On recent cameras: EM-1, XT-1, A6000 ...

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,938Gear list
Like?
Re: see analysis here
In reply to ttan98, 6 months ago

ttan98 wrote:

what about availability of high quality lenses at reasonable prices. That's the main reason why I stop buying Sony bodies. BTW I know the prices of most important lenses from E-mount and m4/3 format.

Having said this I anticipate a rebuttal of my above statement but I am sticking to it. BTW I still own both NEX and m4/3 bodies and lenses, they are used appropriately under different lighting and environment situations.

ttan98 wrote:

I am interested in 2 lenses,

Nex. M4/3

24mm $1000 . 20mm. $350

16-70m. $1000.(*) 14-45mm. $350

Both lenses from m4/3 are excellent and compact, I own both, even though I can afford to buy both Nex lenses they are really too expensive, I refuse to buy them. Reasonable price to me should be around $500-600 and more than that.

* it is at best mediocre to good, not excellent. The 18-105mm G lens is too bulky and not proven to be excellent.

Then why didn't you say this in the first place?

So you want the Zeiss IQ, but pay the non-Zeiss price.

Heck, even at Oly, the math does not compute.

The E1670/4 is comparable to the 12-40/2.8 Pro - they are both priced at $1k.

If you throw up the lower-graded 14-45/3.5-5.6, why not just compare against the 18-55/3.3-5.6 kit lens. It is effective almost a stop faster already. And cheaper.

And you 20mm/1.7 gives a 40mm view. Why not put it up against the Sigma 30mm/2.8 or the Sony 35mm/1.8?

  • The Sigma 30mm gives you a 45mm view, and has almost the same speed, and cost $200. 
  • The Sony 35mm gives you a 50mm view, and has a speed advantage, with OSS, for $450. 

Looks to me that you have more choices with the E-mount.

If you want to wider, you can get the excellent Sigma 19mm/f2.8 for $200 or the also excellent ultra compact E20/2.8 for $350.

Again, lots of choices. In fact, you have cheaper options on the E-mount that are just as high in IQ as you can get on your m43. They may be outresolved by the sensor, but I guarantee you that you are still scoring a lot higher in the IQ department than on your m43. There is something about 24Mp versus 16Mp, even if the sensor outresolves the lens ...

The E24Z Zeiss lens is more expensive, because it gives you that much higher IQ. It is up there - check the DxO marks. The Nex-7 ranks among FF cameras for IQ. That is how good this lens is. Sure, it comes at a price, but it is quite a step above.

So,

  • your m43 baseline is $700. 
  • On the E-mount this would only be $400. 
  • If you want to match the $1k E1670/4, you'd have to put up the $1k 14-40/2.8 lens - same expense. 
  • If you get the E24Z/1.8, you'd have nothing that comes even close to matching on m43. 

Looks to me that a real comparison would be:

  • m43: 14-40/2.8 + 20/1.7 = $1,350
  • E-mount: 1670/4 + 35/1.8 OSS = $1,450

And I guarantee you, that for $100 more you'll be getting higher IQ.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
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