An Average Shooter
Member
- Messages
- 31
- Reaction score
- 17
Point taken.
Your problem will be solved when they come out with a f/2.8 zoom. Give them time.
Your problem will be solved when they come out with a f/2.8 zoom. Give them time.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Attacking Sony: Can we take a breather?
- Thread starter Mel Snyder
- Start date
look lets take a step back and look at the Microsoft windows 8 fiasco .. key to MS future in the mid term and the guy Running its windows division had a "screw the customer we will tell you what you want" attitude .. hes fired now and MS is backtracking to satisfy massive customer base complaints with its 8.1 ... it's the same with all large companies that have a corporate structure out of sync with their client base (you could choose MS again with its Xbox backtrack recently or Nokia as well) ...
In Sony's case it has a very new management and it's very clear that they recognise this as a major issue. It looks like they are addressing it .. in simple terms if mirrorless doesnt sell in the US the NEX range will stay/move downmarket, the 7 will die and there will be a high ticket FF for us EU/Asians that like the NEX so much and have lots of wonga), I would hope as well they would align the lens ranges as well with Zeiss for the FF and good value decent performing lenses (not the sharpest or the brightest etc but decent performing)
if you just want to use the NEX as a snapper its fine if you get a working to spec kit lens and the 55-210 these are probably all you will ever need. You could strap one of the monster full range sony/zeiss E mount zooms to the NEX but you end up with something so bulky, heavy and dark that why bother with the NEX in the first place. There are loads of people with an NEX that strap a HUGE heavy DARK zoom on it and I think to myself WTF ? why not just get a small APS-c dslr if you are gonna strap that big bulky dark full range zoom on it all the time ?
For me i use the NEX for home, shooting family plays/theatre, street photography and if i get a working PZ lens back from sony then this will be fine as a general super compact lens for family .. use - its dark and often gives its limited Bokeh that looks like a chainlink fence thats been attacked by a chainsaw but hey its a super compact zoom and once it focuses prioperly it will be just perfect for family purpose - small, great video and pics, easy to use but not portraits
For portraits/street I'm using a legacy manual 50mm prime at the mmt which gives some fabulous pictures (sharpness Bokeh colour etc really beautiful) but even with mag/focus peeking i only get 1 in 3 pin sharp (small DOF-moving targets) .. I would like a little bit more pull in though for both and an 85mm f2 or f2.8 at a push would be perfect .. with a bit of cropping this would also cover my play/theatre use ..
So in an ideal world I would have the PZ kit lens, an 85mm SEL and probably i'd get the 50mm SEL as well ... I would get 3 decent performing compact light lenses all with OIS/AF/focus bracketing all taking advantage of the small size of the NEX and not looking too much out of place with the NEX
..come on Sony do a you cheap decent super value SAL APSC 85mm f2.8 (a bit dark but acceptable) why not give us something like this and give us something with a decent pull in and Bokeh
If you are pro photographer using a huge bulky bright expensive f2 nikon Zoom i fully understand the choice and your limitation often having a static position and I would do the same - but outdoors you can almost always use your feet and/or cropping to get that perfect shot so why compromise so heavily with a dark heavy Bokehless zoom
So all this is saying there is a big gap in the NEX lens range (which is one of the reasons fueling the second hand 85mm-105mm lens market for people that want a bit of pull in with a decent Bokeh.
In Sony's case it has a very new management and it's very clear that they recognise this as a major issue. It looks like they are addressing it .. in simple terms if mirrorless doesnt sell in the US the NEX range will stay/move downmarket, the 7 will die and there will be a high ticket FF for us EU/Asians that like the NEX so much and have lots of wonga), I would hope as well they would align the lens ranges as well with Zeiss for the FF and good value decent performing lenses (not the sharpest or the brightest etc but decent performing)
if you just want to use the NEX as a snapper its fine if you get a working to spec kit lens and the 55-210 these are probably all you will ever need. You could strap one of the monster full range sony/zeiss E mount zooms to the NEX but you end up with something so bulky, heavy and dark that why bother with the NEX in the first place. There are loads of people with an NEX that strap a HUGE heavy DARK zoom on it and I think to myself WTF ? why not just get a small APS-c dslr if you are gonna strap that big bulky dark full range zoom on it all the time ?
For me i use the NEX for home, shooting family plays/theatre, street photography and if i get a working PZ lens back from sony then this will be fine as a general super compact lens for family .. use - its dark and often gives its limited Bokeh that looks like a chainlink fence thats been attacked by a chainsaw but hey its a super compact zoom and once it focuses prioperly it will be just perfect for family purpose - small, great video and pics, easy to use but not portraits
For portraits/street I'm using a legacy manual 50mm prime at the mmt which gives some fabulous pictures (sharpness Bokeh colour etc really beautiful) but even with mag/focus peeking i only get 1 in 3 pin sharp (small DOF-moving targets) .. I would like a little bit more pull in though for both and an 85mm f2 or f2.8 at a push would be perfect .. with a bit of cropping this would also cover my play/theatre use ..
So in an ideal world I would have the PZ kit lens, an 85mm SEL and probably i'd get the 50mm SEL as well ... I would get 3 decent performing compact light lenses all with OIS/AF/focus bracketing all taking advantage of the small size of the NEX and not looking too much out of place with the NEX
..come on Sony do a you cheap decent super value SAL APSC 85mm f2.8 (a bit dark but acceptable) why not give us something like this and give us something with a decent pull in and Bokeh
If you are pro photographer using a huge bulky bright expensive f2 nikon Zoom i fully understand the choice and your limitation often having a static position and I would do the same - but outdoors you can almost always use your feet and/or cropping to get that perfect shot so why compromise so heavily with a dark heavy Bokehless zoom
So all this is saying there is a big gap in the NEX lens range (which is one of the reasons fueling the second hand 85mm-105mm lens market for people that want a bit of pull in with a decent Bokeh.
Last edited:
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
How is it fantasy? This forum is filled with folks who think they know better than multi billion dollar photography companies that have been around for years. That's not fantasy or even reality in the exception- it's par for the course!!!
You misread what I said... I said the lens you want at the price you want ("reasonable") would not be profitable. If the lens were priced at a point where it would make sense for Sony to sell, you would complain about it being too expensive.
Samsung's 30mm F/2 is 1. not comparable to a 22mm lens (it has 1/3 the field of view) and 2. not great (rife with IQ issues from distortion to soft corners to heavy vignetting)
Yes I was hyperbolic and I apologize. But at the end of the day a "simple F/1.8 pancake lens" is an oxymoron and a unicorn. Plus nobody on an APS-C system has such a lens. Can you point me to such a lens from 16-24mm?
For the third time... nobody else makes this lens you speak of. The Samsung 30mm is nowhere near as wide as this 22mm lens you feel Sony has to make to stay in business, and even if it was it's a terrible lens. Samsung's 16mm 2.4 is comparable but it's WORSE- rife with issues until you stop it down to F/11. They have a 20mm 2.8 pancake, but guess what... so do we! And ours is pretty good and reasonably priced. So not only is your complaining unproductive and self-serving, it's not even based in reality. But again such melodrama & fantasy is par the course for discussions here. It's truly amazing to watchSo, you never did answer my simple question, so I will ask it again. " if Sony made a good quality F/1.8 22mm pancake would it sell better than say the 30mm macro? "
Simple question. I say heck yes!
The funny part is if and when Sony releases a lens as good as the Panasonic or Samsung, we will all buy it and YOU will be shouting from the roof tops about how AWESOME it is.
Last edited:
Mel Snyder
Senior Member
At the risk of keeping this going longer...
I went on Amazon and searched for a Canon zoom with an f2.8 aperture. I found its 17-55mm EF-S, so unless you have another lens, let's consider that as what you want for the NEX line.
1. It costs over $1000
2. It weighs 650 grams, twice the weight of an NEX-6 body with battery - so the combination is about a kilogram, 2.2 pounds. Your 2Ti body weighs 525 grams, so with the lens, about 1200 grams, or about a third of a pound heavier than the NEX-6 body with that lens. Ergo, if you go to an f2.8 zoom that replicates the 16-50 or 18-55mm Sony zooms, almost the whole advantage of portability goes out the window. You might as well have the advantages of the DSLR in focus speed and optical viewfinder if you're going to tote a kilogram rig.
3. Forget weight - that lens has a 77mm front objective. I own several lenses with 77mm front objectives. That is a big, big lens physically as well.
4. Canon announced in 2010 that it had produced its 50 millionth EOS lens. Let's get our head around that number. I couldn't find out how many EOS bodies they've produced since 1987, but since most were sold with at least one lens, THAT, friend, is what we call in marketing "one helluva installed base." You know that whatever you make, chances are, you will sell it to at least 1% of that installed base. 500,000 pieces. Let's cut that by 50%, and at $1000 each, that's still $250 million in sales. At a 20% margin, that's $50 million in profits. If you can see $25 million in profits, you make that lens - and so does Tamron and Sigma and Tokina and Quantaray and everyone else.
Sony doesn't have a fraction of that installed base. It doesn't have nearly 30 years of development experience. The whole mirrorless business is a work in progress.
You see, what you and others repeatedly want is pure and unadulterated economic fantasy-land, the kind of crap EU politicians engage in, but anyone who understands Economics 1 realizes is fiscal destruction.
For whatever its errors, Sony is not in any rush to become Greece. And no amount of blasting here is going to influence them one bit.
Finally, your images.
Your baby shot. You are wrong. Babies DO hold still - ***IF*** you know how to get them to hold still. I could easily shoot that at a tenth of a second with my 16-50PZ at ISO 800 and get a vastly better image, because I know how to freeze a baby for longer than that. If you chose to study some good classic texts on baby photography, you could learn how to get them to freeze at any age with better expressions. How do you think people who actually make their living shooting baby images do it? Do you think they can leave expression to chance? You have it easy - the child knows you, he or she is in his own home, and is trapped in a highchair or walker. For someone who has the skill, this is a piece of cake.
I admit I was lucky. My uncle was a Master photographer in PPA for shooting children's portraits, and as his apprentice, I learned there are sounds you can make that will absolutely freeze a baby that age, and get a better expression, than you got. You just don't know how and in what sequence to make those sounds, so you think an f2.8 lens and ISO 5000 are necessary.
That baby photo could just as easily be shot with either bounce flash or a Gary Fong diffuser - or both. S/he is looking up, and at that age, the eye sockets don't become raccooned. The lighting possibilities are endless.
Your second shot could have easily been shot at the same ISO with the 16-50 PZ. f3.5 is just one stop away from f2.8. Submarines are among the easiest locations to shoot slow shutter speeds because there is hardware all around against which you can brace, even during tours. Been there, done that. So, yes, just about anyone with a 16-50PZ and a little bit of awareness could get at least as good a shot with a NEX camera and the PZ lens.
As for your last image, in case you missed the link, check my images at the Pearl Harbor USS Bowfin Memorial, in case you missed the link earlier: https://picasaweb.google.com/112030639630947309972/PearlHarborUSSBowfinMemorial. Nothing that could not be as easily done with the PZ.
Bottom line: I have no special knowledge or secrets of how to get great images out of the equipment Sony already sells. I have invested the time to learn skills that enable me to get more out of it than someone who thinks the solution to every photographic challenge is a faster lens, or a higher pixel count sensor, or some bokeh/IQ baloney.
Sony sells the tools. You have to learn how to use them.
I'm done.
I went on Amazon and searched for a Canon zoom with an f2.8 aperture. I found its 17-55mm EF-S, so unless you have another lens, let's consider that as what you want for the NEX line.
1. It costs over $1000
2. It weighs 650 grams, twice the weight of an NEX-6 body with battery - so the combination is about a kilogram, 2.2 pounds. Your 2Ti body weighs 525 grams, so with the lens, about 1200 grams, or about a third of a pound heavier than the NEX-6 body with that lens. Ergo, if you go to an f2.8 zoom that replicates the 16-50 or 18-55mm Sony zooms, almost the whole advantage of portability goes out the window. You might as well have the advantages of the DSLR in focus speed and optical viewfinder if you're going to tote a kilogram rig.
3. Forget weight - that lens has a 77mm front objective. I own several lenses with 77mm front objectives. That is a big, big lens physically as well.
4. Canon announced in 2010 that it had produced its 50 millionth EOS lens. Let's get our head around that number. I couldn't find out how many EOS bodies they've produced since 1987, but since most were sold with at least one lens, THAT, friend, is what we call in marketing "one helluva installed base." You know that whatever you make, chances are, you will sell it to at least 1% of that installed base. 500,000 pieces. Let's cut that by 50%, and at $1000 each, that's still $250 million in sales. At a 20% margin, that's $50 million in profits. If you can see $25 million in profits, you make that lens - and so does Tamron and Sigma and Tokina and Quantaray and everyone else.
Sony doesn't have a fraction of that installed base. It doesn't have nearly 30 years of development experience. The whole mirrorless business is a work in progress.
You see, what you and others repeatedly want is pure and unadulterated economic fantasy-land, the kind of crap EU politicians engage in, but anyone who understands Economics 1 realizes is fiscal destruction.
For whatever its errors, Sony is not in any rush to become Greece. And no amount of blasting here is going to influence them one bit.
Finally, your images.
Your baby shot. You are wrong. Babies DO hold still - ***IF*** you know how to get them to hold still. I could easily shoot that at a tenth of a second with my 16-50PZ at ISO 800 and get a vastly better image, because I know how to freeze a baby for longer than that. If you chose to study some good classic texts on baby photography, you could learn how to get them to freeze at any age with better expressions. How do you think people who actually make their living shooting baby images do it? Do you think they can leave expression to chance? You have it easy - the child knows you, he or she is in his own home, and is trapped in a highchair or walker. For someone who has the skill, this is a piece of cake.
I admit I was lucky. My uncle was a Master photographer in PPA for shooting children's portraits, and as his apprentice, I learned there are sounds you can make that will absolutely freeze a baby that age, and get a better expression, than you got. You just don't know how and in what sequence to make those sounds, so you think an f2.8 lens and ISO 5000 are necessary.
That baby photo could just as easily be shot with either bounce flash or a Gary Fong diffuser - or both. S/he is looking up, and at that age, the eye sockets don't become raccooned. The lighting possibilities are endless.
Your second shot could have easily been shot at the same ISO with the 16-50 PZ. f3.5 is just one stop away from f2.8. Submarines are among the easiest locations to shoot slow shutter speeds because there is hardware all around against which you can brace, even during tours. Been there, done that. So, yes, just about anyone with a 16-50PZ and a little bit of awareness could get at least as good a shot with a NEX camera and the PZ lens.
As for your last image, in case you missed the link, check my images at the Pearl Harbor USS Bowfin Memorial, in case you missed the link earlier: https://picasaweb.google.com/112030639630947309972/PearlHarborUSSBowfinMemorial. Nothing that could not be as easily done with the PZ.
Bottom line: I have no special knowledge or secrets of how to get great images out of the equipment Sony already sells. I have invested the time to learn skills that enable me to get more out of it than someone who thinks the solution to every photographic challenge is a faster lens, or a higher pixel count sensor, or some bokeh/IQ baloney.
Sony sells the tools. You have to learn how to use them.
I'm done.
Amamba wrote:
Why wouldn't I want to use zooms on Nex ? Why should I be limited to a prime, especially if I am traveling ?
Here's a few shots. The first was taken at f3.2, 1/80, 47mm, ISO5000 with Canon T2i. No flash, very poor light inside a house. If I used any slower shutter speed this would come out with motion blur, babies don't hold still. Note that shot was resized without sharpening, and also note that Canon sensor used on T2i is not as good in high ISO as Sony's sensor, at least according to reviews.
Here's another shot taken with same lens on same trip inside a WW2 submarine, with battle lighting (so, almost no light at all). No flash, of course. ISO6400, f2.8, 1/5s handheld (this was not a stabilized lens, either), 21mm. How would I ever pull this off with either Sony kit ?
Finally, here's the submarine, taken at 35mm:
How many primes would I have to joggle to get all three shots ? I will spare you various shots inside this very cool sub made at 17mm or 50mm, or the portraits taken later same day at 30 to 50mm with same lens. The point is, a fast zoom has definite advantages, and Sony hasn't got one yet.
Well first of all I don't know what you're stalking about with the Samsung 30mm. I owned one and it was sharp corner to corner by f/2.8. Never noticed much distortion either (and I shot RAW). The Panasonic 20mm is the one with the bad distortion.
Now, to Mel: I like reading your stuff, as you're a very opinionated guy but lots of it is based on genuine experience. I'd say that I agree with you about 75% of the time as well. But your OP here smacks of a certain victim mentality. You have a point, to an extent - if these forums are to be seen as a resource for huge numbers of prospective buyers (which is highly debatable), our complaints about the kit zooms are not going to help the brand very much. But the general feeling behind your post is something like "if we keep our mouths shut about Master's I'll treatment, maybe he'll give us an extra bowl of gruel for dinner someday." Yup, it's like that - no hyperbole at all.
Really though, I know you have a higher opinion than most of the kit lenses, and make plenty of valid points about their use being more important than their IQ. But the bottom line is that they're mediocre and Son's QC means that they run the gamut from mediocre all the way down to "utter garbage." So, basically, your desire is for people to ignore that fact and sit around hoping that Sony will deign to release something better. It's not our fault that Sony has designed sub-par zooms, is it?
For the record, I couldn't care less about a fast zoom. I think that the compromises required to build one that'd satisfy people in terms of range and IQ would simply be too great. It'd be large and expensive. What I REALLY want is simply a GOOD zoom. Something that prioritized IQ over everything else. I would, for example, love a 20-50mm f/4 that was about the same size as the 18-55 (smaller would obviously be nice, but unlikely) with Sigma-30-level sharpness right from wide open. Will that happen? Almost certainly not. And no amount of lying back and thinking of England is going to change that!
Now, to Mel: I like reading your stuff, as you're a very opinionated guy but lots of it is based on genuine experience. I'd say that I agree with you about 75% of the time as well. But your OP here smacks of a certain victim mentality. You have a point, to an extent - if these forums are to be seen as a resource for huge numbers of prospective buyers (which is highly debatable), our complaints about the kit zooms are not going to help the brand very much. But the general feeling behind your post is something like "if we keep our mouths shut about Master's I'll treatment, maybe he'll give us an extra bowl of gruel for dinner someday." Yup, it's like that - no hyperbole at all.
Really though, I know you have a higher opinion than most of the kit lenses, and make plenty of valid points about their use being more important than their IQ. But the bottom line is that they're mediocre and Son's QC means that they run the gamut from mediocre all the way down to "utter garbage." So, basically, your desire is for people to ignore that fact and sit around hoping that Sony will deign to release something better. It's not our fault that Sony has designed sub-par zooms, is it?
For the record, I couldn't care less about a fast zoom. I think that the compromises required to build one that'd satisfy people in terms of range and IQ would simply be too great. It'd be large and expensive. What I REALLY want is simply a GOOD zoom. Something that prioritized IQ over everything else. I would, for example, love a 20-50mm f/4 that was about the same size as the 18-55 (smaller would obviously be nice, but unlikely) with Sigma-30-level sharpness right from wide open. Will that happen? Almost certainly not. And no amount of lying back and thinking of England is going to change that!
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
Samsung 30mm F2 has got very mixed reviews...
And as far as the kit zoom... how many of the 1855s have you owned/sampled to say QC is bad? And you want a kit zoom that is as sharp as one of the best primes wide open at every FL??? This is exactly the kind of insanity that makes this place seem more like a comedy club/insane asylum than a discussion forum. If the NEX platform is so terrible, sell all your stuff and go with another platform that has what you need... that seems like a better way to spend your time than making such off the wall demands
I mean for eff's sake nobody else with a mirrorless APS-C platform has such a lens... Sony's kit lens is not much worse if at all than anyone elses... the NEX platform is not super high volume like a DSLR so huge investments into glass on it are not exactly wise. Let's take some time to think about what we "demand"
And as far as the kit zoom... how many of the 1855s have you owned/sampled to say QC is bad? And you want a kit zoom that is as sharp as one of the best primes wide open at every FL??? This is exactly the kind of insanity that makes this place seem more like a comedy club/insane asylum than a discussion forum. If the NEX platform is so terrible, sell all your stuff and go with another platform that has what you need... that seems like a better way to spend your time than making such off the wall demands
I mean for eff's sake nobody else with a mirrorless APS-C platform has such a lens... Sony's kit lens is not much worse if at all than anyone elses... the NEX platform is not super high volume like a DSLR so huge investments into glass on it are not exactly wise. Let's take some time to think about what we "demand"
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
I got it confused with the 16 2.4, which has been universally panned and is a more direct competitor to the fantasy 22mm 1.8 that other dude was talking about. I have been bouncing between reviews of the two today. Still though, Sony has similar and equally good equivalent options in the Sigma 30 2.8 and its own 35 1.8 OSS.
Just Having Fun
Senior Member
Notice how his story keeps changing. When I said if Sony would make a good fast pancake like the Samsung or the Panasonic or even the Canon 22mm F/2 lens it would be a best seller, he has thrown out all kinds of silly excuses. He said I was asking for an F/.9 macro, then claimed the lens would cost over $800 or $1000 and wouldn't be profitable, now he implies that Samsung is not a good lens so no one would want it on a NEX. He claimed NEX users only buy kit lenses and don't need more. The Lens roadmap is fine the way it is , and on and on and on. Meanwhile, the Panasonic has been a top seller for several years, and everyone but him admits a similar lens (fast pancake with good IQ) would be a best seller for the NEX system. A NEX 3x with a pancake like that would fit in many pockets and IMHO be very popular. It would be a great affordable alternative to Sony's RX1 which also just happens to have a very small (fixed) 35mm (23mm in APC terms) F/2 lens.
Last edited:
Just Having Fun
Senior Member
You are making more excuses. I said a fast pancake like the Samsung or the Panasonic, and use the 22mm lens as an example (the RX1 has one already).
Instead you have made the following excuses:
- I really want an F/.9 macro
- the lens would cost $800 ot $1000
- It would not be profitable
- Most NEX owners don't buy extra lenses so why make them
- The Samsung is in not good and no Sony use would want it.
- The Lens roadmap is fine the way it is and does not need and more lenses.
- The larger (non-pancake) 35mm lens is similar to the Samsung pancake.
- And on and on and on.
Last edited:
So, you're saying one needs to be a master photog before attempting to use Sony kits ? Hmm, not sure this is the target audience.
Your research is incomplete. I mentioned four fast zooms for Canon with stellar IQ.
Tamron 17-50/2.8 - the non stabilized version sells for $420-450 street, VC is another $200. I paid $385 for mine but that was in 2007.
Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS, $570 on Amazon. Same IQ, faster AF - I still own one in Canon mount. (Not sure why it's cheaper now as IMHO it's superior to Tamron)
Canon 17-55/2.8 IS is indeed a $900+ lens, with super fast AF, but in reality not much diff in IQ. This was IMHO a first such lens in their lineup for crops and they charged an arm and leg for it.
There is more fast zooms, BTW. These are just some examples.
I think if they can sell a $570 fast stabilized zoom with stellar IQ for DSLR, a $700-750 one for Nex should be possible ?
Panasonic has 12-35/2.8 Lumix for MFT that is, according to reviews, just that - compact, light, fast and sharp. Kind of pricey at $900. But it shows that this is definitely possible.
Your research is incomplete. I mentioned four fast zooms for Canon with stellar IQ.
Tamron 17-50/2.8 - the non stabilized version sells for $420-450 street, VC is another $200. I paid $385 for mine but that was in 2007.
Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS, $570 on Amazon. Same IQ, faster AF - I still own one in Canon mount. (Not sure why it's cheaper now as IMHO it's superior to Tamron)
Canon 17-55/2.8 IS is indeed a $900+ lens, with super fast AF, but in reality not much diff in IQ. This was IMHO a first such lens in their lineup for crops and they charged an arm and leg for it.
There is more fast zooms, BTW. These are just some examples.
I think if they can sell a $570 fast stabilized zoom with stellar IQ for DSLR, a $700-750 one for Nex should be possible ?
Panasonic has 12-35/2.8 Lumix for MFT that is, according to reviews, just that - compact, light, fast and sharp. Kind of pricey at $900. But it shows that this is definitely possible.
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
You left out the most important 2 reasons
- Samsung pancake is 30mm, which is far from the 22mm you want
- Panasonic pancakes are on significantly smaller sensors, reducing the IQ requirements
Again if you like the lenses so much, switch platforms. Hell Canon's EOS-M has exactly the lens you are looking for. Making that switch would be a far better way to spend your time than pleading w/Sony through a messageboard.
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
MFT is a much smaller sensor than APS-C. All of the APS-C lenses you mentioned are gargantuan and wouldn't gel with something like a NEX-5N body.
And I'm not saying you need to be a master photographer to use a camera at all. But good photographers don't need the best of the best to take good pictures. The craft is way more important than the equipment. So the idea that 1-2 stops is such a huge deal seems silly. Plus those lenses exist on platforms folks are free to leave NEX for. NEX isn't perfect but I don't think it's being blown out of the water by not carrying a handful of lenses.
Plus NEX is ahead of the curve in other ways... for example EOS-M, NX, Oly Pen, none of them have Speed Booster/Lens Turbo for example. Only the EOS-M has something like the LA-EA2. So it's not as one sided or terrible as people make it out to be.
Just Having Fun
Senior Member
(what about the Canon 22mm F/2 aps mirorless pancake, lol!)
But, since all the threads have been asking for ANY small, fast pancake, take your pick. 22, 25, 27, 30mm? Anyone one of those would be a top seller for NEX, right???
Oh, so when DPR says, "Impressive image quality at all apertures", they really mean "reduced" IQ?
And when DPR says, "Overall, we can't help but conclude that the 20mm F1.7 is the first must-have lens", they would never say that for a Sony pancake?
Isn't that the problem? Rather than YOU telling everyone that NEX doesn't have what they want and to dump Sony, wouldn't it be better if we all spoke up and Sony made a lens we have all been asking for the past few years?
btw, here is a 22mm F/2 lens for an APS sensor that despite all your reasons why it can't be made, actually exists! LOL!
Agreed, Mel. Every time I see one of these posts, I think, "So, why did you buy an NEX, then?" Frankly, you're right that this negativism just kills sales, especially when newcomers who haven't bought an NEX come here for advice on whether or not they should get one, as opposed to an Olympus or some other brand. I carefully researched, not only the NEX line, but the Canon T3 Rebel, as well, before buying my NEX-5N, over a year ago. Had I known of this forum at the time, I might not have bought the 5N, based on all the negative comments here. Frankly, the NEX has taken my photography to a whole new level (when used in conjunction with Nik's HDR Efex Pro 2 and Silver Efex Pro 2) and I have no complaint, to speak of. I'll be upgrading to the NEX-6 soon, also.
Gary
Second. 35mm lenses from 40mm to 50mm are called normal, with 35mm often considered normal on the wide side, and in the old days 55mm and 58mm accepted as normal (but not generally preferred)Just Having Fun wrote:
But, since all the threads have been asking for ANY small, fast pancake, take your pick. 22, 25, 27, 30mm? Anyone one of those would be a top seller for NEX, right???
btw, here is a 22mm F/2 lens for an APS sensor that despite all your reasons why it can't be made, actually exists! LOL!
NEX needs a fast pancake from 35mm to 50mm 35mm equivalent. Fast means f2 or faster. Reasonably priced. A thrifty fifity.
I have a NEX, but I bought an EOS-m because NEX won't give me that basic lens. If I like the EOS better I might sell the NEX.
Mel Snyder
Senior Member
1. You don't need to be a master to use a Sony kit lens - or any kit lens. It does help if you do a bit of study. I gave my son-in-law his first DSLR 3 years ago, a D3100 with a kit lens, and then the 55-210 zoom. He's an architect, and yet, he used its limited video-audio capabilities to produce videos of my daughter's techniques of teaching English to non-English speakers for Teach for America, and they've gone viral. His portraits are superb, using a little SB400 bounce flash I gave him as a birthday present:
Photo by Felipe Santander
He just studied how to get the most out of his equipment, and practiced.
2. I don't know where you live or your professional/commercial background, if any. But you just don't get it.
I showed you the economics of market share of installed base. With its small installed base, Sony would have to sell the lens you want for $10,000 - $20,000 to recover the development costs of building an AF/OSS zoom at the same rate of return as Canon or Sigma or Tamron building for the EOS platform.
But you keep on pointing to Canon and imply Sony doesn't get it, when it's YOU who don't get it.
You're like a kid begging a poor parent to buy him a BMW like the rich kid next door drives. You want what you want when you want it. The fact that the guy next door is a brain surgeon and your father delivers mail doesn't sink through.
"His father gave him a BMW - why can't you give me one, too? You must be dumber than his dad."
That's how silly you and your cohorts are when you constantly harp here for lenses like those available for Canons and Nikons. Sony must be stupid or selfish or whatever, in your self-centered, reality-free cone of delusion, you accuse them of.
That's your childish, damn the reality fantasy world. Sigma won't do it. Tamron won't do it. All for the reasons Sony won't do it.
2. All those EOS mount lenses still have the same physical characteristics - size, weight, and 67-77mm front element. None has suspended the laws of physics. Not even Panasonic, which is covering a smaller sensor.
If you want to get ridiculous - and clearly, you do - Panasonic markets a "bridge" camera with a constant-aperture f2.8 zoom that covers all the way to 600mm. And so, OF COURSE they can repurpose one tiny-sensor lens to another tiny-sensor system.
That M2/3rds sensor is about the size of an index fingernail. Once you go to an APS-C sensor, the challenge is exponential - and so is the size of lenses, which you demonstrate by the 3 lenses you cite.
And so, all the choruses of everyone on the forum aren't likely to revoke the principles of economics to persuade anyone to build the lens you want for the tiny E mount market. If it survives for 5 years, maybe. But the camera that accepts it is more likely to look like a T2i than an NEX-5, 6 or 7.
There's ton of difference between f2.8 and f5.6, which is what you have to use on the wide end of kit lens. IMHO there's quite a bit of difference even between 2.8 and 4, in real life.
Anyway, this is now going in circles.
Anyway, this is now going in circles.
Mel Snyder
Senior Member
An EOS mount lens will fit roughly 50 million cameras with EOS mounts. I'd suggest you sell your NEX if you're holding out till Sony can sell you that lens for the price of the EOS-M with one.tomtom50 wrote:
Second. 35mm lenses from 40mm to 50mm are called normal, with 35mm often considered normal on the wide side, and in the old days 55mm and 58mm accepted as normal (but not generally preferred)Just Having Fun wrote:
But, since all the threads have been asking for ANY small, fast pancake, take your pick. 22, 25, 27, 30mm? Anyone one of those would be a top seller for NEX, right???
btw, here is a 22mm F/2 lens for an APS sensor that despite all your reasons why it can't be made, actually exists! LOL!
NEX needs a fast pancake from 35mm to 50mm 35mm equivalent. Fast means f2 or faster. Reasonably priced. A thrifty fifity.
I have a NEX, but I bought an EOS-m because NEX won't give me that basic lens. If I like the EOS better I might sell the NEX.
sportyaccordy
Forum Pro
We have the 20mm 2.8.
"Impressive image quality at all apertures" for MFT.
Here's what you still don't get and was my original point. In fact, I will just quote myself since you seem to have missed it, even though it was in the first post of mine you responded to:Isn't that the problem? Rather than YOU telling everyone that NEX doesn't have what they want and to dump Sony, wouldn't it be better if we all spoke up and Sony made a lens we have all been asking for the past few years?
btw, here is a 22mm F/2 lens for an APS sensor that despite all your reasons why it can't be made, actually exists! LOL!
EOS-M has the 1 lens you want. OK, go buy it. NEX platform has way more than 2 lenses, as well as various speed boosters, lens adapters and other accessories. Plus again, unless you are total OCD pedant, 1 stop (20 2.8 v 22 2) seems like a bit much to be making such a stink over.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum