50 f/1.8 $200, 35 f/1.8 $400: WHY???

Started May 12, 2014 | Discussions thread
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,977Gear list
Like?
Re: Unclear? How about being completely off?
In reply to tomtom50, May 17, 2014

tomtom50 wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

Para #1: About difference in flange, which can allow for smaller lenses. This is why my Canon 50/1.4 LTM is not the smallest of my 50-55mm lenses (five of them). The Canon 50/1.4 is 52mm long, Contax Zeiss 50/1.7 is shortest at about 36mm.

Unjustified conclusion. Different DSLR lenses are the size they are for many reasons.

It was a response to your argument on size. Good to see you want to move past it.

I saw some non-engineers speculating on technical issues they don't understand, so I posed a counter-example. The Canon 22mm f2 is another counter-example. M43 has more but then we get hung up on picky arguments about image circle.

What would be this technical issue you speak of? Discussion on such issues require beginning with problem definition.

The assertions that for APS-C normal (35mm f1.8) is less expensive to produce than short tele (50mm f1.8)

Aah! Although, I don't know if anybody made that assertion (its been the other way around).

Whether $225 or $300, the Samsung 30mm f2 is a top-rate fast APS-C lens shorter than 35mm (and therefore even harder to make per some earlier arguments) selling for way less than $450. And a pancake to boot. The Sony 35mm f1.8 is priced with ample margin.

It is selling for $225 because it is on clearance. Let us see how much its replacement costs.

Whatever. It was introduced at a low price and has sold at a low price, and it is an excellent lens. You don't like the example because it is a good one, better than strained conclusions about DSLR lens size based on the relatively minor differences in DSLR mount registers. I had a 50mm E series Nikon with the same optical formula as other 50mm 1.8 Nikkors. It was smaller because Nikon reduced the front recess. An example of how conclusions about lens size based on DSLR examples is not so pertinent.

It was introduced at a higher price point. Rumor has been that a new version is on its way. A while ago, I saw its expected price at $400. Don't tell me that Samsung is only making $200-300 lenses.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
BTWNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow