The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

New Sony lens mockups. No thanks.

GrahamWelland

Subscriber & Workshop Member
I wonder if another reason why a lot of the current crop of hyper-performance fast lenses is getting bigger is that it's easier to build a lens with a larger image circle and leverage a smaller sweet spot of the optical lens. All those edge aberrations end up outside the region covered by the sensor and hence flatter MTFs, less corrections required etc. It would be easier to design and build this way, albeit at the expense of size.

Just a thought. It certainly applies to using existing larger format lenses on smaller format sensors.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
I wonder if another reason why a lot of the current crop of hyper-performance fast lenses is getting bigger is that it's easier to build a lens with a larger image circle and leverage a smaller sweet spot of the optical lens. All those edge aberrations end up outside the region covered by the sensor and hence flatter MTFs, less corrections required etc. It would be easier to design and build this way, albeit at the expense of size.

Just a thought. It certainly applies to using existing larger format lenses on smaller format sensors.
That was the case for the best 4/3 lenses and I believe also for the Otus. It might also be the case for the Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, which I believe wasn't originally designed for m4/3. Those in the know claim it was designed by Sigma for another, probably larger, format.
 

sirimiri

Member
...I'm pretty sure Canon and Nikon know that in a very few years (two, three?) they'll be shifting over most of their product line to mirrorless. There will still be a D5 or D6 DSLR but everything else will be mirrorless. The real question is how do they transition their lenses...
Just because the mirror box, reflex mirror, sub-mirror and pentaprism go away, doesn't mean that Canon has to abandon EF mount bodies. I have often said that it doesn't matter what's between the lensmount and sensor, the only thing we are ultimately talking about is flange-to-film distance and it's quite clear that short registers bring a mess of problems with them. Like-for-like between say a fast EF prime or telephoto zoom and a shorter register AF mount with the same format coverage, I don't see much reduction in lens size occurring.

Rather, a new mount that compels consumers to buy more or less the same thing again. Just like the mobile phone market, things trended towards miniaturization until it became impractical. M4/3rds may be a different story, but what would drive an established conpany like Nikon or Canon to full-frame short registers would be mostly for market share and certainly not for innovation.
 

jfirneno

Member
Just because the mirror box, reflex mirror, sub-mirror and pentaprism go away, doesn't mean that Canon has to abandon EF mount bodies. I have often said that it doesn't matter what's between the lensmount and sensor, the only thing we are ultimately talking about is flange-to-film distance and it's quite clear that short registers bring a mess of problems with them. Like-for-like between say a fast EF prime or telephoto zoom and a shorter register AF mount with the same format coverage, I don't see much reduction in lens size occurring.

Rather, a new mount that compels consumers to buy more or less the same thing again. Just like the mobile phone market, things trended towards miniaturization until it became impractical. M4/3rds may be a different story, but what would drive an established conpany like Nikon or Canon to full-frame short registers would be mostly for market share and certainly not for innovation.

Sirimiri:
I think Sony has demonstrated to the other manufacturers that you can change camera mounts and convince the old mount users to stick with the brand. A really good adapter allows you to hold onto your old customers and a short registration distance allows for the possibility to capture users of other brands by means of third party adapters. I'll be surprised if they don't all start doing it soon. And you don't have to buy new lenses. The old ones work fine on the new camera. Of course, the temptation is to want the smaller new mount lenses (when they are smaller). Currently this still isn't the case for Sony because they don't have E-mount cameras capable of controlling DSLR lenses usefully using the AF in the camera. The adapter that can do this also makes the system essentially a reflex device utilizing a separate AF sensor and a beam splitter.

Will be interesting to see how all this turns out.

Regards,
John
 
V

Vivek

Guest
That was the case for the best 4/3 lenses and I believe also for the Otus. It might also be the case for the Zuiko 75mm f/1.8, which I believe wasn't originally designed for m4/3. Those in the know claim it was designed by Sigma for another, probably larger, format.
Nope. Wrong. The image circle is just enough for the tiny m43rds. OTUS 85/1.4 just covers the 24x36.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I wonder if another reason why a lot of the current crop of hyper-performance fast lenses is getting bigger is that it's easier to build a lens with a larger image circle and leverage a smaller sweet spot of the optical lens. All those edge aberrations end up outside the region covered by the sensor and hence flatter MTFs, less corrections required etc. It would be easier to design and build this way, albeit at the expense of size.
You can't have a telecentric (or "near" telecentric) lens this way. The images circles are defined, with very little light fall off and aberrations.

Old manual focus Nikkors (not telecentric) may cover more than 24x36mm. A newer lens (telecentric) like the 10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye does not.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
K-H, The few m43rds lenses I have project (good old fashioned ground glass projection) just enough to cover the m43rds sensor (at any aperture). I can (anyone can as well, instead of projecting with words) also easily test these on a NEX (APS-C).

Stefan (has a lot riding on the image circles with his HCAM adapter) states that the OTUS 85/1.4 covers only 24x36 (also confirmed by others who tried it at Photokina. It has been reported here.).
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
You can also look at the lens cross-sections on line. The design of both the Otuses (Otii?) and Oly 75/1.8 look like they have no image circle to spare. Telecentric designs (I just read up on them - very good for digital sensors) are going have that shape and size.

Thanks, Vivek, for introducing a really interesting aspect of modern optical design. We don't use object space telecentric lenses in photography, but they're fascinating. Magnification independent of distance to the target!

--Matt
 

Slingers

Active member
Sometimes the product shots of a lens size can be misleading.When I received the FE 70-200 I was surprised at its size. Its still more a DSLR sized lens but it does not feel unbalanced to me. For comparison here is a recent shot of me with the lens.

 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Nope. Wrong. The image circle is just enough for the tiny m43rds. OTUS 85/1.4 just covers the 24x36.
For the final image circle, I agree. That is also limited by the size of the lens mount, which for some (Nikon F-mount, Pentax K-mount and Sony NEX-mount) is a limiting factor compared to the size of a full frame sensor. What goes on before the rear element is another story. With the large Canon EF-mount and the even larger, but sadly obsolete, Contax N-mount, the options are obviously less limited. Interestingly, the diameter of the 4/3 mount was almost as large as that for the NEX-mount in spite of using a much smaller sensor (Sony: 46.1mm, 4/3: 44mm). I assume that was to allow for telecentric or near telecentric lenses.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Sometimes the product shots of a lens size can be misleading.When I received the FE 70-200 I was surprised at its size. Its still more a DSLR sized lens but it does not feel unbalanced to me. For comparison here is a recent shot of me with the lens.
A lens is a lens, DSLR or mirrorless. The Sony 70-200 f/4 FE is almost exactly the same size as the corresponding Canon and Nikon lenses for DSLR cameras. The Canon lens is 80g lighter than the Sony though. They all include image stabilisation.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Sirimiri:
I think Sony has demonstrated to the other manufacturers that you can change camera mounts and convince the old mount users to stick with the brand. A really good adapter allows you to hold onto your old customers and a short registration distance allows for the possibility to capture users of other brands by means of third party adapters. I'll be surprised if they don't all start doing it soon. And you don't have to buy new lenses. The old ones work fine on the new camera. Of course, the temptation is to want the smaller new mount lenses (when they are smaller). Currently this still isn't the case for Sony because they don't have E-mount cameras capable of controlling DSLR lenses usefully using the AF in the camera. The adapter that can do this also makes the system essentially a reflex device utilizing a separate AF sensor and a beam splitter.

Will be interesting to see how all this turns out.

Regards,
John
There's a very good reason why Sony will never offer such an adapter:
Much of their profit is with lens sales. They want to sell their own lenses. Also, there's a certain amount of reverse engineering involved, and if they don't get that 100% right, there's a risk of having to re-call tons of adapters to upgrade them whenever Nikon, Canon or whoever else the adapters are compatible with, make a change to their electronic interface. Sigma ran into that problem a number of years ago with some of their F-mount lenses, and Zeiss have earlier stated that this is one of the reasons why they don't make ZF/ZE AF-lenses.

Leica is doing this for the S model, but it's much more manageable because of their low volume. Also, they charge somewhere around $22,000 for the S-body, which probably means they have a much higher profit on the body. A third factor for Leica would be that they make the best lenses anyway, so most users will change to Leica lenses as soon as they can afford it. With $1,795 for each adapter (Hasselblad H and Contax 645) they probably make a healthy profit on the adapter as well. I doubt anybody would buy a Nikon to Sony adapter for $1,795 :)
 

jfirneno

Member
There's a very good reason why Sony will never offer such an adapter:
Much of their profit is with lens sales. They want to sell their own lenses. Also, there's a certain amount of reverse engineering involved, and if they don't get that 100% right, there's a risk of having to re-call tons of adapters to upgrade them whenever Nikon, Canon or whoever else the adapters are compatible with, make a change to their electronic interface. Sigma ran into that problem a number of years ago with some of their F-mount lenses, and Zeiss have earlier stated that this is one of the reasons why they don't make ZF/ZE AF-lenses.

Leica is doing this for the S model, but it's much more manageable because of their low volume. Also, they charge somewhere around $22,000 for the S-body, which probably means they have a much higher profit on the body. A third factor for Leica would be that they make the best lenses anyway, so most users will change to Leica lenses as soon as they can afford it. With $1,795 for each adapter (Hasselblad H and Contax 645) they probably make a healthy profit on the adapter as well. I doubt anybody would buy a Nikon to Sony adapter for $1,795 :)
Of course Sony won't make the adapters, too much downside. Those type of adapters are already being made by small outfits like Metabones, Techart, etc. But they are not useful unless the autofocus of the camera is compatable with screw drive lenses. Sony's CDAF is not compatible with screw drive lenses. Even the on-sensor PDAF of the new A7 cameras is not tuned for screw drive lenses. Instead you need to use the LAEA4 adapter. The question is whether Canon or Nikon will be able to provide an adapter and a software platform that will adapt their own existing screw drive lenses to on-sensor PDAF (or CDAF if they can make it fast enough to be useful).

Naturally a preference will be for new lenses but if they're smart they'll accommodate their user base to let them continue to use old favorite lenses for the forseeable future.

Regards,
John
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Of course Sony won't make the adapters, too much downside. Those type of adapters are already being made by small outfits like Metabones, Techart, etc. But they are not useful unless the autofocus of the camera is compatable with screw drive lenses. Sony's CDAF is not compatible with screw drive lenses. Even the on-sensor PDAF of the new A7 cameras is not tuned for screw drive lenses. Instead you need to use the LAEA4 adapter. The question is whether Canon or Nikon will be able to provide an adapter and a software platform that will adapt their own existing screw drive lenses to on-sensor PDAF (or CDAF if they can make it fast enough to be useful).

Naturally a preference will be for new lenses but if they're smart they'll accommodate their user base to let them continue to use old favorite lenses for the forseeable future.

Regards,
John
Low-end Nikon DSLR cameras, all the way back to the D40, lack support for screwdriver AF. There's no reason to believe that a future Nikon mirrorless camera will offer that support. There's an abundance Nikon DSLR cameras available for that. Nikon introduced the first lens with built in focus motor with AF-I in 1992 and AF-S in 1998. I don't think they have introduced any new lenses without that motor after 1998 although some screwdriver lenses are still in production. Canon have never made screwdriver AF lenses. The EF-mount has been fully electronic from the outset. The only mirrorless camera that has featured support for screwdriver lenses was the discontinued Pentax K-01. The concept was shelved rather quickly.

Edit:
It's important also to remember that AF systems for mirrorless cameras, many of the hybrid PD/CDAF, is much more complicated than just sending some electronic signals through an adapter. All of these AF systems are proprietary, and even getting 4/3 lenses to work well on m4/3 took years, even for those who made the lenses as well as the camera bodies. Some lenses, particularly those made by Sigma, still don't work or work extremely slowly. Yes, I have tried. To think that this would be possible to do for a third party supplier is not very realistic.
 
Last edited:

jfirneno

Member
Low-end Nikon DSLR cameras, all the way back to the D40, lack support for screwdriver AF. There's no reason to believe that a future Nikon mirrorless camera will offer that support. There's an abundance Nikon DSLR cameras available for that. Nikon introduced the first lens with built in focus motor with AF-I in 1992 and AF-S in 1998. I don't think they have introduced any new lenses without that motor after 1998 although some screwdriver lenses are still in production. Canon have never made screwdriver AF lenses. The EF-mount has been fully electronic from the outset. The only mirrorless camera that has featured support for screwdriver lenses was the discontinued Pentax K-01. The concept was shelved rather quickly.

Edit:
It's important also to remember that AF systems for mirrorless cameras, many of the hybrid PD/CDAF, is much more complicated than just sending some electronic signals through an adapter. All of these AF systems are proprietary, and even getting 4/3 lenses to work well on m4/3 took years, even for those who made the lenses as well as the camera bodies. Some lenses, particularly those made by Sigma, still don't work or work extremely slowly. Yes, I have tried. To think that this would be possible to do for a third party supplier is not very realistic.
Well then you've answered the question. When Nikon introduces their mirrorless cameras, the Nikon screw drive lenses will be manual focus only. Hey look at that, Sony is the company concerned with the customer's welfare. They provided the LAEA4 adapter to allow me to use my Minolta and Sony screw-drive lenses with my A7 series mirrorless cameras. Mighty nice of them. Not money-grubbing cheapskates like those Nikon guys. Thanks Jorgen you've made me feel good about Sony already!

Regards,
John
 

Annna T

Active member
A lens is a lens, DSLR or mirrorless. The Sony 70-200 f/4 FE is almost exactly the same size as the corresponding Canon and Nikon lenses for DSLR cameras. The Canon lens is 80g lighter than the Sony though. They all include image stabilisation.
It is even bigger and heavier than the Canon 70-200mm F4 and at/near the long end the Canon is clearly better in the corners (at least for my copies). Although not by much Here are the specifications

760 gr against 840 gr for the weight; 172 against 175mm for the length and 76 against 80mm for the width. The diameter is where you feel the difference the most : when in hands the Canon feel much slimmer. Adding the Metabones adapter compensates the weight and length difference.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
It's kinda funny. I've never thought of the A7 as being particularly small. It's pretty close to the size of what I always considered a normal SLR, like a Nikon FM2n or FE2. Most of the upper end autofocus SLRs always felt big and fat to me, and the DSLRs even more so.

I use these largish and heavyish SLR lenses on my A7, along with a mount adapter, and I like the way it feels this way even if it is a bit on the chubby side.

G
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
Well then you've answered the question. When Nikon introduces their mirrorless cameras, the Nikon screw drive lenses will be manual focus only. Hey look at that, Sony is the company concerned with the customer's welfare. They provided the LAEA4 adapter to allow me to use my Minolta and Sony screw-drive lenses with my A7 series mirrorless cameras. Mighty nice of them. Not money-grubbing cheapskates like those Nikon guys. Thanks Jorgen you've made me feel good about Sony already!

Regards,
John
Yes, that's one of the great sides of the LAEA4-adapter. It would obviously be possible for Nikon to do that too, but I doubt that it'll happen.
 

Jorgen Udvang

Subscriber Member
It is even bigger and heavier than the Canon 70-200mm F4 and at/near the long end the Canon is clearly better in the corners (at least for my copies). Although not by much Here are the specifications

760 gr against 840 gr for the weight; 172 against 175mm for the length and 76 against 80mm for the width. The diameter is where you feel the difference the most : when in hands the Canon feel much slimmer. Adding the Metabones adapter compensates the weight and length difference.
But it gets better than that also:
One can choose the non-IS version of the Canon, which is 55g lighter still and less than half the price of the Sony.

A Canon 6D with 24-70mm f/4 IS and 70-200mm f/4 weighs 2,130g and costs $4,098
A Sony 7D II with 24-70mm f/4 OSS and 70-200mm f/4 OSS weighs 1,869g and costs $4,394

More batteries are needed for the Sony, adding to the weight and price, since the batteries are smaller and the camera more power hungry. In reality, the battery grip is difficult to avoid for longer shootings with the Sony, making the camera larger and heavier than the Canon and even more expensive. The lenses listed here are more or less the same size for the two cameras. Add to this Canon's lens line-up etc., and there are good reasons why many don't see the point in buying mirrorless cameras except those with smaller sensors and lenses.
 
Last edited:
Top