Show Performance
Member
I would hesitate to call the 35/2.8 mediocre. Don't confuse a pedestrian lens speed for poor optics.Yes, and it is amazing how they got one lens so right (55/1.8) and the other lens so mediocre (35/2.8)
LouisB
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!
I would hesitate to call the 35/2.8 mediocre. Don't confuse a pedestrian lens speed for poor optics.Yes, and it is amazing how they got one lens so right (55/1.8) and the other lens so mediocre (35/2.8)
LouisB
Well it should, shouldn't it, costing nearly 5 times as much. One can of course compare it with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-S that coincidentally weighs exactly the same as the Sony lens and still costs less than half. One can also claim that the Sony is a Zeiss, and therefore is a much better lens, but I look at the photos and see very little difference, if any.The Nikkor will not hold a candle to that 55/1.8 whether it weighs nothing or weighs a ton. Absolutely no match whatsoever.
Well it should, shouldn't it, costing nearly 5 times as much. One can of course compare it with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-S that coincidentally weighs exactly the same as the Sony lens and still costs less than half. One can also claim that the Sony is a Zeiss, and therefore is a much better lens, but I look at the photos and see very little difference, if any.
If you compare with the larger Canon/Nikon bodies instead of the 6D/D750, they will obviously be larger as well as heavier. That was rather predictable, wasn't it? I don't know the Canon 5D III well, and it's a rather old camera now, but I have compared the D810 with the A7 II and the A7r. Image quality, specs as well as ergonomics left me with no doubt, which is why I bought the Nikon despite it being the more expensive and heavier/larger choice, and I did that after using mirrorless cameras for most of my photography for 5 years. One of the reasons for my choice was the size of the Sony lenses, which are almost without exception as large and heavy as their Nikkor counterparts. I can live with a camera that is 300 grams heavier then, a camera where I need only two batteries for a full day of shooting and where I don't need a vertical grip to get a firm grip of the camera for long shoots and use with heavy lenses.Read my post again Jorgen, I said, paired with the A7 bodies. Even if they are equivalent lens weights, the Sony is going to be a lighter combination that takes less volume in your bag.
You can play the lens equivalent game all day and lose.
Canon 5D Mark III with 16-35mm f/4 860g + 615G = 1475g (plus camera body bulk and extra 3/4" of lens length when packed in your bag)
A7mII with 16-35 f/4 550g + 518 = 1068g and a smaller volume package.
Want to compare to the Nikon D810 and A7r?
880g+680g = 1560g (plus a full 1" longer lens) vs 407g+518g= 925g and a much smaller volume package.
Basically the weight of the lens is saved in this comparison!!!
:bugeyes:Sorry for being grumpy and a bit off topic. It's six in the morning.
I don't care what Nikon is known for. I care what I see in photos.There are people heaping lavish praise on the Sigma ART 50/1.4, in case you have not noticed.
Nikon are hardly known for their 50s despite what the Nikonistas may believe.
Yeah and the Leica 50 Lux costs 4X as much as the Sony Zeiss 55FE. You're just reaching for an anti-Sony point now.Well it should, shouldn't it, costing nearly 5 times as much. One can of course compare it with the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-S that coincidentally weighs exactly the same as the Sony lens and still costs less than half. One can also claim that the Sony is a Zeiss, and therefore is a much better lens, but I look at the photos and see very little difference, if any.
I don't care what Nikon is known for. I care what I see in photos.
What is a Nikonista? I have used Olympus for 30 years and Fuji, Panasonic and Nikon for 5 years each. Is that what defines a "Nikonista"?
"cameras that everyone wants but no one needs". On the A7 series, just in another thread (not Nikon forum but here).I have not stated that the Sony cameras are bad in any way, rather the opposite actually.
Criticizing Sony is fine and I think most Sony owners have some criticism of their products/service. That being said there has been a more agressive change in Sony's strategy since the NEX-6 that's been more proactive towards positive changes based on consumer feedback.The title of this thread is "New Sony lens mockups. No thanks.". I did not start it. I have not stated that the Sony cameras are bad in any way, rather the opposite actually. But I have stated the rather obvious fact that due to the size and weight of the lenses, a mirrorless 35mm camera represents little size and weight savings over a corresponding DSLR camera as a total package. I do however experience, like other posters on other forums, that criticizing Sony is not a smart thing to do.
I agree and I suggested that to many who were concerned over lens size or wanting greater DoF. Micro 4/3 is an excellent and complete system for that.AFAIK, Sony has never advertised nor promised a small, compact SLR. The A7/r/s being smaller is a byproduct of mirrorless technology, not a feature of it.
All this "concern" about Sony somehow losing its way with larger lenses and bodies is addressing a feature that has never existed. The fact will always remain that faster lenses will require larger lenses. Mirrorless doesn't change that.
If size/weight is an issue, there are perfectly good non-SLRs that will fit the bill.
No need to apologize. I respect anyone's decision to shoot a DSLR. Unfortunately some people can't just leave it at a personal decision and must question the viability of an alternate choice because it doesn't fit their needs or they think Sony should be able to design rangefinder sized AF 35/1.4 lenses.If you compare with the larger Canon/Nikon bodies instead of the 6D/D750, they will obviously be larger as well as heavier. That was rather predictable, wasn't it? I don't know the Canon 5D III well, and it's a rather old camera now, but I have compared the D810 with the A7 II and the A7r. Image quality, specs as well as ergonomics left me with no doubt, which is why I bought the Nikon despite it being the more expensive and heavier/larger choice, and I did that after using mirrorless cameras for most of my photography for 5 years. One of the reasons for my choice was the size of the Sony lenses, which are almost without exception as large and heavy as their Nikkor counterparts. I can live with a camera that is 300 grams heavier then, a camera where I need only two batteries for a full day of shooting and where I don't need a vertical grip to get a firm grip of the camera for long shoots and use with heavy lenses.
Sorry for being grumpy and a bit off topic. It's six in the morning.
There are many good cameras on the market that many want but no one needs, or at least very few. The Nikon Df is another one."cameras that everyone wants but no one needs". On the A7 series, just in another thread (not Nikon forum but here).
Interestingly enough is the Nikon Df is the one Nikon I'd be interested in...There are many good cameras on the market that many want but no one needs, or at least very few. The Nikon Df is another one.
... and that is obviously one of the great things with mirrorless systems, the different A7 models included. This is also why I don't understand why Sony haven't given higher priority to a complete range of compact prime lenses, from around 20 to around 85 or 100mm. This was one of the main reasons for the fantastic success of the OM cameras and it's one of the reasons for the success of Leica M. Adapted lenses are fine, but they have to be bought too, and they mostly don't feature AF. Sony certainly don't make any profit from those adapted lenses either. I would think that profit is as important for Sony as for any other commercial enterprise.I can configure the A7 S, M, L or XL. Can't do that with a D810, at least not to the point where the camera slips into my windbreaker pocket.