-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Andy Westlake nor impressed by the 50mm F1.8 DT concept
- Thread starter ephankim
- Start date
C
ck3
Guest
It is hard to get, if "getting it" means to reconcile your statement that "50mm is pretty much useless on APS" with your former statement that it was a big mistake for Sony not to offer such a 50mm lens in a cheap version.
If it is useless, Sony was right in not offering it back then (seeing that they didn't have a FF camera in their line-up) and you were wrong asking for it.
But it seems that back then you didn't think it was a useless focal length. And the discussion whether it is DT or not seems pretty much esoteric to me, since 99,9% of Sony cameras sold are APS-C.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
I never said 50mm is "useless" I said other focal lengths are more useful
But as I have said repeatedly, I use 35mm, which is FF! You may not..but that does not concern me
The DT aspect is very important..why?
1: Price, we don't know what it will be..that will be important..if it's not really cheap, the DT part has failed
2: Sony do now have a FF digital, many feel FF is the long term future..even if it's pricey now..5 years down the road it may not be
3: Like many have said, if you are going to make a DT lens, make one that's the most use to the APS-C user, 35mm f1.7-f2 for example. The 30mm macro is not fast enough..(mistake no.2)
Lenses are a long term investment for most people..decades even longer..hence the desire by some/many to avoid APS only lenses (esp primes), is a very valid one.
I find the points put forward/above both logical and compelling, sony have IMO misjudged their users needs, and a long term strategy
Bramley
Veteran Member
I'd say that 50mm on FF is useless and that people were only using 50s because they were small, fast and cheap.
I used to own a 35/2 and a 50/1.4 on a 7D - the 35/2 never came out the bag despite being one of the most raved-about lenses for alphas. The 50/1.4 was fantastic - a short telephoto. Loved it.
Swap to FF and it's the reverse - the 35/2 is brilliant and the 50/1.4 is pretty dull. Can't stand 50mm FoVs - you just have to get too close for things to be interesting and when you get that close you want a 35 so you can take in more of the scene...
While no-one's doubting the enthusiasm for a longer affordable portrait-prime (an 85/2 would be lovely), the new 50 should make a lot of people very happy.
Best follow up with an example or two:
Viva la 50 on APS-C!
--
Please visit my galleries at:
http://www.jaggerbramley.com
I used to own a 35/2 and a 50/1.4 on a 7D - the 35/2 never came out the bag despite being one of the most raved-about lenses for alphas. The 50/1.4 was fantastic - a short telephoto. Loved it.
Swap to FF and it's the reverse - the 35/2 is brilliant and the 50/1.4 is pretty dull. Can't stand 50mm FoVs - you just have to get too close for things to be interesting and when you get that close you want a 35 so you can take in more of the scene...
While no-one's doubting the enthusiasm for a longer affordable portrait-prime (an 85/2 would be lovely), the new 50 should make a lot of people very happy.
Best follow up with an example or two:
Viva la 50 on APS-C!
--
Please visit my galleries at:
http://www.jaggerbramley.com
C
ck3
Guest
That's true. My mistake. You said it was a dumb idea.
This is not a discussion about whether that lens suits your idiosyncratic needs but whether it serves the majority of users. And the majority doesn't use 35mm - neither film nor digital.
Questionable, all other factors equal, a FF lens is always more expensive.
5 years is a long time. And even in 5 years, FF will be more expensive by quite a margin. The bulk of the market will remain APS. And APS users shouldn't pay for lens designs they do not need.
Again - you yourself asked for such a lens, not for your own use but as a lens Sony would sell to a lot of users who otherwise depended on the second-hand market (and in March 08, even more than today, those prospective buyers were people with APS cameras.)
We are not talking about a high end Zeiss prime here but a dirt cheap 50mm - the plastic mount suggests that it is indeed going to be the most affordable lens Sony will offer. That is hardly a long term investment.
If they misjudged it, it is because they've been listening to this forum (don't tell me there is a urgent need for a cheap 50mm to put on a A900). Well, damned if you do, damned if you don't.
B
Barry Fitzgerald
Guest
Get it right please..DT 50mm a dumb idea. It's the "DT" part that I object to.
And? Do we want to be buying lenses that are useless for FF? Look at 4/3..why lock yourself in?
Let's see if it's Canon £50mm f1.8 £75 not expensive..
APS users shouldn't pay for lens designs they don't need? What a hilarious statement if there ever was one. I know, why don't sony do every type of lens including a 300mm f2.8 for APS users only.
Two tier system is not the way forward.
I asked for a 50mm f1.7 with a metal mount and FF, not some plastic DT job. I also asked for a 35mm f1.8-f2, and an 85mm 1.8
Sony have given us nothing on the other two..and a crippled DT lens for the 50mm.
Just because you don't buy a CZ or G, does not mean it cannot be used much later on in years to come. Dirt cheap we will see, but I will reserve judgement until sony show prices for these new lenses.
Get it right..NO to DT, I never asked for DT primes, few people did..
Stop twisting things around..
There is no reason to make a 50mm DT, the 50mm is a small lens..it is not heavy..DT zooms, well we can see a need for "some" of those. Had sone done a 35mm DT f1.8..I might have let them off a bit. It's more useful..
F
Framer
Guest
I have had both the 50mm and 85mm through the A100, A700 and now the A900, and it is only on the A900 that these focal lengths feel just right, both have seemed just a bit too long on APS-C.
I also had the old Minolta 35mm f1.4 lens for a short while and it was a wonderful focal length on APS-C, but unfortunately not sharp enough for me to keep. The combo of a sharp 30 - 35mm and a 60 - 70mm would be much more appealing to me on APS-C, and I think Sony APS-C users will get a nice versatile normal lens with the 30mm f2.8 macro.
It is great for Sony to get this kind of qualified feedback before their products are released.
I also had the old Minolta 35mm f1.4 lens for a short while and it was a wonderful focal length on APS-C, but unfortunately not sharp enough for me to keep. The combo of a sharp 30 - 35mm and a 60 - 70mm would be much more appealing to me on APS-C, and I think Sony APS-C users will get a nice versatile normal lens with the 30mm f2.8 macro.
It is great for Sony to get this kind of qualified feedback before their products are released.
bobfloyd
Forum Enthusiast
You are right about that, of course, Carl. It makes no difference what they do, someone will be unhappy. I think its a rule cause I used to see it in the KM forum and I have seen in it in the Nikon and Canon forums too.
Bob
--
http://www.pbase.com/bobfloyd
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum