D200_4me: I think Fuji pulled off a good one with the 10-24. No big bulging bulb lens on the front so you can use filters if you really wanted to...and at 15 to 36mm, it's a very useful range. That said, Olympus has made some really nice pro lens. I just don't like that huge bulb lens on the end, like the Nikon 14-24 and other ultra wide lenses.
Agreed. Though the Sony 10-18mm and Canon 11-22mm are smaller again, the Sony has a shorter range and the Canon is a bit slower. Still, bulging front elements and no filter threads make these a no go for me.
That 'slow' 35mm has a larger aperture than any overpriced '35mm equivalent' lens for m43's. The 'much maligned' 24-70mm would require a 12-35mm f2 in m43's and I can't imagine such a lens being anywhere near as good, nor small, nor as inexpensive for m43's, pick one but it wouldn't be all three. m43's may have plenty of choices, but it has nothing that can match any of the lenses in the FE range at this point in time.
abortabort: Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?
Thanks, didn't notice that. Is it a Tokina rebadged?
What about PRO support do people find so difficult to understand? This isn't amateur support, it isn't Enthusiast support. If everyone gets special treatment then nobody does.
Greg Gebhardt: Night be good for an compatable laptop if it is short of storage but no camera could effectivly use these.
FS7 could do with them.
I agree, the 18-105mm especially is quite video focussed. The Zeiss 16-80mm though is not and has a much closer to constant aperture than the others. It's just a curious thing as the FF equivalents of these lenses usually have a constant or near constant aperture.
davids8560: At first glance, I find this new lens only mildly interesting. I wish Ricoh would put out a "roadmap" of lenses we can look forward to, even if they are still in the development phase. That would be encouraging.
They have a roadmap, this lens *surprise* was on it... I know this and I don't even shoot Pentax (anymore).
And it won't have the same range. Catch this lens on sale and it will still be significantly cheaper (don't compare sale prices to RRP's). They are different lenses for different uses... Still don't know why they are all so slow though. Is it so unreasonable for a 3x f2.8 and 5x f4?
Marty4650: Nikon makes a very similar lens for quite a bit less. The Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, which sells for around $600. But it may not be weather sealed.
While you really don't need to be competitively priced once you lock someone into your lens mount, setting prices too high can discourage new customers from getting on board.
That might be the street price of the Nikon, which means it's RRP is probably at least what the Pentax is. Can't compare street prices to RRP.
Ugh. Read it again. Is that a 16-80-ish lens? No. Everyone has an f2.8 zoom, is this lens meant to replace the 16-50? No.
I am talking 'premium' midrange zooms. These lenses are the crop equivalent of 24-105mm / 24-120mm lenses, which you cannot tell me is not a popular focal range. Not everyone needs nor wants short ranging f2.8 lenses, personally I find them mostly too short a range while also being too slow, I would use primes over f2.8 zooms. If I want range, a 5x f4 is quite a bit more functional to me (and plenty of others).
But it is mildly irksome that nobody offers anything faster than f3.5-5.6 in these lenses on crop sensors (in OEMs other than Sony). The Leica mentioned above IS an exception and quite a good one at that, but was bloody expensive and is discontinued and for a defunct mount.
DenWil: Would someone care to take a stab at explaining to me why an 85mm lens purpose built to cover an 24 x 18 image circle by Pentax is not proportionally equal to an 85mm lens when it is purpose built to cover a 36 x 24 image circle by Zeiss?
If an 85 is actually a 130 then what is the 85?
An 85mm lens is an 85mm lens. But on a 24x16 sensor it has the field of view of a ~130mm lens on a 135 format camera. If you put any 85mm lens on the same camera they will all give the same (more or less) field of view regardless of what format the lens was designed for.
I can't edit so I will reply, I am talking about the OEMs, I know Sigma do a f2.8-4 in a similar range.
Genuine question, but why are Sony the only brand to offer constant aperture or near constant in these kinds of crop lenses? They have the 16-80mm f3.5-4.5, 16-70mm f4 and 18-105mm f4... yet everyone else seems to be f3.5-5.6 (or not offer one at all)?
CameraLabTester: The manufacturers of this lens could do themselves a real favor by providing a working sample to display on high volume camera shops.
Curious customers can bring their own M4/3 bodies and test it out in the store.
No amount of techno web mumbo jumbo will convince smart consumers.
Marketing 101 101 101 1010101010101010101010101010101.
Stores are not interested in people wasting their time 'testing' items in there that people will then buy online.
hip2: Why do they put aperture rings on their video lens but not on their photo lenses ? :(I'd love to have aperture rings on my FE lenses.
*sigh*. Clicking 'stepped' aperture controls are going to affect which more: Stills or Video?
Francis Carver: Another laugh-fest class feeble opening from Has-Been Giant Canon. This camera with its AVCHD codec, slow frame rates, low-end 8-bit color quality, HD-only resolution, and HDMI jack is a stark reminder how amazingly Sony had stolen the wind out of Canon's sail, as well as out of just about everyone else's sail.
The $8,000, 4K capable Sony PXW-FS7 D-film camera is 12x the camera than this new" Canon wannabe. This thing is old and limping already, and it is not even scheduled to ship until years end.
Canon has never been a giant in video. Ever.
Bhima78: This looks good for professionals that are already shooting with lots of Canon glass... to the budding professional, this price point puts it squarely against the A7S with the 4K addon. Pretty sure the A7S with that addon will absolutely mop the floor with this though. Of course, maybe the A7S has more rolling shutter and this has none. Someone that is actually a videographer, chime in as to why you would buy this other than owning Canon glass already, over the alternatives (especially the A7S with the add-on).
@ Just a photographer... Maybe stick to your day job? Canon TV cameras... give me a break! Canon are a joke in pro video, just accept and move on, they have other strengths... like photocopiers and 'impossible'.
JamesD28: Can we please stop complaining about it's lack of 4K/lag behind competitors and just appreciate the fact that Canon actually released something which isn't a marketing scheme/photo competition?
What do you mean? 2014 marks the year that Canon finally released a (non macro) EF-S prime lens to really offer up some great support for their new system that is only what 12 years old? It has been a GLORIOUS year for Canon.
Elaka Farmor: It´s a good move of Canon to finally incorporate 60fps in 1080p. Well done!!!
Yeah I think it was only like 5 years ago that 1080/60p was the next big iteration in video, good to see Canon staying on the forefront.