 30 mp, something smaller sensors won’t be able to match for a long time.
But it puts in perspective the interest of a FF sensor. It is at its maximum when the system’s lenses are fast, a lot less so when they’re slow.
I also think, but that’s a lot more personal, that 55mm is too long for a normal lens. I’d rather have it at 45mm, like on Contax cameras.
I’d suggest Sony to just copy the Leica summicron’s lineup for every focal length above 28mm (don’t forget a 40mm !) and keep it at f2.8 for lower focal lengths. this should give the best size / performance ratio. And they should copy either Olympus / Fuji’s AF ring system, or the recent Leica X zoom lens’ one.
The last thing they should do is copy Leica’s summicron lineup. Folks will simply just choose the Leicas which is what many of us intend to do anyway
The sensors are the problem.
Sony is comming up with some realy creative new bodies something for everyone.
When it comes to sensors however sony still has a one size dits all mentality.
All the new sensors are cmos, 20-36mp and pdaf built in
Fine for the average photographer.
Sony needs to produce different sensors for different uses.
Both the c and ff top out at 32-36moo.
FF should top iut about 2.25x as high for those who like the c quality but want a bigger COMPARBLE RESOLUTION image.
Another sensor should be available for those doing low light high iso shooting.
Hassy is playing dress up games with sony cameras.
Sony is playing dress up games with sony sensors.
Put a high resolution sensor in ONE of your 10+ new ff cameras for the more than 10% of users that care about that most.
The same sensor is not right for everyon.
Canon and Nikon are known for choices. Whatever your needs you can count on them.
No one yet has a high resolution ff camera.
Put that on a universal camera and 10% of users of ALL brands will want it.
barry do you know what its like to work with 60+ mp medium format files? its ridiculously taxing on $5000 computers. just get yourself a mf camera if you want the pixels.
Yes I d. I regularly process 150-300mp tiffs on a newer $800 laptop plus 16gb of ram.
Processing is VERY fast.
I used to use a 10 year old computer snd orocssing was much slower.
Good god man. You have to be the most pathetic human being on the face of the earth.
STOP DEMANDING YOUR HAIR BRAINED MILLION MEGAPIXEL CAMERAS!
1) Sony isn’t going to listen to you, no matter how loud or annoying you are.
2) We don’t want to listen to you.
3)50+ MP RAW files are huge and extremely cumbersome even with the best computers
4) WE DONT HAVE lenses that will resolve a sensor like that properly.
Get over yourself. Get a life. Take this to heart if you have any sense at all.
I cant imagine how annoying it must be to the poor Admin to always read your repetitive crap.
Henry.
Hair-brained? Really?
“50+ MP RAW files are huge and extremely cumbersome even with the best computers”
You obviously have never used a computer with 64 state-of-the-art CPUs…
I agree with Barry. Give us more detail. Seems like there is a lot of info out there rebutting those lens resolving issues.
“4) WE DONT HAVE lenses that will resolve a sensor like that properly.”
exactly!
Weve debunked the lens resolution limit 1000x its just plain bullshit.
Processing time is also just olain bullshit as you can shoot raw+jpg and just process the keepers.
Not everyone needs higher resolution and they can buy one of the 90% of cameras that dont have it or shoot at lower res. You have lots of choices.
But 10% of us need higher res on a more compact camera.
Mf will not substitute for that.
If you dont want it dont buy it but why to you object so much to having one single camera a ailable for the 10% that currently have no suitable camera available for them
You have NEVER seen me say ALL cameras should be highr res only that ONE should be available.
The only way sony will know how popular it will be is to make ONE.
10% are sure to want it and eventually others will too.
Remember that althogh many people only use tv screens and small prints others still consistantly work big and require more.
Many others occasionally need more.
You complain about processing time for large files….
Do you have any idea at all of how much time and difficulty is involved in shooting enough multiple pictures of difficult moving subjects and then stitching them into high resolution pictures just because there is no high res option. I DO!
My other comment is awaiting moderation bit in the meantime people like yourself have never responded to this question.
Although you do not want a high res camera and will probablyy not buy it what harm does it do you if just one of the many available choices for other people were high res. Especially considering it will in no way limit you availabilty of lower res choices?
What is your odjection to allowing other people like myself have what we want even though you dont want it?
Don’t worry, Sony is making a
NEX FF LL for Low Light fanatics, and a
NEX FF S for sports enthousiasts, and a
NEX FF BP for those you shoot only birthday parties, and a…
Am I making any sense?
Alain
The system also need cheap and good standard Sony lenses e.g 50mm f/1.4
I’d agree that copying something along the range of both the summicron and summilux lineups would be ideal for a FF high-end system, as this would give 2 price/performance ranges for users to pick from, based on need. I can understand their reluctance to copy outright copy the Sonnar from the RX1, to avoid cannibalizing sales of those models, but they need a faster option than the 2.8 currently speculated. Zeiss doesn’t seem to do much below 2.0, so maybe they’ll need to look at their G series and use some of the expertise Olympus is supposed to be sharing with them to reach a peaceful middleground of fast 24mm and 35mm primes that are at least 1.8 if not 1.4. If they really expect to compete with Leica and possible competition from Fujifilm, this is going to be essential to this system catching on and succeeding.
If I can mount my new 50mm 1.4 ZA with auto focus ( non-SLT adapter is fine) I’m a first day preorder!
“5) He didn’t like the lenses. The zooms are to big and the primes not fast enough. The NEX-FF camera will appeal pro photographer but Sony didn’t make the right lenses yet (so he says). He hopes they do it in future.”
ZoomS – plural
Admin, does this mean there will be more than one FF zoom lens released at launch?
yep. more zooms.
As long as the new FF sensor can be used with my Zeiss ZM lenses including the amazing 2.8 15mm without corner smearing or the purple shift like my NEX7… I’m sold! I’ve never been let down with the NEX7 image stills quality. If Sony manages to provide a better video codec along with separate channel audio control and metering that would be a huge plus. Throw in a clean uncompressed HDMI output and I would have a great do all compact camera.
IF… Sony did these things 🙂
there could well be a benefit of a small size lens on cost of aperture as this makes most sense for a small size camera (which the NEX will remain compared to a DSLR-like body. and when I say small size I actually mean flat (what is that, z-direction?)
my first choice would be the 55/1.8 and I am sure that soon enough there will be all kind of ff-lenses from all kinds of manufacturers
in fact, if you see all the announcements on new stuff, it seems that it is only a matter of time until we have all lenses for all shapes and mounts
btw, almost 300 comments but where are the “A-mount is dead, dead, dead” people? 😉
What is it about full frame cameras that everybody is so excited about?
Ha, I was thinking about this lately and have an idea for an article 🙂
Yeah. To be honest for me having a small camera is the reason I shoot NEX. A full frame camera and lens is suddenly going to push the size up to something Im no longer interested in. APS-C has good enough image quality nowadays for my (and I believe 99% of people’s) use. Id rather Sony just concentrated on getting some more lenses out there.
The ability to use my fullframe lenses obviously!
Why would you want to do that? Their just bulkier, isnt the whole point of NEX that it’s compact?
Actually, all my fullframe lenses are smaller than NEX lenses. Leica, Zeiss ZM, COntax G and Voigtlander.
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7019/6839854569_ca86af897c_z.jpg
Yes but their not native lenses. Why wouldn’t you just use those on a Leica?
I already use Leica and NEX bodies. But $8000 for a M240 is too expensive and ideally I would prefer a Sony sensor with superior EVF + peaking options.
Any chance of a 10bit codec for video? That would be something…
Sadly I really, really doubt it. The $4k AX1 uses the XAVC-S 8-bit codec. Though if the high-end NEX-FF does use a 10-bit video coded that’d be reason enough to pay up (for me).
thanks for the report. but I am kind of waking up now. it does not seem to be able to replace my A99v or 5D3 or D800E or anything like that. if the zoom is huge and does not balance well on it, I am not getting it.
and,lacking really fast native mount AF primes does not make it really a practical system camera..
well, I know I can use my Zeiss ZF, Leicam M or Minolta primes with a mount adapter but then it won’t be small or really convenient…….
maybe I was right just got the rX1R last week, to back up my NEX6 /NEX7 and A99 bodies.
if this report is real , then I think I have to say I am disappointed, maybe I was expecting too much.
but, it seems like NEX7 might be a more well balanced practical camera than this FF NEX,especially after the Zeiss f4 zoom and 85mmf1.4 are announced for it.
At this point it’s rather unlikely for Sony to deliberately cripple the camera for use with legacy lenses. Those who care about aperture can just get a CV 35 1.2 II. It’s a good performing lens. Cosina probably would have sold it as a Zeiss if the FL wasn’t such a niche FL on rangefinders.
Like pretty much everyone reading these rumor posts, I don’t understand why Sony doesn’t just do the right thing. This type of camera needs fast primes and we know that they are capable of building them. The current 2 rumored lenses miss the mark. The 35 and 55 are both too slow.
Make a fast wide angle zoom similar to the 10-18mm, but f/2.8
Make a 35mm f2 (which already exists on the RX1) could be faster as well.
Make a 50mm 1.4mm
Make an 85mm 1.4mm
Done.
As a second round, they could do a telephoto zoom and perhaps more of a kit zoom. Also, something like the 24mm zeiss would be cool. Fast wide angle is great, and is my personal favorite.
You people are unreal.
You want 35 mm f/1.8 of Zeiss quality? Take the Zeiss 24 mm f/1.8 for APS-C and multiply by 1.5 in all dimensions.
You want 85 mm f/1.4? Such a lens requires a physical aperture of 85/1.4 = 60 mm. These lenses are big.
You want an f/2.8 zoom? Take any full-frame zoom and picture it on a NEX body.
Physics still exists, no matter how much whining and bitching will go on on this board.
My Pentax 50mm F1.4 FA full frame lens takes 49mm filters.
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2832/8941810155_51392273a8_k.jpg
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8489/8170752122_b17dff4b98_k.jpg
skeptical – you don’t know much about lenses , do you?
The right thing for whom? Lol.
Have you ever looked at or held any of the Leica lenses menitoned in these comments? They all fall within the size of the 24/1.8 or smaller and cover a FF image circle. The notion that in order to increase a lens’ cabaility from APS-C to FF requires physically inflating it by 1.5x is pretty absurd when you think about it. Flange depth and mount distance from sensor are all things which contribute to bridging that gap.
I have. Though I’ve more experience with ZM ones. How big that 10-18 f2.8 (described above) would be? Or the 85 f1.4? Your beloved Leica is making a 90 f2 and it is already half a kilo without AF. And the issue isn’t only about size. It is also about price.
i have to agree it needs a stellar lens to kickstart the new camera.
A lot of Leica lenses are f/2 or slower and don’t have auto focus etc.
http://en.leica-camera.com/photography/m_system/lenses/
Only a few are 1.4 – and they are horrendously expensive.
Their fastest 90mm lens is f/2
I son’t see people moaning about Leica’s f/2 lenses.
Any rumors about shutter sync? 160 sync on NEX 7 seems to be holding the system back from a pro standpoint.
OK, what about specs of the two models, can we speculate?
High-end model: great AF, IBIS, articulated screen, built-in EVF, high frame rate, large buffer, external mic, etc.
Basic model: good AF, no IBIS, fixed screen, external EVF, basic specs — essentially RX1 without lens in a 7-like body (i.e. smaller than the High-end model).
Obvious compromises. All in all, many would be fine with the latter, I think. Any clue, anyone?
Any news on NEX-7 successor? Chinese site now say it is coming very soon from “very reliable” source:
http://xjrumo.com/2013/09/07/nex-7n-soon/
although there is no SAR, our trusted network partners revealed: In fact, it will be released soon.
We now know it has almost the same appearance, except that bayonet position was shifted slightly toward the middle. 3.8 million points EVF, which caused the delays, 24 million pixel sensor, unclear how much improvement.
I would be skeptical about this as there is numerous forum postings about making SAR red faced with a lot of emoticons.
this is ridiculous. 50mm 1.4 (or 35) should be considered kit lens for any FF camera, anything else is a let down…dont wanna wait three-four years for such lens. not buying this…
So the Leica Summicron 50/2 Asph is a letdown? lol
didnt know that one were coming as a kitlens with lightning fast AF to a non fantasy price…or will it?!?! …no, thats right…..
I want a small and light FF system, and I don’t need f/1.4 lenses.
For f/2.8 or even f/4.0 can be enough.
What I need is a good FF sensor so if needed a few times I can shoot at
high ISO and get good results.
Not all people want or use f/1.4 lenses.
The 35mm f/2.8 I think will be very nice for me. Just need 24mm f/2.8
and 85mm f/2.8 also. If I must wait I might even buy the Sony E 16mm pancake
just to have a 24mm (in APS-C mode) until Sony have a FF E 24mm lens.
Hi Maxwell, can I ask why you want a full frame camera with a 35 f2.8? Shooting an NEX 6 or 7 with the 24mm is going to give you exactly the same results in a smaller package?
What I mean by this is 24mm at f2 and ISO 1600 on an NEX 6 is going to give you about the same depth of field, field of view, shutter speed and noise as a 35mm at f2.8 on an FF camera.
“What I mean by this is 24mm at f2 and ISO 1600 on an NEX 6 is going to give you about the same depth of field, field of view, shutter speed and noise as a 35mm at f2.8 on an FF camera.”
Well, difference in DOF is about 1,3 stops, therefore wide open at f1,8 on the crop camera corresponds roughly to f2,8 on the FF. But then there is the difference of an FF camera compared to a crop. The New FF nex will (most likely) provide 30MP or a bit more or less compared to 16 or 24MP on the nex cameras. But it will provide nicer transitions, clarity and smoothness. Like any FF has more relaxed rendition than smaller sensors.
It is always the same: The internet is a place where people can offload their next shitstorm. It is all not good enough, because they want:
– only the fastest lenses at all focal lenghts (1,4 or faster, but of course….
– light & small & cheap
– high resolution (same pixel density than their current APS-c
– class- leading ISO performance
I for one will consider the Nex FF
– if all in all it is substantially lighter and more compact than a comparable DSLR (d800/ 5dIII) with comparable lens attached.
– if it has a good sensor with large DR and good colour
– if the lenses are sharp and have the “Zeiss look”.
– if the whole thing is not insanely expensive
If this will not be the case, I just stay with an inexpensive 5dII with 1-2 lenses and do the rest with my Fuji X or Nex 7 setup. Not the end of all…
Similar DOF? Prob. Similar noise and resolution? Highly doubtful. Smaller package? No way.
The new 35mm is rumored to be the size of the 1650PZ when collapsed. That’s much smaller than the 24mm–even considering the FF NEX is 20% bigger. Now is that worth the premium? That depends on the person and your needs.
1.8 or 2.0 is enough for most of us, 2.8 is also acceptable, esp. on wider lens. With 2.8 there is still a little benefit over aps-c in low light, with 1.8 or 2.0 a lot more, and you always have a benefit in dr and resolution, and dr is equally important. At 2.0 or below there is also a benefit in dof, although thinner dof isn’t always that useful.
Those who reference fuji 35 1.4 seem to forget lack of any stabilization of fuji primes, for low light sony 35 1.8 oss is just better and so will be this 2.8 ef with ibis.
No you don’t always have a benefit in DR.
And the difference between 35mm vs 1.5x APSC isn’t more than a stop. 35mm vs 1.6x is a little over a stop.
The benefit in low light is non existent if the sensor tech is at the same level of technical advancement.
This 35mm 2.8 will not be just better than the Fuji 35mm F1.4. Fuji will have an extra stop of light gathering and shallow DOF. DOF has a massive effect on how an image is rendered. My clients love dreamy bokeh, and it’s this what helps pay the bills. Also the Fuji ISO can already practically match FF bodies in terms of ISO.
However the Sony/Zeiss 35 & Fuji 35 is not a worthwhile comparison. Instead it would be better to compare the Fuji 35 F1.4 with the Sony 55 F1.8, where the Sony will have a very slight advantage.
SONY YOU NEED TO OFFER SOMETHING TO CONVERT THE PRO’S IF YOU WANT TO DOMINATE THE MARKET. WHEN THE PRO’S ARE CONVERTED, THE HERD OF AMATEURS WILL FOLLOW.
“The benefit in low light is non existent if the sensor tech is at the same level of technical advancement.”
I meant DR not low light (ISO)
Agreed.
Sony is halfway there.
A new universal camera that uses all lenses will make it possible or rven easy for non sony users to buy sony.
They will still only do so if the sensor is noticeably better than anyone elses.
A solid 10% of the camera users want 50+mp ff.
Producing the highest available resolution will compel these people to buy sony.
Competitors will soon copy whatever new ideas sony has. Others will produce thier own universal cameras.
Unless sony also wiws them with the sensor the window of opportunity will expire.
You know what? If those are your needs, those are YOUR needs. I’m sure you are not alone but I’m pretty sure you are not the absolute majority. As you said the field of view of the 35mm Fuji is almost identical to the rumored 55mm lens and the difference between f1.4 and f1.8 in bokeh and DOF (in the real world) is virtually nil even when compared to the same size sensors. In this case the Sony/Zeiss likely to best the Fuji by an noticeable margin.
Regarding the 35mm Fuji vs. the 35mm Sony: the Fuji lens is great. Seriously if I were starting out today I’d be real tempted by the Fuji system and that lens in particular; however, if you are looking at equivalent DOF as a top priority the two lenses should be very similar when frame size and field of view is taken into account but the Sony/Zeiss is likely to be sharper wide open. Not to knock Fuji, but it is much easier to make a f/2.8 prime sharp wide open than an f/1.4. Zeiss has already shown they can with the ZM 35mm f/2.8. That sharpness combined with a similar DOF *should* create a more pleasing 3D effect/pop that your bokeh crazy clients will like.
Of course all this is just an educated guess since it is all rumors.
Could be an ideal camera for landscapers, if Sony have enough brains to include a cable release socket in the 20% bigger body. Hmmmm, not holding my breathe on that one.
Could also be a great backup cam for FF Alpha shooters if it used the same battery…
on paper I don’t think the lenses are bad at all, but only if they are properly sharp from wide open
a 55mm f1.8 $500+ zeiss that would be softer than say, $200 nikon 50mm 1.8G would be an utter fail, wouldn’t it?
personally I’d probably vote for:
~15mm f4
~45mm f2 (or faster, but tack sharp and zeiss bokeh)
~90mm f1.8 (“big” and “heavy” is acceptable in this case imo, look at the excellent samyang 85mm f1.4, it’s not that big at all and at 500g with metal build, and nikon 85mm f1.8G is 350g)
The 55mm will be not as sharp as Canon or Nikon 50mm f1.8. This basically is because the flange distance is so much smaller it would be extremely difficult and expensive (think Leica money) to make sharp lenses focussing on the sensor that close.
It is actually EASIER to make sharp lenses for shorter flange focal distances.
35mm F2.8 is slow. A faster 35mm lens won’t kill RX1. Example: Fuji X100(s) and X-Pro1 + 24mm 1.4.
Sony and Zeiss should make a showstopping lens for this system. I propose a 50mm 1:1 or 1:0.95 like the Leica 50mm Noctilux. It should be priced at $1500. It would be the lens of choice for anyone who owns this system.
While we are in Neverland, why not just make it 100US!
Don’t be ridiculous. Many people make noctilux lenses now. Panasonic/leica is coming out with one very soon f/1.2. Or you could stick with the current amazing FF NEX lineup.
Given the additional bookeh provided by FF, given the extra stop(s) provided by usable higher ISOs, given IS even, I will be happy with the 35 2.8. The one thing I will not compromise is the small size. I NEED small for my tourism usage. A camera that is not IN MY HANDS does not take photos – even less good ones.
Alain
Please
24mm f1.8
50mm f1.4
85mm f1.4
135mm f1.8
I just want a cheap 85mm 1.8 like the Canon USM and I am happy X’D
I have my Nokton 35/1.2 and my Noctilux 50mm f1 e60 waiting for the FF NEX.
I don’t think I need anything faster, although a 50/1.5 with AF would be awesome for my use
Lens suggestions…I think f2.8 is good enough for starters. 14,24,35,50,85.. All 2.8. But they have to be really small. For 50mm, they can even make it collapsible pancake. Or make it a little faster(my A mount 50mm f1.4 is relatively small for a f1.4 lens). To keep the size down, f2 or f1.8 should be the max speed for anything below and above 50mm. Asking small f1.4 lens is kinda wishful thinking. I have manual focus 85mm f1.4..it’s huge, I don’t want to use it on a mirrorless,seriously.
Hmm, on FF F2.8 is really not that slow. And he said it himself, don’t want it to be too big. And definitely don’t want there to be compromise on quality for size. Rather have the best F2.8 than a average F2.
True, f2.8 is fast. Maybe the slowest speed in the fast lens world, but it is still fast.
For my landscape photography, I want an ultra sharp wide-angle Zeiss, 18mm or 21mm ƒ2,8.
Capable of resolving the latest sensors of 36+ megapixels with superb color rendition. At least as good as the Touit 12mm but optimized for a FF sensor. Price and lens speed is less important to me than maximum IQ.
I think in the short term many will hold this new camera up against the RX1 FF 35mm IQ. It will likely fall short due to a number of technical limitations. A certain crowd will then try to pile on. Finally (maybe), smarter heads will prevail if the front end resistance does not kill progress.
Having read years of negativity about lack of quality e-mount lenses I am not prepared to hop in on the front end to hear more years of whining about lack of FF native lenses for this camera. I can only imagine the cropped e-mount output of the FF NEX would be no better than the NEX 7, so the only real value will come through acquiring high quality native FF lenses… which will take years to develop.
I am very interested in the Nex FF as I will use it with my Leica M glass – so make a good adapter, a good viewfinder and split image/digital rangefinder. This cam will truly be the Digital Leica CL. The lenses 35mm f2,8 and 55mm 1,8 as Sony has made sounds good – if the autofocus is fast. For me this is much more important than f1,4 / f1,2 etc
Sony use your energy on develop the mirror less A-mount to compete with CaNikon. Smaller cams like Nikon F / N75.
Nex = keep it small for street/art/snapshot/PJ
Skip the zooms – or make them small (pancake) 28mm – 70mm f3,5 – f5,6
More lenses for the Nex FF;
24mm f2,8
15mm f4,5
Good Luck!
good news to me is “The two NEX-FF cameras”. a pro one and a cheap one?
How good is focus peaking for manual focus lenses with Sony?
Can you manually focus people at apertures like F1.4 with say people moving at walking pace?
As capable as split screen or rangefinder focusing aid I guess.
Well at least some fast M mount glass may be an option for me until Sony release some more exotic lenses.
Where is all this super “fast M-mount glass” people keep talking about?
Of the twenty-one M-mount lenses Leica currently make, only five are faster than f/2.
You also pay $2,300 for a 50mm f/2 Sumicron and $4,000 for a 50mm f/1.4 Sumilux – nearly twice the price.
Of the eleven ZM lenses Zeiss make, only one (50mm f/1.4 Sonnar) is faster than f/2
Voigtlander do have a 21mm f/1.8, 35mm f/1.2 & f/1.4, 40mm f/1.4, 50mm f/1.1 & f/1.5 and a 75mm f/1.8 – the other seven VM lenses currently listed are: 12mm 5.6, 15mm f/4.5, 25mm f/4, 28mm f/2 & f2.8 35mm f/2.5
But how much of the faster Voigtlander glass is optically as good or better than the slower Leica or Zeiss lenses at the same focal lengths? At least they are more affordable than f/1.4 Sumilux lenses.
It’s about the same count as Canon, ignoring the classic rendering f1.4 voigtlanders.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup
Well this is the 35 I would look to get.
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/12/02/voigtlander-nokton-35-1-2-aspherical-ii-lens-review-on-the-leica-m9/
Focus peaking with a Samyang 85mm F1.4 works really good with moving stuff:
http://www.alphabart.nl/fotomateforum/contrast.jpg
What’s you’re hit rate on subjects like that?
I don’t mean to question, however even broken clocks are right twice a day. If it took you 50 frames to get one sharp one, then a photographer may struggle.
Focus peaking is in most situations VERY useful, but it depends on few things.
1. The contrast delivered by the lens.
I use some very old glasses like Trioplan or Jupiter-9. These lenses show significantly lower local contrast, so the peaking effect is sometimes not so evident and helpful as with a more modern lens design.
2. On the other hand it is useless and even disturbing, when you take a manual super wide angle like the Samyang 14/2.8. Almost everything seen in the Viewfinder or monitor is blinking in red, yellow or white then.
3. It works best only with contrasty vertical lines – at least with my A57, so by turning the camera from landscape to portrait the peaking is mostly gone away.
A full frame NEX should make lenses like the Zeiss ZM 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar come into their own. That lens, which is a very old design, has a lot of focus shift – so it is difficult to get wide open shots in focus with rangefinder focusing. With focus peaking you shouldn’t have to worry about the focus shift as you can focus at the taking aperture.
Although it is an old design (updated with modern coatings), the lens has rather unique rendering qualities. It should shine on a full frame NEX.
I don’t think this kind of focus peaking will cut it for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMAlMQev7Kw
Found some news abou nex 7x according to their source its coming soon.I dont know how reliable this site is. http://xjrumo.com/2013/09/07/nex-7n-soon/
What might have been the reason for not using the 35/2.0 lens design from the great RX1/RX1R?
It’s because they can’t seat the rear element as close to the sensor in E-mount. Also product differentiation.
Thank you, John!
Just wondered if it couldn’t be possible anyway. I don’t know the diameter of its rear element, this should be the only limiting factor, because the sensor distance should be at least similar if not the same.
So the reason will be indeed marketing concepts and product differentiation.
Or does Sony not want to have to explain, why a NEX-FF body + 35 lens is almost twice the price of the RX1R, as I would expect that combo for around 5000$/€? 😉
It’s a pity, that marvel might be a very interesting FF lens!
The RX1 lens has a leaf shutter, whereas NEX FF needs a shutter behind the lens and in front of the sensor. This means that you can’t get as close with the rear element as you can with the RX1.
That’s interesting! Thank you!
They could use it, but it would protrude significantly more on an E-mount as almost half of the RX1 lens is “hidden” inside the body.
I wouldn’t get surprised if Sony released an E-mount version of the 35mm f/2 down the road, maybe even f/1.8 at some point. For now however a compact 35mm f/2.8 is what is needed according to Sony, and I agree 100%, this will make it a PERFECT street lens. For f/2 the RX1 is awesome.
It is fascinating how you can make a Zeiss FF 35mm f/2.8 the size AND weight of the m43 Oly 17mm f/1.8 and at the same time offer shallower DOF and most likely superior image quality – again well played Sony!
Will it be priced at consumer friendly price?
Guys, has there been any further rumours/updates/info on the sensor based AF. This could be the ace in Sony’s hand if it comes to pass.If the camera came with a sensor at least 36mp I would jump on it.As well as my mFT gear {sorry guys!} I use the D800 with an extensive selection of high end lenses.Though I still appreciate the view through the OVF I must admit that more and more I am enjoying all the advantages that a good EVF brings.
Personally, I disagree with the SAR guy that the primes are not fast enough.
With such fantastic ISO6400 and 12800 results of the latest Sony sensors, there is little practical need for f/1.4 or even f/2 for exposure purposes in typical scenes.
Size matters to sony. They have a tradition of miniaturization. They also design for modern aesthetics and features, which means autofocus, digital, and to correct lots of aberration.
Consider these five size drivers for lenses:
•autofocus drivetrains make lenses fatter
•Ziess-style many-element lens designs are longer and heavier
•interchangeable lenses—as opposed to integrated like RX1—require a bayonet and electrical interface
•image sensors don’t see light at angles as steep as film, so digital lenses have to back off to keep the image periphery free of excessive vignetting
•SLRs have a mirror ad shutter between the image plane and lens, so the lenses have to back off even more!
Considering these factors, the size of these lenses on a per-aperture and per-field-of-view basis is going to be:
•larger than Leica
•larger than contax G
•longer than RX1 (maybe)
•smaller than DSLR
If the FF NEX has AF, has interchangeable lenses, has a focal-plane shutter, and a traditional digital sensor—not like Leica’s digital M—then the lenses are necessarily going to be pretty large on average.
When you decide to make a prime at 35/2.8, it is a lot easier to make it small and sexy to a target market who may have traditional views about what good photography is and who prefer to shoot between f/4 and f/16.
So, it’s great as far as I am concerned for f/2.8 be the maximum aperture for a modern high-end system. Ziess will make a 1.4 in the future anyway.
DP?
Many people are talking about the aperture being fast enough or not, but it’s all relative. You can indeed get faster shutter speeds with higher ISO, but you can only change the DOF with the aperture.
While f/2.8 may be good enough for many uses, some might want faster. I own a few Zeiss ZE lenses at f/2 as well as the RX1, and prefer f/2, even if it means having a slightly bigger/heavier lens. OTOH, if it’s just for landscapes, a slower lens that’s smaller and more optimized for its narrower aperture range might be better. It depends on the use.
So ultimately, Sony will make a choice based on marketing research, and we’ll just have to see how it plays out. Personally, since I’m planning on switching over a lot of my shorter focal length Canon lenses to this new system, I’m hoping for the best image quality regardless of size/weight, as anything made for this system is going to be a lot less bulky/heavy than my EF lenses.
What I don’t want is for the 35mm f/2.8 to be of mediocre image quality, which would kill a lot of the meaning of my getting this new FF mirrorless system in the first place (I’m not saying it will be mediocre…just worried because in the Canon world, slower primes typically end up being consumer-grade). If they make the f/2.8 with the best image quality possible, within reasonable engineering tradeoffs, I would still be OK with f/2.8 instead of the f/2 of the RX1. This is Zeiss after all, so I’m still hopeful
If IBIS contributes with up to four steps antishake support you have to count that too when talking about the need for fast lenses. In a lot of situations when you don’t face moving targets IBIS will balance some of the problems the lenses might cause. Lenses seem never get fast enough no matter what happens with improved high ISO performance and improved antishake. We have heard the same complaints over the last ten years and it sure has happened a lot during the same time.
If I can use my SEL 35mm 1.8 with the Nex FF, it’s good enough and I hope the IS will work as well…