samfan: Well if they can pull off a 16mm , why wouldn't they rather make a decent 16-100 or something?
All these superzooms are rather tiring. 'Either get a crappy megazoom or deal with prime lenses' seems to be a message of the day. What happened to good zooms with moderate range and moderate speed? Not pushing the envelope much lately.
@iudex - Sigma has the 17-70mm f2.8-4 lens for Pentax. Pentax also has a 17-70mm f4 which is pretty decent I have heard.
iLandPhotos: hmmm what about VC for sony's a7 and a7r?
^^ You really gonna use a crappy superzoom with a high performance FF camera like an A7/A7r ?
ceaiu: How about a stabilized 16-85mm f/4? Anyone... Tokina?
Nikon has a 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 VR and Canon has a 15-85mm f3.5-5.6 IS. Both are not f4 constant but honestly 1 stop difference with today's modern sensors isn't really going to be a make or break moment for anyone.
Alphoid: Impressive engineering accomplishment. That said, I'd never consider buying or recommend one. What would be much more impressive would be extending the zoom range on an f/2.8 zoom without compromising image quality. Now a 16-105mm f/2.8 -- that would be revolutionary.
Tamron has a 28-105mm f2.8 in the film days. Wonder why no one has tried to replicate that.
peevee1: Nice. But at f/6.3 max... - do DSLRs even focus?
This is hardly the first time a lens has f6.3 at the long end. All of them focus fine. Well about as fine a cheap lens focuses. Don't expect it to compete with a Nikon 18-300mm in focusing speed.
Sigma makes a 17-70mm f2.8-4 which doesn't sell too well as its superzooms.
Even Tokina has a 16.5-135mm type lens which doens't really sell.
Nikon and Canon both have very good moderate zooms - 15-85mm IS USM for Canon and Nikon 16-85mm VR for Nikon.
Miwok: Traveling compagnion?Why would I buy an Fuji XE2 when I can find a Sony NEX-6 for half of the price. I like traveling with a backpack in some not so safe countries, and don't want to paranoid about getting rob of $2k of gear (X-E2 + a couple of glass)
^^ I agree with you that the Sony kit lens isn't in the league as the 18-50mm f2.8-4 but calling it junk is plain ridiculous IMO. I would bet you would fail to figure out which shot was taken with kit lens with sizes as small as the ones in the article.
oselimg: So...Dpreview is largely followed by 4/3 users. That's fine but please don't call a smaller sensor cameras as "innovation" and compare them to bigger sensor ones. It's not because 4/3 is bad, not at all but they are simply governed by their physical structure which can be advantage or disadvantage at times. Neither camera group is a replacement for the other.
Exactly I don't shoot mirrorless cameras. Never will ever buy a m43 camera EVER (just love FF images and m43 will never cut it for me). BUT I believe the EM-1 is deserving of being a winner. Its a very good camera at its price point.
It has no real weakness that would detract from its winner tag.
Everlast66: Regarding the "limited" FE mount lens line-up, it should be taken in account that Sony are building a NEW system here and this is the ONLY mirorrless FF system right now!In a generation or two Sony's mirorrless AF technology will catch up with traditional SLR/PDAF speeds and Sony will be far ahead in lens line-up.Nikon and Canon are only maintaining their existing systems and sooner or later will have to abandon the flappy mirros and bulky prisms and come up with new systems themselves. The 50 year-old lens systems will not be cutting it anymore if they will want to take advantage of the dropped mirror box.We should SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE INOVATION if we don't want to keep getting minor updates in hugley advertised marketting gimmicks as we do from Canikon.
They are currently #2 in the mirrorless market in Japan ahead of Panasonic which is quite a feat if you consider the limited lens line up.
There are no reliable figures for sales for the rest of the globe unfortunately but in Japan at least they are #2.
Black Box: To sum up 19 pages of the review, Sony Alpha a7 is ambitious but rubbish. It should now be Sony's slogan.
Really. So 'rubbish' products get a silver award ? You should complain to DPR. :P
$1k for an f1.2 lens ? Nice. :)
Der Steppenwolf: What an overpriced joke. Unfortunately there will be a lot of morons out there that will see the price tag and and directly assume it's "greatness". They will then start defending their purchase with crap like "3d effect" "feel" "it" and other words that are used to describe something intangible that is simply not there.
If I squint my eyes and jump up and down on my chair I can't help feel that the 58mm images have a more 4D feel to them than the 50mm images !
if you are one of those morons who sit still when you look at photos then you won't notice the "fourdness" (as I call it).
cinemascope: The small throat of the FE mount also forces the lenses to be big, so it's not like it would make any difference if these were "native" designs.Sony itself also stated they are not "interested" in doing fast FE lenses, maybe because they would be silly monstrosities? Of course they won't admit FE is a technical nightmare, so let's just say they are "not interested"...This FE mount is a bad joke really and I hope this silly FF fad dies with it too...
FF fad ? Well be happy with sub frame crop sensors and let people who appreciate the quality of FF be happy with their purchase.
I want to move to FF but I don't like what Sony has currently on offer. Hoping for some new launch early next year so I can move.
rockjano: The competition is the Sigma 150-500. Which is a good lens for what it is. Similar price and will be updated sooner or later.
The Sigma at 500mm is strictly OK. The canon 100-400mm L @ 400mm and cropped (mostly) resulted in better performance from the Canon.
So heres hoping the Tamron can at least match the Canon 100-400mm L at 500mm and offer a further 100mm advantage over the Canon.
George Veltchev: what about 350 -600 f/4-5.6 . it may be seen as too restrictive for some but at least you can really expect exemplary optical performance .
^^ And an exemplary price to boot ! 600mm and f5.6 = not cheap at all. Even 500mm at f5.6 isn't cheap.
koolbreez: If the IQ is up to par, and the VC works good, this will make a nice addition connected to my Nikon D7100, set on the 16mp 1.3 crop setting, essentially making it a 300mm-1200mm at F5-6.3 and then in focus at 2.7meters away, decent macro shooting comes to mind at a good working distance. Now that is a respectable "reach out and grab it" wildlife optic. It even makes it more enticing at 1680mm at F8 with a 1.4 tele-converter attached, although manual focusing hand held might have to be completely reconsidered depending on the VC quality...hehehe.
^^ Oh really ? Any half decent 70-300mm @ 300mm and cropped will give sharper telelphoto images than a Canon SX50 at its max zoom.
Leandros S: Yeah, well, we need a Pentax mount version of this lens. Whether it be from Tamron or Pentax, same difference really.
The Pentax version would be much more expensive.
io_bg: No filter thread and 6 diaphragm blades? Too bad...
6 bladed aperture means no pointed stars on light sources like streetlights. This is one feature I really hate on my 6 bladed Sigma 10-20mm.
Also no filters is a big no no for me. I need GNDs or ND filters to be attached.
Don't mind the MF but the lack of filters and 6 bladed apertures are two disadvantages that cannot be overlooked.
Nukunukoo: My only complaint is that it should have IS, at narrower apertures, I keep raising my ISOs above my comfort zones. Minor quibble really, since the overall performance more than makes up for that. Besides, I think of this lens as a prime, and how many primes have IS?
I'm starting to think that the Pentax K3 and this would make the perfect light, indoor event shooter.
In real life I doubt you will really be able to tell any real differences TBH between current APS-C camera bodies.
I have taken plenty of useful ISO 3200 shots on my Sony cameras and I have compared them favorably with my friends Nikon and Canon APS-C cameras.
Sensor format does matter though. FF will look better than anything APS-C can offer with the sole exception of the Fuji X-Trans sensor. I have used a 5D Mk 3 and its ISO 12800 look about as good (bad ?) as the ISO 3200 results from my Sony.
^^ Sadly this lens doesn't come in a Pentax mount. :(