Discussion of lenses, brand or independent, uses and merits
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
I may update the write up from 2007 though I don't necessarily think the tele or wide are exact replicas of what was planned then.
Just as an aside, I am going to say: 30mm f/2.8. This is one fantastic little lens. I have been shooting with it for a week, and it's been giving me some of the sharpest snapshots I've ever had. So if 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2.8 SAM lenses appeared, even built to the same lightweight cheap quality, Sony could have a winning formula.
My 50mm and 100mm macro lenses (Minolta original) were meant to go on eBay today and I forgot, I was too busy. I am using the 30mm and the Sigma 70mm from now on.
David Kilpatrick wrote:
Just as an aside, I am going to say: 30mm f/2.8. This is one fantastic little lens. I have been shooting with it for a week, and it's been giving me some of the sharpest snapshots I've ever had. So if 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2.8 SAM lenses appeared, even built to the same lightweight cheap quality, Sony could have a winning formula.
My 50mm and 100mm macro lenses (Minolta original) were meant to go on eBay today and I forgot, I was too busy. I am using the 30mm and the Sigma 70mm from now on.
David
That gives me the chills. Could you please provide with some full size shots, David?
I'm hoping the 30mm or 35mm (I hope the 35mm is as good) turns out to allow DMF to operate without damaging the lens in the end. Does the 30mm focus slowly like a regular macro? i'm wodering why they woulkd even bother with the 35mm ?
David Kilpatrick wrote:
Just as an aside, I am going to say: 30mm f/2.8. This is one fantastic little lens. I have been shooting with it for a week, and it's been giving me some of the sharpest snapshots I've ever had. So if 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2.8 SAM lenses appeared, even built to the same lightweight cheap quality, Sony could have a winning formula.
Yes indeed, they need more lenses to make the bodies more attractive anyway. So I'm surprised that they only announced two lenses at PMA 2010.
David Kilpatrick wrote:
My 50mm and 100mm macro lenses (Minolta original) were meant to go on eBay today and I forgot, I was too busy. I am using the 30mm and the Sigma 70mm from now on.
The Minolta 50 & 100 macro are very good, why use the 30 and Sigma 70mm instead?
David Kilpatrick wrote:
Just as an aside, I am going to say: 30mm f/2.8. This is one fantastic little lens. I have been shooting with it for a week, and it's been giving me some of the sharpest snapshots I've ever had. So if 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2.8 SAM lenses appeared, even built to the same lightweight cheap quality, Sony could have a winning formula.
I knew it! I just got a little scary when I saw the plastic mount. I'm willing to buy a wide angle (prime) and this 35mm f2 FF will fit perfectly my needs (and I hope my pocket too, I imagine the 24 Zeiss a little too expensive)
I was a little reluctant to add this post given that the level of whining on some boards already exceeds rush hour at Heathrow even without the release of specifications, sample exposures and hands on testing.
Its just that I would have thought that lenses like the CZ 18 mm or 21 mm would have added something more than a 24 mm however good it turns out to be. The 500 mm is not going to be the years best seller but I can understand the need for a good long telephoto or two.
My own personal hope was for something like the Contax N 24 mm - 85 mm / 2.8 even when you have to buy 82 mm filters to feed the damn thing. Alas that became a forlorn hope for the next few years when they re badged the Tamron 28 mm - 75 mm.
That being the case where's the bl**dy Sony 24 mm - 105 mm / 4.0 ?
David Kilpatrick wrote:
Just as an aside, I am going to say: 30mm f/2.8. This is one fantastic little lens. I have been shooting with it for a week, and it's been giving me some of the sharpest snapshots I've ever had. So if 35mm f/2 and 85mm f/2.8 SAM lenses appeared, even built to the same lightweight cheap quality, Sony could have a winning formula.
I knew it! I just got a little scary when I saw the plastic mount. I'm willing to buy a wide angle (prime) and this 35mm f2 FF will fit perfectly my needs (and I hope my pocket too, I imagine the 24 Zeiss a little too expensive)
The 35mm f/2 is still a rumor. The only announcement was for the 24mm f/2 Zeiss.
peterottaway wrote:
Its just that I would have thought that lenses like the CZ 18 mm or 21 mm would have added something more than a 24 mm however good it turns out to be.
Sony is already selling the rebadged Minolta 20/2.8, which is old but not bad.
But the 24mm slot was empty until now.
peterottaway wrote:
My own personal hope was for something like the Contax N 24 mm - 85 mm / 2.8 even when you have to buy 82 mm filters to feed the damn thing.
I think the Contax N 24-85 mm is F/3.5-4.5, not F/2.8. It would be welcome to my camera bag anyway
peterottaway wrote:That being the case where's the bl**dy Sony 24 mm - 105 mm / 4.0 ?
Yes where Concerning lenses, a big disappointment. The 500/4, at probably $8000 (give or take a few thousand), will only appeal to a minority, certainly not to A2xx A3xx A4xx A5xx owners.
The A700 'upgrade' doesn't look that promising, either. Doesn't look like a solid and full-buttoned body. Makes me scared thinking about an A900 successor
I think there is a huge disconnect between Sonys lens and body strategy. Wouldn't be surprised if they stop APS-C next year, forcing you to buy one of these mirrorless things and use your APS-C lenses with an adaptor.
peterottaway wrote:That being the case where's the bl**dy Sony 24 mm - 105 mm / 4.0 ?
Yes where Concerning lenses, a big disappointment. The 500/4, at probably $8000 (give or take a few thousand), will only appeal to a minority, certainly not to A2xx A3xx A4xx A5xx owners.
The A700 'upgrade' doesn't look that promising, either. Doesn't look like a solid and full-buttoned body. Makes me scared thinking about an A900 successor
I think there is a huge disconnect between Sonys lens and body strategy. Wouldn't be surprised if they stop APS-C next year, forcing you to buy one of these mirrorless things and use your APS-C lenses with an adaptor.
Concerning lenses, a big disappointment. The 500/4, at probably $8000 (give or take a few thousand), will only appeal to a minority, certainly not to A2xx A3xx A4xx A5xx owners.
