NEX 6? Any downsides?

Started 5 months ago | Discussion thread
quezra
Contributing MemberPosts: 538
Like?
Re: NEX 6? Any downsides?
In reply to BobSC, 5 months ago

BobSC wrote:

quezra wrote:

jcharding wrote:

Sony has a quickly maturing line of lenses, but many people argue that a number of those lenses are not so great optically (here comes the Sony defenders to defend their lenses).

It depends on how you criticise them. Sony lenses, like most other brands, have a direct price:quality relationship.

Perhaps within the Sony line, but some of the routine lenses, like the 55-200 costs $340 in Sony flavor but $246 in Nikon. Nikon is well known for having expensive lenses too, and it's not like the image quality from the Sony will be significantly better. There is a similar differential in the 50/1.8, and every other lens they have in common that I have looked at. You can get a Canon 50/1.4 for the price of Sony's 1.8. The one that really gets me though, is the frequently recommended 35/1.8, which out to be a pretty easy lens. Nikon: $200; Sony: $450.

Mirrorless lenses are all more expensive than SLR lenses right now.  This is economic: there's not yet enough competition in this segment to drive prices down (or decades of secondhand lenses out in the market), and the system is still so young you're paying for Sony's R&D costs.  Sigma are the only third party that have gone in with competitive offerings to date (and with optical designs that were made for their Foveon sensor which is why they're so fabulous), but when Tokina, Tamron, and Samyang roll out their lenses it's going to be a lot more interesting for the budget photogs.

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