-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
NEX-5T, 16-70, E PZ 18-105mm F4G OSS Leaked~
- Thread starter privater
- Start date
What *do* you want ?
Many (including myself) clamored for small lenses early on. Sony has done some work in that area. The 16-50 is tiny (though between the distortion, auto-corrected or not, and the power zoom, I don't care for that lens) and there's the 20mm pancake (FL doesn't interest me, but can't knock the effort).
Meanwhile, the system has clearly lacked high end zooms with across the board image quality, and whenever discussion of the long-awaited 'G' midrange zoom comes up, lots of people start asking for f/4 or even f/2.8. (Personally, I think that for a smaller option, the 18-55 is really a decent lens, but it could be that I have a very good copy).
The 18-105 is odd to me, but I'm guessing I just don't understand its purpose. Looking at it in the lineup, it seems abnormally large for its specification and right now, I'd guess that the power zoom is responsible, and speculating that the PZ implementation is more refined than the 16-50 ?
Anyway, the CZ16-80 for the Alpha mount goes for nearly $1000 - it's nicely sized for all day use on a DSLR, but would be a bit big on NEX. The new lens is 16-70 instead of 16-80, f/4 instead of f/3.5-f/4.5, offers OSS and seems like it's going to be more compact (didn't SAR quote a 55mm filter thread ?) I think it's going to be a great option, other than the fact that $1000 is simply too pricey for a lot of people who would love to own it. I think the 16-70 on a NEX will prove to be compact compared to a comparable (16-80) lens on a DSLR. And, of course, you always have the option of using a smaller lens when you want to go smaller.
My ideal kit is built around 2 zooms (a mid-speed, midrange lens that gets into portrait range, like this one and a high quality tele zoom) and a couple fast primes. I'm not about to give up my DSLR while I still use a 70-200/2.8 frequently, but could see it in the future, and this lens looks like it could be a key part of a great kit.
- Dennis
I've actually seen one mounted on a NEX-5 mate ;-) Probably the same guy, a sports photographer from here at DPR.blue_skies wrote:
Danny, you have too much moneynzmacro wrote:
Not one decent long. heavy fast tele lens in there at all.
Sorry, what were you saying
All the best and yes, you probably do want small lenses on the NEX ;-) I would like bigger !!
Danny.
Sony 500mm f/4 for about $12,999 ....
--
Cheers,
Henry
I would probably go Canon in this case. The new Nikon 800 F/5.6 is around $18,000 US
All the best Henry and that Sony is the only lens I would ever need the truth be known if I wanted AF. Oh yeah and the Minolta 600 F/4 to go with it. Second hand around $6,000 - $8,000 US
Danny.
--
开云·官方wen站登录入口-开云online(中国)
欢迎您访问⩤开云网站官网在线登录入口⩥⩤开云官方在线官网登录入口⩥！我们提供简单的：开云官方官网线上平台入口、网页版、登录、入口、注册、app、下载、链接、网址、手机版网站、访问开云官方网站在线登录入口的全站服务，这里是您享受丰富在线服务的最佳平台。通过开云官方官网登录入口，用户可以快速注册并登录，浏览各类优质商品。我们的平台覆盖了时尚、健康、美妆等多个领域，确保为您提供多样化选择。我们始终关注用户体验，致力于让每一次购物都成为一次愉快的旅程。
www.birdsinaction.com
Just Having Fun
Senior Member
The size and range of the 16-70 Zeiss is PERFECT for walkaround/vacation shooting. Don't need F2.8 for speed since most walkaround/vacation shooting is done during the day when light is likely to be decent. Most likely won't be using it for portraits so bokeh is not an issue. I usually prefer not to blur the background too much for vacation shooting anyway so you can see where you are. Switch for 35mm F1.8 for the few night shots. 16-70 - GET IN MY CAMERA BAG!!!!
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Canon SL1 is comparable in size and weight to my three year old Sony A55. Most of the “trimming” on SL1 is achieved via removal/flattening of right hand grip, fixed LCD and like. While I LOVE the size and weight of A55, you would not find me claim that NEX, which I also have, has no advantage. In fact, my experience is the opposite, even with an A-mount lens via LA-EA2 on the NEX.
Generally, I carry both cameras in my sling and here is the key: The lower half of the main compartment is generally occupied by A55 with Sony 16-50 f/2.8 SSM. There is no room for an additional lens left, although, I have compartments used for an external flash and filters on both sides. Putting Minolta 70-210mm f/4 (the Beer can) on A55 is a tight fit in terms of length. Minolta 200mm f/2.8 G APO HS is slightly better (Beercan is longer but slimmer with 55mm filter, 200G is shorter but wider with 72mm filter).
OTOH, even the beer can is an easier fit on NEX-3 via LA-EA2 and still leaves room for 2-4 extra lenses (number depending on my choice for the lens). This is usually the reason I use Minolta 70-210/4 and Minolta 200/2.8 more on the NEX-3.
Portability, not pocketability, along with the ability to be the perfect companion to my A55 as a backup, along with adaptability are major reasons for my appreciation of the NEX. So, you may stop selling Canon’s talking points which might work with less than aware consumers.
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
There's been a rumor about a new 400mm lens as well, this one to be developed by Olympus. But then, that would be only a wide angle lens for you. 
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Certainly makes things more interesting. My take on that black lens to extreme left is SEL85.
The Sony-Zeiss 16-70 f/4 uses the Zeiss Tessar formula (Vario-Tessar) so I believe that makes it unique as all Sony-Zeiss zoom lenses for an ILC or cameras like Sony F717, Sony F828, Sony R1 and Sony RX100 which have all used Sonnar formula (Vario-Sonnar). So, it is a different optical design from the A-mount Sony-Zeiss 16-80 as well.
Tessar design is simpler and expected to reduce size and weight. And also expected is higher contrast. As long as it also lives up to expected sharpness, distortion and aberration control. On distortion though, I will not be holding my breath at the wide angle but also hoping that Sony doesn’t resort to automatic correction in RAW like many other manufacturers have resorted to.
Sonnar design is good for larger apertures, but the lenses can get larger as well. In this case, I don’t see much loss of aperture size. The closest competitor, Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4 only has a 1-stop advantage under 24mm and the difference decreases from then on and going away eventually. And that little advantage doesn’t really mean much in practice as I find larger aperture more useful at longer FLs than shorter. Chances are, the Sony-Zeiss 16-70 might be smaller than the Fuji 18-55 (starting with filter size itself where the Fuji uses 62mm while Sony uses 55mm).
The Sony-Zeiss 16-70 f/4 uses the Zeiss Tessar formula (Vario-Tessar) so I believe that makes it unique as all Sony-Zeiss zoom lenses for an ILC or cameras like Sony F717, Sony F828, Sony R1 and Sony RX100 which have all used Sonnar formula (Vario-Sonnar). So, it is a different optical design from the A-mount Sony-Zeiss 16-80 as well.
Tessar design is simpler and expected to reduce size and weight. And also expected is higher contrast. As long as it also lives up to expected sharpness, distortion and aberration control. On distortion though, I will not be holding my breath at the wide angle but also hoping that Sony doesn’t resort to automatic correction in RAW like many other manufacturers have resorted to.
Sonnar design is good for larger apertures, but the lenses can get larger as well. In this case, I don’t see much loss of aperture size. The closest competitor, Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4 only has a 1-stop advantage under 24mm and the difference decreases from then on and going away eventually. And that little advantage doesn’t really mean much in practice as I find larger aperture more useful at longer FLs than shorter. Chances are, the Sony-Zeiss 16-70 might be smaller than the Fuji 18-55 (starting with filter size itself where the Fuji uses 62mm while Sony uses 55mm).
Just Having Fun
Senior Member
Um, the Nex 3 does not have a flash nor a VF.
The SL1 is larger than a NEX 7 but not by much (except for depth)
Loading…
camerasize.com
Even with the Depth disadvantage, with some lenses some will find there is not a significant difference and will opt for the better focusing.
Loading…
camerasize.com
I don't like the SL1 and thought my A55 was a good camera. I wish the A57 and not the A37 had the same size body. I would take an A55 with the A57 EVF and SSS over the NEX 6 and an Alpha adapter. It is easier to hold and both cameras don't fit in a pocket and need a bag. If the Alpha bag is 1 inch larger who cares.
Unless you think that a DSLR is mostly worse. Unless you think that a moving mirror is a stupid element to insert in an electronic imaging system. Unless you prefer an evf. Unless you don't like that focusing is modally linked to the framing/visualization system for bizarre mechanical reasons. Unless you think when you have a really heavy long lens attached, "Gee at least the camera is light."
Well, the NEX-3N does, not the NEX-3 ;-)
3 and C3 --> No in built flash
3F and 3N --> built in Flash
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
Since you couldn't read and comprehend: I was comparing SL1's size to A55 (not NEX-3).Um, the Nex 3 does not have a flash nor a VF.
The SL1 is larger than a NEX 7 but not by much (except for depth)
Loading…
camerasize.com
Even with the Depth disadvantage, with some lenses some will find there is not a significant difference and will opt for the better focusing.
Loading…
camerasize.com
I don't like the SL1 and thought my A55 was a good camera. I wish the A57 and not the A37 had the same size body. I would take an A55 with the A57 EVF and SSS over the NEX 6 and an Alpha adapter. It is easier to hold and both cameras don't fit in a pocket and need a bag. If the Alpha bag is 1 inch larger who cares.
parallaxproblem
Veteran Member
I guess you could be right, but doesn't the 18-200 (all three versions) cover that sector for amateurs, with pro's being expected to buy the FF VG900? Not really sure about this as I know nothing about the video sectornevercat wrote:
t
this is what they are thinking, this is E-mount too. So no, not all the lenses will be for us photographers.
Yes 24-105 equivalent is a nice focal range - I have the Minolta 24-105/3.5-4.5 (better than it's reputation, though terrible distortion at 24mm) which I like to use as a walkabout on my A900
It looks quite a lot bigger than the 18-55 from what I can see, however
parallaxproblem
Veteran Member
Well, apart from the EVF bit I understand what you're saying but this isn't a philosophical debate
At the current time (though things will change one day) DSLRs are 'not mostly' worse from a user perspective... they are actually 'mostly better' (as long as they are setup right), and often a bit cheaper, but just inconveniently bigger and heavier - unless you have a huge lens on the NEX in which case the DSLR with equivalent lens becomes 'mostly better' and about the same phyical size/weight!
Last edited:
lets wait and see ..if i were a betting man i would bet we will see the last round of the old Senior mgmt before the E-mount focus (NEX/new entry level dslr) so a Zeiss price 85mm f1.4 OISless which <1% of NEX users will buy
... but if it is an 85mmf2ish SEL priced like a 50mmSEL (which isnt cheap compared to Nikon/Canon) with OIS/AF it tells me the new mgmt will change things fast and are listening to NEX users and theres a lot of hope for the E mount going fwd
parallaxproblem
Veteran Member
I guess I want some of Samsung's NX lens range...
The NEX-5 series is tiny... it was the first NEX camera that Sony released (if you consider the NEX-3 as a plastic-body version) and seemed to promise, together with the pancake 16/2.8 released at the same time, a minituraised interchangeable lens system offering top quality IQ
Now the release of these bigger lenses makes me wonder what the purpose of the NEX-5 series is as these bigger lenses really need a bigger body for good balance, and that is what many people posting here are asking for as well. That isn't what I personally bought into NEX expecting or wanting!
I wonder if the NEX-5T is being released to use up left-over 5R parts and whether we will see the NEX-5 series developing a 'middle-aged spread' with the subseqent version?
EinsteinsGhost
Forum Pro
There is more to a lens than the FL. If Sony has chosen to label this lens as a G, expectations for IQ will be along the lines. That is in addition to the lens being faster. Although, with all said and done, there's always that chance of throwing in a new idea: FF coverage for the NEX.I guess you could be right, but doesn't the 18-200 (all three versions) cover that sector for amateurs, with pro's being expected to buy the FF VG900? Not really sure about this as I know nothing about the video sectornevercat wrote:
t
this is what they are thinking, this is E-mount too. So no, not all the lenses will be for us photographers.
Yes 24-105 equivalent is a nice focal range - I have the Minolta 24-105/3.5-4.5 (better than it's reputation, though terrible distortion at 24mm) which I like to use as a walkabout on my A900
It looks quite a lot bigger than the 18-55 from what I can see, however
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum