Sony's EVIL GUI revealed (a bit) in CP+

karaatanasov wrote: 16/2.8 is interesting but not necessarily bad choice - wide angle is cool. No body offers this wide prime fro EVIL cameras at present. I imagine it is nice for taking street shots. It is strange but will set the system apart from the competition. In terms of classic 24 or 28 would be better choice than 35. 18-55 is kit lens - no more, no less

I'm all for Sony setting themselves apart, but I'm not convinced. How many A900 users here shoot the 24 2.8 as their main walk around lens? I'm sure it isn't the majority.

Roweraay, I certainly expect Sony to bring more primes, but time is becoming an issue for me. If they don't show me a small standard lens soon, I'll have to move to another brand to find my A900 complimentary camera.

As for size, if anything, the 16mm is probably a little bigger than a standard equivalent. Look at Samsung's 30mm f2 lens for their APS-C based NX10. Samsung is supposed to show some new EVILS, and I may go that direction unless Sony shows what primes are coming in the future:



I hope the rumors are wrong, personally, and I'll hold on to my wish that the Sony prime is similar to this Samsung in specs. :)



Edited by douglasf13 - 20 April 2010 at 22:30

douglasf13 wrote:     Roweraay, I certainly expect Sony to bring more primes, but time is becoming an issue for me. If they don't show me a small standard lens soon, I'll have to move to another brand to find my A900 complimentary camera.

What I meant earlier was that they would be releasing more than one prime, along with the camera. It does not make ANY sense to release a 24mm equivalent (in 35mm terms, assuming this is an APS-C sensor) as the *only* prime, when releasing a new product.

The reason for 16mm is very very simple.   You need a lens that is wide as practical. A user can always crop to go more tele with it. But if you came out with a 35 or 50mm equivalent (instead of 24mm equivalent) you would have the same issue that P&S cameras have historically had...not wide angle enough.

Most P&S do in the realm of 28-35mm equivalent as their widest. So offering a camera to P&S people that has better image quality than their P&S, and a little lens that gets them wider than they have ever had as an option is a huge plus.

If they brought out a 12 or 14mm, that would be even better, but they probably drew a practical line in the sand. Also Sony has been pretty big into 16mm, with the 16-80, 16-105, 16-35. It works out as a very nice number because with crop factor you get 24mm, which is right where most FF zooms start at anymore (24-70, 24-105). This is where the 18-55 was rather oddball and broke from the nice trend Sony had and went with being common to the other players.

Additionally, one of the main selling points about an EVIL style camera is the wide angle ability with a small cheaper(er) lens over a DSLR. So offering a 16mm that is in-expensive yet very very good is the perfect way to show this. Unless they go ultra cheap on the lens, if it's designed for any level of quality, it's very realistic to expect it's performance to be better than the 16-35ZA (if the ZA was on an APS body). If a reviewer makes that comparison, it will be an impressive sales pitch.

I'm sure more standard and tele primes will come in time. But it's more important to have as wide as possible if you only have one lens to work with than anything else.

PT, not to overstate the obvious, but the P&S problem is a problem because they're fixed lens cameras :) Of course, that suggests you have to have a WA. But that could be added later after a normal pancake, either as another pancake lens or as an ultrawide zoom. It would be wonderful to have an EVIL system with 3 pancakes: WA, normal & short tele. I won't hold my breath though. Panasonic & Oly seem content to round out the lineup with oversized lenses and Samsung is doing the same thing as Panasonic (making the portrait length lens an f/2.8 macro). And Sony is going to cater to amateurs, not enthusiasts.

You suggest that digicam users want something wider. I counter that digicam users want something faster that offers shallow DOF.

It may sway some buyers. I'm betting some EVIL shoppers who've been waiting for Sony specs will opt for m43 instead, though.

Where I have trouble is getting into the mindset of the consumer, because clearly that's where these products are aimed. Opinions will vary among enthusiasts; some would prefer 28, 35, 40, 43, 45, 50, 58 ! I hear plenty of people say the 20/1.7 is their reason for getting into micro 4/3 (and many buy that lens and put it on an Oly for IBIS). But will the consumer be more impressed with the WA ? I don't know.

Don't get me wrong, I certainly want a wide prime for my forray into EVIL. My ideal setup would be approximately a 24, 50 and 85 prime (equivalent.) However, I would use the 50mm 80%+ of the time, so I need to see that lens before I buy. Right now, the Panny 20 1.7 on an Olympus m4/3 is my best option, it appears.

I wonder if the 'other' lenses Sony says they planned to launch in 2010, are all these NEX mount lenses. So that's 3 NEX and 2 A-mount.

I still think the 16mm is picked to show off their Sweep Panorama feature, to debut in an interchangeable lens camera (be it EVIL or dSLR). 35mm might not look too impressive with it, or might be computationally difficult.

And isn't 16mm on APS-C the photojournalist's dream? Though I doubt you'll see this camera in war...

But gossip is just what it is: GOSSIP.