NEX Lens Wish List

[KevinBarrett]

Who doesn't love a wish list? With the news that a Chinese manufacturer is about to introduce 23 different adapters for the NEX mount, including a some "Tilt" adapters, it wouldn't be inappropriate to start daydreaming about a lens wish list.

So far there are three NEX lenses; two in production and one still to come:
18-55mm f3.5-5.6 OSS
16mm f2.8 (+ two wide angle adapters)
18-200mm f3.5-6.3

If you could add two more lenses to the system, with complete functionality and communication with the camera, what would their specifications be?

[twm47099]

24mm f/2 to replace my film 35mm f/2 museum lens.
Something longer and fast - physical size constrained:
Since the 18-55 is too long physically for a pocket camera, and I'm assuming that the length is because of the long FL (does it extend at the long end or not?), I'd probably be limited to a 35mm lens. But that gives me a focal length that I almost never use (52mm FF equivalent).

Once the camera+lens gets larger than pockettable, my interest goes way down.

tom

[Greg Beetham]

Maybe a 16 or 18-35 f4 or f4.5 might be handy, just depends how big it would be, and possibly a companion 35-135 f4-5.6.
Greg

[KevinBarrett]

Thanks for sounding off, guys! There's no wrong answer. My personal wish list has a kind-of Pentax vibe to it, with off-beat focal lengths:
33mm f/1.8 pancake
57mm f/1.2 (can Alphas even register something this fast?)

Their FF corollaries are, of course, a 50mm normal and 85mm portrait lens.

[Birma]

Can't resist a wish list

I'll try a 60mm Macro (f/2, but f/2,8 would be ok).

I'll assume we have already the T/S option, and therefore for a second choice I'll go for a walk around zoom (16-80 would be o.k., 16-105 even better) with a lovely Zeiss label on it

[Vidgamer]

I think my preference would be a 24mm prime, assuming it could be made reasonably small. I suppose it'd be too much to ask for f1.8, but even f2.8 would be helpful. A 16-105 sounds good too.

[Phaelix_Photoclub]

35mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.8, pancake. IS if I had my druthers, but somehow I doubt it's on the cards

[bfitzgerald]

Ok I'd dump the lot and bring out an M mount rangefinder type camera which really does have a small mount and much smaller lenses.

The mount is just too massive on these bodies and the lenses too bulky so it defeats the point of having a wafer thin body.

What Minolta user would resist something like this? (you could make the body smaller if desired)

Minolta_CLE_2629939638_107c07ce16_o.jpg

(86.96 KiB) Downloaded 2739 times

Gasp small lenses! lol

[Greg Beetham]

That's still a reasonably large camera bod BF, compared too a NEX, and the lens isn't totally small either, what were the specs on that lens btw, do you recall?
But yeah I agree with the idea, the style and functionality is what most would want I think.
Supposedly the thing with the new digital mounts, m4/3, too a lesser extent Sam-NX, and possibly the e-mount as well, is that they made them large enough too make the rear lens element in OEM lenes BIG, so they could get those light rays more perpendicular too the sensor, the old designed for film rear lens element with it's divergent light rays arrangement (the shaded corners, looks like vignetting, maybe some is, some isn't), was quite ok for film but doesn't work anywhere near as well for digital, (according too what I've been reading).
Also the large mount and closer 'fit' means they can have/make adaptors between the camera and just about any brand/model 35mm lens....but you might have to "suck it and see" to find out what functionality there is (probably not much), and how good the optics are for digital etc.
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Ah now we've hit on the problem.
By placing the sensor so close to the lens Sony have made an oversized mount and lenses to counter the vignetting/fall off problem. Range finders suffered from this more so than SLR's..but nowhere near to the degree these digital sensors do.

In short Sony are building a system around flawed/dated sensor technology. Stuff some offset micro lenses in there and you should have no problems at all. If Leica can do it for a FF sensor then APS-C is going to be a lot easier.

Sure the body isn't small but it could be made a lot smaller for a digital type body. Some lovely lenses for that too..
As it is right now I see a wafer body with a mount that's too big and lenses that are not really very small at all. I'm not sure how appealing that is..but it's got very little pull for me.

[alphaomega]

I would like someone to release two smallest possible quality zoom lenses with ranges 12-24 mm (18-36) and 16-135 mm (24-200) and preferably max F5.6 at the long end. That will do for most of my requirements. For anything longer I would use the adaptor plus an Alpha type lens. In such situations I would probably have a DSLR anyway. I would only make a move if I could also get an EVF on the NEX. With reference to the T&S thread I would dearly love an adapter that could turn a standard lens such as a Minolta MD or other manual focus W/A lens into T&S on a NEX.

[Greg Beetham]

Yeah I saw that mentioned about the Leica sensor, incredibly expensive solution though, (so they say), the further you go from the centre the more angled the sensels become, apparently there is also shading from sensel too sensel due to the well nature of them, and sensel crosstalk, the crosstalk is not very handy either especially if it's between a red and a blue, or probably more likely a red and green, and a blue and green. So all in all, the large concave rear element sounds like a more cost effective solution, only thing is, where does all this leave FF? with it's extensive legacy of film lenses, reflex mirror, and pre-determined distance too the film plane?
Greg

[bfitzgerald]

Well it leaves FF exactly where it is..as in makers have a large legacy of lenses and bodies (film and digital) and I highly doubt any of the top makers have the guts/stupidity (delete as appropriate!) to mess about with new mounts for the reflex systems or the distance to the sensor etc.

Not all SLR's are big, my film 5's are pretty small really for a FF body. As it is I've no time at all for these hulking massive top end heavy Canikon bodies..held a few and they are completely unsuited to my style of photography (if I have any!)

Makers can play about with the lens to sensor distance and mount size for these new mirror-less systems some might want to keep it smaller to boost the "shove oldie lenses on there" nothing wrong in that it's got some appeal.

I'll be keeping an eye on what Canikon do here because they've been a bit too quiet and it's obvious something is in the works for both. I keep hearing about this Nikon x2 crop sensor..might limit things a bit more DOF control wise, but it would certainly allow for small bodies and more importantly genuinely compact lenses (and IQ will unquestionably be better than the pinhead sensors on compacts it could well be good enough for many). Canon could do a G series type ILC body again crop size unknown but you can never write them off..as for the offset micro-lenses it might be costly now but they'll have to look at it sooner or later I've seen more vignetting on FF DSLR's then I ever did on emulsion. Ebay around and you'll find some rather nice compact 35mm bodies that are pretty small. I hope this spells the kiss of death to pin head sensors in a lot of compacts..they've milked that cow for long enough.

[KevinBarrett]

So Barrry, lets assume the NEX system had the body you wanted. We'll pretend it's a NEX-7 with all the direct controls and still-shooting features you want, plus an optional but well-integrated EVF. And pretend it was given to you. Describe two lenses would you want to use on it.

[Danjojo_Resurrected1]

An 85mm f3.5 lens with a plastic construction and a prime of any focal length that allows it to be 1/2" length/thickness.

Alternatively, a lens that has two focal lengths from normal to tele and no in between, a one stage zoom. Being able to go from 30mm to 120mm (or similar) in one very quick switch with minimal movement, about a 1/2" turn.

Not just the same old stuff...and all of these are possible.