I already have the 14mm. I'll be interested to see how this 16mm lens performs. If it actually performs as well as the 14mm it'll be a great lens. No doubt if it had been available before the 14mm, I'd probably have bought it already, but I don't know if I'll change over unless it actually outclasses the 14mm at landscape apertures. (I've no use for f1.4 in a WA lens.)
Rod McD: This camera is an incremental evolution from its predecessor. To that extent it's fine, but once again, how about producing a slightly larger model with a bigger sensor? Everywhere you look people are extolling the virtues of very small cameras with 1" and MFT sensors (RX100, LX100). Just do it.
There seems to be an assumption that the people who do active photography in harsh environments won't benefit from the improved IQ that a larger sensor brings. And before anyone says 'buy a DSLR and UW housing' don't waste your breath. They're heavy and costly, there's no way on earth you can stuff them inside a PFD, or do all the things you need to do when you're surfing, kayaking, sailing, climbing, etc while you're hanging on to one. We need the middle ground of a tough camera with a bigger sensor.
Maybe. The key difference between the two types is that the Olympus TGs use a folded light path and the Nikon AW is an ILC and uses a direct light path. I acknowledge that my call for a tough camera with a 1" sensor assumes that a folded light path would be possible for a 1" sensor. A 1/2.3" sensor is 6X4.6mm where a 1" is about 13X9mm, so roughly twice the linear dimensions. Maybe it would be too hard - I don't have the expertise to say. OTOH, the outcome - a small, tough, submersible camera with a bigger sensor is still a great goal.
This camera is an incremental evolution from its predecessor. To that extent it's fine, but once again, how about producing a slightly larger model with a bigger sensor? Everywhere you look people are extolling the virtues of very small cameras with 1" and MFT sensors (RX100, LX100). Just do it.
I completely agree. Your shot stands out on its own. Thank you.
As I waded through all the 'miniature effect' submissions, it occurred to me that it is amazing that in DPR almost all the entrants saw TS as a means to achieve de-focusing as against that classical goal for landscapes and still lifes that are sharp from foreground to background. If this challenge had been run elsewhere the range of images might have been quite different...
Rod McD: It's good to see Sony finally offering a WA prime in the 28mm, but exactly why aren't they offering a prime FE lens in the 21-24mm FL range? Why offer a front end converter for the 28mm? It's been a glaringly obvious gap in the FE range since launch. Does this say something about the feasibility of a VWA lens on the A7r sensor/micro lenses?
Yes I did read it as my post obviously shows. My question was exactly why in a technical sense they've developed front end converters (which have notorious reputations in terms of their IQ) instead of a prime lens in the intended focal length. You don't appear to have answered that question.
This may well be a very good lens, but it will have to compete with similar lenses in almost every brand. Many of them also offer AF, which is handy in general telephoto usage even if it's not that useful for macro shooting. Fuji owners pining for a 100mm macro in native mount may well appreciate it - Fuji aren't releasing their 100mm macro lens for another year.
Hi,Well done! Best bench shot I've seen in a while....and in what I'm guessing was rapidly changing light.
Would you be happy to share your technique? Is that a grad ND filter holding the DR, or was it one of those rare moments when late afternoon and stormy light just worked?
samhain: Good job Sony, nice to see a f1.4. I didn't think they had it in em. That's the kind of lens that grabs other brand shooters attention. Hopefully more fast 1.4's to come.
But- putting out a 90mm macro before an 85mm or 90mm portrait lens? Seriously? That just doesn't make sense to me. Just like when Fuji's intial lens launch included a 60mm macro and no portrait lens. Widely considered a 'wtf' move. Even Fuji later admitted that was a mistake.
@ samhain. Sony, like Fuji, has put out the macro lens first. This is business, so that must tell you something. Macros are very popular lenses and a good one will double well as a portrait lens, but not vice versa. Not everyone is pre-occupied with very fast apertures.
It's good to see Sony finally offering a WA prime in the 28mm, but exactly why aren't they offering a prime FE lens in the 21-24mm FL range? Why offer a front end converter for the 28mm? It's been a glaringly obvious gap in the FE range since launch. Does this say something about the feasibility of a VWA lens on the A7r sensor/micro lenses?
Great timing and a wonderful catch! Rod
Love seeing these and appreciate the humor!
I'll take interest in these lenses when they make it to availability - they all appeal in different ways to what I do......
I'm pleased to see the 90mm looking a bit trimmer than the first prototype they showed at Photokina. A 62mm filter thread seems a bit more plausible for a 90/2 than the 72mm of the earlier one.
I think the 120/2.8 macro is going to need a tripod foot. It's a long lens in the physical sense and the specs suggest it'll be a relatively heavy one. Put that on the matched 1.4X extender or extension tubes (or both) and it will exert a fair bit of leverage on the tiny fixing plate of Fuji camera's tripod socket.
The A7r's forte should arguably lie in landscape and travel photography and I would have thought that a small high grade WA prime lens a good step wider than the 35mm was just crying out to be an early focal length. I'm thinking of a 24mm f2.8. There's still no sign of it. That and the offering of a front end adapter instead make me wonder whether there's an intractable mismatch between the registration distance, sensor micro-lenses and VWA lens design. I've never been convinced by front end adapters, but to be fair we'll have to see how it performs.
It always seems that Canon can't quite get it right. The M system - bodies and lenses - just don't compare as an ILC system with the comprehensive approach of the other mirror-less manufacturers. I still use a Canon G1X (original) but went Fuji for my MILC system - reason : XT1 EVF and lenses. Now here's the latest iteration of the M still with no built-in EVF and an expensive optional add on. Please just give us a complete camera from the outset.
A 1" sensor, an add-on EVF and a super-zoom??? This is a different line of camera from the G1X's. I'm still using the original 1.5" sensor G1X with its crappy OVF, slow between shot times and great IQ (at modest ISOs). I'll upgrade it one of these years with a suitable replacement. ATM, the LX100 would be leading the race. However, a BUILT-IN high grade EVF is an absolute requirement. I simply don't want an expensive, external, add-on EVF that blocks the flash shoe in use and gets left at home, lost or whatever. An egregiously bad idea. Please give us a complete camera.
Rod McD: This is a fast lens, and may well offer excellent IQ, but 830gm and 15.5cm long in mirror-less mounts? Heck, it's not that far off Fuji's new 50-140/2.8 zoom! It might suit some photographers but not me...... just too big.
Surely irrelevant to the parameters of the lens design?
I would have thought that the Canon FD 135/2 would offer a reasonable comparison given that it was an MF FF lens. It weighed 660gms compared to the Samyang's 830gm, was 90mm long compared to 122mm (for the SLR version), and took a 72mm filter as against a 77mm. Unreasonable?
This is a fast lens, and may well offer excellent IQ, but 830gm and 15.5cm long in mirror-less mounts? Heck, it's not that far off Fuji's new 50-140/2.8 zoom! It might suit some photographers but not me...... just too big.
I must be looking to something different from other buyers of this system. Here we have yet another Sony FE mount 35mm lens - now three : the FE f2.8, the FE f1.4 and the Zeiss Loxia f2. Surely it would have been better to fill out some needed additional FLs before variety in aperture?
To me the obvious uses for a high res, low weight camera like the A7r are landscape and travel, yet until this announcement there's been no lens wider than 35mm. So, it's great that there's finally a 28mm, though I would have thought that if you're only going to do one lens wider than 35mm, a 24mm would have been a more obvious choice.
I still suspect that there must be a difficulty with the A7r micro lenses or some other reason they aren't delivering WA lenses. Good to get the 90 macro but I can't really fathom the lack of an early 85mm portrait lens either.
Genuine sale or publicity ruse? We'll probably never know. Even if slot canyon shots have become heavily marketed in recent times, they're still beautiful. OTOH this one is no more so than any number of others and the concept of a $6.5M price tag defies common sense. Mine anyway.