Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
Len_Gee
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,600Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

Interesting read.

So do you think that Sony's lack of available lenses spells eventual doom with the FE movement.

That the  FE system will be an abandoned short lived orphan system?

Hope not, but it is possible.

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Len_Gee
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,600Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Mel Snyder, 9 months ago

Mel Snyder wrote:

Ramius wrote:

Bribed them? So you think third party support for your product is a negative thing?

If anything, that makes the road to success and even shorter. I think your thinking is very proprietary and outdated. The more support, the better. How can you possibly argue against this? Infact, Sony already does this with other products, like their Playstation.

And judging by the responses here, I see there are alot of hobby photographers here who doesnt quite understand how professional photography works. Its good with adapters and and the option of using legacy lenses.

But that stuff is completely out of the question for many professionals. Taking black and white pictures of cathedrals with your Leica lenses in your hollidays is one thing. But for people working with their cameras you need full cooperation between your lens and camera, complete autofocus, exif data and all.

Compactness is not the only advantage of the A7 cameras. There are many other more important reasons for professional photographers to buy these.

People who make their living from photography aren't looking for cheap gear - only the best. We can't afford to bet our business on cheap gear. That's the first evidence you're grandstanding. Our gear is a business expense - a tax write off. We can pay for an A7/r the first day we use it with a single assignment - and if we're going full frame A7/r completely, we need at least two bodies.

I haven't made that decision yet, so I still have my twin Nikon APS-C systems - I can't fly across the USA with only a single body to a hospital with patients permissioned for a video and NOT have a backup. My A7 will be an extra camera for a year until I know what can't be known less than 6 months after launch - how dependable is the A7/r?

Mel,

You make it sound like you make a living as a professional photographer.

Are you?

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Sony RX100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,719Gear list
Like?
Re: +1 on Zeiss 85/1.8 and/or 135/2 OSS
In reply to Absolutic, 9 months ago

Absolutic wrote:

José B wrote:

Absolutic wrote:

The 2 lenses that I am waiting for are the 85/1.4 Zeiss and 135/1.8 Zeiss renderings in FE form. I'd be happy with a reduced weight and price 85/1.8 and 135/2 as well. I probably could even live with even lighter and cheaper 85/2 and 135/2.8.

Of course I can buy these Today plus LA-EA4 adapter. But it will 1) cost me $3500, 2) defeat the purpose of a small portable camera. On the other hand I get Phase AF which I am missing on my A7r with these two lenses.

But ideally for me, something like 21, 35, 55, 85 and 135 (21 is least pressing as 35 is wide enough for me) would be ideal. I shoot mostly people.

According to the road map the 85 comes in later this year and the 135 next year. I prefer the latter but the 85 and the A6000 should be great for heads and shoulders shots too.

Cheers,

José

Jose, the road map you are referring to is fake, and was created by Sonyalpharumors user by the name "Vlad" based on just a wish list of what everyone wants. Sony's own road map is not even close.

A very good point. Where is Vlad? He was a great contributor.

Steve

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,977Gear list
Like?
Reality
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

How does it feel to write such a long post where everything is wrong?

I think I obviously struck a nerve here with my thread. Because everyone probably has invested alot of money in their A7s, most people are afraid to admit its weaknesses and will defend the choices they have made. Its socially economically predictable really. Especially with americans.

OTOH, people buying a7 did so KNOWING that the native lens choices will be limited, starting with on five over first several months, five more by end of 2014 and another five in 2015. The three year plan was clearly spelled out: 15 lenses by end of 2015.

But somehow you managed to miss it.

 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
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 466
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Mel Snyder, 9 months ago

Mel Snyder wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

Well, it should not sell for $1200 to begin with, not in the world where Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 was introduced at $400. Introduced 6 years ago (and computer-aided lens design and aspheric lens molding technologies progressed a lot since then) a lens full stop faster was selling three times cheaper despite the limitations of long registration distance (don't feed me crap about long reg. distance being an advantage -- I am a professional optical engineer) while being almost as light (500 grams vs 430 g).

Actually, the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di was introduced back in 2005 when I purchased my first one with a D70; I still own it and a second I bought second-hand to use with my pair of D7000s in medical video.

Yes, you are right. Then there is even more weight to my point: the lens developed 9 (!!!) years ago, aspheric elements were WAY more expensive then than they are now.A lovely lens, I had one in Canon mount, and bought one now for joint use on my Nikon/Sony setup (Nikon mount obviously).

That Tamron has been made in a variety of mounts for more than 10 years now - Canon, Nikon, Sony Alpha, and probably others.

Well, Tamron didn't know how many copies they would sell when they set a price point at $400.

Sony FE lenses fit only Sony E mounts - and they were engineered in 2013, with 2013 manufacturing costs...

... which are much cheaper than those in 2005.

Just inflation would make that Tamron 40% more expensive if designed and manufactured today.

That it would. However, this price increase would be more than offset by reduction of manufacturing costs of aspheric elements -- which are pennies compared to what they were 10 years ago. Lens prices are indirectly (to say the least) related to the manufacturing cost.

Sony FE lenses are, relatively speaking, almost custom lenses - so few cameras can use them. It knows its market. And all longer than 35mm have OSS

Really? My FE 55/1.8 has OSS? That's news to me.

That's one reason why a 55mm OSS Sony lens costs $800 and and a Nikon non-VR 50mm costs under $200.

I'm not very familiar with Sony line-up, so I'm not aware of any 55/1.8 lens with OSS for $800. There is an APS-C format lens 50/1.8 with OSS for $300 and FE 55/1.8 without OSS for $1000. Which one did you mean?

Nikon assumes anyone who wants a fast 50mm doesn't need VR.

That Nikon is an interesting lens: the only one in 50/1.8 class having an aspheric element. It performs very well for the class, and I guess Nikon didn't make it to perform even better (with more aspherics, e.g. Sony FE 55 has three of them) in order not to kill the sales of more expensive lenses.

Sony sells to amateurs willing to pay $600 more to get OSS in a 55mm prime.

Again, I'm confused here. Then again, in my opinion neither lens should have OSS, it belongs to the body, Olympus style.

That $400 Tamron has no OSS. I can't imagine the majority of those complaining about Sony's roadmap or pricing accepting a 28-75mm at $400 if it didn't have OSS.

At $400 with f/2.8? In a heartbeat. It is quite common (e.g. Canon-Nikon) to price f/4 normal zooms with OSS at 50-70% of f/2.8 lens without one.

As an optical engineer, you recognize the difficulty of simply putting Nikon/Canon formulated lenses in a Sony PDAF optical system.

Depends what lens we are talking about, and who puts it in. If Sony does it, it is not very difficult: Sony has the phase sensor's data. Yes, most SLR-developed lenses are neither easy to transplant (in autofocus mode) nor should be transplanted in the first place. However, at $400-500 this Tamron costs today (new!), many would buy it even as a manual focus lens (all T needs to do is put in a proper (light) extension/mount, mechanical aperture, rework the helicoid and ditch the AF gears/motor). Heck, I prefer it even with a heavy Fotodiox adapter (with aperture control).

Mirrorless designs on the other hand are very easy to design/transplant. I can design such a lens (well, its optical formula anyway) -- not from scratch of course, but derive it from existing designs.

For instance, take Canon 22/2 pancake design and enlarge every optical element x1.6 (well, pay royalties to Canon of course). Minor optimization is needed, but it's really piece of cake. Viola! 35 mm f/2 lens is ready (Zeiss 35/2.8 is a joke considering its aperture and price).

Sigma 30/2.8 covers>80% of Full frame already. Same trick: enlarge every element by 20% and get 36/2.8 -- and Sigma already has autofocus protocols for NEX! And, unlike PDAF, CDAF never misses (well almost never, sometimes i locks on the wrong object such as background).

Same goes for Panasonic 20/1.7, Samsung 30/2, Sigma 19 and 60/2.8 etc.

Strictly on volume, it will be a long time till Sony could make a $400 non-OSS 24-70mm f4 lens.

I hope someone else will do it (Sigma, are you listening?)

Canon can't, Nikon can't -

Of course they can, they even did it 20 years ago: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/187-canon-ef-28-70mm-f35-45-ii-test-report--review but they don't want to kill/reduce the sales of more expensive counterparts.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,719Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Krich13, 9 months ago

Krich13 wrote:

Mel Snyder wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

Well, it should not sell for $1200 to begin with, not in the world where Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 was introduced at $400. Introduced 6 years ago (and computer-aided lens design and aspheric lens molding technologies progressed a lot since then) a lens full stop faster was selling three times cheaper despite the limitations of long registration distance (don't feed me crap about long reg. distance being an advantage -- I am a professional optical engineer) while being almost as light (500 grams vs 430 g).

Actually, the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di was introduced back in 2005 when I purchased my first one with a D70; I still own it and a second I bought second-hand to use with my pair of D7000s in medical video.

Yes, you are right. Then there is even more weight to my point: the lens developed 9 (!!!) years ago, aspheric elements were WAY more expensive then than they are now.A lovely lens, I had one in Canon mount, and bought one now for joint use on my Nikon/Sony setup (Nikon mount obviously).

That Tamron has been made in a variety of mounts for more than 10 years now - Canon, Nikon, Sony Alpha, and probably others.

Well, Tamron didn't know how many copies they would sell when they set a price point at $400.

Sony FE lenses fit only Sony E mounts - and they were engineered in 2013, with 2013 manufacturing costs...

... which are much cheaper than those in 2005.

Just inflation would make that Tamron 40% more expensive if designed and manufactured today.

That it would. However, this price increase would be more than offset by reduction of manufacturing costs of aspheric elements -- which are pennies compared to what they were 10 years ago. Lens prices are indirectly (to say the least) related to the manufacturing cost.

Sony FE lenses are, relatively speaking, almost custom lenses - so few cameras can use them. It knows its market. And all longer than 35mm have OSS

Really? My FE 55/1.8 has OSS? That's news to me.

All NEX and other Sony APS-C cameras can use them of course.

I found something in an obscure Sony Sales website which was a comment made by somebody, about 2 weeks ago. The comment was that the FE 55 has OSS and I was the one who posted it.  But I have not seen any confirmation of that yet, so I would not say that with any degree of certainty.

That's one reason why a 55mm OSS Sony lens costs $800 and and a Nikon non-VR 50mm costs under $200.

I'm not very familiar with Sony line-up, so I'm not aware of any 55/1.8 lens with OSS for $800. There is an APS-C format lens 50/1.8 with OSS for $300 and FE 55/1.8 without OSS for $1000. Which one did you mean?

It is FE 55 mm f2.8, not 1.8.

Nikon assumes anyone who wants a fast 50mm doesn't need VR.

That Nikon is an interesting lens: the only one in 50/1.8 class having an aspheric element. It performs very well for the class, and I guess Nikon didn't make it to perform even better (with more aspherics, e.g. Sony FE 55 has three of them) in order not to kill the sales of more expensive lenses.

Sony sells to amateurs willing to pay $600 more to get OSS in a 55mm prime.

Again, I'm confused here. Then again, in my opinion neither lens should have OSS, it belongs to the body, Olympus style.

School's still out on the FE55 having OSS.

Olympus don't use in-lens stabilization. Theirs is called IBIS and it's internal to the body.

That $400 Tamron has no OSS. I can't imagine the majority of those complaining about Sony's roadmap or pricing accepting a 28-75mm at $400 if it didn't have OSS.

At $400 with f/2.8? In a heartbeat. It is quite common (e.g. Canon-Nikon) to price f/4 normal zooms with OSS at 50-70% of f/2.8 lens without one.

As an optical engineer, you recognize the difficulty of simply putting Nikon/Canon formulated lenses in a Sony PDAF optical system.

Depends what lens we are talking about, and who puts it in. If Sony does it, it is not very difficult: Sony has the phase sensor's data. Yes, most SLR-developed lenses are neither easy to transplant (in autofocus mode) nor should be transplanted in the first place. However, at $400-500 this Tamron costs today (new!), many would buy it even as a manual focus lens (all T needs to do is put in a proper (light) extension/mount, mechanical aperture, rework the helicoid and ditch the AF gears/motor). Heck, I prefer it even with a heavy Fotodiox adapter (with aperture control).

Mirrorless designs on the other hand are very easy to design/transplant. I can design such a lens (well, its optical formula anyway) -- not from scratch of course, but derive it from existing designs.

For instance, take Canon 22/2 pancake design and enlarge every optical element x1.6 (well, pay royalties to Canon of course). Minor optimization is needed, but it's really piece of cake. Viola! 35 mm f/2 lens is ready (Zeiss 35/2.8 is a joke considering its aperture and price).

Sigma 30/2.8 covers>80% of Full frame already. Same trick: enlarge every element by 20% and get 36/2.8 -- and Sigma already has autofocus protocols for NEX! And, unlike PDAF, CDAF never misses (well almost never, sometimes i locks on the wrong object such as background).

Same goes for Panasonic 20/1.7, Samsung 30/2, Sigma 19 and 60/2.8 etc.

Strictly on volume, it will be a long time till Sony could make a $400 non-OSS 24-70mm f4 lens.

I hope someone else will do it (Sigma, are you listening?)

Canon can't, Nikon can't -

Of course they can, they even did it 20 years ago: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/187-canon-ef-28-70mm-f35-45-ii-test-report--review but they don't want to kill/reduce the sales of more expensive counterparts.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 466
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to tn1krr, 9 months ago

tn1krr wrote:

Ramius wrote:

Thus far, Sony has only released four lenses for the A7 cameras. And they have the nerve to present the camera at the Photography Show with APS-C mounted lenses: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/06/the-photography-show-2014-tidbits-from-the-show-floor/10

Is this not a clear indication that the selection of FE optics is too limited? When they should have been presenting new FE lenses, they must instead present the camera with the newest in crop lenses instead. To me, this almost admitting that despite the camera being good, there is a lack of support for it.

They could have been faster, but IMO Sony has been pretty smart (their profit-wize) about product launches in last few years, for example. These in addition that it actually takes time to develop quality products

- they released RX1R/shipped enough before A7(R) that they managed to sell pile of those without A7(R) killing the sales

- A6000 did not come same time as A7 so that 1st customers / holiday market did not choose to take "50% cheaper APS-C with same 24 megapixels and better AF..."

- lens release schedule for FE mount does bit of same. They want to give 24-70 time in market before telling us what's next. And would the 35 have sold as much if 24-70 was available immediately? If we got 55 and 85 immediately I'd bet many would have taken only 85. I'd quess the next lineup will be announced after the first few batches of 70-200/4 have shipped. They do not want people skipping 70-200 to wait for 85 or 105 macro instead

Very good analysis, I completely agree. I would also like to add that they are likely intentionally trying  to keep the market share too small (while collecting huge margins from few users) to interest the third-party competitors.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
EinsteinsGhost
Forum ProPosts: 11,977Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to captura, 9 months ago

Krich13 wrote:

Mel Snyder wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

Well, it should not sell for $1200 to begin with, not in the world where Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 was introduced at $400. Introduced 6 years ago (and computer-aided lens design and aspheric lens molding technologies progressed a lot since then) a lens full stop faster was selling three times cheaper despite the limitations of long registration distance (don't feed me crap about long reg. distance being an advantage -- I am a professional optical engineer) while being almost as light (500 grams vs 430 g).

Actually, the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di was introduced back in 2005 when I purchased my first one with a D70; I still own it and a second I bought second-hand to use with my pair of D7000s in medical video.

Yes, you are right. Then there is even more weight to my point: the lens developed 9 (!!!) years ago, aspheric elements were WAY more expensive then than they are now.A lovely lens, I had one in Canon mount, and bought one now for joint use on my Nikon/Sony setup (Nikon mount obviously).

That Tamron has been made in a variety of mounts for more than 10 years now - Canon, Nikon, Sony Alpha, and probably others.

Well, Tamron didn't know how many copies they would sell when they set a price point at $400.

Sony FE lenses fit only Sony E mounts - and they were engineered in 2013, with 2013 manufacturing costs...

... which are much cheaper than those in 2005.

Just inflation would make that Tamron 40% more expensive if designed and manufactured today.

That it would. However, this price increase would be more than offset by reduction of manufacturing costs of aspheric elements -- which are pennies compared to what they were 10 years ago. Lens prices are indirectly (to say the least) related to the manufacturing cost.

Sony FE lenses are, relatively speaking, almost custom lenses - so few cameras can use them. It knows its market. And all longer than 35mm have OSS

Really? My FE 55/1.8 has OSS? That's news to me.

All NEX and other Sony APS-C cameras can use them of course.

I found something in an obscure Sony Sales website which was a comment made by somebody, about 2 weeks ago. The comment was that the FE 55 has OSS and I was the one who posted it.  But I have not seen any confirmation of that yet, so I would not say that with any degree of certainty.

That's one reason why a 55mm OSS Sony lens costs $800 and and a Nikon non-VR 50mm costs under $200.

I'm not very familiar with Sony line-up, so I'm not aware of any 55/1.8 lens with OSS for $800. There is an APS-C format lens 50/1.8 with OSS for $300 and FE 55/1.8 without OSS for $1000. Which one did you mean?

It is FE 55 mm f2.8, not 1.8.

Nikon assumes anyone who wants a fast 50mm doesn't need VR.

That Nikon is an interesting lens: the only one in 50/1.8 class having an aspheric element. It performs very well for the class, and I guess Nikon didn't make it to perform even better (with more aspherics, e.g. Sony FE 55 has three of them) in order not to kill the sales of more expensive lenses.

Sony sells to amateurs willing to pay $600 more to get OSS in a 55mm prime.

Again, I'm confused here. Then again, in my opinion neither lens should have OSS, it belongs to the body, Olympus style.

School's still out on the FE55 having OSS.

Olympus don't use in-lens stabilization. Theirs is called IBIS and it's internal to the body.

That $400 Tamron has no OSS. I can't imagine the majority of those complaining about Sony's roadmap or pricing accepting a 28-75mm at $400 if it didn't have OSS.

At $400 with f/2.8? In a heartbeat. It is quite common (e.g. Canon-Nikon) to price f/4 normal zooms with OSS at 50-70% of f/2.8 lens without one.

As an optical engineer, you recognize the difficulty of simply putting Nikon/Canon formulated lenses in a Sony PDAF optical system.

Depends what lens we are talking about, and who puts it in. If Sony does it, it is not very difficult: Sony has the phase sensor's data. Yes, most SLR-developed lenses are neither easy to transplant (in autofocus mode) nor should be transplanted in the first place. However, at $400-500 this Tamron costs today (new!), many would buy it even as a manual focus lens (all T needs to do is put in a proper (light) extension/mount, mechanical aperture, rework the helicoid and ditch the AF gears/motor). Heck, I prefer it even with a heavy Fotodiox adapter (with aperture control).

Mirrorless designs on the other hand are very easy to design/transplant. I can design such a lens (well, its optical formula anyway) -- not from scratch of course, but derive it from existing designs.

For instance, take Canon 22/2 pancake design and enlarge every optical element x1.6 (well, pay royalties to Canon of course). Minor optimization is needed, but it's really piece of cake. Viola! 35 mm f/2 lens is ready (Zeiss 35/2.8 is a joke considering its aperture and price).

Sigma 30/2.8 covers>80% of Full frame already. Same trick: enlarge every element by 20% and get 36/2.8 -- and Sigma already has autofocus protocols for NEX! And, unlike PDAF, CDAF never misses (well almost never, sometimes i locks on the wrong object such as background).

Same goes for Panasonic 20/1.7, Samsung 30/2, Sigma 19 and 60/2.8 etc.

Strictly on volume, it will be a long time till Sony could make a $400 non-OSS 24-70mm f4 lens.

I hope someone else will do it (Sigma, are you listening?)

Canon can't, Nikon can't -

Of course they can, they even did it 20 years ago: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/187-canon-ef-28-70mm-f35-45-ii-test-report--review but they don't want to kill/reduce the sales of more expensive counterparts.

AFAIK, the only optically stabilized 50-55mm on any mount is: E 50/1.8 OSS.

And no, FE 55 is: not stabilized (I do not expect FE 85 to be stabilized either) and it is f/1.8 with measured t1.8, not f/2.8.

 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
Mel Snyder
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,088Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Krich13, 9 months ago

-Krich13 wrote:

Mel Snyder wrote:

Krich13 wrote:

Well, it should not sell for $1200 to begin with, not in the world where Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 was introduced at $400. Introduced 6 years ago (and computer-aided lens design and aspheric lens molding technologies progressed a lot since then) a lens full stop faster was selling three times cheaper despite the limitations of long registration distance (don't feed me crap about long reg. distance being an advantage -- I am a professional optical engineer) while being almost as light (500 grams vs 430 g).

Actually, the Tamron 28-75mm XR Di was introduced back in 2005 when I purchased my first one with a D70; I still own it and a second I bought second-hand to use with my pair of D7000s in medical video.

Yes, you are right. Then there is even more weight to my point: the lens developed 9 (!!!) years ago, aspheric elements were WAY more expensive then than they are now.A lovely lens, I had one in Canon mount, and bought one now for joint use on my Nikon/Sony setup (Nikon mount obviously).

That Tamron has been made in a variety of mounts for more than 10 years now - Canon, Nikon, Sony Alpha, and probably others.

Well, Tamron didn't know how many copies they would sell when they set a price point at $400.

Sony FE lenses fit only Sony E mounts - and they were engineered in 2013, with 2013 manufacturing costs...

... which are much cheaper than those in 2005.

Just inflation would make that Tamron 40% more expensive if designed and manufactured today.

That it would. However, this price increase would be more than offset by reduction of manufacturing costs of aspheric elements -- which are pennies compared to what they were 10 years ago. Lens prices are indirectly (to say the least) related to the manufacturing cost.

Sony FE lenses are, relatively speaking, almost custom lenses - so few cameras can use them. It knows its market. And all longer than 35mm have OSS

Really? My FE 55/1.8 has OSS? That's news to me.

That's one reason why a 55mm OSS Sony lens costs $800 and and a Nikon non-VR 50mm costs under $200.

I'm not very familiar with Sony line-up, so I'm not aware of any 55/1.8 lens with OSS for $800. There is an APS-C format lens 50/1.8 with OSS for $300 and FE 55/1.8 without OSS for $1000. Which one did you mean?

Nikon assumes anyone who wants a fast 50mm doesn't need VR.

That Nikon is an interesting lens: the only one in 50/1.8 class having an aspheric element. It performs very well for the class, and I guess Nikon didn't make it to perform even better (with more aspherics, e.g. Sony FE 55 has three of them) in order not to kill the sales of more expensive lenses.

Sony sells to amateurs willing to pay $600 more to get OSS in a 55mm prime.

Again, I'm confused here. Then again, in my opinion neither lens should have OSS, it belongs to the body, Olympus style.

That $400 Tamron has no OSS. I can't imagine the majority of those complaining about Sony's roadmap or pricing accepting a 28-75mm at $400 if it didn't have OSS.

At $400 with f/2.8? In a heartbeat. It is quite common (e.g. Canon-Nikon) to price f/4 normal zooms with OSS at 50-70% of f/2.8 lens without one.

As an optical engineer, you recognize the difficulty of simply putting Nikon/Canon formulated lenses in a Sony PDAF optical system.

Depends what lens we are talking about, and who puts it in. If Sony does it, it is not very difficult: Sony has the phase sensor's data. Yes, most SLR-developed lenses are neither easy to transplant (in autofocus mode) nor should be transplanted in the first place. However, at $400-500 this Tamron costs today (new!), many would buy it even as a manual focus lens (all T needs to do is put in a proper (light) extension/mount, mechanical aperture, rework the helicoid and ditch the AF gears/motor). Heck, I prefer it even with a heavy Fotodiox adapter (with aperture control).

Mirrorless designs on the other hand are very easy to design/transplant. I can design such a lens (well, its optical formula anyway) -- not from scratch of course, but derive it from existing designs.

For instance, take Canon 22/2 pancake design and enlarge every optical element x1.6 (well, pay royalties to Canon of course). Minor optimization is needed, but it's really piece of cake. Viola! 35 mm f/2 lens is ready (Zeiss 35/2.8 is a joke considering its aperture and price).

Sigma 30/2.8 covers>80% of Full frame already. Same trick: enlarge every element by 20% and get 36/2.8 -- and Sigma already has autofocus protocols for NEX! And, unlike PDAF, CDAF never misses (well almost never, sometimes i locks on the wrong object such as background).

Same goes for Panasonic 20/1.7, Samsung 30/2, Sigma 19 and 60/2.8 etc.

Strictly on volume, it will be a long time till Sony could make a $400 non-OSS 24-70mm f4 lens.

I hope someone else will do it (Sigma, are you listening?)

Canon can't, Nikon can't -

Of course they can, they even did it 20 years ago: http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/187-canon-ef-28-70mm-f35-45-ii-test-report--review but they don't want to kill/reduce the sales of more expensive counterparts.

I think your willingness to accept non-OSS lenses bears no resemblence to the expectations of many/most here. We have guys here who returned 8mm lenses for not having AF.

True, manufacturing costs for making aspherics goes down with new tech - but Tamron had had to carry the exorbitant costs of R&D from 10 years ago on their books - those early costs don't go away just because new manufacturing techniques arise. Only the fact that when they started, they knew they were tapping into a market of 2 million bodies made it worthwhile to them. The poor sales performance of E mount bodies pre-A7/r made investment in that mount very resistable.

I would not look to Sigma for much of anything after losing their latest patent infringement case with Nikon: http://www.diyphotography.net/sigma-ordered-pay-nikon-14-5-million-two-year-lawsuit-comes-end/ - and the $14 million doesn't include 2 years of attorney fees and court costs. It's really rare for Japanese companies to sue each other, and probably marks the end of easy knockoffs of AF and stabilization technology by the 3rd party companies.

 Mel Snyder's gear list:Mel Snyder's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sportyaccordy
Senior MemberPosts: 1,487Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

They really should have released it with 4 primes covering the 24-85 range. It would have been better to do that with no zooms, or just the kit zoom, to be honest. But they are coming so it's no biggie.

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-C3 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 466
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Mel Snyder, 9 months ago

Mel Snyder wrote:

I think your willingness to accept non-OSS lenses bears no resemblence to the expectations of many/most here. We have guys here who returned 8mm lenses for not having AF.

What are you talking about? Are you sure you are not mixing up OSS (the image stabilization) and autofocus? There is total of ONE (1) 24-70 f/2.8 lens with image stabilization -- the recently released Tamron. I and I guess most others would accept the 28-70 or 24-70 f/2.8 lens with open arms as we did before the Tamron release.

Frankly, I don't understand why OSS is even important on a normal range 24-70 f/4 class lens. It is too slow to be used indoors without flash -- and with flash OSS is irrelevant. F/2.8 is barely sufficient indoors even with Sony's excellent high-ISO capabilities. Outdoors there is usually plenty of light, again OSS is not all that important. Only to stabilize the viewfinder for critical focusing? But this isn't a long lens, hand shake should be manageable. May be for landscape photos without tripod/bean bag/support, I can't see where else it is critical...

Only the fact that when they started, they knew they were tapping into a market of 2 million bodies made it worthwhile to them. The poor sales performance of E mount bodies pre-A7/r made investment in that mount very resistable.

I guess poor performance of E-mount sales was made even poorer by lens pricing and speed.

I would not look to Sigma for much of anything after losing their latest patent infringement case with Nikon: http://www.diyphotography.net/sigma-ordered-pay-nikon-14-5-million-two-year-lawsuit-comes-end/ - and the $14 million doesn't include 2 years of attorney fees and court costs.

"Show must go on". Now they need to recoup these losses by selling more lenses. BTW, I don't thing $14 M is that big a deal for Sigma.

It's really rare for Japanese companies to sue each other, and probably marks the end of easy knockoffs of AF

Well, they haven't been sued for AF, and Sigma makes AF lenses for Sony Nex (the same protocol (besides PDAF) as Sony FE for reverse compatibility with Sony's own lenses. I guess I'll be OK without IS at first.

and stabilization technology by the 3rd party companies.

I don't know what lenses the infringement part applies to, how relevant it is for E-mount, and whether Sigma can bypass the infringed part in its future designs (I bet it will).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ramius
Forum MemberPosts: 77
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Krich13, 9 months ago

Very interesting to hear from you.

And what you say makes sense too, I just havent dared to ask the question but really, it should not be much more difficult to make an FE lenses than to make the elements bigger right? Bigger sensor needs bigger elements. When you already got a production set up lenses with all the tools in place, is it not actually quite easy to construct a new FE lens? Especially with all the computerwork involved in these things?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sean lancaster
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,563Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to sportyaccordy, 9 months ago

sportyaccordy wrote:

They really should have released it with 4 primes covering the 24-85 range. It would have been better to do that with no zooms, or just the kit zoom, to be honest. But they are coming so it's no biggie.

Sure, for some people. But they didn't and it's selling well, so perhaps they did fine. Releasing it when the camera was ready was the right move. There are plenty of legacy glass users who were just waiting for a mirrorless full frame with a relatively short flange distance to accept old and manual focus lenses. Adding the lenses they did at or near the release just increased the audience that much more. They were smart to jump out of the gate. We might not see a full frame competitor for another year or more. And will that competitor have lenses ready at launch? Are Fuji's great lenses for APS-C able to adapt to FF without vignetting majorly? I doubt it. Samgsung and their lenses? Again, I doubt it. Sony is sitting pretty.

-- hide signature --
 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha 7 Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 OnePlus One +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 466
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

Ramius wrote:

Very interesting to hear from you.

And what you say makes sense too, I just havent dared to ask the question but really, it should not be much more difficult to make an FE lenses than to make the elements bigger right? Bigger sensor needs bigger elements. When you already got a production set up lenses with all the tools in place, is it not actually quite easy to construct a new FE lens? Especially with all the computerwork involved in these things?

The optical design part is actually very easy: scaling things up linearly does most of the job. The subsequent optimization (even if needed at all) is not worth talking about.

Making the components work together is more difficult. Weight scales as cube of linear dimensions, so if you just enlarge every element of the Canon’s 22/2 1.6 times, the weight of each element would grow 4 times – and each would engulf 4 times as much special glass (if there is any) driving up the cost. Glass molding of larger elements is also not very easy (costs drop tremendously with lens sizes).

As a side note, dpreview posted the pics of lenses cut in half somewhere… The Zeiss Otus looks suspiciously like an enlarged double-Gauss followed by a speed booster. Hence the weight and the great MTF results (double-Gauss at relatively moderate aperture of say f/2 is no slouch on its own right, and the focal reducer boosts the performance still further). Likewise, The Sigma 18-35 also looks like a boosted FF design lens – and also has great MTF.

The lens still would be light enough for you to carry, and not that expensive to make. But the AF motor would still need to move 4 times the weight, making fast AF more challenging.

For Sigma 30 type lens, where only 20% scaling is needed, weight increase of 70% is far less critical. In principle, the aspheric element(s) could sit

On the other hand, FF lenses can have roughly 30% looser manufacturing tolerances which should partly offset the costs. Some aspherics could be made out of plastic instead of molded glass or as aspherized hybrids (spherical glass lens with a thin layer of plastic on top further driving down costs -- what wouldn’t be permissible for smaller sensor may become allowed on looser FF one).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marc petzold
Regular MemberPosts: 285Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

well, you can always adapt legacy lenses "blasts from the past" with a cheap 3rd party

adapter, so i wouldn't need current FE lenses when i'd have a A7, i've collected about 10-15

vintage lenses from minolta, zeiss, yashica & more....also, manual focus seems to be more

"right" than AF in todays fast times for me.

 marc petzold's gear list:marc petzold's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Samsung TL500 Sigma DP2 Merrill Nikon D90 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 +56 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ramius
Forum MemberPosts: 77
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Krich13, 9 months ago

How difficult is it to make a non zoom wideangle then? Would a pancake design work for an FF sensor at around 15-16mm focal width? Or would there need to be more elements to correct the front elements?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Krich13
Regular MemberPosts: 466
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 9 months ago

Ramius wrote:

How difficult is it to make a non zoom wideangle then? Would a pancake design work for an FF sensor at around 15-16mm focal width? Or would there need to be more elements to correct the front elements?

On top of my head, down to ~28 mm the design is easy, even in pancake form. Wider than that. fisheye is relatively simple and compact, but rectilinear would grow much bigger and much more complex, even for mirrorless cameras. May be around 24 mm things start to complicate, need to look closer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marc petzold
Regular MemberPosts: 285Gear list
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 8 months ago

sonyalpharumors said that there will be 12 FE lenses released in 2014...take this with a grain of salt...

 marc petzold's gear list:marc petzold's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Samsung TL500 Sigma DP2 Merrill Nikon D90 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 +56 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Gellings
Contributing MemberPosts: 560
Like?
Re: Anyone disappointed with the FE movement?
In reply to Ramius, 8 months ago

Ramius wrote:

Thus far, Sony has only released four lenses for the A7 cameras. And they have the nerve to present the camera at the Photography Show with APS-C mounted lenses: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2014/03/06/the-photography-show-2014-tidbits-from-the-show-floor/10

Is this not a clear indication that the selection of FE optics is too limited? When they should have been presenting new FE lenses, they must instead present the camera with the newest in crop lenses instead. To me, this almost admitting that despite the camera being good, there is a lack of support for it.

Looks like a ZEISS display to me...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads