There are lots of new products vying for attention at CP+ 2016, including Sony's a6300 and new GM series lenses for its full-frame mirrorless cameras. And they are getting plenty of attention from show attendees, especially those eager to try out the FE 85mm F1.4 GM's portrait capabilities. We took another look at the a6300 and the GM lenses on display at the buzzing Sony booth in Yokohama.
Something that I do a lot while shooting UHD is use touch-to-focus to select focus between two (or sometimes more) faces. This can require split-second decisions when the scene is a conversation. Samsung NX1 does this well. Panasonic DVX200 does this well. 70D does this well but is soft HD at best. Sony FS7 - NO TOUCH SCREEN. Sony A6300 - NO TOUCH SCREEN. Sony A7R mkii - NO TOUCH SCREEN. No thanks.
If the Sony cameras had touch screens I think I would sell everything else and buy-in. The quick focussing G Master lenses are particularly interesting with their higher resolving capability making them somewhat future proof.
I really hope Sony finally breaks down and pays to license the touch screen tech that they evidently don't own. Really hard to believe at this point in time Sony doesn't have touch screens. How many devices are there out in the world with touch screens? Billions??
At these prices that sigma adapter and sigma lens look better don't they !!
Why can Sony not make great (not mediocre) lens at a reasonable price ??
Both Canon and Nikon equal quality lens are cheaper, is it the #'s of buyers or is Sony greedy or just paying too much to put blue 'Zeiss' on the lens ??
Why not put some of that cell-phone sensor money as a subsidy to cheapen those prices ???????
Or the Batis 85mm if you don't absolutely need f/1.4...
The A-mount 85/1.4 is an outdated optical design, with outdated screw drive AF. It's far cheaper for a reason. Not to mention you're comparing the launch price of a new lens to the current price of a 10-year-old lens where demand is probably pretty minimal by now.
Guys, I'm sharing with you some pictures I took at CP+. Original ARW data. There should be some files taken with GM 85 mm (most of them), some taken with GM 24-70, and I guess at least one JPEG with A6300 with kit lens. I think I mixed some photos taken with my Batis 85 mm and something taken with RX100mkIV just for reportage. Some ARWs are not compressed. I chose randomly, I hope I've uploaded something that could be useful for you. Note: 85 mm is the only lens that is really ready for production, there were many samples and you could use them to shoot the models. With 24-70 you had to use their camera only, probably because firmware is not ready yet, but at least you could save date on your own SD card. 70-200 is still in a b version (I guess) so data could not be stored. I guess that's the same situation also for A6300 because it was forbidden to store data collected with lenses that were not kit lens. Enjoy. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/b7qjwq5d5jkx3ez/AABHaG2mxoCx-xL3vgNSfuvfa?dl=0
Well they should not of had a conference in Iceland then introducing an unfinished product. The camera did NOT focus on what I told it to, it focused on the background instead of the person the center point was pointed at.
And to be honest? people walked out of the conference and I didnt even test more than one lens because I was just annoyed at all the crap they did, it was basicly a 2 hour advertisement then a 5 minute video that repeated everything they said but compressed it into 5 minutes. And we just got 30 mins of testing for about 40 people. 2 full frames, 2 crops and 3 compacts.
You're being beta testers. Now that they learned about the issue they are going to fix it. Sony is working hard on giving new lenses to users, firmware bugs are absolutely common in all the newly released products. I'm not justifying them, I'm just being positive. :-)
Cant exactly call us beta testers when we got 1 minute at best with a camera because it was overcrowded and people blocking each other. I wanted to like they're cameras and thought I might switch, but instead I just left frustrated and pi**ed off as I felt my time was completely wasted by they're 2 hour talk about 3 lenses and 1 camera (yup thats ALL they talked about for 2 HOURS)
I'm sorry for your bad experience. But I think that a software flaw in the product should be considered differently from a s*itty presentation. ;-) Sony's marketing is not good at all lately. Products are.
I've preordered the 85/1.4, and I'll reserve judgement for then. But I don't understand why this new lens is nearly 200 grams heavier than the fabulous 85/1.4 ZA for AMount. Heavier still than the original Minolta 85/1.4.
Glad these lenses are here. But I hope Sony makes a larger sized camera grip (and battery) soon. When the a7RII overheats, and it overheats a lot, it also cuts the battery life by 75%. It's just terrible to hold and use these cameras for client work. Last week shoot had to swap between two a7RII cams every twenty minutes. Seriously, each camera must have overheated ten times throughout each day... on a two day out of town shoot. Very frustrating and embarrassing in front of client.
Gzz, that's embarrassing. I had a a7II for 2 months last year. Great idea, these Sonys are, but too many compromises and work-arounds and nuisances. I hope you were talking about video, because if it was overheating for stills, you should just get rid of them.
I wonder what prompts your A7RII's to overheat for stills, because I've mostly seen reports on that happening in (certain bodies, others wouldn't) 4K internal video mode, before the last firmware update. Especially if it happens to both bodies, where others can't make it happen once. Maybe in glitch caused by a certain combination of settings?
Whatever those women get paid, it's not enough. The perv element among the photo crowd is just something that's always bugged me. It gives landscape photographers, architectural photographers, pet photographers, and others a bad name.
To above concerns... yes it was video overheating. 4K commercial for manufacturing company. Cameras went bonkers hot for interview footage. Not good to constantly swap cameras out in front of business owners.
I left the VG Battery Grip on tripod, and swapped bodies from there. So the battery wasn't ever even inside the cameras. LCD was pulled out for theoretically better ventilation... but not. Camera was controlled by USB remote, so even my hands couldn't affect it. All tripod work. Touching/removing the camera was extremely hot.
I would have gladly shot this without issue on a99. But client insisted 4K and Sony doesn't provide for their AMount loyalists.
Lens used was 18-200PZ, which is awesome. Much better than the 18-105/4. Point to note that I was in APS-C mode for entire shoot.
Were they running the latest firmware? I haven't heard reports since. Best fix is an external recorder though and then trigger recording through the external recorder.
hehe, these look like traditional designs with a little stump at the end to make up for the missing mirror box!
i´d be curious if is it actually is possible to build shorter lenses for mirrorless FF systems or if sony is just cost cutting complete new optical designs.
they should have leica make them some small primes. would also fit well with sonys price policy.
or some e-mount versions of the beautiful and small zeiss rangefinder glass. in silver. that would make a lot of sense i think.
That "little stump" is full of glass. So your traditional design theory is certainly stumped.
Leica primes are small because they have no AF and are full of very expensive exotic glass. If Sony did what you asked, the prices would double or triple.
It never ceases to amaze me how little people seem to know about the difference between designing lenses for digital and film. It's not as if digital imaging is a new phenomenon. go and look at the difference in size between the original Canon 35/1.4 and the new one.
If you want to know why Sony don't make tiny film-era sized lenses it's because they don't work very well on digital sensors. Leica had no choice but to find a way since they had a user base that would not replace its lenses. Their solution is an engineering compromise relying on a bespoke 'curved' sensor and lots of software correction. The A7rII is also compromised because e-mount is really too-small for full frame.
As for saving money by removing the mirror - the mirror is removed because a digital sensor doesn't need a mirror- there are no mirrors in video cameras.
my film era lenses work quite well on my digital camera. i have 16 of them and none is younger than 15 years.
and digital cameras benefit greatly from a mirror. my d800 is a joy to shoot. quick, responsive, everything happens instantly. not so on the a7s2 i rented over the weekend with a nice lens marred by that dreadfull focus by wire. it´s a beefed up point and shoot from how it operates. horrible body ergonomics as well. small, but hard to reach buttons all over the place. and don´t get me started on the battery. please, where is the benefit of size reduction? i can´t see it!
For most of the show, we used an a7R II shooting Raw stills and 1080/24P video (XAVC S). I shot a lot of stills on an old X100 when out and about (see our Instagram for some less show-focused shots).
Seeing this video made me feel so sorry for the women who have to pose In the booths and have their pictures taken all day by sweaty middle aged douchebags. They should outlaw that practice.
Just because the GM lenses and the A6300 were announced at the same time, does not mean they go well together. The lenses are clearly intended primarily for full frame application, in size and focal length. Sony is in dire need of some high-quality, compact, and focal-length appropriate lenses for their APS-C cameras. Many of their current APS-C line-up do not qualify as high-quality. Even the Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm f/4 ZA OSS does not qualify (just try getting a good one that does not exhibit poor side-to-side sharpness). I am not upgrading my older NEX camera until I see some better compact lenses!
There's always Micro Four Thirds if you want a wide selection of quality compact lenses. The lenses are why I went MFT instead of APS for a compact and affordable kit.
Think if there were another camera like leica m9, with the small optics.. yet someone would find a way to make it electronic / AF, but still keep it small like the original m9 .. I see much more value in a FF that would truly be size of mft body + lens .. and of course without costing a fortune like the leica does
I think the A6300 is for people who already own an FE camera and want a backup compact body. Hence the pairing it with the new GM lenses. But also Sony's marketing division seems a little... eccentric.
People who are looking for a primary camera at the £1000 price point and plan to use native glass aren't really the ideal demographic, unless your focus is video and you don't care about the fact that everything else at the price point has far better ergonomics.
And there aren't any APS-C only lenses covering the same real focal length (no to be confused with equiv or same FOV), because there's no point. They would be practically the same size and weight. Thus, these lenses serve both formats well and are appreciated accordingly, only offering a different FOV.
There's no point in having aps-c lenses? But nikon has a good 35 dx lens (50 equiv), their dx macro lenses are also pretty small / good .. you don't always have to aim for sharpest optics to have a good lens. Just compare size / weight of canikon 20-85 primes to sigma art . Now, think if those canikon ff lenses were all for aps-c with the same design principle, they would probably be even lighter than their FF counterparts. It's actually funny and sad, because leica used to make small cameras and lenses (leica m9), and now even they are starting to make big stuff.
You misread my comments and generalized them. I made them in the context of these specific lenses, these focal lengths. To be more specific: longer focal lengths.
For shorter focal lengths, a difference can be made, hence why they do bother (well, to be honest, less so lately) with APS-C only lenses of shorter focal lengths.
Have a look at the Samsung 85mm f/1.4, APS-C only lens. It's similar in size and weight to the FF versions found on other mounts too. Taking it a step further, the smallest current µ4/3 75-300 (Olympus) lens is similar in size (difference between 1 to 5 mm) and weight (within 30 grams) compared to the smallest FF 75-300mm lens, even though he latter has slightly faster apertures and covers an image format that is 4 times larger in size.
No, the 75-300 from m43 is actually more comparable to nikon aps-c 55-200 imo. The tamron FF 70-300 I have is bigger / slightly heavier than the 75-300 olympus.
I don't know what 75-300 ff lens you're comparing it to, but the olympus 75-300 probably resolves better than the said old FF lens if the said FF lens is very old. DXOMark can compare cross systems. If an old lens on a aps-c or FF body (newer body, like d7xxx or d750 / d810) shows poorer results than a 75-300 olympus, then I believe m43 manufacturers have achieved something.
You're comparing different real focal lengths now, see my earlier point there. A 70-200 keeps the same real focal length on both FF and APS-C. Like I said they may provide different FOV's, but they still serve both formats, since for the FOV and apertures offered, there's practically nothing to gain when designing for a smaller sensor alone with longer focal lengths. Hence why those actively designing for both formats, never bothered with long APS-C only lenses.
Lenses similar to the Olympus 75-300 in size while covering a FF circle are the Nikon 70-300, Canon 75-300 (both able to resolve more, faster transmission, similar distortion and similar or less vignetting still on APS-C according to DXOmark) and the Sony 75-300 for example.
"Taking it a step further, the smallest current µ4/3 75-300 (Olympus) lens is similar in size (difference between 1 to 5 mm) and weight (within 30 grams) compared to the smallest FF 75-300mm lens, even though he latter has slightly faster apertures and covers an image format that is 4 times larger in size." I thought you were the one who wanted to compare them, or did I understand it wrong? 75-300 olympus is smaller than tamron 70-300 usd vc is what I tried to prove
"there's practically nothing to gain when designing for a smaller sensor alone with longer focal lengths. " But that's not entirely true? It's possible to design lenses that are smaller, the nikon macro dx lenses and the 35 dx is good example. Only reason canikon isn't doing it is because they don't want people stuck in DX system too long, their endgame is to get as many users to their FF system as possible.
I don't understand what this true focal length thing you're talking about is. Yes the olympus 75-300 is a 75-300 lens, but it acts as a small 150-600 equiv lens that the canikon or any other manufacturer hasn't provided. Take example the latest olympus 300 f4. Would it be possible for canikon make a 600 f8? Maybe. Will they? Absolutely not.
It's possible to design good or good enough lenses, keeping the optics small. It's possible with FF too, but smaller image circle doesn't hurt? I know Nikon 50 1.4 and 35mm 1.8 DX are "good enough", whilst a sigma's 50 1.4 art is overkill.
"I thought you were the one who wanted to compare them, or did I understand it wrong? " Yes and I gave 3 examples that are in the same ballpark, size wise, while covering formats up to 4 times larger. My comment regarding comparing different real focal lengths, was aimed at your "nikon aps-c 55-200 " example. You still seem to be confusing FOV with the subject at hand: real focal length.
The original premise was that these lenses are needlessly large for APS-C cameras. My point is that tele lenses of such REAL focal lengths, wouldn't be smaller if they had thrown FF coverage out of the window. Yes, of course FOV is different, yes, of course that results in different compression, etc etc. That's all completely besides the point. They serve different holes in the FF and APS-C lineups, but those are functional positions nonetheless. If you want 85mm portrait lens for APS-C, covering the equiv of around 130mm on FF, these aren't needlessly large, FF coverage or not.
"But that's not entirely true? It's possible to design lenses that are smaller, the nikon macro dx lenses and the 35 dx is good example. Only reason canikon isn't doing it is because they don't want people stuck in DX system too long, their endgame is to get as many users to their FF system as possible."
I seem to be talking to a wall here, but I already said that it makes a difference for short focal lengths, such as the one you mention but I also said several times, that this was about longer focal lengths (mostly 70mm+).
Equivalents change nothing about the fact that lenses can serve a purpose on each format, even if the framing and everything changes. Thus 1 lens design, 1 true focal length, can fill different(!) holes in both APS-C and FF lens lineups, without being compromised (such as needlessly large) by the fact that it covers a larger image circle too. Anyone seeing an automatic contradiction there, is following a fallacy.
I think I'm missing the point here. I say aps-c lenses are needlessly large, when I look at the 50-150 sigma f2.8, or the fuji primes, which are very close to FF sigma art lenses in terms of size and weight. I can sort of understand what a 18-35 f1.8 might be going for, but at same time I don't understand why there's no more of the 1.8 sort of small primes for aps-c. The 35mm prime for nikon and couple of macro lenses are the only small primes for nikon, and there's no real 400 or 600 equiv either.
I don't understand what's the point of looking "true focal lengths" other than comparing the sizes, because for the equiv fl is the one that the lens is being purchased for, be it mf, aps-c or mft. You say real focal lengths aren't smaller, but the 100-400 panasonic is both smaller and lighter than either the canon or nikon counterparts. 45 1.8 is also smaller than 50 1.8 .
I think leica with m9 + its lenses has shown it's possible to make even small FF lenses, just that today most of the manufacturers don't embrace it / don't see the value on doing so. I look at canikon 1.8 primes, they're indeed smaller than sigma's or tamron's newer lenses, some smaller than "premium" canikon primes, because different design. It's when we start going for wide open sharpness that things become heavy.
Yet for some reason, they've not tried to make these consumer primes smaller, by making aps-c versions of them. The 35mm dx prime is actually pretty good, and it's sad to see there aren't more lenses of the same ideology for the aps-c. I'm sure if canikon saw value in making small birder lenses, they could make a smaller 100-400 for aps-c. They don't want to.
My interpretation of the A6300 is that it's a tool. They've done very little to make it appealing to a single-body amateur. However as a working professional who wants a second body that generally gets the job done and can merge into their A7SII/A7RII workflow, it will do fantastically.
Hence the pairing it with the FE lenses.
But also the marketing people probably wanted to shoe-horn their products together to make the most efficient use of product exposure.
"I think I'm missing the point here." Clearly... Of course I'm not discussing lenses covering equivalent focal lengths, because this was about 1 lens doing 2 different jobs on both formats. Yes, a 70-200mm gives the equiv. of 105-300mm on APS-C, but that's a desired coverage on that format too and it's not noticeably larger than an APS-C only variant of the same quality would be.
"45 1.8 is also smaller than 50 1.8 ." Really, did I not explain this 5 times before? Not to mention the shorter flange distance convoluting the discussion for shorter focal lengths here.
As for the Panasonic 100-400, it's just 2cm (just 11%) shorter than the Canon, while not as bright at the long end. And the latter covers a format 4 times the size. For an APS-C format 2.3 times smaller, would that be 6% difference? If that's the best example for a tele lens, I rest my case... after one more example: Panasonic 300mm f/4: 9.3x22.7 cm, 1270 gram, µ4/3 Canon 300mm f/4: 8.9x22.1 cm, 1190 gram, FF
Too bad Sony doesn't made a 18:1 to 24:1 lense for this camera. Without it I'll never be interested. Need more reach. But the good news is that Nikon does have that reach with it's new Nikon D24-500 (fixed lense but a good one). The Nikon can do just about everything and then some that the Sony does so Sony is losing the battle at this point.
The Sony mirrorless cameras could use native E/FE mount lenses or any DSLR lens ever made with adapter and the Nikon DL24-500 is a fixed lens camera with much smaller 1" sensor. Too bad there are so many clueless posts on DPR.
Those look nice. Its interesting that although these are lenses for 'mirrorless' cameras they look pretty much the same size as dslr lenses. The purported size and weight saving seems nonexistent.
The size and weight savings are in the body, where the heavy mirror and longer flange are made redundant. As for the size of the lens, to make them smaller would require a breakthrough in the physics of refracting light; a mirror, or lack-thereof, has nothing to do with it.
Yes, actually, they look bigger than the equivalent Canikon. That cheering you hear in the background is Canikon using this vid to market their own products. Size weight advantage to mirrorless? Doesn't look like it on FF, apples to apples comparison. Check this out: http://camerasize.com/compact/#312.286,624.515,ha,t
@Malikknows: It's slightly longer, yes, but as a kit it remains over 200g lighter than the 5DIII despite being stabilized in-body and producing images with twice the megapixel count on a back-lit sensor with live readout to two high-res screens. Not saying the Canon doesn't have its own advantages, just that there's a lot of other perks to shooting mirrorless than just the size and weight.
I don't disagree with any of that, Anders. Just making the point that after all this time we finally have Sony lenses that we can compare directly and that size/weight advantage for mirrorless looks moot. BTW, I'll trade you that 200g for 3x the battery life. Horses for courses....
I sooooo don't understand the people who say they can use their 300 f2.8 or 400-600 f4-5.6 lenses on a sony a7 / other mirrorless bodies .. yeah ofc with tripod it probably doesn't matter much, but I think some people try say they handhold them too.. doesn't make much sense to me why not just use a dslr at that point. Even the 70-200 f2.8 is pushing it too far with the a7 imo
I've asked people at Sony, other lenses are coming. It's just a delay of deadline. We will see them probably during 2016. Zeiss lenses aren't included in Sony's roadmap.
Seattle's Freeway Park is a labyrinth of trees, towers of concrete and tourists. Turns out, it's also a great place to practice parkour. With several Sony a9's in hand, we turned our lenses to the skies to capture some flying humans in our latest sample gallery.
It's been a long week since the Sony a9 announcement, but now we're finally able to show you our real world samples gallery from Sony's shooting event in New York. Click through for hockey, figure skating and a full-on track meet. Read more
Last week we took a look at Lensrentals' disassembly of a broken Sony FE 70-200 F2.8 GM lens. Check out part two to watch the guys at LR further dissect the lens, to see if it can be saved. Read more
When the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM didn't test as well as expected, Roger Cicala and crew jumped on an opportunity to crack one open and see what was going on inside. Read more
2016 saw DPReview staff travel around the world, for our ongoing series of long-form videos. In this article, Barney takes us on a guided tour though the year in Field Tests. Read more
The Nikon Z6 may not offer the incredible resolution of its sibling, the Z7, but its 24MP resolution is more than enough for most people, and the money saved can buy a lot of glass. Find out what's new and notable about the Z6 in our First Impressions Review.
Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.
The SiOnyx Aurora is a compact camera designed to shoot stills and video in color under low light conditions, so we put it to the test under the northern lights and against a Nikon D5. It may not be a replacement for a DSLR, but it can complement one well for some uses.
At its core, the Scanza is an easy-to-use multi-format film scanner. It offers a quick and easy way to scan your film negatives and slides into JPEGs, but costs a lot more than similar products without a Kodak label.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
A question frequently asked on the Internet is 'what's the best DSLR?' In this buying guide we've answered that question – but also whether it's the right question to be asking in the first place.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Shopping for a photographer? We've got some gift ideas for all budget sizes, but here you'll find our budget-friendliest suggestions – just right for stockings.
It's not always easy to find marble, wood or concrete surfaces on demand. Enter Replica Surfaces, small tiles designed to replicate popular photo surfaces and backdrops.
Lensrentals Founder Roger Cicala set aside some time to take apart Canon's new 50mm F1.2L RF lens and in doing so revealed a number of interesting discoveries.
With a nickname like 'bokeh master,' we had to see what the Sigma 105mm F1.4 was all about. Take a look at our gallery of samples shot with the Sony a7R III.
On their latest models the two smartphone manufacturers have replaced the dreaded display notch by a design that features a circular hole for the front camera in the display.
With the latest version, Adobe Camera now lets you import Raw files from the newest iPhones, Pixel devices, the Samsung Galaxy Note 9 and Nikon Z6 among others.
The Nikon Z6 may not offer the incredible resolution of its sibling, the Z7, but its 24MP resolution is more than enough for most people, and the money saved can buy a lot of glass. Find out what's new and notable about the Z6 in our First Impressions Review.
The Sigma 56mm F1.4 combines a sensible sub-$500 price tag and excellent performance, providing a portrait-friendly 85mm equiv. view on Sony's APS-C mirrorless cameras.
The 250mm F4 is Fujifilm's longest lens for its medium-format system. It's equivalent to about 200mm on a GFX camera, and we put it to work on some portraits as well as some scenes around Seattle's waterfront – take a look.
A new patent from Canon lays out the schematics for a speedbooster-style adapter for mounting Canon EF lenses onto EOS M cameras, but with a variable baffle to reduce the risk of flare.
The Jackson Hole Travel and Tourism Board has started a campaign asking visitors to stop geotagging their specific locations when visiting Wyoming's national parks.
Film simulation app Filmborn has been updated with new presets, features, and overall improved support on Apple's latest mobile operating system and devices.
We've been shooting with the LX100 II both in and out of the studio, as part of our ongoing review. We're pretty impressed, so far, with the revised JPEG color and addition of a touchscreen both noticeable improvements.
Skylum's Luminar 3 arrives on December 18 with the long-awaited ability to manage your photo library. However, it won't be a full DAM (digital asset manager); the company plans to roll out features throughout 2019 and won't charge for updates from Luminar 2018 during that time.
Comments