NEX -- Why only 2 e-mount lenses?

[David Kilpatrick]

Paul Genge has sent me this comment:

“All products we provided were pre-production. They were near final quality, but we have subsequently discovered that attendees were discovering some lenses were better than others, of both types. So, please refrain from drawing any conclusions of optical performance based on these examples. Though the camera bodies were near final, so image noise and other parameters were a good indication of the cameras output.”

David

[OneGuyKs]

Paul Genge has sent me this comment:

“All products we provided were pre-production. They were near final quality, but we have subsequently discovered that attendees were discovering some lenses were better than others, of both types. So, please refrain from drawing any conclusions of optical performance based on these examples. Though the camera bodies were near final, so image noise and other parameters were a good indication of the cameras output.”

David

In that case, you should revise your sample images and judgment on the kit lens if the production models turns out to be better

[David Kilpatrick]

It's not unusual to get this response when reactions to pre-production equipment are not entirely positive. I have ordered a kit with 16mm. I'll hope to get another 18-55mm and also a further 16mm in a test loan kit. If I find substantial differences, I will say so.

I know the 16mm underperforms at f/2.8 at the edges. However, it has exceptionally good geometry for a lens of its angle, and I value that more. If they can transform the lens to eliminate the softening at the corners wide open, it would be a small miracle. I tested pre-production 16-35mm and 24-70mm Zeiss lenses, and was not allowed to publish results. What I found was exactly what later buyers found.

David

[OneGuyKs]

http://dpreview.com/news/1005/10051801sonynexlens.asp

All existing examples of the Sony E-mount 16mm F2.8 lens for its NEX system are non-production specification, the company has informed us. Tetsuya Numata, General Manager, Digital Imaging Europe told us: '[Sony] Japan noticed that all 16mm samples were actually pre-production samples and not showing the final performance of the lens. The design was modified from pre-production stage.' Concerns were raised over the image quality displayed in samples on the Internet. The company has promised us a production specification lens and we will post images with it as soon as we have it.

[David Kilpatrick]

That's to be expected when the reaction has been negative - actually, they were probably normal production samples, but someone has now been ordered to recompute VERY quickly to cure the problem. I'm waiting to hear whether Sony want sample shots removed. I see no reason to remove the stopped-down sample shots as they are excellent, it's only the f/2.8 example I might remove.

David

[bakubo]

Frankly, I am surprised how often Sony is surprised about reactions to stuff like this. I have to wonder why poor optical performance (at wide apertures), no NR off switch for raw, and various other things keep surprising them? I would think that they would know enough about camera reviewers, photographers, etc. that they would already know that it would be noticed and negatively commented on. Other camera companies, I suppose, get surprised too, but it seems that Sony does a lot more.

By the way, as an interesting aside, I discovered recently when I had the Pentax K7 that it also does high ISO nr on raw and it cannot be turned off -- see the dxomark site for info. I have not heard any uproar about it and I don't recall even seeing a mention of it in reviews.

[David Kilpatrick]

Pentax users have been used to high noise levels and just accepted it, Sony users compared their sensors with Nikon's use of the same, and have been sensitised to the entire noise issue.

David

[bfitzgerald]

The pre production spin sounds a bit dubious. Why would a company let pre-production optics into the hands of eager journalists only to cause negative PR and reactions? Sounds like a hasty retreat as the optical design does not look up to par. Imaging resource already reviewed the NEX-5..and you can be sure that was not pre-production.

Also noted are a complete lack of any optical corrections, CA, distortion, vignetting etc. This is surprising in this day and age. I'm all for user choice on this (on/off and I'd prefer untouched raw myself) but it seems a bit "old tech" to not have addressed these areas. And this includes DSLR land as well. Sony really need to get up to speed on this one.

I don't know how they let that 16mm out the door surely somebody noticed it's really not that good.

[OneGuyKs]

The pre production spin sounds a bit dubious. Why would a company let pre-production optics into the hands of eager journalists only to cause negative PR and reactions? Sounds like a hasty retreat as the optical design does not look up to par. Imaging resource already reviewed the NEX-5..and you can be sure that was not pre-production.
.

It's still a great news for future Nex buyers if they can improve the lens before the launch. Is there enough time till the shipping date?

I hope they go back to the drawing board for 18-55 too.

[bakubo]

It's still a great news for future Nex buyers if they can improve the lens before the launch. Is there enough time till the shipping date?

At this late date it is hard to believe that they don't already have a whole bunch of them already manufactured and sitting around to be shipped. Unless, what everyone got for review truly were a bunch of pre-production lenses.

[kugelfisch]

The Nex can be also a great toy for fans of old rangefinders. But then they need two or three more prime lenses.

17mm is a little bit to wide for daily use. On the digital Dynax my most used lens is the 20/2.8. But its to big for a small camera with the adapter.


Alex