E-mount holding Sony back. It was a mistake then, bigger mistake now.

[nevercat]

hyenadog wrote:

mmalkin15 wrote:

Perhaps true but the biggest issue for me as a Nikon user with many Nikon lenses is the lack of any adapters that maintain Nikon lens automation. If Nikon were to make such a mirror less camera that maintained the AF-S VR ens functionality AND had a large sensor ( APS-C or full frame) as opposed to the Nikon One series with tiny sensors I may well give up the Sony. If an adapter for Nikon lenses that maintains automation on the NEX comes along I will be even happier as those small NEX bodies are very useful for some work. For now those legacy lenses work very well if one can live with completely manual ( including diaphragm) operation.

A good 90 or 100mm macro lens for the NEX would also be a fine addition

Mark

snap .. with the exception that whats needed for my needs emount wise r small compact "right price" 85mm /120mm bright primes

if the NEX had IBIS then cheap/compact/light e-mount lenses would be enough to differentiate from nikon .. but as e-mounts have to have OIS in they are invariably going to be more expensive .. Sony is just stupid making them crazy expensive

"right priced" 50SEL sells

Can you show me any figures to support this statement?

but "badly over priced" 35SEL doesnt sell at all ..

Again are you able to show sales numbers to support this statement. And for your information the Sone SEL35,,1.8 is the CHEAPEST stabilized 35 mm prime lens on the market. Show me any other STABILIZED 35mm prime that is cheaper...

it's not rocket science SOny !

No it is not, but as long as you can not show that your assumption is right well it is of no use in any discussion.

 

[Mel Snyder]

uhoh07 wrote:

Oh yeah, terrible mistake.

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

This qualifies as camera porn.

 

[SQLGuy]

Somebody should make a Nikon F mount adapter in the form of a DSLR shaped case, with some metal or sand to add weight, that will completely envelop the E-mount body so that people like the OP will more easily be able to acclimate...

Maybe something like this: http://camyx.com/fun/2013/01/sonnikon-the-franken-camera-project/

 

[Mel Snyder]

D Cox wrote:

The E mount is the only reason I bought a Sony camera. In my opinion it is the best design yet for a lens mount.

I cannot see any problem with it at all.

Especially if you have shelves full of legacy lenses you never thought you'd use again, but couldn't bear to part with...

Can't wait to mount them on an A7, and live again. Just wish some of them in brass mounts weren't so heavy. My 85mm f1.2L Canon FD is magnificent, but too heavy to carry routinely.

Gotta take it to a local HS or college basketball game or wrestling match. I would have killed for a rig like that when I was in college.

 

[Murx]

Mel Snyder wrote:

uhoh07 wrote:

Oh yeah, terrible mistake.

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

This qualifies as camera porn.

nod

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

This supposed mistake has helped E-mount systems greatly, making them extremely attractive cameras bodies to have in the bag (without the bodies themselves eating up the space).

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Larger... good.

More demanding... even better!

Short registration distance... versatile!

Larger lenses... one word for you: Physics, and IQ. Sony 55mm f/1.8 OSS and Nikon 58mm f/1.4 are about half stop apart (and about half the price). They are evenly matched on length (70mm). So, when you put the lens on this body wish short registration distance you speak of: Advantage - E-mount. Never mind that the half stop gain also comes at the expense of a really thick lens (82mm versus 64mm).

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

In other words, Sony is making everybody else, including the establishment... followers. Good!

 

[NomadMark]

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

Holy wow. This is the most rubbish post I have read in a while.

To make a camera smaller, you need to make the flange distance smaller. And in doing so, at the size Sony has, it enables you to adapt almost any lens to the cameras. How on earth is this a bad thing?! It doesn't limit anything. It OPEN UP options to include legacy mount lenses that NEED shorter flange distances than you get with a DSLR.Your use of the term legacy mount shows your lack of understanding, by the way. SO, they have not mastered sensors that are optimized for read elements that are almost butting up against the sensor. But, guess what, NO ONE ELSE HAS EITHER. Leica even has issue with some. They may be a little better at it, but they cost $7000+! The a7r cost what? 2300? Bottom line, Sony has created a great platform to build on. You can't blame them for not ensuring that EVERYONES lenses work on their camera. However, Sony lenses will work! I myself feel grateful for the ability to mount some legacy mount lenses should I choose.

The size of the glass has to do with focal lengths. The longer the focal length, typically (optical tricks aside) the longer the lens. And the wider the aperture, the bigger the elements. The bigger the sensor, the longer the focal lengths need to be to compare to the same FOV as a smaller sensor camera. However, sony seems to be doing a great job as minimizing the lens size; compare the Canon 24-70 f4 to the Zeiss 24-70 f4. The Zeiss is much smaller!

WHY are people whining and crying so much. Man, if you don't like the A7/A7r, don't buy it! And please, stop with the rubbish posts! These two new cameras have really brought out the looney tunes!!! Insane!!

Truth - Sony has made a more compact full frame camera. There is only so much you can do to get around the PHYSICS of it all, while adding in AF and OSS. And it's cheaper than its competitors! I fail to see why everyone is causing such a fuss. GET OVER IT!

AND PLEASE RESEARCH A LITTLE BEFORE POSTING TRASH!

 

[SteveOttwa]

I also would like to have the adapter that supports Nikon lens automation.

It doesnt seem that hard to do, in principle.

You would need the two sets of electrical contacts...a single chip withe the appropriate software to do the conversion between Nikon's fstop, focal length signalling and Sony's.

There is lots of room for the hardware.

Maybe the problem is knowing the specs for Nikon's signalling...or Sony's for that matter.

Still, doesnt seem like rocket surgery for some clever (probably Chinese) engineer.

It will happen eventually.

 

[SQLGuy]

SteveOttwa wrote:

I also would like to have the adapter that supports Nikon lens automation.

It doesnt seem that hard to do, in principle.

You would need the two sets of electrical contacts...a single chip withe the appropriate software to do the conversion between Nikon's fstop, focal length signalling and Sony's.

There is lots of room for the hardware.

Maybe the problem is knowing the specs for Nikon's signalling...or Sony's for that matter.

Still, doesnt seem like rocket surgery for some clever (probably Chinese) engineer.

It will happen eventually.

As mentioned on another current thread, MXCamera was supposedly working on it, but seems to have gone quiet.

Besides the electronic interface, you would also need an actuator to drive the aperture lever for G lenses (built-in AF motor), and you would need an additional screw drive motor if you wanted to enable AF for older Nikon AF lenses.

 

[ApertureAcolyte]

Limited selection of overpriced lenses

 

[sroute]

ApertureAcolyte wrote:

Limited selection of overpriced lenses

Funny. Overpriced by what definition?

When NEX arrived on the scene, I'd have said limited selection of just-ok lenses; actually I don't have to say that, actions speak louder and instead of buying native lenses I used adapted Zeiss rangefinder lenses with my NEX-5N.

In the case of the full frame A7, Sony has brought out lenses I'm interested in right from the get go.

You can look at it as a glass half-empty, I'm looking at the A7s as a glass half full.

In the case of NEX I believe Sony underestimated the appeal of the camera to experienced photographers and enthusiasts, so great lenses took a while. They've apparently learned their lessons. I'd have no problems buying the FE55 instead of using a Zeiss ZM50 Planar... and get AF out of the bargain.

As for the FE35/2.8, I wish it was a little faster but am pleased with the size. A good trade off for now I'd say and I won't be surprised to see Sony, or Zeiss, or someone else, bring out a high performance FE 35/1.8 or f/1.4 down the road. Performance wise it looks like it will go toe to to, aperture to aperture, with some very good glass costing as much or more, but of course I want to see more before concluding that.

 

[spacemn]

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

I see, so that is why Canon and Fuji copied them with the same registration distance?!? (18 and 17.9mm)

The E-mount is as of now the best photographic mount in my opinion, maybe even for video as well. It facilitates both APS-C and FF sensors. virtually any lens can be adapted to it. Big win is RF lenses that can be adapted to it.

There are no disadvantage with a short sensor to flange reg. distance, adapted lenses do not get issues obviously and natively Sony can simply make the lens longer IF it is necessary. The 20mm f/2.8 clearly demonstrates you can get decent performance in a super compact design (short reg. distance AND small lens):

Loading…

camerasize.com

This is incredibly compact for a system producing top drawer IQ. E-mount bad design?? Nonsense! (IMHO)

 

[Dirk W]

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

If the short flange distance is a problem for some lenses they can simply build a longer lens in that case and add the necessary distance at the bottom of the lens, right?

 

[Chris 1]

Ignore this troll

 

[parallaxproblem]

Chanthis wrote:

Short flange distance was a mistake then, back when the first NEX cameras came out, tiny NEX body, big lenses (24mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8. etc.)

Now we have an even larger, more demanding sensor, same short registration distance, LARGER, and SLOWER lenses.

Prediction: Sony will stir up interest in the small FF mirrorless segment, but another manufacturer will capitalize on it, one who isn't limited by a "legacy" mount.

Sony E-mount flange distance: 18mm

Fuji X-mount flange distance: 17.7mm

Canon EOS M flange distance: 18mm

Samsung NX flange distance: 25.5mm

Nikon 1 flange distance: 17mm

E-mount seems to have a rather normal registration distance for mirrorless systems. Only Samsung offer a longer one. Samsung NX do offer nice, small lenses for their cameras, but the system will not accept Leica M or M39 mount lenses - swings and roundabouts

I would be very surprised if future FF Canon mirrorless bodies will use a mount different to EOS M, and so at least one other major player seems to agree with Sony on the compromise they have taken with their lens mount

I would agree that Sony did not make enough small lenses for E-mount since launch and focused too strongly on large zooms (three 18-200 models!) and larger prime lenses that were not so well suited to the system, but that was a business decision and not because of the flange length. The small FE 35/2.8 is the most interesting lens in the newly anounced FE series - hopefully it will sell well enough for Sony to recognise that this is the sort of lens they should be making for E-mount in the future

 

[Joe Ogiba]

I agree, the Canon 85mm F1.2 works on the full frame E mount with Metabones adapter and I use 24mm F1.4, 35mm F1.4, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm F1.4 lenses on my VG900.

50mm F1.4 Pentax (49mm filter size) full frame on my VG900

85mm F1.2