For $450, Sony's 35/1.8 normal lens had better be a truly stellar performer...

Started Dec 4, 2012 | Discussions thread
Scott McL
Regular MemberPosts: 249
Like?
100% Wrong. Comparison is valid. Be schooled.
In reply to straylightrun, Dec 4, 2012

Gosh, the fan boys are nit picky and cannot make the tiny mental leap from the "normal lens" of one format (sensor size) to another.

OK, so let me put it in even simpler terms. Nikon's DX "normal lens" - for the same sensor size as the NEX cameras - the Nikkor 35/1.8 AF-S, costs a whopping $195. Stupidly clinically sharp, focuses super fast, yada yada yada.

This Nikon lens has not gone down in price since its introduction. Nikon lenses that remain in the lineup usually go UP in price over time, not down - unlike like last year's mirrorless gear in some bizarre, unfathomable marketing/pricing shame spiral of death.

So, what in the hell is Sony thinking peddling a $450, not particularly fast "normal lens" for its line of system cameras?

Two choices: 1) it bests the "normal lenses" of many, many other system camera line ups in both optical performance, focus speed and build quality justifying its much higher price or 2) Sony is stoned and is ripping off customers who don't want to shoot with crappy consumer quality zooms.

What is Sony thinking? Or perhaps a better question, what are NEX system customers possibly thinking?

Price isn't everything. A Leica f2 Summicron 50 will cost you a pretty penny, but it will also totally *rock your world.*

Is Sony promising the same for the relatively high price? They had better be, or they are counting on fools for customers.

-- hide signature --

"Photography is not about the thing photographed. It is about how that thing looks photographed." - Garry Winogrand

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
.New
easyNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow