New E lens question

[dmanthree]

I've seen the announcements and read the rumors, but is there any hint as to when sony will deliver the telephoto zoom? It's the 45-200 (about) model.
--
-------------------------------------------------
'Hit Refresh if pix do not appear. Flaky ISP at work.'

 

[pjskeleton]

I've seen the announcements and read the rumors, but is there any hint as to when sony will deliver the telephoto zoom? It's the 45-200 (about) model.

Well if you're waiting for a 45-200 you'll be waiting forever! The tele lens is a 55-200 and it will be coming out this year. The release is some time this summer. The lenses this year will be:

• Zeiss wide prime; 24mm and f/2 or larger.
• Tele zoom, 55-200mm and f/4-5.6
• Macro lens, 30mm and f/3.5
• Portrait lens, 50mm and f/2 or larger

The 2011 lenses have confirmed specs (to me anyway) since I managed to pry them out of a rep at CES. So a nice set of lenses are coming his year, hopefully the tele will be $400 or less. Next year's lens lineup:

• G-series standard zoom
• Wide zoom
• Mid-tele zoom

The guy said that those hadn't gotten past design stages yet and so there's no confirmed specs. BUT two lenses are going into production in April with release in June or July, and the other two lenses "needed refinement" and are (tentatively) hitting production in August with release "somewhere before the holidays". Unfortunately I couldn't find out which was which.
--

I can't believe those nutjobs at Sony don't put zoom into their prime lenses.

Anything with a little greek A is cool by me.

 

[bryman31]

why would they release a 55-200mm lens this year for $400.00ish when there is an 18-200mm now for $800.00 dont get me wrong the lower price is awesome but why so much lower?

 

[dmanthree]

I've seen the announcements and read the rumors, but is there any hint as to when sony will deliver the telephoto zoom? It's the 45-200 (about) model.

Well if you're waiting for a 45-200 you'll be waiting forever! The tele lens is a 55-200 and it will be coming out this year. The release is some time this summer. The lenses this year will be:

Man, that's a long time to wait. I wonder if Sony knows that the lack of lens selection is really holding back the system? I like it, but the selection of lenses is way too limited for me, and I don't want o buy Alpha lenses and use that damned adapter. Too kludgy.

• Zeiss wide prime; 24mm and f/2 or larger.
• Tele zoom, 55-200mm and f/4-5.6
• Macro lens, 30mm and f/3.5
• Portrait lens, 50mm and f/2 or larger

The 2011 lenses have confirmed specs (to me anyway) since I managed to pry them out of a rep at CES. So a nice set of lenses are coming his year, hopefully the tele will be $400 or less. Next year's lens lineup:

• G-series standard zoom
• Wide zoom
• Mid-tele zoom

The guy said that those hadn't gotten past design stages yet and so there's no confirmed specs. BUT two lenses are going into production in April with release in June or July, and the other two lenses "needed refinement" and are (tentatively) hitting production in August with release "somewhere before the holidays". Unfortunately I couldn't find out which was which.
--

I can't believe those nutjobs at Sony don't put zoom into their prime lenses.

Anything with a little greek A is cool by me.

--
-------------------------------------------------
'Hit Refresh if pix do not appear. Flaky ISP at work.'

 

[camera2]

why would they release a 55-200mm lens this year for $400.00ish when there is an 18-200mm now for $800.00 dont get me wrong the lower price is awesome but why so much lower?

I think telephoto zooms usually cost less than superzooms to make.

Where did you hear it was $400 though?

 

[Just Having Fun]

Well if you're waiting for a 45-200 you'll be waiting forever! The tele lens is a 55-200 and it will be coming out this year. The release is some time this summer. The lenses this year will be:

• Zeiss wide prime; 24mm and f/2 or larger.
• Tele zoom, 55-200mm and f/4-5.6
• Macro lens, 30mm and f/3.5
• Portrait lens, 50mm and f/2 or larger

When did they announce focal lengths and f-stops? I thought all we had were fake mock-ups and those general descriptions?
Is there a link?

Also, what happened to Sony trying to get others to make NEX lenses? NEX is still stuck at 3 lenses which is one less than members of m43 making lenses. (olympus, panasonic, cosina, and schneider kreuznach).

 

[AHM]

why would they release a 55-200mm lens this year for $400.00ish when there is an 18-200mm now for $800.00 dont get me wrong the lower price is awesome but why so much lower?

But the Sony SAL55200 55-200mm f/4-5.6 DT is $199 on Amazon. The Nex system is targeted in a lower price range than a DSLR. Even $400 is high. If they want to get upgrading P & S buyers to buy extra lenses, the price range is $200-$300. Image quality does not have to be superb, only good.

 

[RussellInCincinnati]

Great point, it is so cool that many different companies are making mostly-compatible micro four thirds lenses. The Nex would be less interesting if the micro four thirds standard was somehow for APS-C sized sensors like the Nex. Maybe some day the sensors and lenses will be so great that micro four thirds image quality will be just as fine as today's APS-C, and we'll have 6mm-to-whatever wide angle zooms etc.

Of course this is a version of a great thing about the Nex...that it can operate usefully with almost any brand lenses except for Micro Four Thirds and Canon EF. But the unlike how nicely micro 4/3 lenses play together, Nex's "compatibility" and operation with all those other vendor's lenses is pretty manual and primitive with anything but Minolta A mount, Sony Alpha and Sony E-mount lenses.

Having said that, all my work now is with such other-brand lenses on the Nex, and their operation is satisfactory at least for static portraiture and weddings.

 

[Just Having Fun]

Yes, but is there really ANY new news about NEX lenses? Everyday it seems that m43 has a new lens or new lens maker. In my mind lenses are more important than sensor (and I own and A55), and the m43 line up is getting to be pretty good.

Great point, it is so cool that many different companies are making mostly-compatible micro four thirds lenses. The Nex would be less interesting if the micro four thirds standard was somehow for APS-C sized sensors like the Nex. Maybe some day the sensors and lenses will be so great that micro four thirds image quality will be just as fine as today's APS-C, and we'll have 6mm-to-whatever wide angle zooms etc.

Of course this is a version of a great thing about the Nex...that it can operate usefully with almost any brand lenses except for Micro Four Thirds and Canon EF. But the unlike how nicely micro 4/3 lenses play together, Nex's "compatibility" and operation with all those other vendor's lenses is pretty manual and primitive with anything but Minolta A mount, Sony Alpha and Sony E-mount lenses.

Having said that, all my work now is with such other-brand lenses on the Nex, and their operation is satisfactory at least for static portraiture and weddings.

 

[dmanthree]

Yes, but is there really ANY new news about NEX lenses? Everyday it seems that m43 has a new lens or new lens maker. In my mind lenses are more important than sensor (and I own and A55), and the m43 line up is getting to be pretty good.

It is getting better, but I'm still looking for a m4/3 body I like. I tried the E-PL2 and sent it back. The controls and I didn't get along. I'm not wild about the controls of the NEX, but I'll give it a go. But without a tele option (aside from the very expensive 18-200) it's a no-go for the NEX.

--
-------------------------------------------------
'Hit Refresh if pix do not appear. Flaky ISP at work.'

 

[headofdestiny]

There are really only two vendors making m4/3 lenses with full compatibility, so far. The Voigtlander 25/.095 barely counts, since it is a completely manual lens and not much different than adapting any other manual lens on NEX.

 

[RussellInCincinnati]

Hmm, so all the micro 4/3 lenses don't work fully on all the bodies? Did not know this. But I still give Voigtlander credit as u4/3 compatible, because there is no extra length mechanical adapter needed to use it. In a sense a micro 4/3 camera owner gets "full use" of what the simple Voigtlander lenses have to offer.

Do any of the Voigtlanders report their focal length or aperture to the micro four thirds camera?

 

[Just Having Fun]

There are really only two vendors making m4/3 lenses with full compatibility, so far. The Voigtlander 25/.095 barely counts, since it is a completely manual lens and not much different than adapting any other manual lens on NEX.

Yes, the The Voigtlander 25/.095 is compatible. You do not need any adapter and it works on all bodies.

So first there was Panasonic, Olympus and Lecia (via Panasonic).
Then...
Carl Zeiss to issue cine primes for Micro Four Thirds
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1009/10090810zeisscine.asp

Cosina joins Micro Four Thirds system
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1008/10082619cosinamicrofourthirds.asp

Schneider-Kreuznach joins Micro Four Thirds
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11020405schneiderkreuznachmicrofourthirds.asp

I am not sure why, but many top lens makers keep joining.

 

[Kalin]

Well if you're waiting for a 45-200 you'll be waiting forever!

So it will be available shortly before the a700 replacement? Cool!

Just kidding, the a700 replacement is just around the corner. It's a long, sweeping corner, though...

On the serious side, any specs on this wide zoom? How about an ultra-wide? I much prefer a Sony Nex over the m4/3rds fare but those ultra-wides they have over there sure look enticing...

 

[PhillipA]

On the serious side, any specs on this wide zoom? How about an ultra-wide? I much prefer a Sony Nex over the m4/3rds fare but those ultra-wides they have over there sure look enticing...

I have the 12mm Voigtlander on an M-Mount adapter for my NEX5 - 18mm equivalent Field-of-View. There is no prime of this width for M4/3, but there are several zooms that give either 14mm equivalent (Panasonic 7-14) or 18mm equivalent (Olympus M4/3 9-18 or 4/3 9-18 with adapter).

I also have a GH1 (and G1) with the Oly 4/3 9-18, but much prefer the overall IQ of the Voigtander 12 on the NEX5. While the Oly will A/F on the GH1, it is painfully slow.

I have the Sony Ultra-Wide Converter for the 16mm NEX prime - giving 18mm equivalent FOV. It doesn't look too bad either, now that I've got a decent 16mm ( the first one was dreadfully soft at the edges)
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '

 

[Just Having Fun]

... there are several zooms that give either 14mm equivalent (Panasonic 7-14) or 18mm equivalent (Olympus M4/3 9-18 or 4/3 9-18 with adapter).

The Panasonic 7-14 is one of the best lenses you can get. I have read posts by lots of users who talk about how amazing it.

Read the pro reviews too

The 7-14mm ƒ 4 produced very sharp images. At the wider end of its focal length, images are sharp even when used at the lens' widest aperture; between 7-12mm at ƒ 4

Conclusion

The Panasonic 7-14mm tested very well, offering images that were very sharp all the way to ƒ 11, and provided extremely impressive distortion correction with minimal light falloff.

A camera is only as good as it's lens, and you don't get much better than this one.

 

[armanius]

I put equal importance nowadays on lens and sensor. I used to think that lenses are everything when I was exclusively using 4/3 and m4/3 stuff. But when I started using the NEX and the A55, I was like WOW!!

BUT, on the other hand, the NEX's initial lens release has not made any sense. I agree with the mandatory kit short zoom. But why an equivalent focal length 24mm (the 16/2.8) with the camera launch?? If Sony wanted to have a small lens at launch, they should have had a 35/1.8. That would have made lots of us very happy.

Then why a super zoom as the third lens? They should've had a 55-200. That would've complimented the kit zoom. And it would be a whole lot smaller and lighter than the 18-200, which is one of those lenses that is so big that it makes the raison d'être of the NEX totally pointless. The only reasoning that I can think of, as to why the 18-200 was the third lens released (which I do agree with from a business standpoint), is that releasing the 18-200 third makes Sony more $$. If a cheaper 55-200 is released before the 18-200, there would have likely been less interest on the 18-200.

Hopefully Sony will release the next set of E lenses soon. And keep them small!

Yes, but is there really ANY new news about NEX lenses? Everyday it seems that m43 has a new lens or new lens maker. In my mind lenses are more important than sensor (and I own and A55), and the m43 line up is getting to be pretty good.

Great point, it is so cool that many different companies are making mostly-compatible micro four thirds lenses. The Nex would be less interesting if the micro four thirds standard was somehow for APS-C sized sensors like the Nex. Maybe some day the sensors and lenses will be so great that micro four thirds image quality will be just as fine as today's APS-C, and we'll have 6mm-to-whatever wide angle zooms etc.

Of course this is a version of a great thing about the Nex...that it can operate usefully with almost any brand lenses except for Micro Four Thirds and Canon EF. But the unlike how nicely micro 4/3 lenses play together, Nex's "compatibility" and operation with all those other vendor's lenses is pretty manual and primitive with anything but Minolta A mount, Sony Alpha and Sony E-mount lenses.

Having said that, all my work now is with such other-brand lenses on the Nex, and their operation is satisfactory at least for static portraiture and weddings.

--
Armanius
Total Noob Photographer

 

[armanius]

Well if you're waiting for a 45-200 you'll be waiting forever!

So it will be available shortly before the a700 replacement? Cool!

Just kidding, the a700 replacement is just around the corner. It's a long, sweeping corner, though...

On the serious side, any specs on this wide zoom? How about an ultra-wide? I much prefer a Sony Nex over the m4/3rds fare but those ultra-wides they have over there sure look enticing...

If you like the ultra wides, the M4/3 may indeed be the system for you. I'm assuming that you'd be using the ultra wides primarily for outdoor landscape and architecture. If that's the case, the low light advantage of the NEX's superior sensor may be moot.

--
Armanius
Total Noob Photographer

 

[kage]

I've been thinking about this a lot lately because of (offline) conversations I have had with friends and fellow NEX users and also because of my newly acquired wide/fisheye converter lenses.

The conclusion I came up with was that Sony's lens choices makes a lot of sense.

The 18-55 is a no brainer if course (so I won't go into the logic there).

The 16 may seem an odd choice because of its proximity to the 18-55's wide end, but aside from the fact that it provides a brighter, more compact option, I believe that it was always meant to serve as a platform for the converters (judging by the quality of the conversion lenses and the robustness of their mounting method). So while the 18-55 covers one side of the focal length spectrum, the 16 (along with the two conversion lenses) was meant to cover the other. Thus hopefully tiding their users over with a broad range till they could come out with more lenses.

As for the 18-200, I think Sony recognized that size would be an issue (thus availability of th 18-55), but also realized that there would be many people coming from superzooms (and so expecting a far less limited "zoom" range), and so provided a lens that would cover this range without requiring a lens change (and so the decision to release an 18-200 initially instead of the 55-200 which is on the roadmap for a future release).

Basically I think Sony knew it was going to take them a while to flesh out their lens lineup so chose the lenses that would best allow them to be everything to everyone, which as we all know is a philosophy ultimately achieved via compromise. I think for their initial intended target (the mass market) the hope was that these compromises would be unnoticed or acceptable, allowing them to build a sizable user base, while the future lenses would, in time, satisfy the smaller harder core/more discerning users.

Anyway, that's just my 2cent theory.

• k

BUT, on the other hand, the NEX's initial lens release has not made any sense. I agree with the mandatory kit short zoom. But why an equivalent focal length 24mm (the 16/2.8) with the camera launch?? If Sony wanted to have a small lens at launch, they should have had a 35/1.8. That would have made lots of us very happy.

Then why a super zoom as the third lens? They should've had a 55-200. That would've complimented the kit zoom. And it would be a whole lot smaller and lighter than the 18-200, which is one of those lenses that is so big that it makes the raison d'être of the NEX totally pointless. The only reasoning that I can think of, as to why the 18-200 was the third lens released (which I do agree with from a business standpoint), is that releasing the 18-200 third makes Sony more $$. If a cheaper 55-200 is released before the 18-200, there would have likely been less interest on the 18-200.

 

[sWoke]

You lot should not be scared about µ4/3 consortium, nex system and µ4/3 can live together because mainly they are not targeting the same audience.

µ4/3, due to the sensor choice, is more like a brand new bridge camera approach. A super zoom in a rather compact body.

Nex system should not target this market. We do not care about super zoom. They already released a useless and ridiculously huge 18-200 and again we should expect another tele ? Must be a joke ..

Nex body and sensor are made to be associated with primes, fast primes. Nex is a M8-like, or should be.
Give us a sharp wide angle (Zeiss please not a 24 .. ), and some fast 35, 50 ..