carlnor: I had a "hands on" with both the Panny and the Leica this week, and I was quite impressed. They seem very well built, and handling is very intuitive and snappy, with most parameters you need in a shooting situation right on the surface. I mainly use a Fuji X-T1 for my work, and I felt right at home with these two. For someone who like to take control over their camera these are two fine compacts indeed. To those who want a swivel screen and a faster 24-120mm lens + complain about the size of the camera + want one for USD 500 - good luck finding your dream camera.
Nikon Df has the worst controls of any DSLR ever made.
ulfie: Why not just get a ZM 50/2 w/ E-mount adapter? Save money and get basically the same thing as the Loxia.
Because ZM lenses are designed for film and don't perform as well as these Loxia lenses which are optimized for digital sensors.
helltormentor: @Rishi Sanyal
I am going to upgrade to a full frame camera. Since I am fond of manual focusing, initially, I wanted to go for the Sony A99 with its EVF and manual focus assists but I realized that its high ISO performance was not on par with Nikon FFs. Since you have not included the A99 in your new studio scene, an accurate comparison is not possible. Can you please tell me how many stops does it fall behind its Nikon peers (this D750 for instance)? I think up to 1 stop could be acceptable since it can compensate for it with its IBIS.
If you want to manual focus, you are best off getting a A7-series camera with Zeiss Loxia lenses. Try it and you will see why.
Serious Sam: I am sure it is worth 2,290.00 but SERIOUSLY!!!!
This cost more than my whole X-Mount set put together. I really admired you Zeiss and Leica boys(and girls) has that much money to throw into a camera/lens.The CV is about 1.2K, this one is double its price and the SUMMILUX again 2.5 times the price of the zeiss. I am certain you will not see the image quality increase proportion to the money you spent even I don't own a single one of these......
Why are you comparing APS-C to full frame?
You would need a tack-sharp-wide-open 24/0.95 on X-mount to even begin producing similar images, and then you still don't have the resolution or dynamic range of a full frame sensor.
AbrasiveReducer: Maybe I'm thinking of the film era but I can't recall anybody buying a camera or system based on a road map. And since digital camera product cycles are so short, you might find another brand of camera suits you better while you're waiting for the road map to materialize.
A road map is infinitely useful on the FE system because the system lets you adapt pretty much every legacy mount out there.
The road map helps users decide whether to wait for the native lens, or to go for a legacy lens. A lot of people can now judge whether they want to get a CV 35/1.2 for example or wait until next year for the native 35/1.4.
whtchocla7e: While this wide zoom is ok, I don't get the reasoning behind releasing the other slow zooms for these supposedly enthusiast cams...
It is to address the Canon 5D3 market. There is an infinite amount of tourists that want a 5D3 with superzoom. Here's Sony's answer.
Serious Sam: NICE!!!!
Perfect for street shooter. Partner this with the A7S. It will be the first time we can use 1/250 @ F8 at a very wide end and still remain AF (not that you need it) and with a package just over 1kg.
Problem... just the A7S body and this lens will cost almost 4K. My X-E1 body come free and my Samyang 12mm F2 cost us$350, gets the job done for now.
Now that's a crazy comparison. My iPhone gets the job done too.
TORN: Nice lens but did they say when they start to build small and leight for a realistic price?
If you want affordable FF the first stop is analog, and the second stop is a used Canon 5D with 135/2L.
Small and light never comes cheap. Have a look at Leica.
Thiom: Not that much smaller or more lightweight than the equally spec'd DSLR competition by Canikon. It eventually turns out as I always suspected: lenses for FF mirrorless are not going to be that much smaller than SLR designs as they have to deliver the same amount of light to the sensor.
The A7s are nice cameras for sure, but for traveling really light and compact regarding the entire kit as possible with APS-C mirrorless or MFT shooters have to confine themselves to relatively slow primes. If one's happy with that, OK. But when fast (zoom) glass is desired brace yourself for DSLR-like bulk and weight of the kit bag.
I call bs on this comment. A7 + this lens = 992 grams. The same on a Canon 6D is 1385 grams. This means the mirrorless combo is 30% lighter. That is significant.
Of course if you want to be compact you should be using primes not zooms.
Jogger: Is this even a viable market??? i.e. do people really mount non-Leica lenses on $8000+ Leica M bodies??? Wont your fellow 1%ers laugh at you??
This lens works just fine on a $1400 A7 camera.
It's no different from people using similar Zeiss lenses on Nikon or Canon DSLRs.
GM5 with viewfinder and tiny tele lens is exactly what I need from Micro Four Thirds. Thank you Panasonic. Time to sell my PEN.
Absolutic: just like with Sony E lenses, the same story repeats. They are releasing a large number of slow 18-1XX (now 28-XX or 24-XX) all in one lenses. No 85 even on the map. I guess the 90/2.8 that you won't get for almost a year is supposed to be your 85. Or use 85 A size lenses with LA-EA4 adapter. I am not even talking about 135FE. not even 85 on the map. Clearly Fuji has a much better lineup now and it is here now. Fuji also has 90/2 (135 equivalent) on the map. Sony is just repeating themselves with their lens history of E mount
@hippo84: ding ding ding. The first lens to be announced in 2015 will be the 85.
Everlast66: They also announced a Sony 90mm f2.8 G Macro which can potentially be used for portrait, but I agree it is a bit disappointing there's still no 85
There is a 85mm prime rumored for 2015.
sportyaccordy: 82x80mm so it's a big honker... but it's only 355g, I'm guessing due to the plastic construction
Pretty cool, but still... Nikon we need lenses like this on DX. 16 1.8, 24 1.8 in addition to the 35 and 50 1.8s, and then an 18-70/2.8-4 and 18-50/2.8 or even 18-50/2-2.8 like Samsung has, with VR of course.
Really looking at things now Nikon could use a big upgrade... some mirrorless bodies, an in body IS, and making DX a viable pro option. It's getting a little silly at this point.
DX is dead.
Nikon wants you to choose between FX and CX.
peevee1: OK, could you predict that Samsung will be the second mirrorless system which acquires the essential pro zoom doublet? And m43 will get the doublet TWICE (from both Pana and now Oly) before Sony, Fuji, Nikon, Canon do it?Sony got sidetracked with all that useless FE adventure, where every lens has to include that missing flange distance...
What are you talking about. Sony has professional 16-35/4, 24-70/4 and 70-200/4 zooms for it's mirrorless system.
That price! The Tokina 50-135/2.8 can be found for $500 and is optically stunning.
TallTommy: Sony A7 owners have waited a long time for new lenses to add to the existing 35 and 55. And we get... a 35 and 50. Ok, these can be cine lenses but when will we get a fast 24 or 85?
No wonder Fuji is running away with it...
There might be several explanations for that. Either Zeiss has a deal with Sony not to undercut their offerings, hence only releasing FL that Sony already has on offer.
OR these lenses got rushed to market and 35 and 50mm just happened to be the easiest/fastest to design.
odobo: Interesting that people keep saying the new lenses are the same old ZM lens with a new mount... If that is true, shouldnt the M to E adapter have 0 thickness?
If that's true then the 35mm will be worthless, because the old ZM design smudges the edges. At those prices I doubt that Zeiss can afford to do that, so let's hope not.
What I don't understand about this comparison tool, is that if I pitch the A7 @ 6400 against the E-P5 @ 6400, I barely see a difference.
But then when I shoot my A7 against my E-P5 at home, there is a world of difference.
The E-P5 is completely useless at anything above ISO 800, while the A7 is perfectly happy at ISO 6400. Why are these differences not visible on the test image?
SaltLakeGuy: Such typical banter regarding the 18-55 "kit" lens. It is perhaps the most wrongly maligned lens out there. I've had the Nikon, Canon and Sony so called equivalents and they don't deserve to be in the same room as the 18-55 OIS. It is exceptional assuming of course you haven't gotten a duff copy which I don't happen to think there are many out there of. As for this new kid on the block, I'm sure for many it will be an essential tool. I prefer the faster 18-55 and frankly I don't shoot in rain conditions nor terribly dusty either so it's of no advantage to me. If I really need longer focal ranges I'll slap on my all time fav the 55-200 OIS which always gets it done as well.
@BarnET. Comparing the Fuji 18-55 to the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 is a daft comparison. The Nikon is a large, professional lens that is 26-85mm f/4 equivalent. It is reasonably wide at the wide end, and reasonably fast at the long end.
The Fuji is a zoom optimized for compactness, equivalent to a 28-85mm f/4-6. It is not particularly wide, and it is slow at the long end.