Photoclubalpha

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/01/23 ... 6-3-OSS-PZ

Even SAR missed that one. A sharp 20mm pancake lens for NEX (30mm equivalent in 35mm format). Also the 18-200mm power zoom now available for NEX and other Sony video cameras.

apparently, the SEL20f28 will support the wide angle and fisheye adapters made for he SEL16f28
http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/ ... 0F28_A.jpg

That could make a really nice 15mm with UWA adapter. If only that 20mm lives up to expectations...

But I'm not quite sure yet if it may work - the front element is much larger compared to the 16mm pancake.

agorabasta wrote:That could make a really nice 15mm with UWA adapter. If only that 20mm lives up to expectations...

But I'm not quite sure yet if it may work - the front element is much larger compared to the 16mm pancake.

It has the bayonet for the adapters -hard to believe it is for a lenshood...

Pako, the same physical bayonet is also there on the 18-55; adapters fit mechanically, but vignette strongly. In fact, it's the hood bayonet that also serves for the adapters.

agorabasta wrote:Pako, the same physical bayonet is also there on the 18-55; adapters fit mechanically, but vignette strongly. In fact, it's the hood bayonet that also serves for the adapters.

I know.
on the 18-55 kit lens, the bayonet is for the lenshood. There is no lenshood for the SEL16f28 -I don't believe we'll see any lenshood for he SEL20f28, and I hope the wide and fisheye adapters will work (not just "fit") on this new lens.
BTW, I'm not really interested on this lens... I want a 60 to 90 mm f2.x macro lens!

The hood of the 18-55 fits the 16mm, and it also helps quite a lot there really increasing contrast. So if they want the 20mm to be better than that 16mm, they must provide hood, especially considering the asking price.

I may be interested in that 20mm if it can really deliver with the UWA. I then could have a smaller/lighter alternative to the adapted Samyang 14/2.8.
Otherwise, the Sigma 19mm can't be beaten.

Wouldn't mind a pancake for A Mount
As per DK's news article f2 would be a lot more interesting.

f2.8 hmmm lots of plastic where glass should be

Personally I'm not sure what you are getting at Barry as I tend to use such lenses at f8 and f11 most of the time and for landscape of one type or another. And so don't really require the designer product range to get good results. For example the new Sigma 35 / 1.4 is pointless to me and though I am on the lookout for a 35mm prime.

And yes I do know it helps to be geographically in a region where you actually get to see the sun and get hard shadows-actually too hard too often.

Depends what you are doing. 20mm to me is a 30mm equivalent so it's open to debate if that's a landscape lens (I would say I use anything from and ultra wide up to 35mm and yes sometimes a tele lens for scenics works wonders too) So not quite wide enough in my view as a go to landscape lens.

Lens speed is always interesting because you can stop the lens down if needed.
$350 is likely to be about £250-£300 odd so it's not really that good a deal for this lens speed wise. Samsung have a 20mm f2.8 pancake that sells for £180 odd.

pakodominguez wrote:apparently, the SEL20f28 will support the wide angle and fisheye adapters made for he SEL16f28
http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/ ... 0F28_A.jpg

I hope you're right. A little "system-within-the-system" would make ownership of either lens or either converter really attractive.

KevinBarrett wrote:

pakodominguez wrote:apparently, the SEL20f28 will support the wide angle and fisheye adapters made for he SEL16f28
http://1.static.img-dpreview.com/files/ ... 0F28_A.jpg

I hope you're right. A little "system-within-the-system" would make ownership of either lens or either converter really attractive.

Compatibility with the wide and fisheye adapters would be the only reason, for me, to buy this lens (that I don't need, but...)

pakodominguez wrote:Compatibility with the wide and fisheye adapters would be the only reason, for me, to buy this lens (that I don't need, but...)

Yeah, for $350 and only f/2.8, they're a little too proud of it for me to put this among the most desirable E mount lenses.

KevinBarrett wrote:

pakodominguez wrote:Compatibility with the wide and fisheye adapters would be the only reason, for me, to buy this lens (that I don't need, but...)

Yeah, for $350 and only f/2.8, they're a little too proud of it for me to put this among the most desirable E mount lenses.

I guess this lens was designed keeping in mind all the (most of the times unjustified) bad press the 16f2.8 had: that means, better sharpness wide open and stuff like that, for novice photographers that don't really knows how to work with a real wide angle lens. And that have a cost. Then, the finishing on the new E-mount lenses is better (or at least, nicer) than the first lenses Sony presented when they introduced the system -and that might have an impact in the cost of the lens.
Unless is a lemon, I don't find it specially expensive. I just "don't need it", since I have the SEL 16f2.8 with both adapters, and the SEL 10-18 f4

pakodominguez wrote:I just "don't need it", since I have the SEL 16f2.8 with both adapters, and the SEL 10-18 f4

Quien sabe, Pako...
The problem with SEL16 was/is all about the internal reflections.
You don't need to trust me, just have your SEL16 really close to a large HDTV screen looking at the screen at an oblique angle so that you can still manually focus in some closest corner of the image (it's better to have the screen lit up with uniform pure green) - then you can see that the 16 produces four or more copies of the closest corner screen pixels' images, and those copies focus somewhat differently. (I really mean that one source screen pixel produces four or more images of the said pixel in the captured image.)

While I have one really 'good' copy of that SEL, I also had/have too many normally bad ones that sometimes produce a great image, if stars align (that's if the internal reflections align wherever most necessary for that particular shot).