Zoom lens optimized for sports

[circa2000]

Shooting a number of sport events recently, I thought there might be a nice market opportunity to create a lens optimized for sports. There is a number of simplifications Sony can use in sports zoom lens:

1. Lens resolving power - no need to be high. Anyway, the resolution is limited by the subject motion blur. Also, when following the action, the camera moves a lot and any imperfection in resolution is not noticeable. Possibly, the resolving power can be as low as 5MP, in DxO terms. This is about the same resolution as FE 24-240 has on NEX-7 body, according to DXO, and it's good enough for fast sports.

2. Image stabilization - do not need any. It just interferes with camera following the subject and makes the blur worse. Anyway, the shutter speed is 1/1000 and faster. No need in IS at that speed.

3. Plastic instead of glass elements. The sports shooting environment is rather harsh and lens does not survive it for long time anyway. So, an aspheric plastic lens should be good enough, if its effective life time is just a year.

The big question is if one can make F2 or faster long zoom lens given all the above simplifications.

 

[Mystery member]

Given enough JD, any lens will be OK for sports.

 

[holin]

Shooting a number of sport events recently, I thought there might be a nice market opportunity to create a lens optimized for sports. There is a number of simplifications Sony can use in sports zoom lens:

1. Lens resolving power - no need to be high. Anyway, the resolution is limited by the subject motion blur. Also, when following the action, the camera moves a lot and any imperfection in resolution is not noticeable. Possibly, the resolving power can be as low as 5MP, in DxO terms. This is about the same resolution as FE 24-240 has on NEX-7 body, according to DXO, and it's good enough for fast sports.

2. Image stabilization - do not need any. It just interferes with camera following the subject and makes the blur worse. Anyway, the shutter speed is 1/1000 and faster. No need in IS at that speed.

3. Plastic instead of glass elements. The sports shooting environment is rather harsh and lens does not survive it for long time anyway. So, an aspheric plastic lens should be good enough, if its effective life time is just a year.

The big question is if one can make F2 or faster long zoom lens given all the above simplifications.

Even if the weight can be brought down with plastics, I don't think there's any way around physics. An example of long fast zoom:

f/2 would be twice the size probably

 

[circa2000]

Thanks for the Sigma lens. Very impressive. I wonder how many of them they sold since 2007. Looks like instead of pursuing the real market demand with new FE lenses, they spend their R&D resources on something that has little or no market at all.

To get back to the original question, my reference was 70-200 GM lens. I thought that getting from F2.8 to F2.0 while making it mostly plastic and sacrifice resolution might keep the weight and size more-less the same as the GM.

 

[tommiejeep]

Who knows what may happen in the future .

I'm not sure there is much of a market for a lens that is a throw away after a year.

My 300 2.8vr and 70-200 2.8G vr are both about 8 years old and going strong after a hard life of shooting Soccer, outdoor events and wildlife.

 

[olstrup]

Sigma make/made a 200-500/2.8 which weighs in at 35 pounds:

Loading…

www.google.dk

It's affectionaly called the "Bigma". Faster than that, it will be even more monstrous - even with the weight reducing suggestions the OP has.

 

[circa2000]

I'm not sure there is much of a market for a lens that is a throw away after a year.

To me, it has some chances on the market. If plastic lens allows a unique combination of low F# and small size/weight for the price of low durability, I would buy one. It might be a boost for the industry, as lenses become, basically, consumables, like some of the low-cost batteries.