Harry S: As far as boundary pushing goes Sony is pretty much ahead of everyone else at the moment, they have to be given credit for that. RX1, a7 etc, the 'big two' are nowhere near that innovative.
The big problem...communication and loyalty. If they could just take 20% of what Fuji do for their users in terms of firmware updates, ongoing improvements, support for old models, clear roadmaps full of stuff people want etc etc etc, they would grow their user base much quicker in my opinion.
Wow they added a new feature? Nobody else ever does that :P
I think you have no knowledge of the camera market at all.
Ednaz: Size and weight matter in a lot of ways. As much as I love my Nikon D800E bodies and Nikkor lenses, I can pack a three zoom, two prime, and two body m4/3 kit in the same space as one D800E and two zooms. I have my Fuji kit because it slots in nicely between the two options - better noise performance than the m4/3, but still light weight, quiet, and small compared to the DSLR kit. XPro1 and four fast primes in the space of a D800E and two zooms that cover the same focal length range, but the Fuji lenses are across the board wider aperture, for more light gathering. (I know f1.2 translates to something like f2 in DOF... but f1.2 in terms of light gathering is f1.2.)
I'd like a few more pixels so I'm not stressing an image so much when printing 20x30, and I'd like a more functionally good XP rangefinder, and an ultra wide prime would basically fill out my complete wish list for Fuji beyond what they have now. They're doing great stuff, and own a range of my work.
D800 and four fast primes would also consume the same space as a D800 and two decent zooms.
Cal22: Not any word about the Loxia line? I'd expect a 25mm or a 21mm to be announced.
You don't need AF in wide angle photography (with primes)!
Loxia line has nothing to do with Sony's future lens plans. But another 3 are expected soon.
five5pho: as a Canon user I always thought that if I ever switch systems would be a Nikon.I m not so sure anymore, Sony turns out to be a innovative player.
They have been for a while, but they are starting to gain traction.
josseee: dpreview shows its "profesionality"..only one week delayed news.
anyway, still no 85mm lens..not even a mention about it being planned (only some rumors). Instead we get a 3th 35mm lens :D
A 35mm f1.4 is at least as commonly used as an 85mm f1.4. Personally I use both and they are my staple FL's, but 35mm gets used more of the two.
Many many many great portraits taken at f5.6-11. It is easy to have selective focus with longer (slower) lenses, which is the reason why larger formats have shallower DoF. On wider lenses having a fast aperture is the only way to achieve this. Longer lenses are used for portraits because of distortion / compression and subject distance more so than having to be ultra fast for wafer thin DoF.
Both are great lenses to have and an 85mm is likely on its way, but I wouldn't trade having a 35mm f1.4 in the lineup to have an 85mm when a 90mm f2.8 is available.
Sony have no control over what other manufacturers decide to release.
plamens: Except 28/2 all of the lenses are HUGE!!The main concept of the mirrorless is the small size, but with these HUGE lenses..Absolutely meaningless!!!They are even bigger and heavier than the same DSLR lenses!Sony, please consider to make small lenses, like olympus, panasonic, fujifilm and samsung stuffs! That because I would not buy any of them! Maybe except 28/2:)
And Fuji is only APS-C.
Dimitris Roubos: I think the 24-240 (3.5-6.3) will be seriously appriciated by both the A7s users that they cant afford much pp cropping, and they should not mind variable lens aperture as they can afford to push the Iso values to maintain a usable shutter speed. A7/r users will be delighted to pp crop their 240mm images and will have still plenty of Mp left to play with. This makes the 24-240 addition a truly interesting one. With the addition of the 28mm + UWA you will have a system at your disposal that can cover a huge variety of shooting scenarios.
An 1.8/1.4 85mm future addition and i couldn't be happier with the FE lineup considering how new the system is.
Kudos to Sony.
Agreed. Not a fan of zooms normally, but the 24-240mm could be quite interesting on my A7S, the slow aperture is not a big deal but the range is really handy. Already use the basic 28-70mm for OSS and as a lazy lens, because frankly the A7S is so easy to please lens wise, so this combo is actually for the first time ever to me rather interesting. The wider wide end is also greatly appreciated.
I currently use the ZA 85mm f1.4 as my 85mm, is actually a decent size and one of the lighter 85mm f1.4's, even lighter than the crop only Samsung 85mm.
As the guy below in the discussuion puts it, in DOF & bokeh area, FF advantage is very significant - I actually didn't expect that much difference in favor of FF...even canon at F2.0, expecting similar dof, it has much better bokeh , more blure, more pop, more 3D photo than Fuji at F1.4.... FF rules but sure it is not the holy grail for everyone. Those who want light weight and small equipment at the expense of the indisputable advantages in DOF, bokeh (also high-ISO quality and resolution) may prefer Fuji (and they got it right for sure) but for the most demanding phorographers, full frame is the choice. Actually, that was the reason Nikon finally turned to full frame long time ago too despite their early claims that "APS-C is the future for us"..... ;-).
There is no advantage to crop sensors when the development is the same, which is to say they are the same sensor fabrication but cut to different sizes. As technology and manufacture gets better yields improve and get cheaper, so larger sensors can be made more cheaply. Cropping 'in camera' rather than being limited to a crop sensor that has been physically 'cut' to the smaller size offers exactly the same thing. A lot of people say that the gap is closing between sensor sizes in terms of IQ (absolutely false, the gap is the same but all are getting better), but the gap in coat between the two is shrinking rapidly and development cycles are accelerating rapidly. It is even possible that 'crop' sensors can become more expensive depending on market demand.
Menneisyys: "Bayer or X-Trans, the format is very important and at the moment I think that APS-C is the best format in terms of size, speed, quality and price. A full-frame camera would be bigger, more expensive and maybe slower too."
Great they don't abandon / neglect their current (APS-C) users, unlike Sony and their APS-C A/E-mount users. (Again, for Sony fanboys: using FE lenses on crop cameras are an unnecessary overkill in every single respect.)
The 'gain' though is that you can use the same lens on two different formats, extending it's versatility.
Size: Nope. Price: Yeah sometimes, though lenses like the 28mm f2 will be cheaper than the Zeiss 24mm, which crop users have been crying out for a cheaper alternative.
24-240mm is interesting for being the widest, still in production super zoom for FF, with the only other one I can think of being the Tokina 24-200mm.
TheCuriousCustomer: Isn't there the 70-400 G II lens missing in the chart? Or did I miss anything about this lens?
Do you mean the A-Mount? This is about E-Mount lenses.
Samsung, Fuji etc equivalent lenses are as big if not bigger. Fuji 50-140mm is bigger / heavier than the Sony 70-200mm. Same with their upcoming, no IS 16-50mm.
Explain "unnecessary overkill in every way"?
Serious Sam: I think the development of FF is a matter of resources. Fuji put everything in house, lens and body and because they are a photography company, they know you need both and do it in house so you are not at mercy of third party manufacturer. And the way they are going with their lens I will be surprise if there is resource in R&D and treasury for a FF system development.
On the other hand, look at Sony, fantastic body but half the optics come from Zeiss. Given the status pf Sony financially, There obviously isn't much left for a Pro lens line up development.
JAP - Straight out of the Zack Arias / Fuji marketing play book. Fact is that there is a bigger difference between APS-C and 135, than there is from 135 to the only CMOS MF.
On the lens front, yes the Sony 135 system has slower lenses, which mean they are nearly equal in low light and DoF (though most all still have a bit of an advantage as there is actually 1.3 stops between them), but these lenses are similarly priced and the end user gets greater DR and resolution. Lenses and bodies are also similarly sized for equivalent FL/apertures, in fact if anything the 135 lenses are smaller / lighter than their APS-C equivalents.
Dave Oddie: So to get a fisheye or a 21mm lens on E mount I'd have to buy two converters and a 28mm lens!!!
I thought converter lenses were what you attached to cheaper fixed lens cameras not D-SLR prime lenses.
What is more 28mm is a focal length I have never been keen on since back in the days of film preferring 24mm and 35mm lenses so it wouldn't see much use without one of the converters.
Sony need to bite the bullet and make a range of lenses such as 16mm fisheye, 17mm (or 18mm), 21mm, 24mm, 28mm and 35mm.
I know they do some of these already but with the 35mm it's either a huge and expensive 1.4 or the small and slow F2.8. One of THE most popular lenses in the old Minolta stable was a 35mm F2. I suppose Zeiss do an MF version but come on, apply some logic to the lens line up and do not leave gaps served by converters.
Erm what? First up if you want a fisheye OR 21mm you buy the lens and the adapter you need, you don't need both. Secondly buying all three will cost significantly less than buying a 16mm f2 fisheye and 21mm f2 and 28mm f2, but that is what you'll get.
The 28mm f2 is completely logical in their lineup, especially with the converters. It would be absolutely ludicrous to release a 35mm f2 ALSO. So they make a similar but different 28mm f2. Simple.
The converters are designed as part of the optical design, rather than a cheap afterthought or 3rd party generic.
Morpho Hunter: At last ... Sony releases a macro lens ... better late than never, I suppose...
Yeah, 12 months for a system to be without a Macro is too long. Already moved to Fuji, you snooze you lose Sony! Now I can't wait for Fuji to have a real Macro on their roadmap...
Yes but it isn't a Sony lens, Sony have released one and announced the development of a faster one.
I know what you meant, but two things:
1) You say that you mean a 'fast' lens, which is what many have asked for in a 35mm, but when they announce they are developing one this is a problem? So you would have been happy with a 'slow' 35mm but not a 'slow' 90mm?
2) 90mm f2.8 is plenty suitable as a portrait lens.
2nd. And there is a 90mm.
DouglasGottlieb: I guess they think that a more Fuji X100 style model would cut into M or T sales.
This camera should have an integrated EVF.
Or be much smaller, like the Ricoh GR.
*sigh* so Samsung have a decent lens in the 85mm, but their 20mm and 30mm (and 16mm) are all only 'ok not great'. Do you think they are really comparable? I don't know many people who compare a 18.3mm lens to an 85mm lens. So in this regard, the Ricoh lens IS better than anything Samsung has as a comparable lens. In fact in it's FOV there are very very few lenses that compare to the GR lens.
No Samsung don't do a directly competing product, but that doesn't mean that they are somehow better because they don't compete and what is most comparable is not as good.
FWIW the Samsung 85mm f1.4 is very good but does not push any boundaries. Ricoh have not ever made an 85mm f1.4 so far as I know.