If you want IQ there are plenty of cheaper alternatives that will perform as good as this lens. If you want something beautifully designed and compact and you don't shoot Leica then this is hard to beat.
Jogger: "But this does come at the cost of pretty huge distortion, and although this can be corrected in software when necessary, doing so will have a slight impact on the image sharpness."
If this is going to be mentioned here, then lenses for m43/NEX/Fuji, etc should be tested without automagical software correction as well.
@Jogger - Your statements are very incorrect. Only a few 3rd party RAW convertors will show the actual distortions. Adobe camera RAW, DXO and Olympus and Panasonic default RAW converters all show the corrected output.
Futher these lenses generally start wider than their rated focal lengths.
So a 20mm f1.7 for instance may actually be a 18mm f1.7 lens with massive uncorrected distortion and when corrected for distortion the lens shows an approximately 40mm FOV when taking into account the 2x crop.
However Nikon, Canon, Sony etc lenses are not any wider so correcting large amount of distortion on an 18mm lens may result in a 19mm or 20mm FOV depending on how much distortion there is.
Slurcher: Beautiful shot!
At the risk of making myself look like an absolute newbie dick, why isn't depth of field an issue with the foreground at f/2.8?
There is absolutely no harm in asking questions if you can learn from them.
14mm is an UWA lens and so DOF is much much larger on such a lens.
There would be DOF problems if there was something relatively close in the foreground that would be OOF with the lens at f2.8 but as per the photo there wasn't anything terribly close and neither was there anything really prominent in the foreground that needed critical sharpness and focus.
IvanM: Now image if I can put my 24TS on a 36mp body via a metabones adapter? No more waiting for the Canon megapixel camera that is coming, when?
^^ Yes you can easily adapt the 24TS with a metabones adapter. Since TS lenses are MF you won't lose much attaching it to the A7r.
HubertChen: Sony 7 Cameras: Small, powerful and reasonably pricedSony FE Lenses: Big, slow, expensive
I always use both: Camera + Lens. What is the point of a small camera with big lens? Seems Olympus, Fuji and Pentax have bigger camera bodies. But once lenses mounted to them, they have smaller and lower cost systems with faster lenses.
I am really impressed with the alpha 7 cameras. I applaud Sony. I worry the big, expensive and slow FE lenses will hamper the success.
The 24-70mm f4 OSS has a 67mm filter size and weighs about half as much as the Canon 24-70mm f4 IS. The 35mm f2.8 weighs 120g, the 55mm f1.8 weighs 281gms but is an all metal body. The kit lens 28-70mm OSS weight isn't mentioned but its for sure smaller than a comparable FF lens with IS/VR.
The only really big lens is the 70-200mmf 4 which is a focal length where mirror less bodies lose their advantages over DSLRs.
So calling these lenses huge is a bit of an overstatement IMO. They are bigger than m43 standard for sure but m43 uses a quarter frame sensor.
dav1dz: Why are these lenses so heavy? I understand the Zeiss may have premium glass but the 70-200 f/4 G? At 840 g it's not exactly mirrorless weight and is heavier than the Canon 70-200 f/4 IS!
That said the Zeiss 24-70mm OSS is much lighter than say a Canon 24-70mm f4 IS.
justmeMN: These cameras will dominate the market, just like Sony's SLT cameras did. :-)
Great you can take a Toyota Camry while ill stick with a non dominating Ferrari. :D
Deserttrip: I am intrigued, but.....
I have the Canon 50D and a Canon Xsi with only L series lenses. However, my favorite and most reliable camera (for anything other than telephoto) is my SONY DCSR1 SLR-hybrid with the attached CARL ZEISS F2.8 24m-120m lens. The cost of that camera when it came out (it was their hybrid experiment) was worth that lens alone.
I wouldn't mind trying this new Sony, but am dismayed by the body cost. I wouldn't mind paying $1200 for great glass with decent range like the fixed lens on my R1, but imo, that body price is a bit much for me when you consider having to pay so much for decent glass on top of it. I will probably wait till the prices come down.
Its currently the cheapest FF camera to launch like EVER. Nothing even comes close.
Jesse P: Ooh, my compact Canon SL1 and 40mm f/2.8 pancake is better! ;-) (all for $850)
Not if you care for IQ. The dated 18 MP sensor in the SL1 is ridiculously bad for these days. But since Canon is market leader they can get away with these bad sensors as there are tons of fanbois willing to get these cameras.
Poss: I think the first casualty will be Leica and not Canon/ Nikon. Leica becomes now even more of a luxury fashion accessory like a Patek Philippe or a Zonda.
Why not just use Leica lenses with the far far cheaper A7r (with better IQ than that dated M9 sensor) ?
You will gain focus peaking for aiding in MF and high ISO performance will be far better.
Digitall: More +-5 years, and APS-C goes to vegetate in rare format DSLR bodies. APS-C format DSLR is doomed, now more than ever. Nostradamus was consulted and what he foresees :-)
There is a massive price difference between the cheapest NEX3N for $399 and this camera.
APS-C will be around for quite a bit more time especially with the FF lens prices.
MarkJH: The biggest unknowns I'd like answered: (1) lens performance and (2) the lens roadmap.
Because . . .
* If I'm spending $1000 for a normal f/1.8 or $800 for a shallow wide f/2.8, they'd better be deeply serious optics in every possible way--sharp wide open, nil CA, flare-resistant, gorgeous microcontrast and defocus, class-leading build and mechanics. Any way you slice it, $800 is a lot to pay for a 35mm f/2.8 lens in the era of the excellent Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "art" optic.
* If you photograph people, it's hard to be enthusiastic about a system that launches without a short (or any) tele prime or fast telezoom. It'd be useful to know if / when these are coming.
* Of course you could adapt A-mount optics (or others), but then we're also told this system's sensor microlenses are optimized for a short register distance. What impact does this optimization have on the performance of lenses adapted at a longer register?
Questions, questions, questions.
They don't wish to canabalize their RX1 sales. So they might come up with a 35mm f1.4 in future at a higher price. The 35mm f2.8 is probably to showcase how small the system can be. The lens weighs only 120 gms.
white shadow: SONY is going through its metamorphosis again. How many times do you think they have to do it before they turn into a swan while the world waits?
Any photographers out there want to take a chance with them?
Why chance ? Their DSLR A mount system is still alive and kicking. They launched the A99 only last year and they launched a A58 this year so this doesn't replace the A mount but adds another option for customers.
Klarth: Why does everyone wants VR on every lens?
Do you have Parkinson's?
I don't get why people complain about people wanting VR with f1.4 lenses. Do people not wish to stop down the lenses from time to time ? Its not unreasonable to get shutter speeds of 1/4 or slower where VR will help if you stop down to say f4 or f5.6 for more DOF.
brendon1000: I barely remember the time when 50mm lenses were among the cheapest premium glass you could afford. Now with the Zeiss 55mm f1.4 for $3k, the Sony Zeiss 50mm f1.4 for 1.5k and now the Nikon 58mm f1.4 for 1.7k those days seem to be long gone ! :P
Yeah almost all 50mm lenses available are not so hot at f1.4. This one should offer superb performance from f1.4 all the way up to f11 when diffraction starts to kill sharpness.
Mirror-less lenses are small only for wide to normal focal lengths. Once you go past 85mm or so the sizes of lenses become as big as any normal DSLR. So the 70-200mm f4 OSS cannot be made any smaller for mirror-less.
dylanbarnhart: This puts an end to the body stabilization vs lens stabilization debate. Sony finally figured out it was a mistake to stabilize the sensor and now put OSS on the lens instead.
There is no space in the body to put a stabilized FF sensor !
They have bought a large stake in Olympus. Olympus gets the advantage of getting Sony sensors that Panasonic won't have access to while the only thing Sony would want from Olympus would be their excellent 5 axis IBIS system to use in their A mount system since the E mount lacks the space for a stabilized sensor.
Felix11: Is Sigma likely to start producing lenses like this (and the 50mm f1.4 EX DG HSM) in the new Sony FE mount for the A7?
If they did would we expect all features to work? ie. OIS, AF etc?
Or is it more likely that I would need to buy a Canon to FE adapter and a Canon mount version of this Sigma lens (and use MF)?
Sorry to hijack the thread to talk about Sony :-)
Most likely scenario is that it would be for A mount later on just like the 18-35mm f1.8.
You will need an adapter to use it for FE mount.
Sigma has made a few lenses for E mount so there is a small chance they will make some more lenses in future.
I barely remember the time when 50mm lenses were among the cheapest premium glass you could afford. Now with the Zeiss 55mm f1.4 for $3k, the Sony Zeiss 50mm f1.4 for 1.5k and now the Nikon 58mm f1.4 for 1.7k those days seem to be long gone ! :P
jon404: Gee, those lenses are EXPENSIVE!
That new Pentax K-3 looks like a much better deal.
Completely different fov for the Pentax since it has a smaller sensor,, Compare with the Pentax 31mm f1,8