(SR4) Possible price of the three new NEX lenses! Zeiss has 16cm minimum focusing distance
As you know three NEX lenses will be announced on 23/24 August! One of my trusted sources (Thanks!) sent me the pricing list. I still didn’t manage to get a confirmation so it’s not SR5 for now. But the source is good!
Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 = $999 (Minimum focusing distance of 16cm!). It costs less than the Zeiss 24mm f/2.0 for A-mount (Click here to see that lens)
Sony 55-210mm f/4-6.3 OSS = $299
Sony 50mm f/1.8 OSS = $349. It has double the price of the A-mount equivalent (Click here to see that lens) but it has OSS.
Loading ...UPDATE: A litte explanation about the poll percentages. The summary is not 100% for the simple reason that every voter can vote one, two or all three lenses. SO when you read that Zeiss has for example 64% of all voting this means that from all people who voted the poll 64% voted that lens.
One more background news: Until the very last moment there were some slightly different prototypes. That’s why for example they were rumors about a Zeiss f/2.0 version.
Support this site: I am having a lot of fun to work on SAR. I don’t use dozens of banners and I don’t get paid by any company to do what I do. All the work you see here is made by me during my free time. If you want to help me to cover the monthly server costs there is an easy way: Click on affiliate links you see on that website like Amazon, Adorama, B&H, J&R, eBay to buy whatever product you want (it doesn’t have to be a camera) and I will earn a small commission from it. You don’t pay any penny more on the items you buy and at the same time you support SonyAlphaRumors without me having to put 100 banners on my website. Cool or not? Thanks 
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources (60-80% the rumor is correct)
SR5=almost certainly correct!
Related Posts
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Jojo: This 16-50/2.8 is an A mount lens for SL...- Comment from Jojo: If we are going to “compare apples to ...
Comment from Sahaja: Though something like that might be nice...
Comment from reinz: well, if that lens nex have a good optic...
Daihao
10 months ago |Wow!! 55-210 is cheap! E24 is more expensive than I thought.
Richard
10 months ago |16cm surely?
Marc
10 months ago |I agree, must be a typo. 16mm is ridiculously close.
admin
10 months ago |Yeah it was a typo! Sorry again! Working in extreme conditions right now as I am travelling and have to rely on my iPhone 3G internet connection.
räven
10 months ago |I have to agree, 16mm is close to 1:1 rendition. 16cm is far more likely.
Carl
10 months ago |16cm would be about a 1:2.3 magnification ratio, which is pretty close to the Minolta 50/3.5 macro.
1.6cm would, I think, give it a higher magnification ratio than the 3x-1x macro, so yeah, nah.
kybel
10 months ago |MFD is distance from sensor, so 16mm would be somewhere inside the lens
Richard
10 months ago |Yes, that’s what I was thinking
.
@admin: Small typo to correct
Marc
10 months ago |Correct.
Carl
10 months ago |The flange distance is 18mm, so the lens might not have even started yet.
Maximus
10 months ago |not necessarily, internal-focus lenses shorten their focal length at closer focus distances
Disinto
10 months ago |I was expecting the Zeiss to cost something like 600$, at 1000$ it’s out of my reach :/ I’d rather prefer buying a new A65 or A77 for this price to fit with my current Zeiss 16-80.
Melotron
10 months ago |my thoughts, exactly. the zeiss is way out of many nex owners league. well, back to those manual lenses, boys and gals…
Sahaja
10 months ago |$800.00 is a lot of money – but a list price of at least $800.00 for an auto-focus 24mm F1.8 Zeiss lens is to be expected these days. The Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM (APS-C) which lists for $690.00 is cheaper and half a stop faster; but any auto-focus 24mm prime with an aperture faster than F2.0 from Nikon or Canon costs considerably more.
Sony should be able to do smaller and cheaper 24mm F2.0 or F2.8 and 35mm F1.8 or F2.0 E-mount lenses – without the Zeiss name.
Sahaja
10 months ago |Sorry that should have been: “$1,000.00 is a lot of money”
Kizu
10 months ago |Uuuu! The Highprice for the 50mm is also to much i think. But im still interested.
Richard
10 months ago |I’m sure we’ll hear a lot of complaints about the pricing of NEX7+Zeiss 24mm, mostly by those who felt the Fuji X100 was overpriced
elliot
10 months ago |Yes! A $2000 nex7 + 24/1.8 that’s bulkier than the $1200 x100 might actually drive a few sales to Fuji. Unfortunately.
Anne O'Namus
10 months ago |Compared to Panasonic or Olympus they are overpriced. If this was a pancake then I’m sure the complaints would come down. If lenses are going to be this huge an expensive on the NEX system then what’s the point? A DSLR or SLT is not much bigger and has a lot more to offer. So yeah, the x100 price is looking pretty good right now, haha.
Melotron
10 months ago |do you mean then that they’ll bundle the bod and the lens together for something like the x100 price? that sounds great! that’d mean the bod would cost something like 200 smackaroos bundled with that lens.
for that price, gents, who could resist getting another mortgage on one’s front lawn… woohoo!
Sahaja
10 months ago |50mm is also a little short for a portrait lens on an APS-C Camera. 60mm would have been better.
eromance
10 months ago |nice!!!
Eric
10 months ago |Yeah…
$2000 mark is way too much. I really wish the NEX7 + 24mm f/1.8 combo will be available for less than $1200. Maybe not at launch, but hopefully a couple months after that.
SonyA77
10 months ago |A “none” option is missing.
Melotron
10 months ago |at those prices, right on! give’s us the “skip and stick to manual lenses” option!
lolly
10 months ago |don’t forget the old screw-drive lenses too
Chris
10 months ago |does it means that i cannot afford NEX 7 anymore..??
$1000 only for the lens..how much will it be after being a bundle..? o.O
Richard
10 months ago |Doesn’t mean to say you can’t use cheaper manual lenses on it.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |Usually minus $100 for bundle … unless there’s miracle
Pablo
10 months ago |Damn, that 24/1.8 sure is expensive… Just hope it will NOT be the only possibility how to get the NEX7.
SONY, please, sell the N7 in a cheap bundle with the 18-55, too!
Or body only, please!
However, the 55-210 price is the best news of the day!
Richard
10 months ago |There is no way the NEX7 would ONLY come with a premium prime!
Pablo
10 months ago |hope, you are right! It would be really a suicide for SONY to bring out to the market a 2300 USD bundle of such a small camera… ouch
Chris
10 months ago |yeah..hope so..please make it cheaper..i wont buy it if the price over 1500..hope i can go down below 1300..
..cross finger..
Eric
10 months ago |It always comes back to the lens conundrum with the NEX system doesn’t it?
$1000 seems like way too much for an f/1.8 standard prime, which is what the 24mm will be on the NEX. The A-mount 24mm may more expensive, but it is also a full frame wide angle lens; 24mm eqv lenses are almost always more expensive then standard primes are (see Nikon’s 24mm/1.4 vs 35mm/1.4 for an example).
Even the new Olympus 12mm f/2 is “only” $800, and it has an awesome manual focus clutch mechanism. The Panasonic/Leica 25mm f/1.4 is only $600. As much as I want the NEX-7, Sony is making it next to impossible for me to justify it with their lens situation.
sow437
10 months ago |16mm, are you sure? even closest than a macro lens
Carl
10 months ago |None of those lenses appeal to me at all.
lomo
10 months ago |16mm 2.8
24mm 2.4
50mm 2.4
or wtv just make them pancake…
elliot
10 months ago |Sony really needs to make a small, affordable “normal” pancake prime. If freaking Samsung could do it 18 months ago with their well-reviewed 30/2.0 ( http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=224 ) then surely Sony could as well.
Nico Foto
10 months ago |Absolutely
Sahaja
10 months ago |Other than size and cuteness, what is so great about “pancake” primes?
They tend to be simple Tessar type optical designs – not particularly fast, with more distortion, vignetting and less edge sharpness than regular (non pancake) prime lenses.
The 24mm Zeiss lens will be faster and should have much better IQ than any pancake design would have had.
ItsaChris
10 months ago |Nothing is great about pancake primes other than there size you are 100% correct (well some like the nikon 45mm are very sharp, and with less glass there should be less flare and less weight.) corner sharpness or color shift would be a problem if there was a need for sharp corners. I am not trying to replace my work-horse DSLR (but I dont understand why people thinking mirrorless will completely replace DSLRs for everyone).
Sharpness is far and above anything we got with old compacts. I even get real apertures and a long enough lens mm that gives some real DOF.
I would be happy if sony lens (12, 16, 24, 35) were not pancake but still shorter then say 35mm long. but for the most part pancakes would be better as IQ is not the most important thing to me (I already got that just by using a larger sensor than traditional compacts) fun and size is what is important to me.
If you want to sell your images then yes, until sensors become perfectly flat wide angle pancakes will most likely not be a useful tool for you. but on days when you are just out with your friends or family they might be a joy to shoot with.
The Zeiss is huge as it looks like they added close focusing abilitys to the lens.
Sahaja
10 months ago |If the NEX7 has the same 24mp sensor as the A77 – and that sensor is as good as everyone hopes – then the lenses are going to have to be very good optically to get the most out of that sensor. Pancake designs probably wouldn’t come near to showing the sensor at its best.
Probably another reason Sony is avoiding more pancakes for now is that the 16mm pancake lens generally got pretty lukewarm reviews.
But yes fun and size are going to be important to many people who buy NEX cameras.
Stephen
10 months ago |I guess this is not a good sign regarding the quality of the 55-210mm at that price.
Anne O'Namus
10 months ago |What are you talking about? The 55-200mm kit A-mount was $250 on it’s own and is a solid performer. I think any zoom at this point will be welcomed. If this was a constant f4 lens for that price then I would be worried.
B
10 months ago |Why is sony so bent on drowning it’s chances of overtaking the x100 market?
rds
10 months ago |You’d be hard pressed to drown in a puddle.
Myst
10 months ago |if the 24mm f/1.8 is very good optical quality and the combo nex7+24mm focuses fast i will surely buy both, perfect walking around kit for basically everything, and i know some people might say, why don’t just buy the fuji x100, well i much rather have a camera with a decent grip and interchangeable lenses.
elliot
10 months ago |If the $2000 kit with the 24/1.8 is a “perfect walking around kit for basically everything” how is the Fuji X100 (which is smaller and much less expensive) less so?
Or is it worth $800 for what might be a better grip plus the ability to use additional lenses (which you probably won’t need because the 24mm focal length is “perfect”)?
Myst
10 months ago |it is perfect for walking around. (fullstop)
I wanted to get the x100, but
the fixed lens is a no go for me,
paying extra for a filter thread…
not being able to focus closer unless it’s in macro mode, this zeiss lens will focus closer all the time,
the focusing is slow
manual focus is a bitch
as i said the grip is better (seems to be at least) on the nex 7
and somehow i assume the iso will be better on the nex-7 the dynamic range…
so in the end paying 1200$ for the fuji is a waste of money i rather buy into a system than a camera
Some people wouldn’t mind the extra 800 for an all around better package, albeit a bit larger with that zeiss lens on, but which can get small if you use the 16mm
Brendon
10 months ago |Ouch ! $1000 for the 24mm has put it out of my reach.
This was one lens I really wanted to have but at $1000 I think ill pass.
The 50mm f1.8 though slightly overpriced has OSS which is probably the first 50mm lens to have it which would increase its cost.
The 55-210mm OSS is the surprise package and IMO priced very well.
Of course this is all rumours but I have a sneaky feeling that this is the real pricing or at least very close to actual reality.
If only Sony could match the price of the Pansonic 20mm f1.7 at around $400 – $500 or $300 extra on a bundle with a camera body & it would have really taken off mostly for the Zeiss brand name. At $1000 I dunno how well it would sell.
Poki
10 months ago |I would buy all three although the 18-200 looks much better than the 55-210 (mockup?). But hey, it’s much cheaper, and with the 50mm there finally is a affordable lens with relatively big aperture. The Zeiss is out of my reach … For 800 € I just haven’t enough use for a 24mm lens which isn’t even a pancake.
Michael
10 months ago |BTW, the 55-210 is a f/4.5-f/6.3 lens, not f/4-f/6.3.
The Lotus Eater
10 months ago |The price for the 55-210mm OSS is around the point I was hoping, but I hope the image quality is decent.
The 50mm f/1.8 is priced a little higher than I had hoped, but as long as build quality is as good as the 18-55mm OSS and the image quality is as good as the Alpha DT equivalent, then I’ll certainly consider it.
I have no use for a fast 24mm lens, especially not at that price.
frosti7
10 months ago |i wish sony had gone the 24/2 compact and 40/2 rumored compact design, adding a 32mm lens in the middle
Simon
10 months ago |NEX 7 + 24mm Zeiss seems to be close to any other enthusiast dslr – in price and size.
elliot
10 months ago |NEX 7 + 24mm Zeiss seems to be close to any other enthusiast dslr – in price and size.
Sure, if you want to compare a mirrorless camera to ones with mirrorboxes… and you want to ignore the native lens deficiencies in that comparison too.
The Fuji X100 is $800 cheaper and smaller. The Leica X1 is even smaller but the same price as the (much bulkier) Sony combo.
Edward
10 months ago |The price of the 24 seems to be quite a bargain for a Zeiss. I don’t know where some here got their expectations so low
I am buying one for sure.
elliot
10 months ago |Because it’s as much a “Zeiss” in the way that Panasonic’s 25mm Leica lens is a “Leica.” In other words, that lens is not made by Zeiss but the name is licensed for a product that presumably has an approved design. THAT’S why the price is comparatively low. But the lens by itself appears to cost nearly as much as a Fuji X100 (w/ lens), and I wonder about the price performance of a Sony nex7 system versus the Fuji.
SonyA77
10 months ago |Indeed, many people aren’t interested in changing lenses and will be wondering why they should get a compact NEX body, with relatively huge and expensive 24mm lens, when they can get the range-finder look of the Fuji X100.
I fear Sony have yet again missed an opportunity here.
Ian
10 months ago |The X100 is sexy, but it performs like a $500 camera. IQ is excellent, but you have to work hard to achieve it. I sold it after 2 weeks ’cause I can’t stand the slowness and overall ergonomics (buttons) of it. The NEX is a gunner while the X100 is made for old retiree people who have all the time in the world to take one picture just like the Sigma DP cameras.
Edward Karaa
10 months ago |And how do you know that? Do you have any insider information from Sony or Zeiss? AFAIC I will believe what Zeiss says, the ZA lenses are true Zeiss lenses.
SonyA77
10 months ago |Sony Zeiss lenses are not manufactured by Zeiss. They are made under a license agreement to presumably Zeiss specification.
Sky_walker
10 months ago |Yep. Zeiss does the design and branding, while Sony produces them. So they are true Zeisses, not just labels stick on Sony stuff. Still it doesn’t mean much considering the fact that Sony is quite capable in producing the quality lenses as we see
Melotron
10 months ago |let’s focus on the word “presumably” and then rethink premium quality in terms of the level of pay the actual workers get.
having thought about it, I’ll just pass this “Zeiss”. I would like sony to offer it in two labels and offer the sony labeled prime for half and *maybe* I’d think about churning out the cashola for one…
sheesh, the nerve of some!
Melotron
10 months ago |“one born every minute” stands true, I guess. hey, hope you’re going to be content with the grand work the German workers did in Malaysia or Thailand or wherever Sony ponies-up a factory just to “get costs down”. wow!
nex7
10 months ago |The only sucker is the one who judges a product based on where it is made, rather than its own merits. Furthermore, if what you say is true then it means that Zeiss can derive a great deal of value from its name alone, so why would they want to tarnish it by sticking it on an inferior product?
Melotron
10 months ago |it has to do with “manufacturing culture”. that’s why the yukhranyans or ruzzyans could never make a decent lens/camera although they stole the factories and kidnapped/enslavement/prisonment the German workers/engineers. a culture of manufacturing goods has to be there, you cannot make a pony out of an ass no matter how much you teach it to prance.
as for zeiss deriving value, my good feller, they are as much zeiss as leica is still leica. it is a money making company; they name does indeed stand for some great heritage in design and manufacturing but that’s all in the glorious past now.their R&D is so far behind they cannot even adjust to the AF era, not to mention internal focusing motors and stabilization. now, i am all for “just glass and steel” but history DOES move on.
to conclude, I pretty much respect the fact that “zeiss” branded lenses from sony would cost an arm and a leg just because the market thinks that behind a tag there is also great design and heritage, that, however, does not constitute proof for me. fact is they want to make us think that paying the premium gives us a zeiss design and manufacturing quality. truth is, that’s a sony lens and they should give us a break with the whole branding thing and just deliver goods. the fact that their branding stuff should only tell you they think theres more money to be made of those willing to cash out for the zeiss name on their asian lens than there is to be made from those not giving a rat’s behind what is called what as long as the quality is consistent.
robert
10 months ago |NONE. lenses are too big/ too expensive. there’s no point in that.
Anonymous
10 months ago |$1000 for the CZ 24/1.8? I was expecting around $600. Hmmm, looks like I’m going to be ordering the x100
CarneAsadaBrito
10 months ago |Same here. I might have considered the zeiss (even at that price) if it weren’t xbox huge.
S Pimenta
10 months ago |Sony 50mm f/1.8 OSS = $349?!
It’s a bit overpriced but if the quality of the lens is realy very good I am still interessed.
Very good camera sensor (NEX-5) = need very good lenses.
elliot
10 months ago |“A bit overpriced”??? The Nikon and Canon equivalents are already ‘really very good’ and they cost around $120 … about $220 LESS than the Sony. I seriously doubt that the Sony is much better in IQ but we’ll see.
zstan
10 months ago |yeah but they don’t AF and have OSS.
The Lotus Eater
10 months ago |Yep, only a bit overpriced.
I’m not so familiar with the Nikons, but the Canon 50mm f/1.8 has poor build quality and neither have stabilisation, which is a major plus for the NEX 50mm in low light.
If the NEX 50mm’s image quality matches the A-mount 50mm f/1.8 DT and it has the build quality of previous NEX lenses, then some may even see it as a bargain. Let’s not forget the lens will probably retail for less than Sony’s rumoured manufacturer price.
Sky_walker
10 months ago |“The Nikon and Canon equivalents” – they don’t have equivalents. Did you see any mirrorless system from Canikon? I did not.
Myst
10 months ago |did you by any change forget that sony also makes a 50mm f/1.8 for 150$? which is at least 2 times better optically that the canon equivalent. just look at how olympus priced their 45mm f/1.8 and the considering all that the sony is price accordingly assuming it’s great optically and mechanically ok.
GJH2
10 months ago |I agree. The 50mm is too expensive.
Dirk
10 months ago |The poll is worthless unless the option “none” is included.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |Let’s see whether CZ 24mm IQ is waaaaaay better than 1855mm, and not only faster. I rarely need f/1.8 for 24mm lens.
I’m ok to pay more for Zeiss IQ, but not much for the speed.
Any idea whether the CZ lens would cost much less if it was f/2.8, or even f/3.5?
PhotoNut
10 months ago |Wow. The Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 is longer than the Kit zoom lens. I wonder if all these NEX primes were really designed for Alpha mount flange distance with added internal extension tube for NEX.
RTI
10 months ago |here comes the troll; no they are tamron rebadged to zeiss… with Chinese adapters soldered…
SonyA77
10 months ago |Don’t joke, your comments about Tamron could be true!
NEXfive
10 months ago |No, unfortunately the troll made a point, since ItsaChris just argued here against me that at least up this awesome 30mm f/2 from Samsung pancakes like those for μ4/3 would be also possible for the NEX’s APS-C:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/534-samsung30f2
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-huge-sony-leak/#comment-34398
PhotoNut
10 months ago |Hey, I’m not a troll. Just making a true observation. The lenses are quite large/long for a range finder style camera. The lenses are even longer than some fast wide angle lenses on older SLRs.
Sky_walker
10 months ago |They are even longer than Sony 70-400G! Or even the Zeiss Apo Sonnar 1700 f/4!
SonyA77
10 months ago |I heard the 500mm f4 was going to be a pancake though.
Raul S.
10 months ago |You got a point in that, now that you mention it…maybe for Sony it was too difficult to make lenses with the 18mm registration distance, and opted to use..mmm let’s say…24mm? more? who knows…It’s the only way I can justify the SEL55210 and Zeiss 24mm lens lenght…
reinz
10 months ago |zeiss 24mm1.8 is to expensive sony! i would buy A77 for that >:0
SonyA77
10 months ago |or the X100
john
10 months ago |better to wait for X200
SonyA77
10 months ago |oooh I hadn’t picked up on that rumour. Now that would be interesting…X300 with interchangeable lenses…
Edward Karaa
10 months ago |Well, so far 431 people out of 708 will buy the very expensive and huge Zeiss
RTI
10 months ago |let me edit it for you: “so far 431 people out of 708 pressed the wrong button”
Edward Karaa
10 months ago |LOL
SonyA77
10 months ago |and since there is no “none” option, the vote is irrelevant anyway
Jennzhen
10 months ago |Not fair since there’s no vote for “I don’t want to buy 24mm lens”. I want to see the % of people supporting this lens.
For all we know, 431 could be 0.001% of the audience here.
Raul S.
10 months ago |or maybe 431 people out of 708 pressed the Zeiss to make joke of the absence of None button
Alex
10 months ago |Very expensive? It’s the cheapest Zeiss lens.
RTI
10 months ago |1000$ for an e-mount lens? hmm, I’d add 200$ to get the awesome Fuji X100
SonyA77
10 months ago |…look at John’s comment above, there is a rumoured X200 and X300. Now is not the time to be buying a NEX-7 and expensive 24mm, Fuji might just be doing some interesting stuff
Almond
10 months ago |That’s great but you will be able to resuse this Zeiss lens on future NEX products (photo and video) for decades. The Fuji, not so much..
SonyA77
10 months ago |Personally I’d prefer the compactness of the X100. I’d be more likely to carry the X100 around for years, the NEX-7 and 24mm I’d leave at home for years.
Alex
10 months ago |It’s a lot of money, but cheaper as a similar m-mount-zeiss-lens.
But I want a smaller lens. I’m thinking about to buy the C Biogon T* 4,5/21 ZM with adapter.
ItsaChris
10 months ago |Do we have any information about on the size of the 50mm 1.8?
24mm – It would be kinda cool to have a fast close focusing wide lens. the price is expected, but I am surprised in the amount of people that want to buy the 24mm on this poll.
SonyA77
10 months ago |Wanting to buy and actually buying it are not the same thing…:)
Eric
10 months ago |Why, oh why can’t we have a fast zoom?
I don’t wanna get stuck with a fast prime, when I need to zoom on a distant subject!!
I want a 16-80 f/1.8 for the NEX7, and make the whole bundle less than $1200.
That’s how Sony will sell those like hot buns.
Raul S.
10 months ago |Then promise you wouldn’t criticize the big lens size (bigger than SEL18200) if Sony makes it
And bundle less thant $1200 with such a lens? You’re asking for mediocre quality then…or Are you on Sarcastic mode ON?
Alfonso Cuitiño
10 months ago |I hope they sell NEX-7 body without lenses
Erational
10 months ago |Admin: what is the size of the 50mm OSS lens ?
Erational
10 months ago |Admin: what is the size of the 50mm OSS lens
SonyA77
10 months ago |50mm
Sorry, couldn’t resist…
Steve
10 months ago |Complain Complain Complain
First I must point-out that to take full advantage of high MP sensors starting to ship and all of the other electronic improvements consumers and posters here keep demanding, you need good optics (lenses).
Second, good lenses often cost more, and it been true forever that a quality lens that’s sharp corner to corner, fast (bright) and has few defects will cost as much, or more than the camera itself.
Sorry to tell some of you this and many other know this painfully already.
Third, Sony pricing is on par with the competition, although often not quite up to the same quality because many of its lenses are now one generation behind; Sony’s Zeiss ZA 24-70/f2.8 is cheaper and I think optically better than the Nikon, etc….
The new NEX 7 looks to be a terrific camera body in a small package and you are going to pay a price for this, and if you truly need this amount of horse-power in a camera then don’t waste your money by putting cheap optics on it.
I think many of you that don’t already know this will eventually figure it out that you need one than one lens. How many, depends on the reason you take photographs.
Here is a basic list of lenses you would expect to find in a pros bag or in the bag of an advanced amateur and about the $ cost (give or take a few lenses). These are FF so adjust for your sensor.
Three or four lenses that it:
16-35 /f2.8 $1,800
24-70 /f2.8 $1,500
70-200 /f2.8 $1,800
50mm /f1.4 or 85mm /f1.4 $500-$1,400
I’m writing this to point-out that stuff cost money and good stuff costs even more. People keep asking Sony to produce the best and the greatest but at the same time don’t want to pay for it.
If the NEX 7 is too expensive, don’t buy it, get the NEX 3
And if the Zeiss is too much money don’t buy it, get something else.
SonyA77
10 months ago |I don’t need more than one lens on a NEX sized camera.
elliot
10 months ago |Comparing a couple of overpriced Sony APS-C lenses to the top-of-the-line, sealed pro full-frame DSLR lenses by Canikon is an exercise in silliness.
reinz
10 months ago |well, if that lens nex have a good optic i don’t mind, but if not good it not worth to buy it.
Sony NEX
10 months ago |Can anyone confirm whether the Sony 55-210 starts at 4 or 4.5? The last two posts have stated 4, but the Sony Canada leak stated 4.5. I am more likely to believe the Sony Canada leak, and assume Sony Alpha rumors is neglecting this detail in error. Unfortunately, the picture of the Sony gear leaked yesterday turns to pixels when you zoom in on the aperture description on the lens. Can anyone confirm the actual lens speed?
SRL
10 months ago |That’s cool it can only connect to one at a time anyway.
So what lens is that and why?
I see it helpful to me to understand what lens a person uses and why.
I don’t own any of the NEX products but thinking about it, but not sure how or where I would use it.
Eric
10 months ago |Exactly…
We don’t wanna buy into a whole camera system, with many lenses that cost an arm and a leg.
We just wanna pay one time for a nice body+lens+card bundle, and that’s it!
So if I’m going to buy a good camera instead of a cheap Point & Shoot, I want to have a good fast lens with zoom.
Just take a look at today’s P&S cameras. They have zooms ranging from x5 to as high as x16. And those (none-removable) lenses are pretty fast as well, with apertures as open as f/2 .
I can already hear the laughs of a Sony HX9V owner zooming all the way to x16 and capturing something that I can only dream of, while I stand next to him with a Sony NEX7 and 24mm f/1.8. Oh god, the humiliation.
So why in the world can’t we buy a good camera body with a good fast zoom lens, for a decent price?
If you can buy a Sony HX9V point&shoot with x16 zoom for $349 these days, isn’t it reasonable to pay $1200 for a Sony NEX7 + 16-80 f/1.8 (x5 zoom) ??
Sure, the NEX7 bundle will give you much better performance and IQ, but you’re paying almost 3.5 times the cost. But as you can see – that lens that I mentioned doesn’t even exist. So you’re gonna get a worse lens, and pay more than $1200.
How much more do I need to pay to get a decent camera?? I don’t get it!!
I am not a professional that makes money off of it.
Just want a good bundle to shoot photos and videos of myself and my family.
Is that too much to ask?
zstan
10 months ago |THEN BUY THE HX9 THEN!!!! WHAT’S ALL THE FUSS?
Myst
10 months ago |and what if you buy a Medium format Leica s2 with a short lens you still wouldn’t be able to shoot that thing far away, but you would have payed over 100 times as much!!! if you want to shoot that thing far away get the darn camera you need… not every camera is tailored for every user, each is specific even if some try to do it all.
Some will prefer to pay a lot more for something that suits them, and their subjects.
Frankly i never heard anyone bashing leica for their lenses which are really overpriced… but are they actually?
Making a lens is hard, glass is expensive, but also the way you stick that lens together matters a lot, a lens that is well made will last longer than one that’s not so well made, you pay a premium for attention given to the lens, cause someone is checking it a lot to make sure it’s in tip top condition.
Nobody is asking you to buy this camera or this lens, if you don’t want to just buy something else that suits your needs and pockets.
Raul S.
10 months ago |again…the same thing…16-80 with constant aperture of 1.8 will be bigger than the SEL18200..and many people will complaint for the huge size compared to the body, and then…make it bundle for $1200??? Point me where’s a constant aperture 16-80 in this world where the Lens only cost less than $800???? I have only seen 17-50 f/2.8 as low as 600 brand new..You’re asking for the unrealistic…Get your logic in place.
P5Freak
10 months ago |Two new OSS lenses means to me that the NEX7 still has no sensor stabilizer ? Sony FAIL again. A camera so small and light needs to have in body stabilization. Lenses with optical stabilizer are bigger that non optical stabilization lenses (and more expensive), which defeats the purpose of a small camera, together they are bigger than a camera with sensor stabilization and unstabilized lenses.
Melotron
10 months ago |not to mention the fact that adding stabilization in the lens (thus another _moving_ element) decreases the optical quality as a rule of thumb, for every design. but dontcha tell it to any canikonian or else expect a raging fit
Melotron
10 months ago |Can anyone explain to me why one would buy only the lens instead of camera plus lens?
Let me rephrase that: why should one buy a lens (~35mm equiv) to stick on the nex when there’s a whole camera lens+combo (x100) for about the same price?!
Sony must be opening the celebration bottles way too early or “the shrooms taste funny this year” to come up with such pricing insanity.
As far as I am concerned, I think the nex is an intermediary system in the sense it is mainly designed to be used with manual glass via adaptors, and it does indeed work very fine that way.
If sony think sticking that label on the prime caused nex customers to bleed cash, they have another thing coming. Best of luck to them!
[somebody wake me up when they discount it to less that 500 smackaroos]
lolly
10 months ago |It’s all about making a profit. If it doesn’t sell well in the market then a cheaper version will appear. The Sony customers will decide if the price is right.
Btw, I consider all the primes to be too expensive for the Nex system that’s targeting the P&S crowd.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |Who are you calling P&S crowd?
lolly
10 months ago |Who’s the P&S crowd ? The people who use an iPhone as a camera for convenience. P&S cameras are made for convenience and usually are at the lower end of the price range.
If you prefer to own/use a Nex instead of a Dslr then you may not consider yourself a part of the P&S crowd … but in reality you are … because you’re using a Nex for convenience.
The Nex body is more a P&S camera on steroids than a shrunken Dslr. So far the pricing of existing Nex bodies (not Nex7) is targeting the budget-minded consumer. So the Nex system is targeting the P&S crowd. If you want a high-quality, Zeiss lens then you want a body to match.
You know who you are.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |I bought NEX-5 because personally it’s better than entry-level DSLR canikon.
I’m going to buy A77 because it’s likely going to be the best APSC camera.
Myst
10 months ago |why would someone buy a leica lens for 7000$ when they can get a whole system for that money? Some lenses are just better, and you pay extra for it the better the lens the more the price goes up. You always pay a lot of that extra bit.
Let’s wait for leica to bring out their EVIL system and compare prices then, the sony lenses will be extremely under-priced.
Melotron
10 months ago |at least what is now called leica do not have the nerve to ask the premium amount for the lenses BRANDED with their name (see the panny 25/1.4 they recently release under the leica brand). now, that is not a leica lens. a leica lens is made in germany (maybe spain, but they won’t admit it) by leica internally-schooled plant workers . that’s where the premium price comes from: those workers actually do get paid MORE than their asian colleagues. do you see where I am driving at and why you just swung by the ball big time missing it?
to make it clear to you: compare apples to apples.
Jojo
10 months ago |If we are going to “compare apples to apples” the m43 equivalent of the Zeiss 24/1.8 would be 18mm not 25mm. Comparing a fast moderate wideangle with a fast standard is more like apples to mangoes. If Panasonic came out with a Leica 18/1.4 would it not be more like twice the price of the 25/1.4?
No axe to grind, just an observation.
Paul
10 months ago |It’s this kind of theoretical nonsense that will kill the video side of the NEX line. OSS is mandatory on every single lens from now on, period. If it’s not there — like on the overpriced Zeiss, which is a big mistake — it’s not to make you happy, or because of some theoretical image quality improvement. It’s just Sony being cheap.
Björn Utpott
10 months ago |The high price of the Zeiss will lead to matching expectations. So Sony had better deliver an excellent lens.
I suspect they will offer the Zeiss 24/1.8 in a kit with the NEX-7 for around 1300 Euros, near the cost of the Panasonic GH2 kit with the video optimized 14-140mm lens.
Raul S.
10 months ago |ummmm I would like to support your idea, but the NEX-7 shares the EVF and sensor with the a77…and comes with more manual controls…and taking into account that the NEX-C3 comes with the SEL1855 OSS around 649USD…the NEX-7 with SEL1855 could be around 949USD easily (and I fear it could be more) so bundled with the Zeiss…1800USD sounds to me the retail price… =(
Edward
10 months ago |So much negativity…
NEX7
10 months ago |Strange that nobody comments on a NEX7 + 16-50mm f/2.8? It would be THE killer, alround kit. I will wait untill this option is available or I will purchase the body and a third party zoom.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |16-50mm f/2.8 = A-mount … unlikely to have NEX7 paired with A-mount kit lens
Jojo
10 months ago |This 16-50/2.8 is an A mount lens for SLRs, but it could make sense to have a comparable E mount version. It would just need to be fatter than the current kit zoom so wouldn’t really seem much bigger, while being much more versatile. Maybe for the future, when the NEX system is better established….
xylum
10 months ago |@Admin – Re: NEX-7
Does it come with a flash (built-in or otherwise) that can control A mount flashes, especially wireless?
Cheers,
N
extra|ordinary
10 months ago |The way I see it, the Nex-7 is geared towards professional and serious hobbyists. That being said, if the performance is there, I will gladly buy the Nex-7 and the 24/1.8 at that price.
I currently shoot with an a850 and a few assorted Zeiss lenses. Why? Because I am after the best image quality I can possibly obtain. Do I enjoy having to pay a premium for quality gear? Not really, but I understand that value of doing so. Do I enjoy lugging around a heavy camera and with even heavier lenses? Generally no, but again, to me the pros outweigh the cons.
So imagine my delight when a camera like the Nex-7 comes along. While it is still yet to be seen how well it performs, I am excited at the possibility of owning a small sleek camera like the Nex-7 that pair with a quality lens, may manage to offer image quality on par, if not better, then the a850 that I have come to know and love.
To me, it’s all about image quality…and as far as I can tell, in terms of utmost quality in a lightweight package, the Nex-7 may be the only option. This camera looks be the perfect companion camera for the full frame crowd…which like I said earlier, seems to be the group the Nex-7 is catered towards.
That being said, if you cannot justify the price for your own needs, simply move along. Just because you don’t see any particular value in something, doesn’t mean someone else won’t. Sony has produced plenty product I don’t understand or see a need for, however I am not going to go out of my way to condemn them for it…my time is better served doing something constructive. In the case of the Nex-7 and the “over-priced” 24/1.8, I applaud Sony for providing the option…and in this particular case, an option that I see tremendous possibilities, for which I am willing to pay the price to obtain.
Raul S.
10 months ago |maybe for people like you that already own FF cameras, the difference in size could be of very good appeal while keeping the best quality available..but there’s people here complaining about the size of the lens stating that the difference between NEX7+Zeiss and a entry level or mid-level dSLR is smaller…hope you get the NEX-7 + Zeiss soon and then tell us your experience, to have an idea of what to expect from making such and investment =)
extra|ordinary
10 months ago |I can certainly understand it for those to approach it from that angle. But I think the important thing to remember about the nex line, and all mirrorless cameras for that matter, is that while the ability to make a camera smaller is one large benefit, the larger benefit behind a mirrorless camera is the fact that IT IS mirrorless. As most people already know, there are many things to be gained when the mirror is removed.
That being said, just because the nex can be smaller then an dslr/dslt, doesn’t mean it needs to be smaller. While the nex3/5 focused on being compact and small, I think the nex7 is built to serve a different crowd. People don’t think of the nex as anything other then compact cameras, simply due to the fact that it has never been produced as such…that is until now.
The way I see it, the nex7 looks to be an equal but alternative camera built for the crowd who initially planned only to buy the a77. Now given the choice, some won’t buy the a77 because the mirror is fixed and thus there is unavoidable light loss. Just the same, some won’t consider the nex7 because it can’t offer phase detect AF(without the adapter). Some will prefer the traditional dslr handling of the a77, while others like the rangefinder approach of the nex7. You are looking at two similar tools, but tweaked to suit those with different needs.
deniz
10 months ago |i thing the problem here is, people are in desperate need of a proper native prime lens for their cameras and this zeiss here is the only option in sight. if there were a few other options out there i dont think anyone would be complaining about the zeiss price this much.
look at m43 arena. the voigtlander 25mm f0.95 is also priced about 1000 and its not a very compact lens either. but who cares? there are a lot of options out there.
extra|ordinary
10 months ago |@deniz
I agree completely.
Paul
10 months ago |Zeiss: overpriced with no OSS. Steadyshot Active mode is MANDATORY for the NEX line. Whenever it’s not included, Sony is just being cheap. And it doesn’t help that people banter about OSS degrading image quality — regardless of whether they could actually prove it in test results.
It’s important to remember that the NEX E-mount standard is motivated partly by video. Again, Steadyshot Active is MANDATORY for the entire E-mount line. If Sony fails to see this, E-mount will join its sad, growing list of decedents: Beta, MiniDisc, ATRAC, etc.
Allan
10 months ago |1000 dollars !! yes a little bit expensive ! i will purchase depending if the lens is really good !!
hope so !!
at this time no lens (even the 18-200 which is really good) is able to deliver all the potential of the sensor of old and new nex cameras !!
so their is a lot to hope in the CZ lens and the futur G lens (e-mount) coming next year !!
Can someone who got the CZ sonnar F2 give his opinion ?
Edward Karaa
10 months ago |If the 24 has no OSS, I’m pretty sure it’s a Zeiss decision. We all know how picky they are about image quality. They have refused to make AF lenses for many years because of the increased tolerances involved. They still make and successfully sell manual focus lenses. OSS also implicates lower IQ and I doubt Zeiss would agree on that.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |Agree. 24mm + OSS probably won’t increase the price much, say maybe $50-100. But the decrease in quality may fall below Zeiss standard. Who will pay for a more expensive lens, with OSS, but less IQ?
For those who need the OSS lens for video, consider that maybe this 24mm is not made for you.
What I want to know is why Zeiss/Sony decided to make it f/1.8 and not f/2.8 or higher, which will make the lens smaller. Is it because they can’t make f/2.8 lens with the same IQ as f/1.8? So they go for lower f number to achieve better quality?
I want a lens with better IQ … but f number is not so important to me at 24mm. I’ve been using f/3.5-5.6 at 18-30mm range without any issue at lowlight (E-mount 18-55mm).
If the lens is 200-300mm, yes it make a bigger difference to have a lower f number … you know how fast those small birds can fly
or F1 cars.
Jeff
10 months ago |Admin,
Any news on the image circle of the new lenses, especially the Zeiss 24/1.8? Whether it covers a full-frame 36*24 CMOS? Curious to know if there might be full frame NEX in the future. Thanks.
Jeff
admin
10 months ago |It is NOT a fullframe lens.
Sahaja
10 months ago |Though something like that might be nice, there is not going to be a full frame NEX. Sony doesn’t have a broad enough range of lenses for the A-mount and E-mount cameras it already makes – without getting into full-frame E-mount.
Sylwiusz
10 months ago |Yup, Zeiss 24 seems to be overpriced. Even if street price would be 800$, it would still be more than 2x more expensive than much smaller, lighter and very well received Panasonic 20/1.7 (pancake) for micro 4/3
Allan
10 months ago |But very probably 4x much better than Panansonic pancake !!!
Sylwiusz
10 months ago |Yeah, right. We will be lucky if it would be at least as good as this Panasonic. See detailed test:
http://lenstip.com/269.1-Lens_review-Panasonic_LUMIX_G_20_mm_f_1.7_ASPH..html