24-105 SSM f4 G ?

[Greg Beetham]

Someone over at DPR claimed to have found evidence of the rumoured 24-105 f4 G lens, they/he had a copy of a "faxed" (recipient unknown) lens user guide phamplet (a photo of which was posted) and it did look authentic...must admit (otherwise I wouldn't waste my time), anyone heard anything?? David K have you heard anything on the grapevine? this is probably one of the better choices in lens design (if true) that Sony has come up with so far....I think, verily..twoud be a lens to lust after, on FF it would be magnifique..anyone else agree?
Greg

[Dr. Harout]

I suggest reading http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32811

[David Kilpatrick]

It seems to be a genuine leak but the 24-105mm is not 'visible' in the Sony databases which some people have got into (the 16-35mm and 70-400mm show up as item codes in the stock listings, the 24-105mm f/4 does not yet). There is a danger it will be a) £1000 b) take 77mm filters etc - I am waiting to try my old 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 on the full frame before deciding whether I need an upgrade!

David

[Greg Beetham]

I suggest reading http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32811

Thanks for the link, I just got through reading it..spread over two nights, everyone seems interested in the mystery display lens, the 70-400 or 80-400 or whatever it is...as well as the previously (until the "accidental" leak) unknown 24-105G...
Greg

[Greg Beetham]

It seems to be a genuine leak but the 24-105mm is not 'visible' in the Sony databases which some people have got into (the 16-35mm and 70-400mm show up as item codes in the stock listings, the 24-105mm f/4 does not yet). There is a danger it will be a) £1000 b) take 77mm filters etc - I am waiting to try my old 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 on the full frame before deciding whether I need an upgrade!

David

Yes I reckon it'll be a bit of a lump as compaired to it's predecessor the KM 24-105 f3.5-4.5 (now discontinued, supposedly) what with constant f4 and SSM too boot...and most likely a price to match the G designation.
Actually that KM 24-105 isn't a bad little lens I was quite surprised at just how good it was for basically an upmarket consumer grade lens, but Sony had their version priced fairly high here, about $150-200 less than what I paid for my 100-300APO (bought it just before KM pulled the pin), so I sometimes wondered how many they would have sold in Oz at the price.
Greg

[PhotoTraveler]

I don't see the 77mm threads as a danger at all. I'm rather hoping for this. The old 24-105 was the only lens I have had so far that had 62mm threads and that was rather annoying as it didn't match up with the rest of my gear. I really hope Sony works towards some standardization. So while 62mm is ok for the consumer zooms, I'd like to see the rest stick to 55 and 77. I like commonality in gear to keep things small. So even if a thread is a bit over sized, I'll take it if it means I can have 1 filter set, interchange lens caps. Anything to reduce gear parts count and increase interchangeability. It's issues like this that drive me to not buy lenses like the 16-80 (one of the reasons) and what really bums me out on the STF.

I sold my 24-105 a couple months ago in anticipation of this lens. This lens isn't a new rumor, I think it is as old as Sony has been in the business as it was first mentioned by folks who alway had seen information on the 70-400 and other lenses that panned out.

While I don't want this lens to be a giant, I do want it to be something that is a tough critter. If it's good, I will use it as my all around zoom. The old lens has a severe case of "dust pump" thus why I nicknamed it the "crop duster" (yes, crop as in crop sensor too). While it was a nice built lens with nice range, the dust problems were too much.

I can only assume the reason we have only seen the 2 lenses in the system is that they were planned to come a bit earlier than the rest, maybe things changed later on. This lens makes perfect sense as an A900 kit lens. So I can't see it not coming at the same time. There is probably a bunch of the mockup lenses coming, just 2 of them are a bit ahead of the curve, like will be available on the announcement day, verses a month later. Remember how Sony staggered the roll out of the first wave of lenses.

On a side note, the whole access to the database was simply people asking folks at a SonyStyle to do a search for "SAL" in the system and see what comes up. And they spotted these. That was a few months ago. Anyone could go to a store and get them to do the same and maybe we would see more gear. There is 4 other mockup lenses and this lens, maybe more.

It seems to be a genuine leak but the 24-105mm is not 'visible' in the Sony databases which some people have got into (the 16-35mm and 70-400mm show up as item codes in the stock listings, the 24-105mm f/4 does not yet). There is a danger it will be a) £1000 b) take 77mm filters etc - I am waiting to try my old 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 on the full frame before deciding whether I need an upgrade!

David

[David Kilpatrick]

I have no doubt that the 2009 lens releases will be showcased at photokina with accurate labelling - whether CZ or Sony, G or SSM etc. I don't think they will put any mockups on show, just prototypes. There should be a studio set like the last photokina with a row of mounted lenses, and my guess is that these will include several of the new 70-400mms, and that the bodies will be Alpha 900s.

I've just put the 2006 report on-line as it will interest anyone planning a visit to the show:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/08/1 ... d-forward/

The only reason I'm not keen on 77mm, as opposed to 72mm, for larger filters on shorter focal length ranges is the size and cost. The CZ 16-80mm has shown us that 62mm is too small a filter thread, and admittedly we don't want to have 49mm, 55mm, 58mm (no Minolta/Sony designs as far as I know), 62mm, 67mm (28-75mm D), 72mm and 77mm - better just to have 55mm, 62mm, 77mm. It is not so important these days, as few people use anything except a UV and a polariser. I used to carry a dozen or more filters screwed into a stack with endcaps, in the 55mm size when the MD system had a 20mm f2.8 with 55mm thread. That lens was nothing like as good as the 21mm f2.8 it replaced (72mm thread) and I was pleased to see the AF 20mm f2.8 return in the 72mm size and Distagon-like design.

David

[Greg Beetham]

Wouldn't it be great if it (the new 24-105) was IF and internal zoom as well...that would surely make it into a fairly big lump (and even more expensive) that's the only thing, but it would be good for cutting down that extending/pumping action and sucking the dust in.
Anyway, whatever will be will be, Sony sure are getting serious about FF...when you have a look at the lenses they have brought out so far and the impending one's too come, the only obvious gaps that I can still see is the 400, 500, 600 prime area, unless they have announced something and I've missed it.
Greg

[PhotoTraveler]

I agree that filters are less used now, but they are still used. For me, I carry polarizer and some NDs around with me all the time. Wide angle lenses you don't use Polarizers much, but you do use NDs. Just the opposite on the tele end. Being able to have the same size all around is convenient. I don't think you save much money with 72mm. The world is standardizing on 77mm as the pro size, superseding 72mm that use to have that spot.

If you have older gear, I can see wanting 72 over 77. But if your like me, you have newer gear, so you are 77mm based. This is why I get frustrated by some of the Minolta system. The 20mm is a lens I would probably get, but I would have to use a step up ring on it, and thus lose the hood. Just not nice. The STF I could manage since I doubt any filter would ever be used on it. I would have loved to see Sony do a mild change on those lenses and grow the ring a little bit. The lens that is surprising is the 85ZA. I can only assume it was made 72mm instead of 77 like the 135ZA because it replaced the minolta which was 72mm and they just made a functional (while not optical) clone of the minolta.

The other part is I hold out hope that someday we will see some factory B&W bodies (no bayer filer/pattern). I'm one who would probably buy a B&W only A900 before a color A900. So there is hope that filters come back.

I would also add that anything with G on it, should really stick with 55 or 77 (unless need for bigger then it doesn't matter as long as it takes rear drop in). Focus on commonality there as people own various of these lenses. I suspect in time, all lenses that could be a G and use 55mm threads will be gone and replaced by ZA's.

Filters sound like a silly thing. But once you start building piles of these things in different sizes, or start using step up/step down rings that then block usage of a hood, or require you to back 2-3 sets of filters for a trip, or buy 2-3 sizes of circular polarizers ($$$) they quickly become a bigger deal. Since you will always have some lenses with big threads like 77mm, might as well unify on that all around.

[Greg Beetham]

I agree, filters aren't a biggie in the digital age, so I didn't fuss too much myself, I just put skylight 1B's on them all as protectors and forgot them basically. In my collection there's two 55's, two 62's, one 67 and one 77, the only one I carry a polarizer for is the 17-35 f2.8-4 D, thinking that's the one most likely too be used as a pan lens, (I like too do a series with and without filter to comare later).
The thing with that lens is, it's got a giant hood, big enough to put a step ring inside with an oversize filter, but like you say PT there is only one thing to do from there, and that is dissasemble it all again afterwards (the cap no longer fits anyway), there is no vignetting on APS-C with the 77 but I've got doubts about FF, I haven't tried it out on a film camera as yet so I still don't know if this lens needs an oversize filter on FF, but then thinking about it, it's probably unlikely that I would use it at anything wider than 30 on FF outside anyway...but there's always that exception that can arise...
Anyone have experience with this lens on film with filters? would appreciate any feedback.
Greg

[David Kilpatrick]

The 11-18mm takes exactly the same lenshood (same actual part no) and also uses 77mm filters. I have the Konica Minolta slim wide-angle 77mm polariser, and there is no cutoff with the 11-18mm at all. I would assume the 17-35mm also shows no cutoff as the filter was designed for use with this lens. It a mark II and not like the earlier stepped-mount Minolta circular polarisers, which I have in 49mm, 55mm, 62mm and 72mm fits. These are quite thick but have a flare stepped mount, so the 62mm actually steps up to be 72mm at the front. Sadly, they did not include a front thread so lens caps can not be fitted to it.

David

[Greg Beetham]

Ta David, no vig with the slim polar, that's good...but no thread for the cap on the slim...hmmm I think in my hazy memory chamber I remember seeing Hoya have pro or "thin" (and expensive) one out now with shallow front thread.....but don't quote me, I'll have to check.
Thanks
Greg
ps How about that, the 11-18 DT uses the same enormous hood as the 17-35 I never would have guessed that one

[David Kilpatrick]

The slim does have a thread, no problem there. It's the flared stepped wide-angle type which do not have a thread.

David