The problem is you don't understand the need or how large the demand is.
Sony would sell way more TS lenses than they will any big tele lens. Nikon is all ready finding this out. They can't keep there TS lenses in stock, they are on the 3rd or 4th run of the 24 PCE now. They don't sell the big teles in those numbers.
Look around at most reviewers these days, from David Kilpartick, to Thom Hogan, they are all pointing out the same thing, the new High Res FF bodies are making TS lenses required lenses just to deal with defraction, let alone the normal uses of these lenses. Reviewers are bringing up lack of TS lenses in almost every review of the A900. It's a very real problem.
Makers are bringing out TS stuff left and right because of the need. The last year we have seen
3 Nikon TS
2 Canon TS
1 Maymia/PhaseOne TS
1 Hassyblad TS teleconvertor which gives them 3 TS lenses
1 Lecia TS for the S2 announced
1 Acra Swiss body that is basicaly a TS medium format body.
The need for them is growing. And people are becoming more aware of them. The price of them is in advanced amature range, and with digital people aren't afraid to give them a shot, they can always sell them if it's not for them. It's not like they suffer bad resale.
Sony brought the A900, it doesn't need any Big Tele lenses, not it's kind of usage. But it very much needs TS lenses. A 24mm TS lens would help sell more A900s than any 300mm and up Tele, or even basic primes. Sony needed the 16-35 and 24-70 for it, and they did it. They have the 2 most needed primes for it (85 and 135ZA). Aside from TS lenses, the only other lens that could help them out is some macro stuff, mainly a 200mm Macro. Of course said lens might cost more than a TS lens.
If Sony had brought a D3/D700 type body, then they would need stuff more towards the Tele world. But they brought a Medium format replacement.
If you are buying an A900, you have the 16-35 to cover those prime needs, or just use the Minoltas that are still out there. If you buy a couple primes, you have equaled the price of the ZA zoom. You can also buy some Sigma Primes as a stand in option. You have options that aren't that bad.
Sony isn't going to go an expect that folks buying 3K bodies are putting 0.3K lenses on it. The cheap lenses are APS, the FF stuff is high end stuff. This was made pretty clear to me and a fellow Dyxum member at PMA 2 years ago. We asked Sony about lenses like the 2/35. The response was simple from the lens/accessory folks "why would you want an F2, we have an F1.4/35".
Right now, the of the lenses I want to have for my ideal setup, Sony doesn't make a single one. (have to get to my expanded system lens list). But all but a TS lens, I can make due with what we have well enough. Sony has things well covered when it comes to pure focal length/aperture coverage. No, you won't find exactly what you want, but you can manage fine. But you can't substitute TS lenses. Just like you can't substitute and STF. I'd prefer to see them make a 55 STF and 85 STF over many basic primes. I'm not going to buy one soon, but that gives folks some unique options.
Also remember, you go to Nikon or Canon, they aren't doing anything with the lenses you like either. Their slow primes are dead too, they just have inventory around, where for Sony you need to find a used minolta. People in those systems ask for what you want too, and it's not happening. Good quality, low price zooms killed the cheap prime. A lens like the 2.8/28-75 makes a lot of those lenses redundant. It's not giving much up optically to them, and for many of them you are only loose 1 stop. Makes it really hard to justify as a maker of making a bunch of primes it overlaps or comes near too. Every Prime 24 through 85 that's around F2 or slower is basically covered by that lens well enough. Believe me, I own it both ways, both that lens, and the 2.8/24, 2/28, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, I can more than manage with the 1 zoom, and the zoom cost me less. (in some cases less than just one of those lenses (2/28). And if you go with the fact I got my 28-75 for 199 bucks, for less than all but the 1.7/50).
I would love to see 4/16ZA, 2.8/20ZA, 2.8/24ZA, 2/28ZA, 1.8/35ZA, 1.8/50ZA, some day, but it's just not happening soon.
The biggest gap in the lens line, in regards to the A900, is
telephoto and t/s. Telephoto looks like it will be adressed first.
We would see even more Nikon users adding the A900 to their arsenal
if T/S was available.
Ah yes.. all 3 of them...
I am just curious - for those who who keep saying how critical these
silly T/S lenses are (expect PT, I know he actually would), how many
of you actually WOULD buy these $2000 lenses? I mean, lets get
freaking real folks. The LAST thing Sony needs to waste their time
on is silly T/S lenses. We A-Mount users need better affordable
lenses (the 20mm and 24mm are in bad need of a refresh, aside from
the other holes in our system).
And yes, I am adamant... I want some good lenses that I will actually
use (and be able to afford). It is so frustrating to see everyone
asking for these useless lenses they wont even buy!
--
My ever-growing flickr gallery:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dsbphotography
