Once it was popular that cars had multi-link rear suspensions to exactly control the movement of the wheels.One thing got obvious after a while, wear and tear made their behavior less than optimal as the car got older. ( Not unsafe, just not as first intended)
Same here: a theoretically perfect design with many parts, glass and others, is really hard to get to perform at its maximum over a period of time.
So have respect for simpler designs with fewer elements that relies on SW to control some of he issues the design doesn't handle. - It may be wise design decision to do so, to allow the lens to perform at its best during its lifetime.
Eugene232: Sony started create affordable FF system..and then forgotten about..
@OP, I think you are half way right. Sony did the same thing with both the first NEX and the A7. Take small size and competitive price to its limits. Thereby creating the great buzz and momentum.
Then, and only then, they added more bodies with more functionality and a bit of size. And a better pricetag. - For Sony.
A smart way of capitalizing on the momentum! But nothin' forgotten.
MPA1: Hardly much weight saving over a Canikon system really. With far worse battery life if you use an A7....
I generally agree with you. But let's argue anyway! :D
I'd say that a 35/2.8 isn't particularly fast. Nothing wrong with that, but slower lenses are easier to make sharp. And they are for sure easier to build and will be more compact.
A 28/f2.0 isn't a particularly fast lens either.
In my mind quality glass is also fast. And MLC is good, but cannot bend physics. For instance, all 85/f1.4 is approximately the same size.
My point was that whilst you are correct that quality glass are always hefty, and battery life is shorter on a mirrorless, people still find reason to buy them. I pointed out video as one example.
Others may be on to something you know. And of you chose to not see that, the only one losing out is you.
But not all Canikons shot 120 fps full HD...
OBI656: What could be an interesting idea if dPreview will publish a book which will exhibit photographs taken by dPreview forum complainers?
I will be the first in lineup paying upfront for such a book ...
Of course with quotes I presume :)
AstroStan: "So these spectabular lenses need vignette correction?" (and similar comments)
Every lens is subject to vignette due to basic geometry. On-axis rays pass perpendicularly thru the full aperture. Off-axis rays pass thru the aperture at an angle, which means that the aperture is foreshortened in one direction (i.e. the lens presents an oval shape when viewed off-axis). Wider angled lenses (short FL) are subject to greater vignette from this effect. This basic effect is of course complicated by multiple lenses, which usually make it worse.
Yes, in systems where the lens can be designed for that kind of sensor.
One eye always seem tack sharp, so I'm guessing eye-focus.In terms of focus, do you guy have any indication on keeper ratio?How did the lens work together with the camera in terms of responsiveness, hunting, lock on, acquisition and all that jazz? Low light, bright light etc.
Rishi Sanyal: Have any of our readers spotted any samples elsewhere showing F22 sunbursts from this lens? The Canon 24-70 F2.8L II sets an impossibly high bar for sunstar rendition, which'll be important to landscape shooters considering this lens.
In defense of all lens manufacturers :) :Sunbursts are lens anomalies and artefacts from bad design that we have learnt to appreciate!
CraigArnold: We all know the dpreview law of comments #1 which states that:
At least 30% of all posters will complain that the camera or lens is overpriced, and as a corollary that the manufacturer is engaged in a malevolent conspiracy directed at photographers.
I am submittting here for your consideration a law of comments #2 for all sample images:
At least 50% of all posters will pour forth a venomous attack on the photographer's (lack of) ability and wonder whether they will ever see any decent images online. As a corollary it must be said that there is no photographer, living or dead, that could be enlisted to make any difference to the scorn and disdain shown by said posters.
#1.We need a schrodinger's lens: A lens that is both cheap and compact, and at the same time a top-of-the-line prime lens with atleast f/1.2 , and have a good zoom reach.Only then can it satisfy both:- Sony lacks Pro lenses,- Why mirrorless when the lenses are so large.
As for #2. Ansel Adams couldn't hold a candle in the sh*tstorm here.
Klaus H: Interesting read over at Lloyd Chambers Blog about the Sony MTF's.http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160204_1942-Sony-GM-fantasy-MTF.html
Again, last sentence says ".. but Canon and Nikon show fantasy MTF just like Sony."
I guess quite a few enjoy a happy living in virtual reality.
zamorac: TLDR after the first sentence. "Forever lenses" from a company that changed three lens mounts in the fast five years? Oh wow!
I think he may mean the classic Sony mounts: EF, EF-S and EF-M.
Thanks for the link!"Sigma does well, offering both geometric and diffraction MTF, but Canon and Nikon show fantasy MTF like Sony."
Only Zeiss seems to measure the lens.
arhmatic: "forever"? ditch the focus by wire, typical, ALL lens makers. Do all mechanical. The only way to make them forever.
The reality is, -this wire thing might break anytime. Might not be supported in 2-3 decades...-compatibility is an issue. How can I use my Sony lens if suddenly I want to get a body from different maker? Adapters don't work. Make them all mechanical, so we can at least focus.
The reality is, my old, 1970s Nikkor works on my Fujifilm like a charm. All manual. Fujiflm on Nikon? Never. Not that I'd need that, but just a thought... Again, do all mechanical (manual or autofocus, your choice) then it's at least a step towards "forever".
@christiankohler (and others) Same is true for Minolta lenses.
The reason we don't have the lens standard is money. The ownership of the mount is what generates the cash!Same for flash shoe. And batteries.
How strong is the drive for the 'standards' that can generate $$$. Look at RS-232 vs USB...
Sony choosed to more or less open up the e-mount. that was needed because they were the new kid on the block, and they couldn't build a solid lens lineup in short enough time.
The upside with new mounts is that they all are much better suited for video. Something that doesn't really work that well with M42. AF, Iris control etc. No mechanical aperture level that creates noise.
Jonathan F/2: What's the point of mirrorless if the lenses are the same size as DSLR lenses? Sony doesn't even have proper pro-oriented repair facilities like Nikon or Canon. At most these will be expensive toys for the well-heeled, amateur tech geek who likes to match their Sony TV, PlayStation 4 and Sony Alpha camera! Their idea of serious shooting entails sipping Starbucks ordered at the drive thru and shooting urban blandness of generic suburbia!
@Yahoo.I got it. It is a problem that they are big because Sony doesn't have proper repair facilities.
I'm betting you don't use that Nikkor for video ...
Which three mounts?
Some of early comments her make no sense at all ...
It sure looks like a small collection. :)
tecnoworld: "Other professional caliber video features include the ability to record Full HD at 120 fps at 100 Mbps, another first for α interchangeable lens cameras with APS-C sized sensors."
What??? The nx1 does 120fps from full sensor readout at 80mb/sec HEVC h.265, which is way better than 100mb/sec h.264!!!
Dead or not, it may well have been first.