New E lens question

Started Feb 2, 2011 | Discussions thread
pjskeleton Regular Member • Posts: 131
Re: primes only

armanius wrote:

The NEX version of the 18-200 is bigger and heavier than the Alpha version.

Heavier, yes, bigger, eh? Basically the same to me. Definitely smaller than Canon, Nikon, Sigma, and Tamron's offerings.

Yes, the E version has a built-in motor and IS, but the 18-200 still goes against everything the NEX is/was supposed to stand for -- portability while still delivering excellent image quality.

And how do you suggest that excellent image quality be delivered without big glass? It's the basic rules of lens making; quality, size, zoom, speed, price. Pick four. Quality optics in a small package with a fast aperture gets you a prime lens. A small cheap fast zoom won't give you top notch optics. Etc etc.

And I'm not knocking on the 18-200 as being a crappy lens. By all accounts, it's a fine lens. But IMO, just not the type of lens for the NEX system.

Sure it is. The NEX is fully capable as a professional level system whilst still being simple enough for the beginners. Let them have the small lenses. See the above about lens design.

The Samsung NX also has an APS-C sensor, and it's got a couple of nice small pancake lenses. So small (relatively anyway) and fast is doable, depending on the type of lens that Sony wants to produce.

Sony wants to produce an all around quality system to impress both compact upgraders and professionals, using knowledge gained from their buyouts of Konica/Minolta and their partnership with Zeiss. This can almost certainly only be done with big glass.

It's just a matter of what does Sony want to do with the NEX?

They want to make it a fully capable system for both professionals and enthusiasts, as well as amateurs, to take gorgeous shots without sacrificing too much portability. Samsung and Olympus and Panasonic just said, "how can we make it small?" whereas Sony said "how can we make it the perfect camera?". And Sony came out with the smallest, lightest, camera out of the four of them, and the NEX trumps the competition on all counts, save for number of lenses. However the NEX lenses are higher quality.

Does it make sense to produce big lenses for the NEX?

Yes. A big bulky frame is good for staying still. If I'm, say, hiking, I want a small camera body and the most versatile lens possible, the 18-200mm. That combo still ranks in at half the weight of any comparable combination. Or, say, a 70-200mm f/2.8 for sports. Would I rather be circling the field with a Canon 1D IV and an L-level lens, the total cost of which is more than my car, or a NEX and an 18-200, the total cost of which is less than a new Mac.

Because like someone else already said, if Sony is going to give us a bunch of big lenses for the NEX, we NEX users might as well switch to Alpha's, which have better grips and balance big lenses much better.

The Alpha's do have better grips certainly, and balance better. They're also much bigger and heavier and have too many buttons. Anyone who's used rangefinders or film SLR's will tell you that buttons are bad. The NEX is in so many many ways the poor man's Leica M8.

I can't speak for everyone, but I assume that most of us that have NEX's, bought the NEX, because we wanted something smaller.

Nope. It almost entirely was either people stepping up from point and shoots (or their ridiculous semi-half-cousins those unspeakably dreadful m4/3 cameras), or getting a more portable camera to complement their profesional one, since they got self conscious about lugging around 20 pounds of camera gear to all the events in their lives.

-- hide signature --

M Irwin wrote:

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.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow