JackM: One question: will it work with a selfie-stick?
But will it blend?
TheClueless: See this Sony? Ricoh has a 24-70 F2.8 for a body they aren't selling yet...
BarnET: Sony could use an existing SLR design by adding a hollow space behind the rear element. See the 28-70 F3.5-5.6 - it has so much hollow space behind the rear element I suspect it's a reused SLR design. It adds to size, thouhg...
noflashplease: The Pentax full frame body is probably the most eagerly awaited camera release in the next 6 months. It's a good sign that Ricoh (Pentax) is releasing lenses ahead of time, even if this one may be a rebranded Tamron with proprietary Pentax "HD" coatings. At very least, it's the priced at the same MSRP as the Tamron, so there's no profiteering.
Why not, the Tamron is great and Pentax HD coatings are superb as well.
Canť wait to test it on my Z1P :-D
EuropaJDM: But you have to multiply the aperture number by the crop factor, right?
But be aware that 'same light in the sensor' doesn't mean same brightness! Brightness of the picture taken with FF 2 will be darker than APS-C 1.2!
That was a rhetoric question, bacause nothing changes. The 'light gathering ability' is better, but that's completely different from exposure. And it could be better ONLY if sensitivity of the larger sensor is better as well. And that's not always the case with medium format...
Question - does using MF F2.8 lens on FF make it an F4 lens due to approx. 1.5x crop factor of FF?;-)
And then there's the 75 to 85 mm ratio - I like 'wider' portraits, so the 75mm suits me well.
Well, they're not cheaper, since I use the A version. I bought it primarly for my Pentax 645, but I enjoy it on a7 very much. It's 'only' F2.8, but its sharp from there and if I want lower aperture, I have different lenses. This one have just the perfect sharpness/bokeh/size ratio for casual outdoor portraits:-)
Then count me as a first one:-)The Pentax 645 lenses I use on my a7 are not big and heavy, neither expensive. The 'humble' 75/2.8 puts many FF primes to shame in terms of sharpness.
Do you multiply the fullframe lenses aperture by crop factor vs. medium format, then?
RedDog Steve: More primitive lenses ? no thanks ...
Leica M is the most primitive system, then:-D
No viewfinder... pass.
vermaden: There is also another 'bad' thing about APS-C superzooms ...
The 300mm on the end is not REAL 300mm ... for example on SIGMA 18-200mm the 200mm is more like 135mm (when compared to 70-300mm lens) and on SIGMA 18-250mm the 250mm is more like 200mm ...
Why lie like that? This is pointless?
Aren't in-camera corrections to blame? Different lenses need different amount of distortion correcting and the corrections eat out of field of view... did you do your test in RAW using third party software (preferably something like RawTherapee)?
iudex: How about Pentax? It is clear Pentax will introduce it´s FF soon so a FF prime lens would be a nice "birthday present". THe FA 31mm f1,8 is nice, however really pricey.
Pentax may be rebranding it like 18-270 ;-)
Can't decide. This or Leica S???? Help pls!!!!
I do not get why this is important news, because I don't like it, I don't want it and I don't live in America. Yet still somehow I had to comment. You know, for internet's sake.
Roland Karlsson: A very beautiful camera. I wonder who buy them? Studios tends to have the digital back kind of cameras AFAIK. This one seems more aimed at hand held work. Who carries around an S camera? The huge Nikon and Canon with long fast teles for sport I understand. But this one?
Or an APS-C one, or a m4/3 one... different formats for different tastes (and wallet sizes, of course).
Something in the rather small middle ground between sport and studio.