Look: http://www.jp.sonystyle.com/Qnavi/Main/ ... list1.html
Can anyone explain why
Hello Dr. Harout,Dr. Harout wrote:Somehow I'm not prone to think it is due to the fixed 2.8 aperture. I have a bad feeling that Sony lenses are degrading (prices too) giving way to Zeiss lenses.
You couldn't find formerly G zoom lenses with non-constant apertures, now G lenses are ONLY with non-constant ones.
Formerly G lens meant (subconsciously perhaps) wide aperture lens, now... you know what!
Finally, rumors of stopping production of 70-200 G SSM...
What is happening?
Most likely you do indeed. I guess it was a HS version ('High-Speed'), not SSM. The only SSM lenses Minolta ever released were the AF Apo 70-200 SSM and the AF Apo 300/2.8 SSM. Not even prototypes of other SSM lenses were ever heard of.Greg Beetham wrote:... I think when they finally closed it there was [...] a 600 mm f4 APO G left (@ approx $6000 US), thing is, I've got this hazey memory that it was an SSM ... but maybe I'm suffering from "enhanced" memory.
I saw a copy of this lens for sale somewhere earlier (two years or so ago). It's very rare. As far as I know the glass of this lens is the same as in the Minolta TC-1 compact camera exactly. It includes two aspherical elements, and it's extremely good.David Kilpatrick wrote:Actually I found another G lens - one I was completely unaware of [...] 28 mm f3.5 G for Leica ... amazing ...
Good spot. This would make it around 1500 Euro here, not too bad if its good!Dr. Harout wrote:If you take a look at the Japanese site you'll notice that the 70-200 G SSM costs much more than the new 70-400 G SSM.
I noticed today at Sony Style USA that prices have dropped. Sony has cut the prices of several items.peterottaway wrote:Call them Sony G or C Z, my main concern is that Sony puts adequate cattle in the market at similar prices that Nikon and Canon charge.
They don't have to match them lens for lens and mm for mm, after all just look at how many Canon 70 - 200 are on offer. But to be taken seriously Sony does need to offer say a 400/4 and a 600/4 and some alternative mid / high level price points.
I can probably justify to myself buying a Sony G 17 - 35 / 3.5 and a 28 - 85 / 3.5, but not the C Z 16 - 35 or 24 - 70.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests