FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Sony: step up your LENS game: A-Mount plea

Page  123 9>
Author
Steve-S View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 July 2006
Country: United States
Location: Sonoma Co. CA
Status: Offline
Posts: 2529
Post Options Post Options   Quote Steve-S Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Sony: step up your LENS game: A-Mount plea
    Posted: 18 September 2017 at 21:18
In another thread, I was noting that Sony really needs more new-lens action in A-Mount to reassure the faithful; not just "v.2" lenses with new coatings and SSM-II upgrades but new optical designs. The current bodies are REALLY nice, and nice to have, and don't really show "lackof attention" or "time for a new model"...

But the lack of new lenses makes it look (to some) like A-Mount is being sunset'ed... or at least like it may be being sunset'ed.

I pointed out that Sony's lens-design team has really needed to build-out the E-Mount designs before back-filling the (relatively-few) signifigant holes in the S-Mount line-up; but they really shouldn't let the A-mount lens lineup languish the way they have.

Since (by my own admission) Sony didn't have a lot of "needed" lenses (gaps in the A-mount lineup), I launched into a plea for Sony to produce INNOVATIVE (vs. me-too-spec) lenses... then realized how OT it was for that thread.

So I cut it there, and now I paste it here:

Ideally, I'd like Sony to take some pages from the Sigma/Tokina playbooks, and produce new IDEAS instead of "me-too" lenses already seen in the CaNikon stable (I'm looking at things like the 18-35/1.8, 50-150/2.8, 11-16/2.8, 8-16/4.5-5.6, 120-300/2.8, 300-800/5.6, etc). These are USEFUL lenses & lens-specs (one guy I've seen calls the 18-35/1.8 his "moneymaker") that IMHO could/should (and eventually maybe some will) be much more mainstream & every-maker.

What else could Sony do? Something not "me-too" even vs. the 3rd-party lensmakers? How about matching the FF f/2.8 "pro trio" with a DT f/2 trio: 11-24 + 16-55 + 35-135 (all at F/2, all at least of "G" caliber) would be a REALLY close match to the FF trio of 16-35 + 24-70 + 70-200 (all at F/2.8). Bring them out with the a77mkIII (or whatever it's called); noting that "fast" is only part of that equation -- DOF/bokeh is also addressed! Note that I intentionally overlapped the 35mm-48mm range: I don't think it's a design challenge, and getting a bit more versatility as you cross the Normal-vs-ShortTele barrier seems like a no-brainer (I note that the 24-35 range is overlapped in ALL makers' FF/2.8 trilogies).

Look also at old Minolta -- they had the only STF lens for DECADES (now Fuji (& Laowa iirc) make them too), the only AF'ing catadioptric EVER... (Canon's 135 Soft came 5-10 years before MinO's 100 Soft, but it shows MinO was in the game!). Sony inherited the 135TF (and even went one better with the AF'ing 100STF (!))... but they discontinued the cat, and afaik never brought the 100Soft out of retirement.

So on the innovative-vs-conventional lens-scoreboard, Sony scores pretty poorly. That 100STF is IMHO their closest approach to a "headliner," but merely evolutionary (unlike the original which was quite visionary).

The "Easy Choice" lenses (headlined IMHO by the 85/2.8) were a GREAT move, innovative not technically but on the value/marketing front. Sony seems to have dropped that lable, however (so I'm guessing the market didn't agree with me)... Still, it is at least SOME form of "innovative."


- Steve S.
Alpha: a77+7000; SAL 18135, SAL1870, MinO50/1.7, MinO75-300, Tam90/2.8, Smyg85/1.4, others.
SR(MC/MD): XD-11, XK+AEhead Min50/1.7&1.4, Tam70-150/3.5, Viv35/2.8, Viv2xTC
 



Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14166
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 September 2017 at 01:54
In practical terms, almost anything I could personally make use of (and personally afford!) in A-mount is either in my possession now or already out there somewhere, depreciating in value. But to play along, something new that could attract my attention would be a compact 16mm f/2-ish Easy Choice DT lens ... rectilinear, not fisheye. Of course I can imagine other new lenses, but they're not things that I would see myself buying.
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4177
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 September 2017 at 05:06
They're really missing USM prime tele's. The 135 is fine enough. But the manual focus on the 85 is simply unusable.

I would pay any price for a 40-120/2.8.

40mm and 70mm T/S lenses.

Revive the Minolta 58mm 1.2. I'd prefer a 75/1.4 over an 85/1.4.

I'd love to see an Olympus OM style 180/2, 250/2, 350/2.8 lenses. Sign me up for at least two of them.
___

EDIT:
My problem with the 85ZA is not that it is screw drive. I like the manual focus of screw drive lenses that don't have the DClutch. My Minolta 85 original is great for manual focus. But the 85ZA loses clutch and often than not just spins without doing anything. Very frustrating. My Minolta 85D did the same thing. Hate DClutch lenses.

Edited by Photosopher - 19 September 2017 at 05:27
Back to Top
Steve-S View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 July 2006
Country: United States
Location: Sonoma Co. CA
Status: Offline
Posts: 2529
Post Options Post Options   Quote Steve-S Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2017 at 22:53
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

... But to play along, something new that could attract my attention would be a compact 16mm f/2-ish Easy Choice DT lens ... rectilinear, not fisheye...


Have you looked at the Samyang of those spec's? It's fully-manual & un-chipped; maybe you wanted all the bells&whistles...
Alpha: a77+7000; SAL 18135, SAL1870, MinO50/1.7, MinO75-300, Tam90/2.8, Smyg85/1.4, others.
SR(MC/MD): XD-11, XK+AEhead Min50/1.7&1.4, Tam70-150/3.5, Viv35/2.8, Viv2xTC
Back to Top
Steve-S View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 20 July 2006
Country: United States
Location: Sonoma Co. CA
Status: Offline
Posts: 2529
Post Options Post Options   Quote Steve-S Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2017 at 23:07
Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I would pay any price for a 40-120/2.8.

That seems remarkably similar to the 50-150/2.8 from Sigma. Does the 40-50 range really make it a "pay any price" lens? I mean, sure that's hyperbole, but I honestly don't see that as a terribly-desirable range...

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

40mm and 70mm T/S lenses.

I always expect T/S to be wider than that... 35mm, 28mm, 24mm...

I've never seen 70mm. What is T/S used for in the short-tele realm?

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

Revive the Minolta 58mm 1.2.
Really? The old Rokkor? I agree that something in the f/1.2 range seems called-for, but I'd expect they could (trivially easily) come up with a better design...



Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I'd love to see an Olympus OM style 180/2, 250/2, 350/2.8 lenses. Sign me up for at least two of them.

200/2 is a well-known lens in Canonland & Nikonland; I could see 180 instead (or 250), though I honestly don't see much reason to prefer either of those over 200 (other than to differentiate for the sake of being different); or to prefer the 200mm FL, for that matter. Similarly, the 300/2.8 seems awfully similar to a theoretical 350/2.8. Surely it makes more sense to go straight to 400/2.8 ... ? Or how about something like a 200-400/2.8?
Alpha: a77+7000; SAL 18135, SAL1870, MinO50/1.7, MinO75-300, Tam90/2.8, Smyg85/1.4, others.
SR(MC/MD): XD-11, XK+AEhead Min50/1.7&1.4, Tam70-150/3.5, Viv35/2.8, Viv2xTC
Back to Top
momech View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 27 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 2853
Post Options Post Options   Quote momech Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2017 at 23:51
I'd like to see something in the 20-120/2.8 range , although it might be a bit heavy for a walk around lens. The other thing I think is needed is a longer macro - 150-180mm. Also heavy but I think they'd sell very well to the serious macro shooters.

But if Sony really wants the A9 to play with the big Canons and Nikons, they need the big primes, probably 2. A 400/2.8 would be nice, but a 600/4 or even 800/5.6 is really needed at the long end.

And definitely new TCs, for both A and E mount. The current ones are no match for the competition.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
 



Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14166
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 00:07
Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:

Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

... But to play along, something new that could attract my attention would be a compact 16mm f/2-ish Easy Choice DT lens ... rectilinear, not fisheye...

Have you looked at the Samyang of those spec's? It's fully-manual & un-chipped; maybe you wanted all the bells&whistles...

I know about the Samyang, but would rather have capabilities including AF, image stabilization, full EXIF data, color consistency with other Sony lenses, potential in-camera lens corrections ... bells and whistles.
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 00:30
Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I would pay any price for a 40-120/2.8.

That seems remarkably similar to the 50-150/2.8 from Sigma. Does the 40-50 range really make it a "pay any price" lens? I mean, sure that's hyperbole, but I honestly don't see that as a terribly-desirable range...

He is probably thinking full-frame.

It seems like the wide end determines some/a lot of the size:

Sigma 24-105 F4 - 82 filter, 885 g
Sony E 18-105G F4 - 72 filter, 427 g

FE 28-135G F4 - 95 filter, 1215 g
Sigma 24-135 F2.8-4.5 - 77 filter, 530 g
MAF 28-135 F4-4.5 - 72 filter, 750 g
MMD 35-135 F3.5-4.5 - 55 filter, 510 g
MMD 50-135 F3.5 - 55 filter, 480 g

Vivitar 70-150 F3.8 - 52 filter, 434 g
MMD 75-150 F4 - 49 filter, 445 g

MAF 70-210 F4 - 55 filter, 695 g
MAF 70-210 F3.5-4.5 - 55 filter, 420 g
EF 50-200L F3.5-4.5 - 58 filter, 695 g
Soligor 35-200 F3.5-4.5 - 67 filter, 650 g


Tokina 28-80 F2.8 - 77 filter, 819 g
Tamron 28-105 F2.8 - 82 filter, 880 g
Tamron 35-105 F2.8 - 67 filter, 620 g
Panasonic 35-100mm F2.8 - 58 filter, 357 g
Olympus 35-100 F2 - 77 filter, 1650 g
Sigma 50-100 F1.8 - 82 filter, 1497 g
Tokina 60-120 F2.8 - 55 filter, 630 g

Tokina EF 50-135 T3 - 114 mm filter, 1,530 g
Tokina 50-135 F2.8 - 67 filter, 845 g
Sigma 50-150 F2.8 II - 67 filter, 780 g
Fuji 50-140 F2.8 - 72 filter, 995 g
Olympus 40-150 F2.8 - 72 filter, 760 g

Edited by QuietOC - 21 September 2017 at 04:36
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4177
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 00:49
Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:


That seems...


All my requests are for fashion, lifestyles, portrait, groups, journalism. The telephoto T/S is very handy for creative portraiture. I shot this DJ group shot for The 9's mens lifestyle magazine. Sony a900 with Mamiya 80/1.9 on Mirex TS adapter. I could not have done this as a single shot without a T/S lens. I wish Sony provided better. I fell in love with my Canon 90mm T/S and miss it very much. Very good for band group shots, or a line of executives.



The 180/2, or Leica 180/1.8 are very small compared to Canon/Nikon 200/2 lenses. I want that for handhold use. It will bokeh better than ZA135. The 250/2 will bokeh better than CaNikon 200/2 lenses. I want both. Don't really care for 350/2.8 over 400/2.8. Matters not to me.

The 40-120/2.8, as long as it is super high quality, would be my go to for environmental portraits, preventing the need to shift between ZA24-70 and G70-200. I'm always hovering in the focal lengths that force lens changes. A 40-120/2.8 (full frame) would literally cut shoot production time. I have three copies of the old Tamron 35-105/2.8, and enjoy that very much. I just want modern sharpness and coatings. I also have Sigma 24-105/4 Art, which is twice the size of the Tamron because of the extra wide that I don't need. The Sigma also zooms opposite direction, which can be frustrating to my muscle memory. And I want faster with wider manual focus ring. The Sigma also has tremendous focus breathing at 105mm close focus, making it closer to an 85mm. The old Tamron stays at 105mm even at close focus.
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4177
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 01:03
Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:

Really? The old Rokkor? I agree that something in the f/1.2 range seems called-for, but I'd expect they could (trivially easily) come up with a better design...


Yes really. I've owned a few. Very unique. That 58mm length is lovely for many sorts of portraiture.

I forget where it was, but a while back I came across a web site that had enormous amounts of photos taken with many different 50-58mm 1.2 lenses. I found it researching getting a Contax 55/1.2 Leitaxed for Sony (which they no longer offer because of special machining)... And I'm glad I didn't.

As I browsed the photos, without knowing what lens shot them, it turned out my favorite draw was virtually always coming from the "old Rokkor"... And then the Nikon 58/1.2 noct (which I also owned long time ago). The Contax at 55mm just made nervous backgrounds for the subject to tog distances I would be working with. I want the 58mm. Even more so now that I see it has coverage enough for the Fuji G50 medium format sensor.

Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I would pay any price for a 40-120/2.8.

That seems remarkably similar to the 50-150/2.8 from Sigma. Does the 40-50 range really make it a "pay any price" lens? I mean, sure that's hyperbole, but I honestly don't see that as a terribly-desirable range...


Not hyperbole. When Sony charges $3G for their cine' lenses of similar (but far from same) capability, I'm ready to pay similar, or more, for a lens that will shorten my shoot time. Environment and studio people shots would be well served.

Edited by Photosopher - 21 September 2017 at 01:14
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 01:40
Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

Originally posted by Steve-S Steve-S wrote:

Originally posted by Photosopher Photosopher wrote:

I would pay any price for a 40-120/2.8.

That seems remarkably similar to the 50-150/2.8 from Sigma. Does the 40-50 range really make it a "pay any price" lens? I mean, sure that's hyperbole, but I honestly don't see that as a terribly-desirable range...


Not hyperbole. When Sony charges $3G for their cine' lenses of similar (but far from same) capability, I'm ready to pay similar, or more, for a lens that will shorten my shoot time. Environment and studio people shots would be well served.

Tokina is selling a full-frame 50-135mm T3 lens for $3,500 for EF mount (114 mm filter, 1,530 g). How hard would it be to convert it to A-mount?

Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
sybersitizen View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 04 August 2006
Country: United States
Location: California
Status: Offline
Posts: 14166
Post Options Post Options   Quote sybersitizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 01:53
Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Tokina is selling a full-frame 50-135mm T3 lens for $3,500 for EF mount (114 mm filter, 1,530 g). How hard would it be to convert it to A-mount?

Could be pretty hard if it relies on a short flange distance - as it should if it's actually intended for E-mount. Or is it a universal design with a built-in E-mount extender?
Back to Top
Photosopher View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Knowledgebase Contributor

Joined: 13 June 2010
Country: United States
Location: St. Louis Mo
Status: Offline
Posts: 4177
Post Options Post Options   Quote Photosopher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 02:01
EF, not FE. Sounds like DSLR flange style. But, T3, well there it is. It's basically the lens I was asking for.
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2429
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2017 at 02:02
Originally posted by sybersitizen sybersitizen wrote:

Originally posted by QuietOC QuietOC wrote:

Tokina is selling a full-frame 50-135mm T3 lens for $3,500 for EF mount (114 mm filter, 1,530 g). How hard would it be to convert it to A-mount?

Could be pretty hard if it relies on a short flange distance - as it should if it's actually intended for E-mount. Or is it a universal design with a built-in E-mount extender?

No, it is a full-frame Canon EF mount lens.

Here is a review comparing it to the Super-35 Fujinon T2.9. The Fuji is E mount and not full-frame.

It is on sale for $1,000 off right now, so act quickly!

Edited by QuietOC - 21 September 2017 at 02:05
Sony A68 A77II A6000 A7II LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MC-11
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk Page  123 9>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.