Right now Sony-Zeiss-Samyang-Sigma-Voigtlander are probably using their best “minds” to figure out what FE lens they should add to their roadmap:
1) Sony already said they have three new FE lenses in 2014
– One Zeiss fast prime lens in 2014 (hurray!)
– One Zeiss f/4.0 wide angle zoom
– One G macro lens
– By end of 2015 a total of 15 lenses will be released (today’s five announced lenses included).
2) Zeiss also confirmed they will launch manual focusing lenses with electronic support
3) Samyang,Voigtlander and Sigma could launch proper FE designed lens (and not DSLR designed and FE adapted lenses)
But now it’s the SAR reader turn to come up with prime and zoom lens suggestions. Please comment this post with a short list of lenses that Sony,Zeiss or other manufacturers should make for the FE system. As usual please try to come up with lens specs that are realistic and be aware that you have to pay for quality and super specs 🙂
This for example would be my suggestion list:
Sony 12-24mm f/4.0 lens
Zeiss 24mm f/1.8
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4
Sony 35mm f/3.5 pancake
Zeiss 50mm f/1.2
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Sony 135mm f/2.0 G lens
I will sum up your suggestions and launch a POLL next week to see what lens is needed most!!!
316 Responses
70-400mm G e-mount version
This flat box is just front heavy with kit lens, so I wouldn’t even think of using it with big tele.
everything is front heavy with a big tele, even a D4, if you have a big tele you probably are using a monopod or a tripod (both connected by the lens collar), or a bean bag
A 14-24 Zoom that fits the size of the A7/7R. Sony can ask how Nikon make their superb zoom when they supply the new 54MP sensor to them. 🙂
Something like 20-30mm f4 with super corner sharpness at f8 (landscape photography). A 16-35mm would be ok as well but I think a smaller zoom range would result in better image quality and usually you don’t need 16mm for landscape photography…
Also a Zeiss 21mm f1.8.
Sony 85mm f/1.8 OSS
I fully agree
Yep, would buy that straighaway. f/1.4 is overkill at that focal length, and would only add to cost and size.
Make the fast 85 mm macro and you now have 2 lenes in one.
A fast portrait and a tele makro.
One way to lighten the load is smaller lenses..but the other way to do it is carry fewer lenses that serve multiple functions.
Except for my very long lenses all my lenses are makro.
18-35f2.8
35-105f2.8-4.0
50-150f2.8-4.0
90f2.8 Macro like the Tamron for A-Mount
85f1.4 (expensive)
85f1.8 (rather cheap)
50f1.8 (beercan)
24f2.8
A pendant to the 135f2.8 STF from Sony for A-Mount, possibly to keep it a little smaller 100f2.8 STF.
I want a 21mm f/2.8 from Sony.
When Voigtländer and Leica can do a 1.8 and 1.4, Sony have to make at least a 2.0!
+
I would be very happy with admins suggestions. I’d like to add a fisheye, hopefully a cheap and good from Samyang 🙂
Yes definitely a fisheye! An equivalent to the awesome Samyang 8mm f2.8 with the same image angle.
Oh and something like a 12-14f2.8 Fisheye would be cool!
14,16,24,28 primes and fast if possible
+++++
Some wide-angle zoom covering >24mm:
16-35 f/4 or 17-40 f/4
70-150 f2.0 ，24-50 f2.0
85 mm f 1,8 OSS
24-105 mm f 4.0 as light as possible
The more options the better, but those two would be my top priority too:
a nice travel lens and a fast portrait lens with good control of CA, OSS and great bokeh: (edge to edge sharpness not quite as important to me personally)
Me too! Light hiking in the mountains.
Equivalent to the Samyang 8mm f2.8 with the same field of view.
I want STFs! Since E-mount have contrast-detection AF, it’s possible to make STF with AF. So, my suggestion is:
– 135 f/2,8 STF (restyled A-mount)
– 85 STF
– 50 STF
Even price doesn’t matter.
Me to! Good choice!
+1
A Ultra Wide Zoom like 15-28mm f4 and a Fisheye 16mm!
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Sony 135mm f/2.0 G lens
As soon as possible and as light and small as possible
PANCAKE 35mm f2.0. And I mean flat as a Pancake!
PANCAKE 50mm f1.4 OSS
PANCAKE 800mm f/2.8
LOL
Now that is just being silly. You clown!
got the hint huh?
If you can invent apochromatic glass than your 800 pancake would be doable with only 2 elements.
Well, if it’s possible.. then it should be made. Save a lot of weight and bulk.
PANCAKE 28mm f2.0
14-24mm f/4 G
60 or 90 or 100mm f/4 macro
at least one normal/wide f/2.8 pancake (and not 35mm how boring)
24mm f/2 G
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
I personally wouldn’t buy any more than the above (and it would take me several years to acquire all of them)… for tele I’d get a smaller sensor camera
Oops 24/2 should be Zeiss of course. And a 35mm f/1.4.
PANCAKE 90mm f2.0 OSS
I’ve come at this from the perspective of what would have to be on the table for me to buy into FE… A 50/1.8 oss (or faster), 35/2 oss (but would settle for 2.8) and a 90 or 100/2.8 oss macro (1:1 but would settle for 1:2).
Seeing a pattern emerging? The lenses need to be compact, fast, well built.
And if they told you that you can 2 of 3 from pick fast, compact, sharp?
* “pick 2 or 3 from…”
To be honest it’s more like choose 2 from compact, fast, sharp, stabilised.
Easy: Compact and Fast 🙂
That’s easy then! You’re probably going to be happy with plastic lomo lenses that are fast and can probably be made compact. images will look like it was shot through a frosted window though
I see a pattern emerging of somebody posting junk just for fun. What optical formula do you propose for a 90 mm f/2 pancake?
Your name says it all. LOL.
He is right. Lens design isn’t so easy. Sigma’s 35mm 1.4 is not small than any of its counterparts, why? Sony did not design an f2 35mm because I am sure it wouldn’t have been as compact as the 2.8. Before you bring the “but Leica can…”, stop, think about what you want to say carefully and add to that AF motor, lens restriction size/weight that has to be moved by AF motor, angle of incidence of light of rear element to perform to a high standard and price tag.
Now, what optical formula do you propose for any of the lenses you mention when you add the word “pancake” to them? Mind you it should be a “pancake design for digital 135mm type sensor with 18mm flange distance from mount to sensor”
In the 1700’s if you told people they could travel to the outside of the world in 24 hours they would think you were crazy. Innovation is created be people who think it CAN be done. Not by people who are negative and think it CAN’T.
@ Gordon – and how many of them are still alive to witness it?
Zeiss Otus MF 18mm ƒ3.5 (keeping size and weight as close to Touit version as possible)
Zeiss MF 21mm ƒ2.8
18-35mm F4 OIS
40mm F2 pancake (like the Canon just faster)
75-150mm F3.5 OIS (like the Nikon Series E lens, could be F4) + 2x TC
80-400 F4-5.6 OIS
For the first three I’d even get an A7 or A7r. Buying the last one would depend greatly on how much Sony can improve the AF in future itterations.
Here is my wishlist:
Zeiss 21mm f/2.8
Zeiss 50mm f/2.0
Zeiss 85mm f/1.8
Sony 100mm f/2.8 G Macro
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 G
Voigtländer 21mm f/1.8
Voigtländer 35mm f/1.2
Voigtländer 50mm f/1.1
Voigtländer 75mm f/1.8
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4
90/2 or 90/2.8
Zeiss 24mm f/2
Zeiss 85mm f/1.8
28..30mm f/2 with or without OSS
OSS 85mm f/1.8
OSS 40..50mm f/2
And bring back mirror lenses! The SAL AF 500/8 was excellent and we need compact stuff again.
Please make a compact 300/5.6 mirror lens with or without AF. Would be one heck of a lens if you could make it with OSS too.
For non-af version, there’s Samyang mirror lens 300mm f6.3 – http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/first-image-of-the-rokinon-300mm-f6-3-mirror-for-nex/
I have the Tokina 300 6.3 for mFT which covers aps-c. The Samyangs aren’t bigger, are you sure they cover FF? Might check one out.
Not sure, but I don’t think it does. So yes, please Sony, revive mirror lens for that covers FF sensor.
@just me:
I have an old M42 300/5.6 that works nicely on the a7r but it’s not that much bigger than the mFT 300/6.3. I wonder if they can make one noticeably smaller if it was made for FE.
14-24 f/4 Zoom
21/1.4
35/2.0 Pancake (I know this is propably too complex and will finally kill RX1 sales…)
50/1.2 STF (with CDAF)
85/1.8 OSS
135/2.8 OSS STF (with CDAF)
150-400 f/4 OSS Zoom
Under 20mm and faster than 2.8!
14mm and 2.0, a dream for night landscape…
+
Sony 12-24mm f/4.0 lens
35mm 1.4 Zeiss
100mm 2.8 G macro 🙂
a range of portrait lenses for me, something like this:
– zeiss 85/1.4-1.8
– zeiss 135/2-2.8
– sony 135/2.8-4 STF
actually they could make them all STF, then we could have just one zeiss 135 STF, of course this is just a dream 😀
Here is my list:
A7r could be best traveling camera so i will be definetely for 35-70 2.8 lens in high quality. I think its possible to do it. With 28-70 4.0 its not so perfect and 35 is easier to build. For potrait defineteli 85mm 1.4 and 120mm 2.0. There have to always be 50mm 1.4! That will fit for my work, street foto plus potrait and nudes. 🙂 My ideal lens is hard to build but it will be 35-85mm 2.0 :)) i will pay for it 4000 usd but it can be only one lens i need 🙂
ahh and i forgot there will be nice to have 40mm Pencace! 2.8 or any other pencace 35,50
Sony 24mm f/4.0 (Sony easy choice)
Sony 35mm f/2.8 (Sony easy choice)
Sony 85mm f/2.8 (Sony easy choice)
Sony easy choice = small, cheap but ok performance.
500mm f8 mirror lens. a 16mm fisheye, a 21mm, a 24mm and a 24mm tilt shift, an 85mm, 135mm a 200mm, 300mm and a 400mm. I won’t say apertures because I have no idea what they would need to be to be a reasonable size. A tri-elmar type lens like 18-21-24 would be awesome too. This unrealistic list could go on. Its nice to dream. Of all the lenses for this system a couple of lenses that are ultra wide for architecture and landscape are what I believe are most important as the af is not such an issue and the size of the cameras means travellers and hikers would love it. But needs to be done before the copycats slink on in.
My #1: 24mm, not necessarily fast, but certainly small (smaller than the current 24mm f1.8, more like the 35mm f2.8)
Rest: fast 50mm (1.2?) and 85mm (1.4?)
And all of them CZ please, OSS if possible. 🙂
I’d love to use:
50/1.8
35/2
24/2
all of them small,lightweight and cheap. OSS not really needed. Then it would be great to see some jewels like
50/0.95
21/1.4
85/1.4
where the price would be probably quite high
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 please
Thank you
Why skimp on it:
35mm f/1.4 OSS
85mm f/1.4 OSS
24mm f/2 OSS
Ok, maybe those designs would be quite large. I don’t mind manual focusing, especially if it reduces the size of the lens, but I guess the optical stabilizer can be hard to implement on fully manual lenses. If however, Sony comes to its senses and adds sensor IBIS on the future FF NEX-bodies, the OSS can be left out of the lenses and make them smaller, lighter and cheaper.
So people really think that Sony can support A mount + E mount FE & APSC lens development when they have shown they are so slow with new lenses in the past? Experience is they won’t do that, at least any time soon – e.g. 24-105 f4 a year from now. Too slow Sony! Or maybe too may different directions.
Didn’t we have a similar poll earlier?
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/zeiss-full-frame-lenses-for-nex-ff-will-be-expensive/#ViewPollResults
Doesn’t really matter what focal lens they make. What really makes a difference is that the iris should close only at the moment the shutter releases.
Zeiss 180mm f2 APO
Zeiss 28mm f2
Compact AF Zeiss 21mm f/3.5 or 4.0
Compact AF Zeiss 85mm f/2.0 or 2.8
50mm f1.2
85mm f/1.4
70-200 f/2.8
With fast accurate AF, sharp with nice bokeh and I don’t care what they cost.
Affordable version of Zeiss 15mm prime
21mm prime, preferably fast
Fast 35mm, f/1.4 or better
85mm 1.8 or 1.4
105mm f/1.8 (coupled better with 50mm class lenses in a set)
100-300 fast variable, 2.8-4
200-600, variable 4-5.6
Other lenses I want are already on the roadmap.
Zach
The tamron 150- 600 is reasanably similar to your 200- 600 and would only require tamron to make it e mount and activate the stabilization that is already built in.
Also it is only 4.3 lbs. The lens you describe would be much heavier.
Do you think that would be a more practical lens for your wishlist?
cheap & light as possible:
50 f/2
100 f/2.8 macro
200 f/4 macro
Sony 40/2.5 Pancake
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 or 1.8 please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 🙂
Zeiss 50mm F/0.95 AF
ala Noctilux (but with AF)
What about shift lensis, like the canon ts-e lensis.
Sony 12-24mm f/4.0 lens
Prefer a 12-18mm f/2.8 or f/2.
Or like the Tokina 11-16 but for FF.
Zeiss 24mm f/1.8
Prefer something shorter than 24, under 20 would be best.
14mm f/2.0 ?
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4
Agree
These lenses are not that interesting to me.
Zeiss 50mm f/1.2
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Sony 135mm f/2.0 G lens
Because they’ve listened so well up to this point…
What is this obsession with 50mm f/1.2?
Is it just because Canon do one? It should be noted that the Canon 50/1.2 is large and not actually that great.
I’d like a compact 21mm, and a 12/24 even if big, or 15/35.
A 35mm f1.4 would be neat, or compact f2 but I doubt that this is possible…
16-35mm f/4
24mm f/2.8
I am fully after Andrea (admin) wishlist,
but I am sure that 12-24mm would be difficult for FF system.
Another way, I wish to have 55/1.2 or 58/1.2 more than 50/1.2,
but all of f/1.2 would be blessed.
I am really not interested in Sony G or not G lens,
but maybe some Zeiss 2/180 or 2.4/200?
Best reagrds, WZ.
24-135mm f2.8-4.5
24-120mm f4
24-300mm f3.5-5.6
24-35mm f1.8
70mm f2.8 macro
priority in my view should be
50/1.8 (eventually 1.4 but 1.8 ensures sth decently compact)
85/1.8
and a wide-angle zoom photography like 18-30/4.0 for example.
whatever with dof scale and hard stops!
There are digital hard stops and digital dof scale. Welcome digital cameras 😉
Are all new E-mount lenses FE from now on or will Sony still release APS-C E-mount lenses? I mean, I have not seen a “non FE” roadmap for E-mount and FE lenses can be used on APS-C, so I could imagine Sony not bothering with APS-C versions anymore.
Anyway, E-mount lenses I would like to see (FF or not) are simply put a good range of primes at the tele end. Zooms and primes at the wider end (50mm and below) are not a problem on APS-C and seem to get priority on FF as well, but tele primes are severely lacking in the line-ups.
My guess is no more apsc primes (they wouldn’t make sense) but we’ll probably see some apsc zooms
Zeiss UWA likely a 16-35mm f/4 with reasonable size and cost
Probably see an 85 before 135. Look for 1.8 or f/2. Non stabilized.
Sadly, the macro will end up a 60mm. Prefer 100 2.8, stable
A big, fat, expensive 35mm 1.4 may be realistic.
My wish list.
Zeiss manual distagon design 15 or 18mm. F/4 is fine. Better actually
24mm f/2 or 2.8 AF lens
Any good 135mm
Lens profile app with peripheral shading and color shift compensation profile capability through the App system for under $50
Some of these wish lists are a manufacturer’s nightmare
Small, stabilized, very fast, sharp and cheap!
Let us also ask Sony for a unicorn pony
40mm F2, not pancake but small like the Leica/Minolta 40mm Summicron with AF and maybe OSS.
85mm F2.8 for studio portraits, similar to Sigma 60mm F2.8 which is super sharp and perfect for studio use.
28mm F2.8 pancake with distance scale to use with zone focusing on the street.
Cheap options for popular focal length – 35, 50, 85, etc.
35/1.4 and 100/2.8 Macro are the two lenses I use on my 6D. I’d probably buy an A7/R with just a fast 35, but I’d love to have a portrait and macro lens all-in-one like my 100/2.8L (and I’d probably keep it and use a Metabones if a fast 35 emerges first).
Sony/Zeiss
85 or 90 f/1.8 or 2.0 OSS
50-150/2.8-4.0 OSS
50/2.0 or 45/2.0 pancake
15-30/4.0
all above small and in reasonable prices.
85/1.2 Zeiss
135/2.0 G/Zeiss
35/1.4 G
200/2.8 G
Sigma
90/2.8 very affordable
35/2.8 very affordable
Samyang/Rokinon
16/2.8 fisheye MF
35/2.0 MF
85/2.0 MF very affordable
New firmware for A7 that enable phase detection on sensor when use with LAEA3 and EOS to e-mount adapter.
Or a kind of eos to e-mount adapter with emulator chip to enable on sensor PDAF on A7
Zooms:
Zeiss 16-35 F4 (to keep small but with great image quality)
Sony G 24-105 F4
Sony G 150-300 f4 (a good range of focal lengths but still relatively compact for a super telephoto zoom, I think)
Primes:
Zeiss 21 F2.8
Sony 50 1.8 (lower image quality at max aperture but very low price)
Zeiss 50 1.2
Zeiss 85 1.8
Zeiss 100 2.8 macro
And for the other manufacturers:
Sigma continue the affordable world beater Art series:
24mm 2.0
35mm 1.4
85mm 1.4
24-70mm 2.8
Zeiss manual focus (whatever apertures make a good balance between size and brightness in a manual focus lens:
18
21
24
35
50
85
100
Voigtlander
35 1.2
50 1.1
75 1.8
samyang
18mm T/S
24mm T/S
45mm T/S
90mm T/S
It’s nice that there are some new Full Frame lenses coming but, WHY NOT MAKE SOME FOR A-MOUNT FIRST? 35mm f2, 85mm f2, 100mm f2 etc?
I want the 24-70/4 really badly.
Other than that I’d really like to see a set of 24/2, 35/2, 50/2, 85/2 and 135/2 that aim to be smaller than their DSLR Canikon versions.
That lens, the 24-70 keeps slipping. it’s gone from the beginning of January to the end of January to early February to late February and now it looks like early March! At least that’s in the USA, we do seem to get stuff a few weeks later these days than the Australasia.
24-70 f/2.8 or 35-70 f/2
35-70 f/2? That doesn’t exist from any manufacturer and if it did it would have to be huge and heavy to get good optical performance at the larger apertures. This one isn’t going to happen for a full frame sensor, probably ever!
A7 and A7r are small and light cameras, so the first series of lenses to this cameras also should be like that, so just stop with nonsense stuff like f1.2 apertures or 12-24 zooms… those woulde be massive in size, weight and price
here are by bets and hopes
a 16-35mm f4 (or 16-24…), this would complete the classic f4 line (16-35, 24-70, 70-200), only then Sony could move on to the big and heavy 2.8 guns
a 85mm f1.8, classic portrait lens, cheaper, smaller and lighter then a 1.4, but still fast enought and with lots of creamy bokeh
a 100mm f2.8 Macro, an must have in any serious lens lineup
if Sony releases this lenses, with the existing ones they would have a dream lens lineup for such a young system, then they could focus on stuf like classic primes (20, 24, 135…)
@quark as far as I know { which is not very far} at very wide angle there is a possibly significant reduction in size/weight of lenses due to the shorter register. This potential to reduce lens sizes erodes as the focal length grows.
A good of example of this is the difference in size and weight between the Olympus FT 7-14mm and the Panasonic 7-14.The Olympus weighs over 2.5x that of the Panasonic it is also 50% longer than the Panasonic.
What you are trying to descibe is retrofocus.
By using additional element a short focal length lens is made physicall longer than the actual focal lengththerefore provideng needed additional distance between the rear element and film plane.
This is exactly the opposite of telephoto where the physical length is made shoter than the actual focal length to reduce the size of the lens.
Almost all current wa lenses are retrofocus.
Also a 21 f/2 or f/1.8 would be on my list alongside a non zeiss 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.8
Again, like your 35-70 f/2 request, a 21 f/2 would be absolutely huge to get good cross frame performance at large apertures. It would be about 50% bigger than the current Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 or in the same neighborhood as the Zeiss 15 f/2.8. Again, not going to happen, ever! 😉
+ 1000
A 100mm f2.8 is an essential lens to have in any system.
Is using an adapted manual focus macro lens of which there are a huge selection , much of an issue with macro where manual focus is most often the default usage anyway.
if you wanna be taken serious as a photographic brand, you must be able to provide, at least, the minimum material necessary for your own system. When i buy a camera is nice to know that i can buy a native lens optimized to that camera, not something with an ebay adapter… and if you wanna use the 100mm to shoot portraits AF is always nice to have 😉
100Mm macro is also a 100 mm portait.
Also you can priech that no one should use af for macro but people do andthey want to be able to do so.
At the risk of reapeating myself a system is grossly incomplete without a 100 mm f2.8 macro.
Af might not be necessary for macro shots (although I’ve used it quite successfully in the past) but it definitely helps when you use it as a portrait lens or short telephoto. After all, there’s a reason they come with focus limiters… Personally I’m a bit concerned about how focus by wire would affect macro shooting – I’m definitely not a fan!
realistically?
28 f2
85 f2 (or 1.8)
20mm 2.8
40mm 2.8 (for size and price)
a great macro prime
I don’t care about Tele
I’ll second the 28 f2.
I’ve a sense it’s considered an awkward fit between the more popular 24 and 35 mm focal lengths. But I’ve come to love it for a field of view that nicely balances a subject with its setting.
As for the f-stop? f2 seems fast enough and feasible as a relatively compact lens.
24-105 f4 or f3.5-4.5 – try to keep it small,
as a kit with a cheaper compact viewfinderless A7
I might actually buy that –
and then add primes as and when I could afford them.
Zeiss manual focus/metal barrel (the same small size as Leica M mount Zeiss lenses):
-35mm f2
-50mm f1.5
-85mm f1.4
…with these I will switch to Sony–it will be my Leica system that I’ll never be able to afford otherwise (in your face Leica for not making cameras for working photographers but for only the rich). Thank you Sony and Zeiss!
I am a canon user, and i am not satisfied with canon’s dynamic range and especially the quality of wide angle lenses. so, for me the wide angle zoom will be the no.1 deciding factor.
12-24 i think its too wide, there would be design and quality problems for sure, and not even necessary. i think a 16-35 f/4 would be smaller, better, and satisfying zoom range. just make a resolution and corner sharpness at least as good as nikon 14-24, but without bulky front element, and i immediately switch to sony. and also make a very sharp 70-200/4. the rest of the lenses are not interesting for me.
The primes:
35mm f1.4
50mm f1.4
85mm f1.4
The zooms:
24-70mm f2.8
70-200mm f2.8
I know they’ll be big, but sometimes ya just gotta ‘go big, or go home’
I’ll use a different set of lenses when ‘travelling light’
14mm f/2.8 medium size fix
30mmm f/1.8 (or f/2.0) medium size fix
50mm f/1.2 any size fix with canon 50 1.2 price
135mm f/2.0 any size fix
180mm f/2.8 Macro (or 3.5) any size fix
I hope the f/4 wide angle zoom goes down to 15 or 14 (perhaps meaning it tops out at 24 or 28). That’s fine. I would like something a bit wider than the great A mount 16-35. I hope it has OSS, but I think there’s a chance it won’t. Depends if Sony thinks it’s a likely video choice. Speaking of video, anyone think Sony will do a PZ in FE mount?
OSS
i bet, what coming lens is :
CZ FE 85mm f/1.8
CZ FE 16-35 f/4
FE G Makro 50mm or 60mm F2.8
CZ FE 24mm f/2.8
i would be super happy if sony zeiss make CZ FE makro plannar 100mm F2 🙂
Zeiss 14(16)-24/4, Zeiss 85/1.8, Sony G135/2.4.
Tamron should make e mount version of thier 150-600 that includes stsbilzation that is missing from the a mount version.
A reasonably long 100mm-ish macro f4 or f2.8. The f 2.8 could just be an e mount version of an existing lens with stabilization. The f4 would be a compact high quality macro with stabilization.
A long cat lens…of higher quality than current cats..possibly. 800mm, 100mm or 1250mm. F8 or f 6.3 with stabilzation an autofocus.
These lenses would appeal to wildlife photographers who currently have no usefull e mount choices. All the current choices and sar suggested list are for wa to mormal lenses with a possible modest portrait length available. There are no choices for wildlife making this an incomple system no matter how many more short and wa lenses are made.
The tamron 150-600 is a practical choice because it offers the stabilzation not availble on a mount an does not require a new desighn. This is actually an extremely compact lens for what it is even though people used to shorter lenses might consider it huge.
All the lenses I described should include a tripod mounting ring because this would be particularly inportant considering the small size of the camera body.
“”These lenses would appeal to wildlife photographers who currently have no useful e mount choice””
I am not sure that the AF performance of the current FE cameras makes them an obvious choice for wildlife shooters.I would also be concerned with their durability ruggedness and especially ergonomics.There has never been a genuinely good quality catadioptric lens combined with the often hideous doughnut bokeh and typically slow fixed aperture.Their only advantages are compact size and the distinct lack of CA
You cannot leave out an entire class of photographers just because you can invent a few obstacles.
The a7r actually does focus fast even though you may find another camera that focuses closer.
Current cats are lacking in quality however many people only use a long lens rarely so want a light cheap one.
Schmidt Cosegrain desighns are higher quality but smaller apperture they are sort of middle of the road between cats and all glass.
I really do think the tamron 150-600 will prove to be very popular for.wildlife.
As for durability take better care of your equipment an durabilty will not be an issue. I have never damaged one of my.cameras in over 40 years an that includes climbing mountains, dangling from trees and setting up tripods in the middle of waterfalls all while carrying over 75 lbs of equipment.
“You cannot leave out an entire class of photographers just because you can invent a few obstacles.”
Nothing is being invented compared to the DSLR cameras typically the AF performance of the A7/R are woeful with regard to anything that moves.
“Current cats are lacking in quality however many people only use a long lens rarely so want a light cheap one.””
“As for durability take better care of your equipment an durability will not be an issue. I have never damaged one of my.cameras in over 40 years an that includes climbing mountains, dangling from trees and setting up tripods in the middle of waterfalls all while carrying over 75 lbs of equipment.”
Congratulations on your good fortune for that is all it is. There are good reasons why serious nature/wildlife photographers use serious equipment.I spend a lot of time in the mountains and a FF kit consisting of my D3s+D800 along with 2x flashes , 105mm macro 14-24F2.8 ,24-70mm F2.8,70-200mm F2.8, 400mm F2.8 and a 2xTC covers from 14mm-800mm spare batteries in a bag weighs with tripod weighs in under 40lb. I tend to put down my pack { camping gear food etc } when taking photos or setting up tripods so why would you be carrying 75Ib of equipment when doing these activities ?
Tripod(much heavier back then) 4×5 view camera , film hoders ,lenses, polaroid back, emergency rain protection, 3or 4 minolta bodies lenses flash, reflector cable release , filters and misc special gear related to what iam shooting like blinds, climbing gear etc.
I currently travel lighter than I did back then.
Current e mount totally leaves out wildlife photographers and will not be a complete system until it is also good for them.
I stand by what i said about taking care of your equipment..my stuff doesnt last because im “lucky”.
And creating obstacles means tacking those every day challenges that are a part of life and turning them into resons things cant be done…or taking each word I say and trying to find enough flaws in them to believe none of it is true.
I suggested lenses that are usefull to wildlife photographers and might go well with the ff e mount.
My statements were that simple before you made them more complicated.
Lastly i know cats are low quality but some people want this system only because it is light and might want a cheap light long lens for ocasional use. We were asked to suggest lenses for a survey next week and including them in a survey would be a good idea..would I use current cats …no..then again i cant use current e mount because they are incompatable with my a mount system..
This post is to put together a list of lenses to put on the survey so we can objectively determine what sar readers want.
We dont need to filibuster each choice to keep them off the list.
Vote against the ones you dont like.
Catadioptric lenses? Really!!!??? 😉 😮
Manual zeiss 21~24 f2
Manual zeiss 50 f1 sonnar
Zeiss 75 f1.8
24 Tilt Shift!!
I think Sony actually having 15 lenses in the marketplace in FE mount is a pipe dream. There is no way that they have the bandwidth to get that much new glass out. I’d bet that it will be more like 8 and maybe 10 at the most. And I’m counting both Sony branded Zeiss lenses like the 24-70 and Sony branded lenses.
Also “announce” and “ship” are two completely different things. Note in the graphic above that it has the 24-70 in 2013 but it actually won’t be delivered until mid to late Q1/2014. You pretty much need to push every one of the dates on the graphic 3 to 6 months for when they would actually ship. That means about 8 lenses in 2014 (even that is aggressive for Sony and Sony/Zeiss IMHO) and 13 by the end of 2015. Figure on at lease 1/3 of those projects getting cancelled or delayed (it’s what always happens) and you are left with about 6-7 lenses in native FE being available at the end of 2014 and maybe 9 or 10 at the end of 2015. Just trying to inject a little dose of realism into the hype. Now 6 or 7 native lenses in 2014 and 9 or 10 in 2015 isn’t bad if they are the right lenses at the right quality level.
Main walkaround/creative lens
35mm f/2 (f/2.8 is never enough!), small/pancake, no stabilization (does not have to be critically sharp @f/2, slightly softer corners are ok until f/4-5.6). Not like Zeiss 24/1.8 for APS-C (35m f/2.5dof ff equivalent, but both expensive and large!)
One uwa to rule them all
17 or 18mm f/4 small-ish (sharp corners at f/5.6-8 for landscapes)
both AF (18mm might be manual if cheap), price up to $500
Done.
Also “announce” and “ship” are two completely different things. Note in the graphic above that it has the 24-70 in 2013 but it actually won’t be delivered until mid to late Q1/2014. You pretty much need to push every one of the dates on the graphic 3 to 6 months for when they would actually ship. That means about 8 lenses in 2014 (even that is aggressive for Sony and Sony/Zeiss IMHO) and 13 by the end of 2015. Figure on at lease 1/3 of those projects getting cancelled or delayed (it’s what always happens) and you are left with about 6-7 lenses in native FE being available at the end of 2014 and maybe 9 or 10 at the end of 2015. Just trying to inject a little dose of realism into the hype. Now 6 or 7 native lenses in 2014 and 9 or 10 in 2015 isn’t bad if they are the right lenses at the right quality level.
Oops, sorry, I put this in the wrong place.
16-35 f4 OSS
35 f1.4 and/or 35 f2 OSS
40 f2/2.8 PANCAKE
50 f1.4 and/or 50 f1.8 OSS
85 f1.8 OSS
135 f2.8 OSS
What’s missing so far are mostly OSS primes. Fast zooms will be too large anyways so I have no desire for those. What the system needs is at least one pancake prime for compactness, one wide angle zoom of very high quality and a portrait prime. With the current Zeiss 35 and 55 there’s no direct need of similar lenses, but I would like to see OSS versions and lenses with faster apertures in the near future. And these fast lenses are important for the image of the whole system.
wide angle zoom for me
10-20 or 12-24 / f4
Guess a
– 16-35/4 or 17-40/4 is granted, hopefully with OSS
– a marco will come, maybe 4/100
– a bit more tele reach would be good: a 100-300/4 OSS and a 1.4 converter
This way the system would cover 16-420mm.
A few fast(er) primes would round the system:
1.4/85
1.4/24
as far as I’m concerned Sigma and Tamron need only equip their existing lenses with an E-mount. A 70-200/4 or 2.8 or a 24-70/2.8 or a 24-105/4 for 35mm format still will not be a small lens so a modified barrel for the different focal distance is not an issue for me.
besides, Sigma and Tamron need to focus on designs which will not only work with E-mount (or X-mount or EF-M or EF or whatever the nikon mount is called). The more they can standardize their lenses between different mounts, the more competitively they can price them.
Of course, I still might prefer to buy EF mount lenses and use an adapter simply to avoid being dependant of a single system. Which in turn means that I might only buy very specific lenses in native e-mount (same goes for other mirrorless mounts). So maybe I should be hoping for lenses developed especially for shooting video with mirrorless cameras. Yeah, that might be it for me. A lens with good build quality, something like 18-105mm range, powerzoom… whatever makes the video shooting experience more pleasant. And still not focused primarily on small size.
Small, always, to match the bodies.
totally agree with that!
my first experience with the A7R was with the adapter and the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 and it felt to heavy to hold at the camera grip (ok, the Zeiss is a heavy lens, full stop). but also with Sigma 85/1.4 it felt quite big and not comfy at all
no comparison with the FE 35/2.8 that makes a perfect match with the camera in terms of handling (and also offers the full AF options of the A7R btw)
12-20/3.5-4.5
15/4 pancake
16/2.8 fisheye
20-35/4
21/2.8 pancake
28/2.8 pancake
35/1.4 (luxury street lens)
40/2.8 pancake
50/2 (cheap but good)
50/1.4
85/2.8 OSS pancake
85/1.4 OSS (luxury portrait lens)
100/2.8 OSS macro
135/2 OSS
200/2.8 OSS
300/4 OSS
70-400/4-5.6 OSS
I just read other peoples suggestions
For wildlife whats most needed would still be a
100Mm f2.8 macro with tripod collar
Tamron 150-600. WITH STABILIZATION
And possibly a longer macro like a 200 f 2.8 with tripod collar
Thes 3 lenses would be everything a wildlife photographer needs to carry.
All the other choices are good but not needed if wildlife photography is the only goal…of course carrying a smaller lens along just in case is not a bad idea and we have lots of them to choose from already. Before anyone yells at me I have no objection to smaller lenses being made I just dont need them.
for wildlife any APS-C SLR is much more convenient. I can’t even imagine how someone would like to use such uncomfortable camera for wildlife…
A higher resolution ff such as the ne 54 mp sensor will equal the pixel density of the 24mp c.
Since most long lenses are already ff anyway this would eliminate ALL the downside arguments against ff (which i agree with) and make ff more practical.
This would also decrease the incedence of cut off body parts on moving subjects.
Exactly, for wildlife, or virtually anything that people use suer teles for, the A7/A7r doesn’t have the AF performance to do well. Virtually all photographs taken with optics like this are done of things that move in varying degrees. And the DOF is razor thin with optics like this so even something that moves relatively slow needs superb AF tracking in order to get consistently sharp shots of say a bird, even one just sitting there – there is enough movement that the AF needs to constantly make minor adjustments instantaneously and more often than not in relatively low illumination scenarios. Even the A7’s PDAF is not capable of that today. Maybe a future version, but not these. So for now, anything longer than 300mm or maybe 400mm is not going to provide most photographers that use these optics with the AF performance they need.
I don’ use AF at all for birds/wildlife.
my bird-shooting friend would disagree. He’s all about fast tele primes like the 600/4, 300/4 and so on.
Im not completely shure which parts of my statement you are dissagreeing with
As por long fast primes they are very good…very expensive… and very heavy.
The tamron is lighter less expensive but not quite as high in quality.
More people will get the tamron for those reasons.
only disagreeing with you regarding the “everything a wildlife photographer needs to carry”.
people are very concerned with weight and size but not enough concerned about what lenses will do the best job on a dedicated photography excursion. When you’re out doing whatever, with your camera over the shoulder just in case something comes up, portability is a huge factor. You won’t want to carry a 600/4 with you for that. Even a 100-300/4 would be pushing it. But when you’ve decided you’re going out to shoot birds and you know that you will only walk for a couple of hundred yards, you bring a lens to do that and portability and weight are suddenly of lesser importance. Yes, a 600/4 is probably a heavy beast to lug around but some photographers are willing to do that to get the shot they want rather than grab the smallest and lightest lens available and be held back by that.
I do not dissagree with you.
Some will spend the money and buy the best available lens.
Others will go for the less expensive option and since the lens already exists the tamron 150-600 would be a good choice to make in e mount.
People forget so easy or they just dont know that all these fast wide primes everyone wishes for will have issues when stoped down! like field curvature astigmatism etc…
i think they schould do a 35 or 24 1.8 or something but they mot def. need to make a 21 and 24 f 2.8 or f3.4 with absolutely no field curvature and no CAs and distortion. There is a reason why Leica has these lenses! There is people out there that love landscape photography and architecture photography where a 24 1.8 ist almost useless even stopped down! … UNLESS they manage to somehow to make them as good as the 55 FE but its yeasy to make a good 55.
24-70 f2.8
I understand the argument that the f4 lenses are lighter and some would say fit the camera better, but I say the camera itself is already super light and with the lens and body will still be much lighter than the dslr equivalent. That being said I do not mind some slower glass as long as we can get some faster glass also, not everyone will use these cameras for just travel so the weight will not always be an issue. The beauty of these bodies is they are a little lighter for on location shooting, but that does not mean you do not want some good fast quality glass at those times. So I suggest:
a good fisheye 15mm f/2.8
14-24mm f/2.8
24-70 mm f/2.8
70-200 mm f/2.8
a 24 or 28-300 mm f/4 (for those travel photogs out there)
85 mm f/1.8 or f/1.4
135 mm f/1.8 or f/1.4
35 mm f/1.8
50 mm f/1.8
24 mm f/2
there is no reason why they can’t have both the faster and a little slower in their line up of the same focal ranges and let the consumer decide how much weight and money they are willing to carry and spend.
You had me until 28-300 f4 and 135 f1.4. Those are a little ridiculous.
But I agree with the sentiment that there needs to be very compact f4 and f2.8 lenses, but also some larger lenses that perform well. Let the buyer decide what they want to use it for instead of deciding for them.
Okay I get your point on the 135 mm but how about a f/2.0 for that one both nikon and canon both make a really good 135 mm f/2.0 why cant we have one in e-mount. But on the 28-300 mm f/4.0 both canon and nikon make a 28-300 for full frame, the nikon one is supper nice great glass, mind you they are f/3.5-5.6 and i would be okay with a variable aperture also. I just figured they were making everything else a fixed f/4 hey why not give it a shot.
Agree with Rorey.
This 3 first, i would buy immidiatly:
14-24mm f/2.8
70-200 mm f/2.8
24-70 mm f/2.8
28mm f/1.4
i need 16-35 f4
and manual voigtlander 15mm
make it small… make it fast!!
Now i want:
12-24 f/4 or faster
24 1.8 or faster
85 1.8 or faster
100 or 105 2.8 macro or faster
135 2.8 or faster
Later:
100-400 f/4 or faster.
200 2.8 or faster.
300 2.8 or faster.
35 f1.4! The current sigma 35 1.4 would do! 🙂 just make it in fe mount.
A 50 f1.2 or 1.4 would be great! 🙂 one w beautiful bokeh!
And a 24 f2.8! Really sharp, as sharp as the 55 f1.8 across the whole frame!!
you can already put the sigma in the a7(r). and the la ea4 will enhance autofocus speed as well. great, isn’t?
My pick for the 3 unannounced lenses, with the thought process for the selection:
UWA zoom: Zeiss 12-24mm f/4 OSS
The perfect zoom range for a ‘Holy Trinity’ of zooms together with the 24-70mm f/4 and the 70-200mm f/4.
large aperture prime: Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 OSS
To use Eye AF for portraits with lots of bokeh, a native lens is needed, and this is that lens.
macro: 100mm f/2 OSS G Macro (1:2 magnification)
Since a great many macro lenses can be adapted, there is no need to re-invent the wheel with yet another boring old 100mm f/2.8 1:1 macro lens. The best optical qualities of the Minolta AF 100mm f/2 and the Zeiss 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar will be combined for a more general-purpose lens that can also capitalize on Eye AF for portraits.
Teleconverters are VERY important if keeping wieght down is the goal.
I suggest a series of 4 telecnverters of high quality specifacally desighned to work with all manufacturers lenses.
1.2X
1.4X
1.8X
2.0X
The consensus seems to be, that people want lenses four times the size and weight of the camera… 🙂
I know I am strange, but I think they should priorize a sharp:
50/85mm f2.0 OSS
Yes to good primes with optical stabilization ! It is more important than super large aperture.
from Sony
FE ZA 16-35mm F4 (12mm is too wide, not compact)
FE ZA 24mm F2 or 28mm F1.8, no another 35mm.
FE ZA 85mm F1.8
no another 50mm
from Zeiss (manual focus)
21mm F2.8
28mm F2 : low CA, high contrast, vivid like 2/25 Distagon please!
35mm F1.4, smooth bokeh
60mm F2 Macro 1:2
90mm F2 Apo Sonnar
60mm Macro 1:2 not F2 but F2.8
In order of importance.
35mm 1.4
85mm 1.4
24mm 1.4
Then I will buy into your system Sony.
Thanks
This sounds about right. +1
24mm f/1.8 OSS
85mm f/1.4 OSS
200 mm f/2 OSS
You have to make at least a few lust-worthy lenses that are too big and too expensive, but optically amazing and make Steve Huff go gaga. Everyone knows that a 50mm 1.2 will be heavy and big, but nothing matters as long as it is sharp. A lineup of amazing 2.8 primes won’t sell the system. It’s all about diversification.
So, even though all I want is a great 50mm f2, here’s what I think will sell the system the best:
Zeiss 50mm 1.2 (or, what the heck, why not a 0.95? Make it $10,000; it’s about creating desire)
Inexpensive Sony 50mm f2 OSS.
Optically great Zeiss 18mm f4
Sony 28mm f2
35mm f2 OSS
Give the people a great 85, already. It seems like it’s all anyone wants. Make it an 85 f2 OSS with incredible bokeh.
Sony 135mm f2. Yeah, it’ll be a big lens for the system, but it’s a 135, don’t worry about it. If people want a lightweight kit, they carry a different lens.
Macro 100mm f4
For the manual focus Zeiss and Voigtlander, I don’t think you need to reinvent the wheel, just make the m-mount lenses in FE mount. Maybe an updated 50mm from Zeiss.
I agree on most counts but I don’t think there will be a 35mm OSS lens any time soon–too much overlap. It might happen at the end of 2015 if there’s still people asking for it.
Also I think the 135mm & 100mm will be one lens, not two, at a compromise f2.8. Macro but with pleasing enough bokeh to serve as a portrait lens. Given that Sony/Zeiss already have the well like ZA 135mm f/1.8 I don’t see replicating that a priority. A super fast telephoto on a mirror less system won’t gain much weight/size (relatively speaking) by adding an LAE4 adapter. I’m not saying it wouldn’t be nice, I’m just saying I doubt it will happen.
If Sony/Zeiss can design a WA zoom that rivals Nikon’s but takes full advantage of the shorter registration distance (i.e. is noticeably smaller) it will generate even more interest in the system.
Lustworthy is goo…but we all lust after differrent things…we definitely do not all want the same lenses.
FE 21-80mm f2.0 OSS
35/f1.4 oss
50/f1.4 oss
NOTHING.
Apply any would-be FE-mount resources to A-mount.
For landscape/panorama work, I don’t need large aperture lenses. I would favor small and light, so a series of f/4.0 lenses would be fine by me. Some zooms:
12-24 f/4.0, 24-105 f/4.0. Primes: 85 mm f/2.8, and a good 135 mm f/2.8. I would love to have them all available in Zeiss, weather sealed, etc. I don’t mind paying extra for the quality.
Zeiss:
14mm f2.8
16mm f3.5 fisheye
16-24mm (or 16-35mm) f4 OSS
85mm f1.8
Sony
105mm f2.8 macro OSS
300mm f4 OSS
zoom:
Sony G 24-105 F4 OSS
prime:
Sony 50/1,8 OSS
Sony 85/1,8 OSS
I’d say
15/f4 (2.8 would be nice, but not required)
21/ff3
28 f2
35/1.4
50/1.2
85/1.5
Ultrawide zoom
a short range but fast zoom (24-55/2.8), or somthing like the Sigma
would like to have a wide angle zoom, a 24/25mm. Doesn’t really need to be fast but smaller package and good image quality is good. Something like the Zeiss 25mmF28 Biogon ZM will be perfect. When I first heard about the a7r I’ve already got my eye on the 25 biogon and 50 planar ZM. But in the end I only end up with 50 planar as the 25 biogon doesn’t do well with the a7r. Finally I would want a fast 85mm. 🙂
15/16 up to 21 prime, MF:
One UWA prime—anywhere from 15/16 -21. Speed not so much of an issue, but it must perform well wide open. If that means a somewhat slower lens, so be it. I’d shoot it stopped down a bit anyway.
24: an optically excellent 24—again sacrifice speed for all other IQ matters. MF or AF
28 f2 (at least 2.8): As above, but 28. This I’d like to see a bit faster. MF or AF
AFAIC, wides are NOT isolating lenses DOF wise. I’ll sacrifice speed for all other aspects gladly.
we have the 35 we need from Sony -Zeiss. And other options.
A 28 or 35 T/S, better than the Samyang, or from Samyang with improvements.
35/40/50 pancake: not fast, but otherwise very good. AF if possible. I could live with MF.
50, minimum f1.8: We have the expensive option, I’d like to see another with a better price. AF or MF
85 f1.4: Sigma makes a beauty. I’ll take it in FE mount. AF or MF.
28-100 f 2.8 zoom, AF. Smaller than the 24-70.
70-300, similar to the new model Tamron, hopefully smaller but i won’t quibble.
Zeiss 85mm f/1.8 (possibly as slow as 2.8 to keep it compact but I doubt it)
Zeiss 12-24 f/4 (this will be smaller than a DSLR because of the short focal length but still not a terribly compact lens)
Sony 100/150mm f/2.8 Macro (not 100% sure on the focal length as it will have to fill a spot on both E & FE cameras & double as a portrait prime for FE)
I’m also thinking:
Sony 24-105mm F/4.0 OSS (~ size of 18-200 E-mount) (possibly PZ–remember the VG900!)
Zeiss 28mm f/1.8 (~size of FE 55mm)
Sony 40/45mm f/2.8 pancake (think Perar lens with AF)
Zeiss 18mm f/2.8 Distagon (big $$$ lens)
…possibly a crazy fast f/1.0 normal prime “just because we can” lens.
…hopefully a T/S lens with a electric aperture
Sadly I’m skeptical there will be other AF alternatives until Fuji or Samsung comes out with a competing product in 2015 or so. I think the Zeiss MF lenses will mirror the ZM line exactly (sans the biogon lenses) with very similar prices.
A-mount Zeiss Otus
– minimum investment from zeiss ( no backward engineering the mount)
– ideal with a-mount IBIS & focus peaking
– better adaptation for e-mount cameras via sony’s AE adapters (with full electronic communication)
Do people realise these cameras have full frame sensors in??? The amount of people saying they want a 12-20 (24) f4 etc lens are crazy. It would be a monster on this camera!!!!
There are sooooooooooo many wa and normal lenses out and so many more comming out yet so many people are asking for more of the same.
How many of the same lenses can anyone use?
This seems like a lens bubble to me.
Everyone will make all these super fast super expensive normal and wa lenses and when the fad dies down the lensmakers will lose thier shirts.
Zeiss 21mm f/4 or f/4.5– around the same size as the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8. Compact 135mm f/2.8.
85 F/1.4 but I’ll take a 1.8
16-35 F2.8
100 F/2.8 macro
24 F/2
an ultra wide prime like a 14 or 16mm
This roadmap leads to a dead end in the middle of a desert.
The most important holes in the current lineup are:
– a 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus
– a Holga pinhole lens
– a anamorphic 50mm T2.1 Makro lens that works well with follow focus rigs.
they should just copy the EF lineup really.
Including what’s listed on the road map I would add:
1) A very wide prime 20 MM F2.8
2) A prime macro 1:1 50 or 80 MM F2.8
Longer lenses can use existing A-Mount or other manufacturers lenses via adapters, since the small foot print is no longer a virtue.
I really want to see the 24-200mm f2.8 from the RX10 in a FF format or APSC size, that lens in any NEX camera will rule the lens arena
Keep ’em compact:
28mm f/2.8
85mm f/1.8
and a true dream…
40mm f/4 tilt-shift
I could live with those three lenses alone.
Tilt-shift is unlikely any time soon ( given that Sony has produced zero t-s lenses thus far). However, since t-s lenses are manual focus any way adapting the great canon tilt-shift lenses doesn’t result in any loss of functionality. Plus for landscapes and interiors the a7r may well be superior to any current canon bodies anyway given the higher resolution and better portability.
Sony: deliver an 85mm f1.8 and a 135mm f2 and then I can finally dump my Canon 5DMKII and lenses.
A 50f1.4 oss, and that’s all I need.
I use Voigtlander for most shooting, but there are two huge gaps:
Zeiss 100mm F2.8 OSS macro, highest resolution and weather sealed
Zeiss 70-200mm F4 OSS, keep as small and light as possible without sacrificing IQ
There are many good suggestions here, but let’s look at extending the current Zeiss offerings to work with the FE mount. The 16-35/2.8 for A-mount is probably too large, but if that could be reconfigured (even if it were to lose a stop) that would be a workhorse.
Andrea, you mentioned a 135 Sony G and others have mentioned a Zeiss 135. One of the finest lenses ever made is the Zeiss 135 (f1.8 AF model for Alpha 135 f2 in ZE and ZF), so how about porting something like that over? Maybe it’d be a 2.8. I have a Contax Zeiss 135/2.8 that I use on my NEX-7 that will be on my A7r as soon as it shows up, but an AF model would be welcome.
Long, fast lenses are the biggest hole in the lineup in my view. An 85/1.x or 2 or 135 (mentioned above) would be nice, but a 180/2.8 or 200/2.8 would be great.
BTW, I already dumped my Canon gear (a year ago, in fact) and shoot exclusively with Sonys. My company owns a99s and Zeiss lenses (16-35, 24-70, 50, 135) that we shoot commercial photography and video with, and I personally own a NEX-7 with Zeiss, Leica and Sony lenses. I’ll never go back to those beastly Canons.
For af lenses 24mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4 or any 2.8 zooms are pipe dreams.
Most likely primes are.
85mm 1.8 or 2.0
135mm 2.8
20mm/24mm/28mm 2.8
Zooms
16-35 f4
12-24 f4
Macro
100mm 2.8
50mm 2.8
1. Sony 12-24mm f/4.0
2. Zeiss 20mm f/2.8
3. Zeiss 35mm f/1.8
4. Sony 100mm f2.8 MACRO
5. Zeiss 50mm f/1.4
6. Zeiss 85mm f/1.8
7. Sony 135mm f/2.0 G
8. Sony 70-200 f2.8 G
9. Sony 24-105 f4.0 G
I have the Vario-Tessar T* FE 24-70mm F4 ZA OSS on pre-order that should be a great companion to my fast 24mm F1.4, 35mm F1.4, 50mm F1.4 and 85mm f1.4 primes on my full frame VG900.
Revive some of the classic Minolta Rokkor lenses like the 58mm 1.2 and the 28mm 2.0!
and some of the old Minolta M Mount lenses like the 40mm!
Since they are manual focus lenses anyway, just get an adapter. You can get a decent one for very cheap that will adapt MD Rokkor to E-mount. And since they all have an aperture ring you have direct aperture control. no point in building those lenses with a native FE mount.
whatever the wide angle zoom is, I hope it performs in terms of across the frame resolution on the A7R sensor, has the typical zeiss microcontrast/colors and takes filters… please no bulging from elements like the nikon 14-24, A 16or 17-35/4 would be dandy!
And no permanent lens hood please!
When Zeiss does a bulging front element they still provide filter threads as part of the lens hood. Anything wider than 16mm is going to have a bulging front element in full frame. Personally I think a 16-32 or 16-28 or something along those lines in an f/4 optic would be a good match to the A7R. Sure I would prefer f/2.8 but that does get pretty big and will need 82m filters in all likelihood where you could do an f/4 in a more friendly package.
don’t forget the weight difference between a f/2.8 and f/4 UWA
I want the ideal (for me) snapshot lens: a 40mm 1:1.4. No need for pancakey lenses, just make it good and with fast and accurate AF.
And maybe a fast 90mm (85…10mm), something like 1:2, with again fast and accurate AF. For the rest I can and probably will live with legacy lenses on the A7.
fast lens with OSS, something like current 50/1.8 oss
how about:
50/1.8 OSS
15/4
Listen.
Sony already has primes coming down the pipeline.
keep it classy and simple people.
Sigma needs the Art lenses in these category
18-50mm 2.8\50-150mm 2.8 SSM (or 3.5/4.0)
18-200mm 3.5-4.5 or 5.6 OSS
16-35mm F4
20mm-35mm 2.8-4.0
AND hurry up! please..
Yes! 20-35mm f4 please!
I love the 18-200 idea, I still think that Sony needs to look at the really popular lenses from their competitors, like the Nikon 28-300 f/3.5 – 5.6 a perfect all around travel lens and very popular not cheap but well worth the money. I am looking to get a good lineup so I can start getting rid of my D600 and the associated lenses.
By order of importance :
85mm 1.8 or 1.4
100mm or 135 2.8 or faster
14-24 f4 to finish the trio
Maybe a trio of 2.8 zooms of same focal length (12-24, 24-70, 70-200)
One macro 100 or 150mm
Zeiss 24mm F2.0!!! Please
This would complete my kit for urban/landscape photography. 24-35-55 Zeiss prime with my A7r would be the ultimate system for me.
A 50mm F/1.8 or F/2.0, and a 85mm F/2.8 or F/2.0 are the most likely.
I’ll have a friend of mine translate the Japanese when I get back to work. F/1.4s or faster primes will be too large for the A7 form factor.
For the good of Sony in the marketplace, What I’d like to see are a couple of high quality fast zooms with stabilization to remove that last barrier for pros to make the switch.
24-105mm f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8
Expensive yes, but we all know these are cornerstones for event and Editorial shooters on DSLRs.
For me? I use the 24mm Zeiss on a NEX 7 and have been happy as a clam, but I’d probably upgrade when and if they come out with a 35mm f/1.4 with stabilization. I’m kind of wondering if the next versions may have the Olympus 5 axis stabilization in-body though.
35 1.4 !! but at least one with f 2.0 !
I would like it if everybody could please specify the weight, size and price you’re willing to put up with. most of the lenses mentioned in this thread would be very large. why not use la ea4 and a-mount lenses for the occasions when size doesn’t matter? and we do need some budget alternatives as well!
IMO, this is how a 15 FE lens lineup should look like in two years:
Five zooms…
16-28/4 OSS FE ZA
24-70/4 OSS FE ZA
28-70/3.5-5.6 OSS FE
28-135/3.5-5.6 OSS FE
70-200/4 OSS FE G
Ten primes…
24/1.8 FE ZA (E converted to FE)
24/2.8 FE (pancake)
35/1.4 FE G (Manual Focus only… Make it as small as possible)
35/2.8 FE ZA
55/1.8 FE ZA
55/2 OSS FE (E50 converted to FE55 as a low cost normal option)
85/1.8 FE ZA
100/2.8 OSS FE G (macro)
135/2 OSS FE ZA or G
200/2.8 OSS FE G
Keep E primes as follows:
16/2.8 pancake
35/1.8 OSS E
Keep a consolidated E zoom lineup:
Premium Line:
10-18/4 OSS E
16-70/4 OSS E ZA
18-105/4 OSS E G
18-200/3.5-5.6 OSS E
Consumer Line:
16-50/3.5-5.6 OSS E
50-200/4-5.6 OSS E
CZ FE 135mm f2 couldn’t realistic for small form factor A7/r, i think 135mm f/2.5 or 2.8 would be realistic.
i agree fast lens on FE mount will be handle by manual zeiss lens. because they can make it in small form to fit in camera.
35mm/1.4, 50mm/1.4, 21mm f/1.8, 24mm f/2, 90mm/f2, 18/2.8, etc
Your list of wide angle primes needs to be expanded. No UWA primes? Zooms compromise IQ at these focal lengths.
Zeiss makes the best primes for 15mm, 18mm and 21mm focal lengths with their superb Distagons. All would pair well with the resolution of the A7r sensor and be ideal for landscape and architecture. They could easily adapt the 18mm Touit design for FE.
Ideal would be a UW prime as well, but IMO the first 15 lenses should be about consolidating the E-mount lineup and offering a wide variety of choices, both expensive and inexpensive. The one lens that could be given up in my list would be 35/1.4G for a 14/2.8 or 20/2.8 or something like that.
I suspect Zeiss will be going for a 18mm lens.
I would prefer the list not resemble a list of Canon L’s. It just seems like you’re opening the door to repackaging and copying. It’s bad enough we get the Leica mount comparisons using electron microscopes. For example there have to be other zoom lenses beside the 18-135 w/ the specs for the aperture. Nothing personal. Just who wants to go over to Canon and say I saw that there can u make me one. Learning how to shoot and not be so concerned with what the competition is doing is more important than bragging your not u but your brand is better than mine and everyone else is an idiot. Too many trolls yanking chains with their ideas and I’ll bet most never owned a Brownie much less a DSLR or film camera. But seriously all the brands and not all are individual manufacturers as we well know should use some sort of ISSO counterpart of standardized size mounts. When trying to figure out what the MIS shoe was all about I finally realized that it will be the standard across all the lines not just a Sony invention. Why should I have to buy a new camera or a new lens when and if I decide to add to or change mo’s.
Bottom line is I’d like a f/2 for a range somewhere around the standard. For the most part everyone has primes especially the normal. And everyone has a wide to normal to standard and the ever present 70-200. So like many I bgt the 24-70 and its complementary angle 70-200 to start and added a prime super tele later. But why? Because it was the standard. Well being that that’s a choice I don’t care. they were good. But now I’d like something that overlaps the 24 and the 70. So let’s say a 50-90mm ff. An f/2 if they can keep the weight under 7 oz. and the dimensions say no more than 3″ with IF and OSS. When they build a better stabilization in the body that’s fine but up until now at least in the lens is reportedly superior. Hey the list is long and good just too much like the other guys. And one final note: if the G brand is a premium and costs less than the stamp for a Zeiss give me the G. I don’t need a CK to wear around my neck. Let the Leica people pay the mortgage.
You cannot really have a system without a 300mm f2.8. But I would prefer a 500mm f4. To me, it makes a lot of sense to slap one of these little cameras onto any lens that comes equipped with a tripod collar. Bodies without mirror slap seem like good mates for super teles. Not to worry though. If Sony doesn’t do it, somebody else will. And there are plenty of elderly Nikon and Canon manual focusers that can be adapted that have plenty of optical quality for the purpose.
If you are going that big, might as well go with A-mount lenses for 300/2.8, 500/4 or 600/4. LAEA4 adapter (or if you prefer MF or okay with slow AF, LAEA3.
E mount has no ibis amount has no oss
You can use anything except a sony len for sony
Unfurtunately sony has decreed that a mount users shall be eternally cursed.
I guess thats the price we pay for being sonys chosen people.
A mounts are for cameras with mirrors. Why?
A-mount uses mirror based PDAF, hence the mirror (also on the LA-EA4 adapter). When you use LA-EA4 and A-mount lens on E-mount cameras, you will be overriding the camera’s native AF system (which makes perfect sense for ability to acquire focus and track).
All i really want is re-release of Zeiss 135/1.8 but with STF. Please Zeiss do it!
btw, on a more realistic note 8-16 and 12-28mm f.4.0, 24mm f1.4, 85mm f1.2
I have wanted to see STF in 85mm form so it can benefit on both sensor sizes. At 135mm, the FOV is just too narrow on APSc. Also, only to complement an 85/1.8 rather than be 85mm options since STF tech results in lower t-stop although maintains the f-stop.
Actually, I would love to see Sony bring out a series of specialty lenses that are back to the basics type lenses, fully manual and as compact as they can be while being fast… More like a trio of 35/1.2-1.4, 55/1.2 and 85/2 STF (where t-stop could be 3.5).
Sony 14-24 f4
Sony 70-200 f2.8
The people complaining about fast primes being too big for the a7 are the same people who shoot with 70-200’s on their dslrs. I’ve seriously had enough about hearing that point. The A7 is about as compact as a film camera, I’ve never heard people complaining about the size of fast primes on those! And before you say “but they didn’t have autofocus” just think of fuji x lenses. They may be APSC but they’re tiny! And, if you don’t want the larger lenses, don’t buy them! There’s plenty of people who do want them! You guys are worse that the senile old photogs who snap at the thought of a touch screen on a pro level camera!
/rant
the thing is, since there are already lots of bulky alternatives with better af using the la ea4, I think it’s wise of Sony to go for compactness right now.
One more VERY usefull lens would be
100mm-300mm f3.5-4 macro with maximum magnification of 1/2
This would be a great compromise of reasonable size and maximum capability.
Admin please put this lens plus the tamron 150-600 plus the 100mm f2.8 macro on your survey.
I really would like to know what people other then myself think of them.
Something like 30-90/3.2 for FF would be great.
An affordable but high quality long lens, optimized for use on the A7/A7r – for wildlife and other long uses. Something like an image stabilized 300mm f/4 prime, or possibly an image stabilized 300mm-500mm f/4.5-8 zoom. The 300mm f/4 IS could be combined with a teleconverter to get longer focal lengths.
The current 500mm lens is not affordable for most people and the 70-400mm is slow and not image stabilized, and both would have to be used with the A-to-FE mount adapter.
A 100-300 f/4.5 could be done at a reasonable size and weight and match up pretty well to the A7R. There is about a 25% size and weight penalty to come down to f/4 so I’d be willing to give up that half stop.
14mm f/2.8 or f/4 (Basically any ultra wide angle super sharp prime)
12-24 f/4
105mm or 135mm f2 or F2.8 Macro/portrait
Besides what is coming, these are my only lens wishes.
35mm system builders have tended to overlook the fixed focal lengths between 55 and 85 way too much. That’s a huge jump. Same with the range between 35 and 55, or even 35 to 50. For a series of fixed lenses, I like to see jumps of only about 20%. So a 65 to 70 and a 40 to 42 would be nice to see, though there are a couple of pancakes around, Canon’s and the nicer Voigtlander 40’s which can be adapted to the FE bodies. And the Voigtlander 40 in the Nikon version can be adapted with tilt.
I am very happy with the original plan of offering the 24-70 f4 and the 70-200 f4, both stabilized and both of exception optical quality, per the MTF. I think Sony couldn’t have gotten off to a better start than those two, for what I do with cameras.
I would like to see something in the 18 to 21 range with superb performance corner to corner by f/4 or 5.6, and very fine manual focus only and a likely maximum aperture between 2.8 and 3.5. With numerical distance readout in the finder! (by the way — if a digital micrometer can be built, a lens which tells the body its focussing distance certainly can too)
For next years’s f/4 wide zoom, I’m hoping it’s roughly 16 to roughly 30+, and I think I’ll get my wish. Stabilization would presumably do more harm than good.
For native tilt capability, it will be hard to compete with Canon’s TS-E’s, especially once they finally replace their 45 and 90 (though the 90 is already optically superb).
Whatever they build, I want to see corners sharp on the plane of focus by two stops down, always!
What I would love to see soon as follows:
24-135 f4.0 Zeiss or G series (priced under $2800)
70-200 f4.0 G series or Zeiss (a G series is due out in January or so)
Yes fast glass is nice, but when always on location & on the road, smaller is really much better !
after that maybe a super wide prime 12mm or 14 mm f4 (or even 5.6) without image quality compromise (almost no distortion, flair, or chromatic problems)
24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, no OSS, use Oly’s 5axis in-body stabilization from the next FE-mount camera
My wish list:
35/2.0, preferably with OSS
85/1.8, preferably with OSS
100/2.8 Macro 1:1 OSS
…. and then I would love a:
1.4x Zeiss quality Teleconverter that works perfectly with the Macro and the 70-200/4
Thomas
I would really like the 1.4X teleconverter for the 70-200/4 also, and it’s always a plus if it can work with some other lenses too, without compromising the performance, though I suppose that’s an inherent contradiction.
A compact fisheye like the Samyang 8/2.8, of course it will have to be somewhat bigger, just not DSLR big.
15/3.5
20/2.8
24/1.8
35/1.4
50/1.2
85/1.4
100/2
135/2.8
200/2.8
I’d really like a tilt/shift lens like Canon’s 17mm TSE but without the electronic stuff.
And a tilt/shift 100mm macro.
Dear Sony
I like your cameras very much, in fact I have 2. An A900 and an Nex 7, I don’t want another full frame unless it is an A mount, I don’t like SLT, mirrorless A mount would be fine but it must have built in OSS and I would appreciate tele-converter compatibility. The only lens I require that I don’t have at the moment is a native E mount (APS-C)fast tele or tele-zoom (say a 55-150 f/2.8) with built in OSS. Not interested in slow and/or heavy full-frame FE lenses.
Sony 24mm f2.8
Sony 85mm f1.8
16-35mm f4
Hahaha 35 1.4, 50 1.4 and 24 2.8 with oss! :)all AF lenses! 🙂
85mm 1.8
35mm 1.4 or 35mm 2.0 oss
FE 14-28 f4 OSS ZA
FE 28-135 f4 OSS ZA
FE 20 f2.8 ZA pancake
FE 85 f1.8 OSS ZA
FE 135 f2.8 OSS ZA
FE 100-300 f4-5.6 OSS G
FE 100 f4 marco 1:1 OSS G
Mirrorless -> easier to design more compact wide angle lens
Full Frame -> Capable of producing shallow depth of field at wide angle
Please do what other system can not:
Sharp and Compact :16-35 F2.8
or even better: 16-35 F2 (Even-though it will be quite large.)
I personally thinking about 16-35 F2.8-2 which is 2.8@16mm but extend to 2@35mm but not sure if this is possible or make sense.
These would be the lenses I would like to see added to the ZE LINE
ZE 24mm f1.8 or f2.8
ZE 100mm f2.8 OSS Macro
ZE 85mm f1.4 or 1f.8
ZE 14-35mm or 16-35mm OSS f2.8 or f4
ZE 10-20mm f2.8 or f4
ZE 35-100mm 2.8 just for lols! I would use this as my general purpose lens or even my workhorse hahaha
Alsooo
Video lenses with clickless aperture rings
24mm
35mm
85mm f2
Will the Sony Carl Zeiss E-mount 24mm F1.8 work great on the A7/A7r?
Will the Sony Carl Zeiss FE- mount SEL35 F28Z work great on the NEX series?
Long term investment and pricing reasons aside. Just want to hear opinions on performance.
I don’t see why it’ll have any degradation in lens performance as the E 24 would work in crop mode and vignettes in full frame mode. The E 24 works superbly on the NEX 7 which has a more demanding pixel pitch then the A7/A7r, so this lens wouldn’t be a problem.
The FE35 would work more like a 50mm FoV on the NEX series, and I’m not sure how evenly sharp the center of the lens is, but it’ll likely work fine on NEX as well.
FE mount 35mm would not be a 50mm on an Emount.
The Sony Zeiss 35mm will indeed work on APSc (and I bet with superb IQ) albeit with a narrower field of view, comparable to that of 55mm on FF. But given its f/2.8 max aperture, I would prefer to use it on FF while the 35/1.8 OSS E goes better on APSc (same FOV as 35/2.8 FE would provide but over a stop faster at wide open apertures).
Dear SAR
I have got Alpha 7 R and the Zeiss 35 mm Sonnar lens. It is a nice lightweight system. I would like some more light lenses e.g a 100 mm 4.0 macro, 400 mm 8.0 and 18 mm 5.6.
Yours
Kurt Engelhardt
Just 3 lenses for me…
Sony 16-35mm f4.0 minimum G lens
Zeiss 85mm f1.4
Zeiss 135mm f1.8 or f2.0
Oh, I would rather stick with M mount if they are purely manual lenses.
I would only consider FE mount lenses, if they are zooms or focal lengths =>85mm
Unless you shoot exclusively in B&W, most UWA M mount lenses (except WATE and Voigt lenses) will have issues in colour.
Telephotos. Telephotos. Telephotos. Why do none of the mirrorless cameras have any native telephotos?
I want a 135 and a 180 as soon as humanly possible. Quality ones. That means not Sony G (why would you request that?!), nor even Sony Zeiss, but Cosina Zeiss.
Ok, why is a Sony G and Sony Zeiss not considered quality? The recent 35 and 55 is stellar and worthy the Zeiss name.
You might see a 135 from Cosina Zeiss, but it’s unlikely you’ll ever see a 180 coming from them.
Cosina Zeiss would be better? Cosina manufactures Sony Zeiss lenses under design and quality control considerations from Zeiss.
I would really like a 24 2.8 for a reasonable price.
-Full Frame
-Compact
-Low Distortion Wide Angles
-Fast / large apertures
21mm F2.8
24mm F2
28mm F2
35mm F1.4 and F1.8
100mm F2
135mm F2
Zeiss ZM 35mm 1.4 ASPH
I want e-mount version of vario-sonnar 24-70/2.8 (not tessar)
Of course wearther sailed and stabilized
I’ll bay this lens
I understand the allure of primes, but a camera like the a7 cries out for a reasonable size/weight high quality walk-around FE zoom. f4.0 or f4-class and under 500g. It has been done for FF so it can be done again, this time with modern coatings, IS and SSM. It should be somewhere in the range of 24 or 28mm to 105mm or more… wherever the compromises need to be to keep quality high and the weight down.
Please no power zoom…many of us don’t do video and it can degrade the photographic experience. Video has turned into the photographic tail that wags the dog.
From the road map above, the 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f4 is coming next year. Leaving only the 14-24 f4 and the f4 zoom trifecta is completed.
Good luck trying to ask Sony for a mirrorless zoom that’s not the size of a whiskey jug.
There are plenty of cheap, compact minolta a-mount zooms that can be used with full functionality. For instance, there is the great Minolta 100-200mm f4.5 zoom. I’ve been using this on my a99 when I didn’t feel like busting out a canon with 70-200 combo. It is tiny compared to the 70-200 and can be purchased for around $50. The image quality is surprisingly good. There are many other compact minolta lenses for low prices – full frame with AF via adapter for e-mount available.
185 F4 1:1 macro
100 1.8
24 f2
& some $500 or less lenses
Sony 35 f2
Sony 85 f2
for underwater with housing :
– 15mm fisheye f2.8 or f3.5 very sharp with close focusing
– 50mm 1:1 macro f2
– 100mm 1:1 macro f2.8
black lenses with no white letters on the front of the lens
For mee 100mm f1.8 or 2.0 OSS G or ZA portrait (not macro) lens would be great choise (instead of pair 85mm + 135mm)
Zeiss 24mm f/1.8
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4
Zeiss 50mm f/1.2
Zeiss 85mm f/1.4
Are good suggestions, though not necessarily from Zeiss.
I mean, we don’t all have such big pockets…
If Sigma can do for the FE mount what they did for the SLR’s with some very good and affordable primes, that’d be cool.
Plus, an IS inclusion might also be nice. I’m gonna try out Canon FD lenses, but my hands are not as steady as they used to be 😉
I’d like to see:
45/2 or f2.8 from Sigma, a la 30mm f2.8 for APS-C. The biggest thing for me would be image quality, and lens start-up speed. I love the 30mm, but it is SLOW to respond.
90mm or 100mm f2 or 2.8 from Sigma.
35 f1.4 or f1.8 the size of the Sony 55/1.8 from either Sigma or Sony
24mm or 40mm f2.8 pancake from Sony
75/85/90mm f2 Portrait lens from Sony
Fast, small manual lenses from Voigtlander, like f1.4 (28, 35, 40, 50, 75)
A Tamron 90 2.0 macro stabilized for under $500 all metal under 7oz. less than 3×3″
A G 16-60 2.0 for under $600 with 2 ED, 4 ASP distance encoder/aperture ring- all metal under 8oz less than 2.8×2.9″
remove sales from non dealer listed companies/sites
A macro like the EF 100 L stabilized and good for portrait
…Who the hell needs Zeiss lenses?! Zeiss, Zeiss, Zeiss – just for the name, to spend more money for lenses, which Sony can produce under its own brand for half the price? Make a poll with normal lenses…
Sony Zeiss lenses are sony lenses, Sony simply uses the Zeiss designation and blue tag as Canon uses “L” and the red band on those respective lenses. It indicates, in theory, and differentiates, via marketing, that such a lens features highest build quality and optical performance of all the sony lenses particularly when there are duplicate focal lengths. For example, Sony 50mm 1.4 lenses. They produce a less expensive cheaper Sony model and an expensive Sony Zeiss model that is all metal with SSM (and larger & heavier). Don’t blame Zeiss for these lenses or pricing. If Sthey weren’t called Sony Zeiss they would simply be called something else with the same pricing level, such as Sony Omega lens or some such branding.
If you want to blame Zeiss for pricing, they are solely responsible for the Otus and Touit lenses.
sony 50 f/1.8 OSS
at the reasonable price
What i would love to see, in designed for FE mount:
Autofocus:
Zeiss 50/1.5
Zeiss 35/1.4
Zeiss 21/2.8
Sigma 35/1.4
Sigma 50/1.5
Sigma 85/1.4
(The latter three because I loved my canon mount 50/1.4. I’ll put up with the size for that. )
Beyond that, in MF land, some manual wide and ultrawide glass that plays nice at the edges if the frame. With electronic aperture control.
Why bother saying anything? Nobody listened when we asked for tethering on the A77. The rumoured update never materialised.
There’s none so deaf as those that cannot hear.
WITHOUT A UWA ZOOM LENS THE FULL FRAME E SYSTEM IS INCOMPLETE AND UNABLE TO BE USED BY REAL PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHERS. I’VE TO STICK WITH MY D800 BECAUSE SONY FORGOT ABOUT IT. WE ALREADY HAVE LENS SOLUTIONS FOR ALL OTHER FOCAL LENGTHS. I DO INTERIOR PHOTOGRAPHY AND THIS SYSTEM IS AN ABSOLUTE PIECE OF CRAP BECAUSE THERE’S NO LENS TO BE USED OR IF USED VIA ADAPTER IT LOSES ALL THE ADVANTAGES IT HAS. I WOULD BUY IT FOR SURE IF THERE WAS SUCH AN OPTION. IT’S WORTHLESS FOR ME. GET AN UAW ZOOM AND I’LL BUY 2 BODIES AND SOME MORE LENS FOR SURE.
I wonder what would be the macro G lens?
It be great if there is one from Zeiss as well like the 85mm f1.8
16-35mm f4
24-200mm f2.8-f4 (but preferably f2.8 for the entire range like the RX10)
85mm f1.8
So many people clamoring for fast lenses. Do they not consider the size and weight implications and how they will make the diminutive A7s clumsy and unbalanced? This, of course, is one of the tradeoffs that come with FF sensors. But when you have a sensor that can perform well at ISO 6400-12,800, ultra-wide apertures are not essential. I would rather have image stabilization in my lenses (which would also add slightly to size and weight).
Sony will never make fast lenses for the E mount since they idea is to build compact lenses for small cameras. If you need f/1.4 – welcome to the A mount.
I personally want 14-800mm f/0.95 APO zoom with no CA of course, no barrel distortion, no vignetting, crazy high resolution from center to borders, not heavier than 1 lb, with OSS. The price should not exceed $20. I’d like to buy two.
What about a Sony Leica Summilux DG 75mm 2.0 for $600. 7oz. One Super ED, three ASP, Distance scale, Aperture ring, Two year drop and spill warranty from Walgreens.
A Sony G 50-90mm f2.0 for $699. Two ED, two ASP, rear focusing, OSS, 9oz.
– Whoever 24mm f1.8 or f2.8(pancake, if possible, both cameras need at least one small carry-around lens, f1.4 becomes too big/bulky again for this form factor, killing portability)
– Whoever 85mm or 90mm or 100mm f1.8 (classic portrait range, f1.4 glass is prohibitively expensive for 90% of us, f1.8 fast enough for most)
– Sony 28-70mm, constant f2.8 with OSS (Zeiss too expensive, this is the ideal carry-on, all-purpose, travel-lens, fast enough, but not too heavy/big nor too expensive)
Those would sell tons. I’d buy all three.
Sony 50mm 1.4 or 1.8 OSS
Sony 28mm 2.8 pancake
22f4
26f3
42f2
75f1.6
For the a7