DVT80111: So after many years of working with Zeiss, these OEM should be capable making great lenses themselves without paying license fee. Why wouldnt they do that? ...because they can charge more with a little blue logo. Hmm.
Diversification is also possible, cosina makes some wonderful Voigtlander lenses, but having a seperate business line seems reasonable.
Iloveaircraftnoise: G'day all,
Well for all the innovation this camera brings, the battery life is an anachronism... And there is one other thing I don't understand...... Why bang on with this ''smaller form factor'' philosophy when a quality 70-200 telephoto lens attached to the body will still make it look like the elephant dragging a mouse ? Surely the Sony engineers are kidding themselves.....
I guess the most often used lens on a camera is not 70-200?
Lanski: #6 is like a visual representation of what Sony just did.
And apparently the lens remains usable as a third party lens...
mpgxsvcd: Sony just added several hundred lenses to their lineup and they all have Canon written on them.
Canon now is a lens maker for Sony, who would have thought...
Did he speak in Japanese and someone translated?
Must have been something lost in translation ?
My voigtlander lenses may find a affordable 'home' at last!
prossi: These new Pentax dslrs look fugly. There, I said it.
These new Pentax dslrs look funky, There, I said it.
So,If you shoot stars - get D810AIf you like buttons - get DFIf you have a bit tight budget and don't like dust - get D610If you are on an even tighter budget and trust Nikon quality - get D600I am not a Nikon user, someone should continue with D800, D800e,D810, D750...
If you enjoy this video, you are kind of geeky...;-)
No matter the result, this has been
The Year of Alpha
gftphoto: What a great little camera. If only it had a viewfinder I would jump at the chance to own one.
Have a look Sony a6000. Viewfinder, fast AF, less plastic cheapness.
Thoughts: The top plate looks very nice, the rest looks a bit cheap, in particular that plastic SD card cover.
I agree as I have tried few fuji cameras in the shop. I even found that X100T on display was showing some quality issue as the camera 'leather' surface was peeling off in some edges.
The top plate looks very nice, the rest looks a bit cheap, in particular that plastic SD card cover.
nerd2: Samsung has the best APS body yet (28MP BSI sensor, 240fps sensor readout, 15fps continuous shooting with AF tracking) AND they have a very solid lens lineup already, and they are not terribly overpriced like fuji or m43 offerings. See.
10mm f2.8 fisheye - $29916mm f2.4 pancake- $26920mm 2.8 pancake - $26330mm f2 pancake - $29945mm f1.8 prime - $25660mm f2.8 macro - $46985mm f1.4 prime - $763300mm f2.8 prime - coming
Oh they have enough zoom lenses too - 16-50 f2.0-2.8, 50-150 2.8, 12-24, 18-200 etc.... Why still people don't consider samsung seriously?
I think they should spend more on marketing.
GPW: My upgrade path is from a D7100 DX to a pro DX, not to a FF camera. Why do I have to settle for less FPS, smaller buffer, build quality, and autofocus because I want to shoot with a DX camera? Is my money not the same as a FF shooters money? Am I not as important a customer as a FF shooter? At this point in time Nikon is saying NO you are NOT because you shoot a DX camera.
Is there a Pro DX from Nikon?People are still waiting D400 in 2015?
yzhenkai: A major reason of "upgrading" is that Canon and Nikon will not do their best on APS-C lens.
Agree, Mirroless APS-C cameras these days have better lens choices than Canon and Nikon offering.
ecube: As I recall, Sony was the first to offer [essentially] digital camera in 1981, the Mavica. In 1995, I used Mavica to document field work. I'm not sure but it seems that Contax was the lens used by Mavica. Around 1997, I tried Minolta D'Image at a traveling Minolta trailer. The so called "Minds of Minolta" merged with Konica and years later, Konica-Minolta was purchased by Sony
Why bring this up? Contax, Minolta, and Konica had GREAT lenses for SLR. Minolta, Canon, and Nikon produced GREAT Japanese lenses that competed with the best of German lenses since the late 1940s. I don't know when Sony stopped using Contax but I assume Sony owns all the lens design and technology pf Minolta and Konica. That said, I am puzzled why Sony seem well behind Canon and Nikon in producing lenses for their DSLR
On an "aside", the best Japanese lens I ever owned was the Takumar lenses from Asahi Optical Company, aka Pentax. That was in the mid-1960s
Be free to correct any of my errors
This is the patent Minolta filed.
vmwelt: Hi all, I'm interested in FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS lens - does anyone have the info on the filter size (i.e. 72 mm etc)? Thanks!
If you look at the photo of the lens a bit harder, it says 72mm.
Boss of Sony: Sony FE lenses are seriously too expensive. If Sony wants to sell the A7 series, they should drop the lens prices down to realistic levels.
Canon 50mm f1.4 = $400Canon 50mm f1.8=$150....Sony FE 55mm f1.8 = $1000
Canon 35mm f/2 IS USM = $600Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM = #200....Sony FE 35mm f2.8 = $800
Canon 17-40 f4 = $800...Sony FE 16-35 f4 = $1350
Canon 28-135mm = $500Sony 28-135mm = $2500
As an amateur, I would be interested in buying an A7 camera if it wasn't for these ridiculous prices.
You are comparing two systems at two completely different maturity stages. Many people are using legacy lenses with these full frame cameras. Try to mount a Canon FD 50 f1.4 on a 5D MKIII :P
ZeneticX: GREAT. Now how about some aps-c lenses ? sony could show some love for a6000 after the popularity it gained last year
Just out of interest, what lens you are hoping to see for the APS-C?