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!

A7 camera lens choices

jfirneno

Member
I know the standard refrain that there are more A7 cameras than lenses in the system is almost true. But for me the recent developments mean I soon need to make some choices.

1) FE 16-35 or some combination of 35f1.4, Loxia 35f2 and 28f2 (and attachments for 21mm and 16mm fisheye).

2) FE 70-200 or 90mm macro.

As I've noted elsewhere basically I look on this as a lose/lose situation. If the lenses are mediocre I'll be disappointed and frustrated. If the lenses turn out to be really good I'll be greedy and poor.

3) Now I've heard that Canon has come out with a very good 11-24 zoom. This competes with the VC 12mm and some of the Canon TS choices. Is there no end to the choices I'm confronted with by the A7 plague?

Regards,
John
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well the first statement is very much false but lens choice is subjective. I think that the 90 Macro and 35 Distagon will be outstanding optically. The 28 is my wild card but I did notice it was the only lens that they didn't highlight as being sharp corner to corner in the marketing materials. They even highlighted this claim on the 24-240 so I have my doubts about it initially.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I know the standard refrain that there are more A7 cameras than lenses in the system is almost true.
That is true if it comes to the dedicated FE lenses that I own (exactly none). :)

The rumor site marked a 6 month anniversary without a new Sony E mount camera. That ought to tell something.

I will buy the 28/2 from Sony (it has a 30 day return possibility). As for the other humongous lenses, Sony can fill their giant socks' with them.
 

Eoin

Member
A more true refrain would be ... the lenses are now bigger than the camera :D

All joking aside, if you need/want what these lenses offer than the choice is simple. I on the other hand am somewhat disappointed with the "Sony Road Map". This small camera seems destined to support some huge hunks of glass and plastic.

Don't pick me up wrong, I'm happy to have the option of playing with some C/Y glass while Sony rolls out it's roadmap and Zeiss release their plans and offerings in the Loxia range. But hopefully there will be a point later this year where I can choose 4 good relatively fast primes that will cover wide to short telephoto and not be bigger than the camera it's self.
 

ErikKaffehr

Well-known member
Hi,

I am not very impressed by the A7 models today, so I have not jumped on the A7 train. A great advantage with the A# is that they can be used with almost any lens.

From my reading, the 55/1.8 is a really excellent lens and so is the 16-35/4. The 70-200/4 may also be a good one. Personally, I would be interested in a short tele lens that performed great at large apertures, without longitudinal chromatic aberration, but that may be a category of two, the Zeiss Otus 85/1.4 and the Zeiss Apo 135/2.0. Zeiss, please make an 85/2.0 APO, I would buy!

I am waiting for the "A9". The short list of lenses right now is:

16-35/4
55/1.8

For the rest I would go with my lenses for the Sony Alpha 99

Sigma 10/2.8 Fisheye (APS-C)
Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6
Samyang 14/3.5
Sony 24-70/2.8 ZA
Sony 70-400/4.0-5.6 G

Best regards
Erik


I know the standard refrain that there are more A7 cameras than lenses in the system is almost true. But for me the recent developments mean I soon need to make some choices.

1) FE 16-35 or some combination of 35f1.4, Loxia 35f2 and 28f2 (and attachments for 21mm and 16mm fisheye).

2) FE 70-200 or 90mm macro.

As I've noted elsewhere basically I look on this as a lose/lose situation. If the lenses are mediocre I'll be disappointed and frustrated. If the lenses turn out to be really good I'll be greedy and poor.

3) Now I've heard that Canon has come out with a very good 11-24 zoom. This competes with the VC 12mm and some of the Canon TS choices. Is there no end to the choices I'm confronted with by the A7 plague?

Regards,
John
 

Bryan Stephens

Workshop Member
It will be interesting to see how the new Sony FE 35/1.4 ZA will stack up with the Sigma 35/1.4 Art.

I have seen the Sigma in action and can say that it is stellar to say the least. For almost double the price, you would "expect" that the image quality on the new ZA lens would be superior, but is it possible?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
It will be interesting to see how the new Sony FE 35/1.4 ZA will stack up with the Sigma 35/1.4 Art.

I have seen the Sigma in action and can say that it is stellar to say the least. For almost double the price, you would "expect" that the image quality on the new ZA lens would be superior, but is it possible?
Possible yes... Likely... Probably not but I'd say (in my uneducated opinion regarding the Distagon) they'd be about on par with one another.
 

uhoh7

New member
If i was sooting the unmodified A7: any flavor, I would own the FE1635. I'd also own the FE 35 and 55.

Longer than that there are a lot of variables.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Thanks for the link.

I like Steve' delivery (with its over enthusiasm and all) better than these parakeets repeating the full name of the lens several times in a short clip.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
The 28 is certainly interesting idea and at its low cost it might be worth a try with a 30 day return.

The 90 is interest as well. Could it take my 85 1.4 place though. Not sure it really can

I would love to get to mostly FE lenses.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The 28 is certainly interesting idea and at its low cost it might be worth a try with a 30 day return.

The 90 is interest as well. Could it take my 85 1.4 place though. Not sure it really can

I would love to get to mostly FE lenses.
Yeah my think also has to do with limiting the amount of filters I'd need for the FS camera as well. The 35 uses 72mm filters like the 16-35, and the 70-200. The 90 uses 62mm filters and that would give me the option of a bit more range if I decided to buy the A-mount 70-300Gv2 for my long zoom.

I'm mostly leaning to stay with the FE but I do miss having a Macro and this can double as a great portrait lens maybe depending on if it's too sharp (although it can always be dialed back in post.) I haven't owned one since I sold my 45/2.8 Macro Elmarit for Micro 4/3
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Has anyone seen the pics of the lenses with their hoods on? The video linked on the 35/1.4 shows it with its hood. I am yet to see the 28/2 (or the others) with its hood.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Has anyone seen the pics of the lenses with their hoods on? The video linked on the 35/1.4 shows it with its hood. I am yet to see the 28/2 (or the others) with its hood.
I generally don't shoot with lens hoods on with the exception of being nearly perpendicular to oblique light sources. I'm sure it gives the impression of a much larger lens though. The lens looks to be about the same size as the 16-35 though so that's an acceptable lens size for me.
 
Top