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.
Let's see, Sony added XAVC-S to the RX10 (most recent update they released). They added PDAF support for all lenses and future lenses on the NEX-6/5R/5T, all of which were discontinued and were all models that supported PDAF. AF was significantly improved on the A7 and to some extent the A7R. These are firmware updates in the last few months.
As for adding EFCS to the A7R, the 36MP sensor in the A7R (and D800/E) don't support EFCS, this is why it doesn't have it. Sony cameras all include EFCS where it is supported, unlike Olympus who didn't include it and then added it later (though in a still rather clunky implementation).
cgarrard: Fujifilm on a roll.... a refreshing interview compared to some of the other company interviews especially ;).
Fujifilm should have stayed on a roll of velvia *boom-tish*
Morpho Hunter: At last ... Sony releases a macro lens ... better late than never, I suppose...
I was joking and pointing out how silly it is to complain that a new system goes without a macro for a whole year. Fuji don't have one and not even on their roadmap, m43's took a long time to get one. A macro is an important lens in a system lineup, Sony have responded well to that providing one in the ~first year from introduction, so I wouldn't say 'finally' I would say 'great Sony gets it'.
Chillbert: As a NEX user, am I just paranoid or is Sony basically giving up on developing any more small lightweight E-mount lenses for APS-C size cameras? They seem to be so far behind Fujifilm in terms of lens range and performance, and their roadmap is all bigger FE lenses.
28mm f2 looks to be smaller and lighter than the Zeiss 24mm for crop. It will also be cheaper. Longer lenses have no advantage being crop. Look at the Samsung 85mm f1.4, it is a crop lens and is bigger and heavier than the A-Mount Zeiss 85mm full frame lens. It is a total MYTH that FF lenses are bigger, FF lenses are Longer FL for the same effective FOV which makes them bigger, but FL for FL there isn't a significant difference because FL and aperture determine the physical size of a lens, not crop factor.
Tapper123: Are any of these lenses weather resistant?
Also, are the A7 camera bodies weather resistant? I have read they are, but some say they are not. Not sure what to believe.
Every lens thus far, including the 'kit' lens is dust and moisture resistant. The system is and it includes every lens they have designed it that way from the beginning.
E.J.: Put a Sony 24mp APS-C Bayer sensor in that X-T1 Platinum and I'm all in on the system, hook line and sinker, lenses and all. For me and what I do, there is zero advantage to the X-trans and in some ways it is a disadvantage. The X-T1, to me, is the most photographer friendly digital camera ever built from a controls standpoint.
@ JAP - Did you read the interview? Citing the D800 doesn't make it false, they said there were 3 categories of sensor they produce, while the 36MP may or may not have been exclusive (there is no evidence to suggest it was) to Nikon, there are other sensors that fit into the category of "just for Sony and may be made available to other manufacturers at some later point", examples of this include the 20MP 1" sensor (RX100) and 12MP 135 sensor (A7S).
APS-C the 'C' stands for 'classic' not 'Canon'.
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"..... ;-).
@ JAP - Not really. Equivalent FF lenses are about the same price / size / weight.
"Aside from the A7R and some Canon sensors, most full frame sensors don't have as much an advantage over APS-C."
Yep, A7R/D800/D810 are examples of using the same / similar fab to produce a FF sensor as a crop sensor (36MP FF vs 16MP APS-C).
"Nope. Sensors are made on silicon wafers, and larger format sensors are prone to higher defect rates because of their size. That doesn't get better with time or manufacturing process."
Wrong. Yields get better all the time with fabrication processes. This is why LCDs, sensors etc get cheaper and cheaper and as such larger formats (more prone to defects) come down to 'acceptable' prices to become market standard. How many 32" LCD TVs do you think get sold vs 50"+?
"Um, what? Cropping down in a D610 from full frame to DX is a difference of 14MP."
Doesn't matter whether you lose 100MP, physical cropping vs 'in-camera' cropping is the same for the same fab. There is no advantage to physical cropping, other than cost, if and when the cost no longer becomes a sginificant factor then there is no advantage.
"SNR is improving faster on smaller sensors."
mjoshi: It says E-Mount so will this work with Sony A6000 or this is only meant for Sony A7 series ?
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.
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.