D90 and EOS 50D launched on same day

Maybe, but little nice things could slip through the cracks that are very important. Sure, something are needed.

Like debating between F1.7 or F1.8, or the min aperture on a Lens (F22 verses F32)

But some things do get more exact, like FL on wide angles, filter sizes, sealed or not.

Kiklop wrote: We can start with a poll; if one wants to think about it and write about no more than 10 options (lenses) with only one possible option we may get an interesting results about which lenses we do miss the most. And that poll will serve for argument our needs (once again) :)

I think that any poll should not have exact lens specifications because those can vary between people too much. E.g. "Shorter focal-length STF prime" rather than 60mm STF or 85mm STF

It should also avoid the lenses we know Sony are about to release; "wide-angle, large-aperture zoom" (16-35mm F2.8), "super telephoto zoom" (70-400mm F4.5-5.6), and "full-frame standard zoom" (24-105mm F4).

So the question for your poll would be "Which type of lens do you think Sony needs to work on first?"

Options might include...
* Semi-large aperture prime
* Telephoto macro
* Wide angle prime
* Semi-large aperture telephoto zoom
* Super telephoto prime
* Soft focus lens
* Tilt & shift prime
* Revised basic kit lens
* APS-C large-aperture standard zoom
* Shorter focal-length STF lens

Any alternative ideas?

roweraay wrote: ab012 wrote: But which is the top of the line Nikkor action camera? D300 or D3? Believe it or not, for "tracking" action, the D300 is the body that is most used - even over the D3/D700.

Just because there are more D300s out there or for some other reason? eg Does one need tracking for athletics or sport?

Incidentally, the reason I personally really want cross sensors on the outling sensors is less to do with tracking then with relatively static scenes, as sometimes one wants to (and have the time to do so) compose with a bird's head/eye far off center in relatively static (as opposed to BIF) scenes.

oh ps I agree the AF point spread of the D300 is certainly nice to have

Edited by ab012 - 31 August 2008 at 15:33

Exactly, fill out a niche and move on. Right now, the macro line is one that is easy to complete. I'm pretty sure the smaller white lens is the 4/200 reborn. get that, a ring flash, maybe even bring back the 3X macro and they are there.

Bring lenses that fit with the cameras they are bringing right now. Hitting markets less surved by Canon and Nikon smart plan too. Of course they serve pretty much all markets/niches, so find the ones you can do better in, and compete there.

Portrait stuff could be the next best one for them. As they pretty much have it right now, a 2/100 might help, hard to say. I think a 50 or 85 STF might be better. Still, a quick hit and they have it.

chthoniid wrote: It almost feels like we need to start a new thread. Nonetheless, what I'd like Sony to do, is to provide a more or less 'complete' system for each genre. So, for a studio-type shooter, not just the excellent new CZ lenses but also a Sony hot-shoe radio-trigger for studio-lights. Something that works reliably etc. The non-standard Minolta hot-shoe makes studio-lighting a hindrance. Once the studio-guy has the fuill setup, move on. For a landscaper, get a weather-sealed body (or casing)with a couple of weather sealed lenses. Add in some electronic gaget to assist with getting level shots. Then move on. At the moment, the shot-gun approach suffers from nothing but 'quite ready'. The α700 took us a few steps towards sport/wildlife photography, but better weather sealing and a 500/4 is almost mandatory to bring in this to maturity. The alpha system is pretty good for macro photography but having a 200/4 macro back, and a decent ringflash would 'finish' this market better than current scene. In effect, rather than looking for the 'next cool' lens, consider the whole camera/lens/flash system for each genre. Get it complete rather than spreading effort too thin over too many genres.

This kinda makes me think we need to create a Virtual Lens Database. Were we all put input into the specs on every lens the system needs, build and refine each lens so we can come up with a clear spec for Sony . Also give some info on what is acceptable pricing. Maybe let it show how many people want each lens (rank them).

Every time a lens that matches or is good enough to be a match is announced, it's removed from there and put in the real lens database.

Probably would require a whole sub forum where people can nominate a lens for the system and have threads created for each one for everyone to refine the specs.

Nah, there will be arguments about the argument, and of course lots of threads about lenses left out of the poll.

But might work, I'd say we wait till after the photokina announcements.

I agree with your first one, see my thread from a bit back about building a better kit lens. Sony needs that. After that one, I would disagree on most of them.

Sony has the rest of the kit lens lineup pretty good, it's just the base lens that needs work. For APS lenses, they mainly just need a new super wide, and then something like a 2.8/17-55.   I would give those 2 a decent priority.

A lot of your items are primes, that's were priorities tend to fall. For many of them there are Minolta options out there. Yes, hard to find, or expensive, but they are there for the burning needs. 1.8/50 and 1.8/85, yeah, they would be good, and I bang on the 1.8/50 a good bit, but again, some other stuff comes more important. But the big part is most of those primes can be done with a zoom, zoom will be a bit slower, but it covers more ground. The good news is Sony is getting pretty well covered with the zooms.

Stuff like replacing lenses they have with SSM, or making cheaper versions of current lenses should be a very low priority. Items like your #8 and #9 probably won't happen for 4-5 years at the soonest, as they really don't help sony. Replacing lenses that work fine with new models while there is needs for lenses that don't exist at all will not go over well. Just look at Canon and Nikon, they keep bringing new lenses they haven't had, or they add VR/IS to a lens. Updates to give lenses AFS/USM just aren't happening no matter how much some people want them. Very low priority for them, Sony won't be any different.

There is nothing wrong with your picks, I think there is very few lenses anyone could disagree with, but I'm curious as to what drove your priorities on them.   Pushing an aperture to faster, or creating a prime were a zoom covers it should not be a priority. Of course a 2.8/400 is a very different beast than the long end of a 70-400. But one cost 5x+ as much as the other.

My case is the priorities need to be on things that stop core sales dead in the tracks, thus why the kit lens needs an update. As a side note, Sony may have just been helped by Canon going 15MP and nikon at least getting to 12 on a cheaper body as the Canon and Nikon lenses will start to look not so hot.

After that, it needs to be lenses that there are no close enough options in the system right now. So some super wide stuff could be in there, including aps fisheyes. the TS lenses. Look at what kind of cameras they are selling and or the kind of people they are getting into the system and will use. Stuff like the big telephotos are important, and need to come, but they won't shift the bottom line anytime soon. Sony currently has the 2.8/300, yet how many of those have we seen anyone buy? We have 3 reviews here, I would wager total sales are under 100 units globaly. The 2.8/400 will be even worse. $8500 lenses just don't move well.

Once you get into any lens below $1500 sales can really pick up. Your now in the range where people will buy a lens and sell it, it's manageable for them to do that. You can't do that with big teles. And without a line of pro bodies or Pro users ready for them, it's a hard sell, but since that will be the hardest market for them, it's something best spent working one lens at a time without to much up front spending by Sony. They can't put their resources into bringing out just big telephotos for the next 2 years prepping for pro bodies and leave markets they can have now open.

Aside from basic kit lenses and consumer zooms and some real cheap primes. All other lenses in a system are niche. Many of the lenses we have now are very niche, 1.8/135, 135STF, 16fisheye, 1.4/35, these are lenses very few people buy. Yet, they aren't crazy expensive (near 2K and up), so if you get the ich, you can. That's where lenses like TS fit in nice. a lens that is in the 1200-1800 range (canon's are 1150, nikon is new an a rapid seller, so the price is high). The sales volume would be no different than these other lenses, but they are something that will help pull in pro's. And if Sony is bringing lenses like a 1.4/24, they will sell way more than that lens.

Once sony has covered the needs of folks in some form, then they can progressively get into more extreme combinations of apertures and FL.

I would re-shuffle your list.   I'm basically ignoring your reds because well, they are in the can.

1. is your #1, but minus the new 75-300

2. is your #6 minus the 2.8/70-200 and maybe minus the 28-75.

3. is your #2 but only the 4/200 and 4/300

4. is your #10

5. is your #3

they rest, no real priority.

But it all comes down to you could make a list, I could make a list, kiklop could make a list, anyone could make a list. That have logic to it, but none of the are the same. It's just the way it is.

All our issues would be solved if september 9th sony launches 30+ lenses. That would help. But they won't. So we will keep making list and debating the worthiness of a lens.

If this was a school room, kiklop should assign us all homework to do a paper on why we feel X lens should be made and why it's a priority. Or he will just beat us all with rulers.