ByThom with Love

[peterottaway]

Barry, CZ produced a nice light, small and well performing 85 / 2.8 lens for the MF Contax. Given the IQ that can be extracted at ISO 800 - 1600 from modern sensors compared to film I can't see anything wrong with a 2.8 prime for the same sort of price as a plastic 3.5 - 5.6 zoom with inferior optical performance.

There has been plenty of agitation for some digitally prepared new mid priced zooms for lower cost FF cameras such as the A 850 - this isn't what I was expecting but hopefully it is pointing in the direction of continuing support for this sector of the market. Given that the new Nikon 16 - 35/ 4 sells for around USD 1600 and the rumoured 24 - 120 VR II is thought to be about USD 1300 then maybe dreams will come true for USD 1000 - 1200 Sony 17 -35/ 4 and 24 - 105 / 4.

I paid about USD 800 for an pristine Minolta 85 / 1.4 a couple of years ago without regret. But a brand new USD 400 Sony 85 / 2.8 would be my choice if I was making it now.

[bakubo]

Barry, CZ produced a nice light, small and well performing 85 / 2.8 lens for the MF Contax.

I didn't realize the new 85mm f2.8 is a CZ. Really good price then.

[bfitzgerald]

The 85mm isn't a CZ it's a cheap plastic mount lens with that SAM motor in it.
Sorry f2.8 plastic mount..erm no thanks.
35mm f1/8 not as bad again using the awful build of the 50mm SAM. (sigh another DT lens)

Regardless I have 0 interest left in A mount no matter what they do lenses wise, they just don't have the overall system to appeal to me. The 85mm should have been f1.8 or at least f2..there is no reason to make an f2.8 lens when Canikon both offer affordable better build f1.8 versions.

[bakubo]

The 85mm isn't a CZ it's a cheap plastic mount lens with that SAM motor in it.
Sorry f2.8 plastic mount..erm no thanks.

Okay. In that case I have no interest in it since I have an old Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro lens bought in 1991 that I occasionally use.

[bfitzgerald]

Yes to be blunt you might as well just use a macro lens. Tamron's 90mm f2.8 isn't the fastest lens for AF speed but you really might as well buy one of those instead. and it's close up performance is going to be a tad better as well! Not sure how the Sigma 90mm macro stacks up. Point here is an 85mm lens is a very important one in the line-up..both Canikon offer a sub £300 metal mount f 1.8 lens and both are popular. In difficult light you need every bit of speed you can get and there is a big difference between f1.8/f2 and f2.8 even more so with camera shake being more of an issue.

Easy choice is about the right name for it..it's easy alright thanks but no thanks! I'd be willing to be most folks would happily pay £300 ish for a decent build metal mount f1/8 lens. Yet again another Sony blunder..do they ever listen?

[InTheSky]

Money Money this is who decide for the future of the Full Frame.

For sure we can see that the Full frame market is about 2 or even 3 times slower than the APS-C. Because this is another category of buyer. And also those buyer some time has even money to decided to switch to a complete new line of product depending the job they want to do.

But I'm curious to see if the future is not reserve for a very big split like Medium Format Sensor (full size and half size) and APS-C.

If APS-C become better and better with details and ISO ... , This reduce the margin with the FF sensor. Yes Full frame are better for capturing the moment, but the Medium format are way better. (Sigma, Fuji ... and in the past Kodak (12mp early in time) has already take this decision).

Well .. there is Leica with it's Hybrid size and lenses ... but Leica is in an another word There is still Lamborgini and Ferrari on the market .

Regards,

Frank

[peterottaway]

APS sensors are now close to maxing out in MP on current technology. Anything from here on will be small gains at increased cost. Sure Canon ( for example ) with a combination of software and hardware will be able to offer improved performance from their 18 MP sensor, but only to those with high end camera skills and who make the time with high level post camera processing will be able to obtain these results. Many of the lenses being put on existing cameras cannot deliver the performance that people seem to think will magically happen.

The cheaper constructed lenses are adequate for simple day to day use and for the amount of use they are likely to have from year to year. If your day job is shooting Polar Bears in the Arctic then such lenses as the 35 or 50 DT etc are not for you.

[alphaomega]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote

Regardless I have 0 interest left in A mount no matter what they do lenses wise, they just don't have the overall system to appeal to me. The 85mm should have been f1.8 or at least f2..there is no reason to make an f2.8 lens when Canikon both offer affordable better build f1.8 versions.

So Barry has finally made the decision to retire his A200 and switch to Canon???
If so, I wish him all the best and I do hope he will write the occasional entry to inform us of the usefulness of his new kit and compare with his old Minolta/Sony stuff.

[Javelin]

the Sony 85mm is going to start on release day at £200 so it should be in your price range in pretty short order Barry

[UrsaMajor]

Barry Fitzgerald wrote

Regardless I have 0 interest left in A mount no matter what they do lenses wise, they just don't have the overall system to appeal to me.

So Barry has finally made the decision to retire his A200 and switch to Canon???

I think Barry said he was switching to "Canikon", not Canon - although it does appear that he said he is definitely leaving Sony and purchasing something from either Canon or Nikon.

Barry - which Canon or Nikon model meets your requirements? I haven't really looked at their products other than very casually, so I would like to take advantage of your research rather than re-inventing the wheel.

I hope you will not abandon the forum here just because you are leaving Sony. Please post your experiences with your new camera, and continue to post lots of pictures - even if you do take them with a "Brand X" DSLR.

With best wishes,
- Tom -

[bakubo]

Yes to be blunt you might as well just use a macro lens. Tamron's 90mm f2.8 isn't the fastest lens for AF speed but you really might as well buy one of those instead. and it's close up performance is going to be a tad better as well! Not sure how the Sigma 90mm macro stacks up.

I have found it to be good, but I don't test lenses. Here are few sites that have some info on the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro though:

http://www0.epinions.com/review/pr-Sigm ... 1026708100

http://www.photodo.com/lens/Sigma-AF-90mm-f28-Macro-404

http://www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/rev ... IDLens=276

[pakodominguez]

I saw the new 24 mm tonight at a Sony event at Adorama -nice but big! they didn't have the 85mm or the 35mm, but they told me that it was of the same size and quality of the 50mm and 30mm SAM.

The 85mm f2.8 will sell for 199 US$ and now I'm wandering if I'll get one or not (I had the Minolta 85mm f1.4 that I didn't use that much because big and bulky and delicate and I was never really convinced of the utility of that focal distance, while I feel way more comfortable with the 100mm SF) and it will depend on the use I'll give to the NEX5 and if Sony fix the AF function with the LA-EA1.

The plastic mount? well, at the beginning it is weird, but it is not cheap plastic. I don't know... I have to see it and handle it for a while before I can tell.

Regards

[bakubo]

I am not interested in the 85mm f2.8 just because I wouldn't use it much and the Sigma 90mm f2.8 macro I have had for years will work just fine in the same situations plus it has macro. It has a focus limiter switch so that is useful when using it for non-macro shots.

The 35mm f1.8 DT is interesting though. The 50mm f1.7 with 75mm fov I have is just not that useful a focal length for me on APS-C. When I want to carry just one small, prime lens I much prefer my 24mm f2.8 with the 36mm fov. The 35mm would give a 52.5mm fov so that would also be pretty good and the f1.8 would be welcome since I usually use the 24mm when walking the street at night. It is hard to say which I would find more useful in this circumstance though, a 36mm fov or 52.5mm fov.

[pakodominguez]

When I want to carry just one small, prime lens I much prefer my 24mm f2.8 with the 36mm fov. The 35mm would give a 52.5mm fov so that would also be pretty good and the f1.8 would be welcome since I usually use the 24mm when walking the street at night. It is hard to say which I would find more useful in this circumstance though, a 36mm fov or 52.5mm fov.

If you can not afford the new 24mm f2 (...) there is an old Sigma 24mm f2.8 "Macro" that works really well, even wide open. I was about to sell it when I got the 24-70 f2.8, but I've been using this lens on the NEX5 and I'm really happy with it. I paid 120 US$ for it but I saw it a couple of times on ebay for about 100 US$

[bakubo]

If you can not afford the new 24mm f2 (...) there is an old Sigma 24mm f2.8 "Macro" that works really well, even wide open. I was about to sell it when I got the 24-70 f2.8, but I've been using this lens on the NEX5 and I'm really happy with it. I paid 120 US$ for it but I saw it a couple of times on ebay for about 100 US$

Affording the new 24mm f2 is not an issue. The size and weight is though. Yes, I have the Sigma 24mm f2.8 that I bought in Tokyo in 1991 and I often use it on the street at night when I am traveling.