New FE Lens Announced - Zeiss 16-35mm F4.0

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
NumberOne
Senior MemberPosts: 1,462Gear list
Like?
Re: New FE Lens Announced - Zeiss 16-35mm F4.0
In reply to abortabort, 5 months ago

abortabort wrote:

Dandrewk wrote:

Not really a surprise, but there it is.

"Midyear". No prices yet.

Who's in? (raises hand)

Thank you very much for posting.

Will buy it - I was waiting for an ultra-wide (F2.8/F4) zoom since the announcement of the A7 - but definitively would have preferred a 12-24 or 14-24/28/36, specially because 'FF 16mm' is not wide enough in many occasions!

Guess I have to live with that (or buy a '14mm FFL', when available)...

In fact, I do understand Sony (market) option/decision - 16-35 & 24-70 are zoom standards - but definitively I think there's too much overlap; there's no overlap if you buy the 70-200 F4, for instance...

Therefore, if the 28-135 F4 turns to be as good as the 24-70 aperture sibling, I may consider selling the latter; and again I can't understand why not offering a 35-105/135 F4, if one has to buy a 16-35 zoom...

Just my opinion, of course, but it looks to me that Sony is more interested in creating standard lenses&zooms than having a (FE) lens range that makes sense!

Best regards,
Pedro

I dont get the issue with overlap.

Overlapping is a subtle (or not so subtle, from my point of view) way to "oblige" you buying another lens...

Let's pick Sony actual/announced 'FE Zoom' range of 3 lenses: 16-35 + 24-70 + 70-200

Now - in terns of range - wouldn't it be better to go wider and have a 12-24? Of course, it would!

By not providing its users, like myself, who need 12 and 14 mm focal length, with the "wider" range, the one and only solution is to buy a prime, in other words, another lens; in a more extreme case, the same goes for someone interested in a 300 mm...

Now imagine these ranges: 16-35 + 35-105 + 105-300 or 12-24 + 24-70 + 70-200...

Do you see what is gained and why I "hate" the overlapping trick!?

Personally I find 16-35mm perfect for reportage / events as well as landscapes. Wide to wide is just too limiting for me, if I am.going to compromise and use a zoom I want it to have a useful range, not be sitting there comparing FL to other lenses or having to swap them all the time. The last UWA I had that only went to 24mm might as well have been a prime. 24mm is too wide a lot of the time, I need something that is ultra wide to normal wide. Plus I woukd want to use filters (unlikely to happen on anything wider).

If I really need wider I will use my Samyang 14mm and suffer no filters. This way I get a choice.

Don't get me wrong, it makes perfectly sense to have a 16-35 or a 24-70 or a 70-200 separately, and I understand (and in a certain way prefer) the usefulness of a 16-35 against a 12-24.

It's just that things just don't look so pretty/wise when you buy/have them all together!

Do you see my point, by now?

Best regards,
Pedro

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