(SR5) Full size images of all three upcoming NEX lenses
Just cam back from a climbing trip in the dolomites and there are already new leaks! Those are the fullsize images of the upcoming three E-mount lenses. Click on the images to enlarge. As I already told you the Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 will cost around $999, the 55-210mm f/4-6.3 OSS will cost $299 and the 50mm f/1.8 OSS will cost $349.
There is also a nice size comparison (Thanks PaulPI!):
Don’t miss to be here on SAR on August 24 (6-7 am London time). Keep following us on Facebook, Twitter and follow our RSS-feed! And be sure to be here at SAR on August 24th!
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 
Loading ...Related Posts
Via Dpreview forum
Share
Recent comments
Comment from Nice: ha!...
Comment from Cisto: 50mm F1.8 and CZ 24mm/1.8 both comfirm h...
Comment from NEXfive: Exact equivalents, opening the aperture ...
Comment from Allan: Yes ! especially if you looking the pric...
sudhir
10 months ago |Too good to be first
cool stuff !!
r41n
10 months ago |I want the 50mm f1.8!
ToddAO
10 months ago |Great job Sony Alpha Rumors! I love this site.
AVESTA
10 months ago |Still think the zeiss is too big… oh well
Frosti7
10 months ago |I’m just not crazy about 36 fl, its not wide enough to capture a place imho, and not long enough to take a portrait or to make a shallow dof photo,
besides yes, it is too big
The 50/1,8 is the least interesting, its a specific purpose lens that is not “carry everywhere” thus not needing to be compact,
so i dont mind using one of my 10 legacy 50mm lens that i’ve collected over the years
AVESTA
10 months ago |Yeah, I agree. They shoulda made a 16mm (24mm) instead.
I just think it’s pointless because i’m already using my Zeiss 24mm on there so what am i really benefiting from buying this other than loose a few ounces off the weight.
I mean, the size is still not super portable so whats the point.
nopt
10 months ago |“They shoulda made a 16mm (24mm) instead.”
Lol what, are you serious? There’s already a ton of NEX owners with a 16mm lens. You’re saying it would make sense to add another 16mm to the system (with such a lack of variety in native lenses), because you’re already using the a-mount 24mm Zeiss on your NEX? Talk about warped perspective.
Maximus
10 months ago |24mm (36mm equivalent) is a highly universal focal length, the classical focal length for reportages.
AVESTA
10 months ago |Yeah, I used to own it… and in case you didn’t notice it was a shit sandwich.
Zeiss has made duplicate focal lengths in the past, and people buy them because they’re not garbage like most of the sony kit lenses.
Now for Zeiss to make 2 (TWO) 24mm lenses that both fit on the same camera with slight differences, that’s what doesn’t make any sense. Nothing warped about that perspective!!!
kevin
10 months ago |Now, concerning there being two similar Zeiss 24mm lenses: it might make more sense if the faster 24/1.8, already dedicated to the shallowest interchangeable mount, had some extra exclusivity such as a built-in leaf shutter for faster native flash sync speed.
Raul S.
10 months ago |the Zeiss looks delicious… And with my black NEX-5…wow, Sexy =)
nopt
10 months ago |It makes sense just fine.
1) They are completely different mounts. Tell me, how fast does that a-mount 24mm focus on your NEX? AF through the adapter verges on useless.
2) One is a full-frame 24mm lens designed for a900/a850 users, the other is designed as a 36mm equivalent lens for an APS-C only system.
3) The e-mount Zeiss is significantly smaller than a-mount 24mm + adapter. It’s more than just a “slight difference”
http://i52.tinypic.com/spwz6t.jpg
Alfonso Cuitiño
10 months ago |I can’t afford any of them, I think I’ll stick with legacy lenses
Phill Cocks
10 months ago |How much is the 50mm 1.8 expected to be?
Sandro
10 months ago |is the 50mm gonna be so good? It won’t explain why it costs so much compared to the competition otherwise
Booe
10 months ago |Let me guess… 50/1.8 is another SLR lens with built-in E-mount adaptor )))
Gert
10 months ago |I really don’t think so! Here you can finde a pictures of the nex + adapter + 50mm sam lens
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_MTsUjTsloTM/TNi4Gf8gsLI/AAAAAAAAFLQ/nR1yD40k78U/s1600/IMAG0039.jpg
its way bigger isn’t it?
jg
10 months ago |What Booe is rightful suggesting IMO, is that all these lenses (except 16/2.8) are of a size similar to DSLR-lenses. According to rumors on this site, they could even be meant for another run in DSLR-clothing.
Even id it is of course rational for Sony to use some of the same lens designs in more mounts, it is somewhat to let the NEX-users down, since we need (and deserve) smaller lenses utilizing the very short distance between lens and sensor.
Booe
10 months ago |I don’t see DSLR’s Zeiss.
Isn’t ist E-mount 18-200?
Esa Tuunanen
10 months ago |Well fooled by marketing…
Lenses are basically same size because sensor size is same meaning: Same lens focal length and physical aperture size. Same image circle they need to cover.
Short flange back distance of mirrorless helps to simplify design of only those lenses which suffer from flange back distance being bigger than focal length… And even without need for as complex retrofocus design it’s hard to make those wide angle lenses small without optical quality dropping to sewer because good correction of all various lens aberrations needs complex design in any case.
There’s no such thing as even semi-free lunch in optics.
If you want small lenses there are two simple ways:
1. Make them optically garbage and with slow max aperture.
2. Use smaller sensor for allowing smaller focal length/aperture size and no need to correct aberrations for as big image circle.
Eric
10 months ago |@esa
Then how does one explain high quality APS-C pancakes from both Pentax and Samsung? Even a number of full frame Leica M mount lenses are smaller than The new Zeiss 24mm. The Leica 35mm f/2 Summicron is downright tiny, and obviously has extremely high IQ. Then of course there’s m4/3′s; the 4/3′s sensor isn’t *that* much smaller than APS-C. The Olympus 12mm f/2, Panasonic 25mm f/1.4, and 20mm f/1.7 are all quite small and of extremely high quality. Something the size of the 20mm/1.7 may be unreasonable, but can they at least not give us some decent primes in the size ballpark of the Oly 12mm?
Booe
10 months ago |Esa, have you engineered something ever?
There is no relationship between lens size and image circle it produces. A simplest pinhole can cover sensor of any size. And actually the reverse of what you said is true: given fixed aperture and angle of view, it is easier to design lens for a large image circle/focal length.
Removing mirror allows to place lens elements closer to sensor, thus giving more freedom to optical designer. Note that SLR lens designers usually try to place rear elements of lens as close to sensor as possible. So at worstcase, camera + lens size won’t be greater, but sometimes a lot smaller. So mirrorless camera + lens combination should be either of two
1. smaller than a SLR+lens
2. in case or same size, have superior image quality due to having more elements in it (where mirror was).
If it’s neither, it’s because of
1. marketing.
2. cutting expenses for unifying production of SLRs and mirrorless (that is, producing SLR lens with E-mount adaptors builtin)
WyldRage
10 months ago |The biggest news in these images is that the Sony 50mm 1.8 is NOT with OSS.
Jennzhen
10 months ago |55-210mm is taller & thinner than 18-200mm?
What does it mean?
Sky_walker
10 months ago |that it’s lighter and smaller.
Engineer
10 months ago |Great news that the 50mm 1.8 from sony has OSS!
Optical Steady Shot is the best image stabilization system shipping today, I’m pretty sure. At least, on the 18-200 it is. It is really quite amazing.
I think this 50mm lens is going to be the great one for action video photography, especially in low light.
Imagine, being able to run down an alley at night covering a riot or whatever, not having to focus (like all the legacy MF fast lenses) and with the video stabilized.
$350 is not a bad price. I know there’s an Alpha mount fast 50 for $200, but I don’t think it has OSS.
OSS is what made the 18-200 worth $800 to me. It is really compelling– at least if you shoot video.
If you don’t shoot video, I bet you’ll get a lot fewer blurry low light shots with this lens… but you won’t realize it because you’re thinking it is your steady hand!
Sandro
10 months ago |the OSS really helps with the longish focal range, it would make it act like a 1.0 camera if it had at least 2 stops of stabilization
Michael
10 months ago |The 50 mm clearly does _not_ say “OSS” on the lens.
Sandro
10 months ago |ok then the price is unfair IMHO. Canon and Nikon offer the same lens for $240 less! Do lenses in NEX mount cost more to make?
acolyte
10 months ago |Economies of scale.
Booe
10 months ago |Looks like NEX version has OSS. Also it is probably ‘video’ and ‘CDAF’ optimized.
Michael
10 months ago |Oh, and BTW, the 55-210 starts at f/4.5, not at f/4. I’ve mentioned this before, but Andrea keeps saying “f/4″.
Michael Welle
10 months ago |And the 1/3 of a stop makes a big difference. Hopefully the lens will hold f4.5 from 55 to a decent telephoto length. The alpha lens which is 55-200 holds f4 from 55-100 (according to kurtmunger.com). My fingers are crossed that the 4.5 on this lens will stay in that range. Why don’t I buy a 70-200 f2.8? Well, for one thing, it doesn’t autofocus and it isn’t stablized. Then again it is f2.8 throughout the range and Sony is coming out with the LA-EA2 which should rectify the autofocus isssue, but not the stabilization problem. Is it worth $1,800.00 for this huge lens? Or will the 55-200 suffice?
Lessob
10 months ago |Surprisingly big and expensive, no OSS for the 50 and 24?
nopt
10 months ago |I can understand no OSS on the 24mm, and Zeiss have stated that they don’t do OSS because it compromises their build tolerances/IQ (or words to that effect), but I was under the impression that the 50mm would be stabilized. If it doesn’t have OSS then I don’t know how they’re going to justify the rumored $350 price. The e-mount lenses have much nicer materials and construction compared to the Easy Choice stuff on a-mount, but that doesn’t account for $200 extra for an equivalent lens.
Also wasn’t there a 40mm OSS on the roadmap at some point?
Michael Welle
10 months ago |The slideshow pictures that Sony had showed a picture of a 40mm f/2 OSS. Looks like they went with the 50mm which they were originally talking about.
Michael Welle
10 months ago |Since the 24 is fairly wide-ish you could get away with no OSS (just like on the 16mm). With the 50mm you are so telephoto that a lack of OSS means shaky video without support.
Hellven
10 months ago |crappy crappy lenses… way to big, what is sony doing?? if they continue this route i’ll probably sell my Nex-5, cause its gonna take years to have a good COMPACT 24mm or 35mm fast prime…
oh well, lets hope Canon do it right, they’re my last hope
GH
10 months ago |You should look at Samsung NX and their 30/2.
camilo
10 months ago |whats wrong with the 50mm? it would be a great portrait lens.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Don’t be so sure about that, since you’re just able to shoot portraits from a similar distance as with a 85mm full frame lens, but if you want the same visual effects (e.g. decent nose), you’ve still got to go for 85mm and shoot from a bigger distance.
Kiril
10 months ago |>>> shoot portraits from a similar distance as with a 85mm full frame lens
Exactly. But you forget two things 75mm makes good enough portraits too on full frame. The 50mm on NEx is exactly equivalent to 75mm on full frame.
Puzzle solved 50mm is a great portrait lens on APS-C. I would too prefer 60/1.2 but lets face reality.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Sorry, mate, you misunderstood the point that a crop is simply something like a digital zoom and does NOT change a lense’s special characteristic. 50 mm lenses will always project their image in the same way no matter on which sensor size.
Just compare how the nose looks like on the following portraits taken with several 85mm equivalents and you might realise that it’s looking nowhere as decent as with the original 85mm full frame lens on the fifth picture:
http://www.heise.de/foto/bilderstrecke/bilderstrecke_1279507.html?back=1277611
So at least you’d be right arguing 60mm would come closer to that special look, but that’s what I’d already said before.
ItsaChris
10 months ago |a 50mm magnifies the image the same no mater the distance but the perspective (special nose look) only changes based on distance from your subject.
you can take an image with a 16 or 300mm for the same distance and the image will have the same perspective (not DOF or FOV). The 50mm will do fine from a normal distance for 2-4 people.
the link you provide if you translate the captions below the image you will see they are talking about the background not perspective. page 4 “…APS-C provides an even softer rendering of the background” (the lighting and her head angle relative to the camera look to be more of the difference in the images.)
I know a photograph that like to use 300mm+ lens for portraits bc it (the distance) flattens the face even more than your typical portrait lens 85 105 or 135.
P.S. not overly enthusiastic about this lens. With out OSS It just looks to be a slightly longer AF version of what I use now. But I do like how sony has made a unformed lens length and filter size with the 30, 18-55, 24, and 50
P.P.S. I did not even realize till now I was am responding to the same person as I did last time with the pancake lens LOL. not meaning to pick on you or anything, just went to your link.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Yes, ItsaChris, the German article is about the background behaviour with different sensor formats. That’s why they’ve chosen an ugly one not so far behind their model, but you can see this effect on portraying physiognomy as well in that series. Unfortunately you’re wrong about this and so far I don’t really know why, but not a single of those portraits I took with my Canon FD 50mm 1:1.4 attached to my NEX-5 comes near this effect I’m having with 85mm. I’m still searching for the ultimate explanation, but it’s not the depth of fields, that’s easily to arrange with opening one or two more stop as long as the background isn’t as ugly and near as in that linked series.
P.S. Andrea mentioned on top the 50mm comes WITH OSS and I’m also fine with my old Canon FD 50mm. Additionally never having been much into autofocus makes me a bad lens customer today anyway, since I’m having nearly everything I need.
P.P.S. I don’t feel persecuted. Always nice to see, somebody is arguing seriously online.
ItsaChris
10 months ago |If you are using the 85mm and 50mm on the NEX (or any camera with any format size.) you will not achieve the same perspective unless you are standing the exact same distance from your subject (then would need to crop to achieve the same FOV (a 1.7 crop from your APC sensor to make up the difference from 50 – 85mm))
But check out the example below -
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Optical/Perspective_01.htm
(It was not the one I was looking for but it will do, same physics.)
and admin did say its OSS but unlike the 70-210 it does not say it on the lens. Also it is larger than my 45mm p or the even the nikon 50mm E with attached adapter. But the front lens elemental looks large, and with a larger front element then a lot of 50mm’s it should produce smoother bokeh.
Steve Jones
10 months ago |Can we repeat yet again, the only thing that matters for perspective is how far the camera is from the subject. Using a 300mm lens does not, repeat not flatten the features. What does does flatten the features is the greater distance away from the subject you can shoot at using a 300mm lens whilst framing it properly. If you could crop a 50mm image down to the same size and somehow still retain the detail, it would have exactly the same perspective.
Please read some text books on optics.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Yes, I know that the same angle of view should bring the same results, but unfortunately it doesn’t. When I started portraying in the 80′s it was such a boost to get a 85mm prime lens instead of cropping 50mm or using a tele zoom. The NEX-5 is my first camera below full frame and I know with 50mm I should come closest to the angle of view of formerly 85mm and using f/1.4 is no problem to hide the background in bokeh anyway, but these pictures are still looking like cropped standard lenses and does not show the excitement I know from 85mm full frame. I’d seen this effect in that series I’d linked here myself and funny thing just following what’s written on Andrea’s pictures above brought me to others experiencing the same: http://www.talknex.com/showthread.php?31-Is-50mm-Long-Enough-for-the-NEX-Portrait-Lens
You might argue that 55 or 60mm instead of 50mm would be the answer already and at least this would proof the optical explanation, but would it really in practice?
ItsaChris
10 months ago |yes we know Steve -
)
distance from subject is the only way to control perceptive but, indirectly changing a lens can effect the working distance one has. (who reads books
K now back on topic the same angle of view (if you are using the term as i know it) does not give the same perspective. It is solely based on distance from subject(as steve reiterated). when you try to take your next portrait frame it how you want, then take 5 steps back and re shoot. (or if you normally shot vertically just frame it horizontally (that should force you to take a few steps back))
I did read over the link and in my opinion everyone is too wrapped up in the perfect lens mm yes a 60mm might be your answer and in theory it should work just fine (but practice with a 50mm and you should be able to achieve what you want.) that said I am prone to using longer lens on my portraits as well ~100mm on APC. you could also put your 85mm back on, 125mm equivalent is not too long for portraits. If you find that the 85mm suit you better but is too hard to hand hold then I would say yes you should be looking for a 60 or 75mm lens (more 75mm lens out there than good portrait 60mm in fact I dont know of a good 60mm portrait at all (I do not count the tamron 60mm as a portrait lens)).
PS you can let me know how it goes on our next encounter.
NEXfive
10 months ago |This portrait stuff with changed sensor format is more challenging than expected. First it’s about intimacy anyway. Everything’s destroyed when you’re coming too close with your camera and being too far away you’re losing contact. Second is that I’ve always been a typical slide photographer, who’s pictures usually fit the frame, which often worried me when doing b&w prints in my lab. Third I’ll probably forget your good advice to step backwards, since I’m usually also forgetting that SD-Cards do not limit me to 36 exposures any more. I should try next time doing portraits and additionally the SEL-1855 at 55mm before buying such a prime lens. But these days I’m discovering the unexpected big fun of Sony’s Ultra Wide Angle & Fisheye Converters…
Jerry_R
10 months ago |Why people confuse effective focal all the time…
50mm f/1.8 on NEX should be compared to FF 75mm ~f/2.7 in terms of perspective and DOF.
* * *
RE:
http://www.heise.de/foto/bilderstrecke/bilderstrecke_1279507.html?back=1277611
This comparison would show more, if below combinations would be used:
u43 45mm f/2.8 vs APS-C 60mm f/4 vs FF 90mm f/5.6
Another words – the smaller sensor the wider aperture.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Exact equivalents, opening the aperture the same stops as the crop factor and all photographed from the same position should bring exactly the same results. Interesting idea to proof that (as long as you don’t start with f/1.2 at Full Frame)…
Steve Jones
10 months ago |A 50mm lens will, of course, be equivalent to 75mm, not 85mm on a 1.5 crop factor. However, if we take the basic principle of using lenses on different sensor formats with the same FoV you will get precisely the same optical geometry from the same camera position. All the perspectives will be exactly the same. Do the opposite, and put an 85mm lens on both an APS-C and FF and adjust the distance to the subject to achieve the same FoV (i.e. the APS-C camera is further away) and the perspective of the photos will be different. The APS-C image would show flatter features than the FF one.
So, take a picture with camera with a 1.5 crop factor APS-C and a 50mm lens and then another from the same spot with an FF camera and a 75mm lens and all the perspectives will be identical. The noses will look exactly in the same proportion, the flattering “flattening” of the face with a
That’s why the classic portrait lenses for medium format camera is not 85mm, but in the 100-150mm region (depending on format).
Quite simply, the important thing about portraits is how far you are from the subject – the lens is simply a way of reducing the FoV to the subject area. In theory you would achieve the same effect (at least from a perspective point of view) using a lens with a wider FoV then cropping it subject, of course, to resolution. Clearly it’s not desirable from optimising image quality.
This is all just simple optical geometry.
Mike
10 months ago |Either good or compact. You usually can’t have both.
NEXfive
10 months ago |With only a little experience one can see that these NEX APS-C lenses are sized nearly exactly between their full frame and their μ4/3 equivalents, even more if one honestly counts their length from the sensor. So everybody complaining about these big lenses simply has decided for the wrong sensor format.
With 16, 24 and 50mm prime lenses plus 18-55, 55-210 and 18-200 zoom lenses those manual focus haters should be finally pleased to be able to fill their photo bags, while left for 2010 are as announced a mid telephoto prime lens, a wide angle zoom lens plus a G series standard zoom lens.
That last one still is the only lens that really interests me from Sony’s roadmap, if it really improves those lenses’ quality…
Hugo
10 months ago |Hello guys what could be the price of the A77??
emopunk
10 months ago |I don’t see them selling a lot of these lenses at these prices. I don’t know how many users are going to spill couple of thousands euros for NEX-7 + Zeiss :s
Allan
10 months ago |i’m sad but u right !! nex-7 + zeis will be very probably near 1700 $ / 1800 $ !! way too expensive !!
no advantage of bying this system compare to what cameras are proposed in the market !!
really sad !!
jazzroy
10 months ago |I’m really surprised by Sony’s choiches.
Nex cameras are the compact version of DSLR, so size matters here, no doubt (otherwise go buy A77).
So let’s see:
- Zeiss 24mm way bigger than Voigtlander lenses for full-frame Leica. Why?
- 50mm seems without OSS.. 350$ for a non-stabilized 50mm? Why should I stop using my beautyful and sharp 50$ legacy lens?
- 55-210 taller than 18-200: what did they take? drugs?
Hellven
10 months ago |yep, the prices are very high for what they offer
$350 for a 50/1.8!! oh sony…
and does enormous lens! oh sony…great bodies very bad lenses… the future doesnt look bright, at lest not for stills, for video its not bad
Booe
10 months ago |add the price of SAL50F18 in A-mount and the price LA-EA1, and you get the price of SEL50F18
dac38
10 months ago |What does a 5o /1.8 lens cost on a M43 ?
I think its time you guys whining about large, small , crappy , heavy , black silver etc .. just stop using nEX. Donate it to a homeless guy (It may employ him) and go buy a D7000 or a 60D.
Hellven
10 months ago |you’re right, the nex system is perfect, love the current lens lineup, and lens roadmap is even better, small fast cheap primes all over it! and the zooms… so good and portable they are.
Jaye
10 months ago |NEX what a joke. $1000 for the 24 1.8, what basically amounts to a 35mm 1.8! I’d be better off just buying a Panasonic G3 and 20 1.7 for less the cost!
NEXTL
10 months ago |The NEX is APS-C with way better DOF and low ISO!
Hellven
10 months ago |better DOF is something that doesnt exist, it can be bigger or smaller, but never better or worst
dac38
10 months ago |Try looking at portraits from a M43 system and then come back and say that the DOF is lower/better .
NEXfive
10 months ago |…and don’t miss to look at portraits done with full frame, where the DOF is perfect
Hellven
10 months ago |sorry but you have your basic concepts all wrong, the bokeh can be better, the DOF can be shalower, deaph of field it’s a mesure (in meters) not a quality, so a better DOF doesnt exist.
bokeh–> quality (good, bad, better, worst, crappy…)
deaph of field (DOF) –> measure (meters, feet, inches…)
got it
NEXfive
10 months ago |Just change “where the DOF is perfect” against “where the DOF looks perfect” if you really need that. That’s why many photographers call full frame the ideal format, because you’re getting the best harmonising results to highlight objects in front of their background. How the bokeh looks is secondary as long as you don’t make it your basic concept to blame others for being wrong.
Hellven
10 months ago |so don’t say “better DOF”, that’s just plain ignorance.
and there’s no such thing as a “perfect formatt”, it all depends on what you want to do. In portrait i prefer to use one of my two rolleiflex medium format cameras with a velvia or hp5+, 135 is so tiny!
but that’s just me, i dont konw anything about photography…
NEXfive
10 months ago |Come on, there’s an ideal format concerning special aspects as well as there’s a critical mass for nuclear chain reaction. There’s a rule that for the same DOF you’ve got to open the aperture the same steps as the crop factor. So for getting the same DOF like full frame f/1.4 you’d need equivalent focal lengths at f/1.2 with APS-C or with f/1.0 with μ4/3. That’s possibly why medium format is your ideal format?
NEXTL
10 months ago |SEL-55210 is designed like the old Minolta “BeerCan” AF70210 and so it´s better dust proofed than the SEL-18200!
horst
10 months ago |The beercan is known for eating dust like there’s no tomorrow, like most push zooms .
cyrus
10 months ago |Perhaps Sony has to go with 2 different lens families
As they did it with sam vs ssm and za.
1. High quality lens but bigger (as per today)
2. Lower quality compact lenses (and perhaps introduce correction on sensor as ca, distortion… Like in u4/3 cameras)
Hellven
10 months ago |1. what high quality lens in the nex system are you referring to? sony doesnt have them, maybe the future Zeiss 24mm, but thats it.
NEXTL
10 months ago |The SEL18200 ist the best superzoom for APS-C. Also better than the mFT-superzooms. Look at the Test at Photozone. I use it as a travel Lens. It has for such Zoom a great bokeh and is very sharp. Current the best NEX lens. It’s an typically example that Sony can make very good telezooms.
deniz
10 months ago |i cant believe people use that hilarious combination.
NEXTL
10 months ago |I can’t understand Why People think that’s too big. The NEX-5 has well designed grip and I use my left hand to balance the lens. With the tilting screen you can use it like a medium format Camera. Manual focussing is a joy with this combination. And what means “big”? The NEX-5 + SEL18200 is way lighter and smaller tha a DSLR/SLT with a Tamron/Sony 18-200 APS-C lens and it has a better build and picture quality and OSS for video.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Of course it’s possible to use this combination and the the SEL-18200 surely is an awesome lens, but you’ll loose the advantage of a small and handy camera this way, that’s still easily to carry around with a hand strap with the SEL-1855, but not with more weight. The SEL-18200 is an excellent choice for NEX-VG10 and NEX-FS100. But on my NEX-5 I’m more looking forward to get similar or even better quality from that G Series Standard Zoom Lens announced for 2010…
Kiril
10 months ago |50/1.8 and 30/3.5 are likely to produce some decent results too. So we have at least 3 superb lenses.
16mm f2.8 is actually great in real life performance – I have no complaints. I know the corner softness thing and compose images with this in mind.
By the way there are tons of Alpha compatible lenses which are just fantastic on NEX. Today I played with Sigma 28/1.8 – it is amazing – fantastic bokeh, superb sharpness, focus with peaking is child play (seems faster then using AF).
NEXfive
10 months ago |Yeah, the SEL-16F28 Pancake is quite a good lens from f/5.6 to 11 and especially together with the two converters it’s big fun. So far every single of Sony’s E-Mount lenses is doing a fine job according to it’s price – same limitation as everywhere…
dk
10 months ago |I do a lot of still photography. I also do a lot of video.
In the past you needed separate systems for each.
I bought a NEX 5 (with an 18-200 lens) because it is optimized for both and it has a large sensor which gives excellent quality and excellent low light capabilities.
The size of the system in not the primary reason I bought it.
horst
10 months ago |nm
Lionheart
10 months ago |A very minor point, but the origin is showing: the CZ 24mm lens states the aperture as “1,8″ whereas the 50mm lens is “1.8″. Most people would probably never notice, but the CZ lens uses the European comma (“,”) and the 50mm lens uses the American, maybe also Japanese point (“.”). For what it may be worth…
AXL
10 months ago |The 50mm has OSS !
Honza
10 months ago |FFS, 349 USD is way too much for 50mm f/1.8 OSS.
Sergei Zhukov
10 months ago |As much as I like and enjoy Alpha products by Sony I fail to understand what those monstrous sized lenses are doing in the compact NEX range. Reminds me of “cross those not belonging out” type of quest, with the 16mm F2.8 staying. It is a COMPACT system after all, for God’s Sake!
NEX 7 may prove to be a different beast, I would only try it when it has proportionally sized primes to go with it. Compact of course!
acolyte
10 months ago |Think the common answer is, what are you comparing it with? If you compare it with m4/3, then the answer will be because the crop factor is larger in those. Meh, instead of complaining, people should just buy from a place with 30-day satisfaction guarantee, play with it, if they decide they _truly_ don’t like it, then they can return it back :p
Wayyy too many rants of products people here never actually touch, or see firsthand @_@
Edit: oops, Joe replied below. Yeah, this is too common of a question and many people have seen the common answer. It’s good for a reminder for ignorant newcomers but I tire looking at it sometimes T_T
And as some say, if you don’t like Sony, don’t go with it. If you like Sony, give it a chance. If you just want to rant, meh, find some forum or unpopular sites :p
Can’t wait for A77+NEX7. Will definitely preorder A77 but I have to see whether NEX7 + the new lenses are worth it from reviews
Sergei Zhukov
10 months ago |I’ve played with Nex 5 with 16mm pancake and 18-55 combo at BH. It’s ok. I shoot professionally with A850 and the Sony 70-200mm G glass, 24-70mm, 85mm Zeiss, 50mm F1.4 primes. I’m very happy with it.
I can see NEX 7 used by pros, only with smaller compact primes. Otherwise, there’s no point in investing in NEX 7 line. I’d get it with compact 16,24,35 and maybe 50mm primes any time – crop sensor in mind:).
Booe
10 months ago |Sony marketologists probably didn’t expect that professionals would even think about using NEX.
Note that compact 50mm for NEX would have to use telephoto scheme which is barely applicable at NEX 3 & 5 sensors.
Eric
10 months ago |I completely agree, but I personally want a good quality 11mm, 16mm, 30mm f/2 pancake, 60mm f/1.4, and 85mm f/1.4. Not all the lenses have to be pancakes, bit I do require a few (I’m the classic street photography angles).
I just hope the execs at Sony don’t get discouraged from making small high end bodies in the future if the NEX-7 doesn’t sell well. I can assure them it’s not the NEX-7 body that is the problem; it’s that just outside of the 16mm/2.8 and 50mm/1.8 Sony just doesn’t have any lenses I’d use. The best body in the world is pretty much worthless without a lens line up to match. Plus, the sad truth is Sony only has one compact prime, and the Olympus 12mm f/2 is so much better than the Sony 16mm that even with inferior m4/3′s sensors I’ll still get better results.
NEXfive
10 months ago |Yes, but Olympus’s 12mm does cost near three times the price of Sony’s SEL-16F28, that’s at least working fine from f/5.6 to f/11 and additionally it’s 12mm-UWA or 10mm-Fisheye options are delivering very respectable quality for their prices. Those fast quality lenses you’re asking for, I wouldn’t mind having myself, of course, but they won’t be affordable at all.
@Booe, I doubt that Sony really hadn’t professionals in mind, since they’d developed E-Mount including it’s use for cameras like the NEX-FS100. They’d only started to sell this to amateurs to make sure there’s a growing market for E-Mount when they want to convince professionals with more advanced cameras.
Booe
10 months ago |E-mount needs small lenses but in not way compact system. Compacts use fixed lens, and usually smaller frame than APS-C.
It would be pretty stupid to prohibit using NEX with larger lenses.
Leo Spaceman
10 months ago |It’s been a while since we’ve heard anything on the a-mount 500mm lens. Is thatbeing announced on the 24th with the a77?
NEXTL
10 months ago |NEX stands for “eighteen” mm from lens to sensor and not for compact. In Future this mirrorless system will became the A-mount successor. There will be bigger cameras. And why is a 5-7cm lens with 49mm filter size “monstrous”. For me this is also COMPACT…
dac38
10 months ago |TROLL ALERT!
Joe R.
10 months ago |The lenses are huge because the sensor is. If you want small lenses you have to get a m4/3. All Sony did with the NEX was remove the mirror/prism to make te camera smaller. There is nothing inherent in the e-mount that will lead to smaller lenses. Smaller lenses are more difficult to design and more expensive to produce. The camera body is small but the lenses still need to follow the same optical rules as full-sized APS-C SLRs.
Te shorter flange-to-image plane distance is of no practical help when making smaller lenses. In fact, it’s more expensive to avoid soft corners with a shorter flange distance.
Booe
10 months ago |No, lenses are huge because Sony is doing something stupid. They launched NEX only because Pan/Oly/Sams launched their mirrorless camera. Well, that’s better than nothing.
Only major problems – about smaller lenses – is sensor angle of incidence issue, which is of small significance for DSLRs (which use retrofocus designs for WA) but plaques mirrorless cameras
Booe
10 months ago |All this comes, from using DSLR sensor in NEX in order to cut expenses.
Zaph
10 months ago |Can you explain how Samsung managed it, with the same sized sensor?
morgul
10 months ago |Bravo, Sony, for making, by far, the best mirrorless cameras, but at the same time, the worst lens lineup. Besides the 16mm pancake, every other upcoming lens is as large as or larger than the 18-55 kit zoom. Way to drop the ball.
minoltian
10 months ago |E-mount is still E-mmature
Nice
10 months ago |ha!
Raul S.
10 months ago |Mmmmm something wrong is happening…look at the SAL50F18 vs SEL50F18…yeah, right, the A-mount is smaller because of registration distance, Sure, I don’t mind size of E-mount lenses, I got the grip of my NEX-5 so it isn’t a problem…But looking on performance/build quality delivered vs. Price tag…A-mount 149USD vs E-mount 349USD without OSS? 200USD of difference?
I was expecting at least 100USD more than A-mount version, because SEL1855 is only 100USD more expensive compared to SAL1855, they’re almost the same size and even it got OSS.. what’s happening???
NEXTL
10 months ago |The SAM 50F18 costs 250€ and has a plastic finish with plastic mount. I would say 350€ is a fair Price for a metall finish and OSS. Even without OSS i would Pay the higher price for better build quality.
SRL
10 months ago |I’m confused, the rumor says that the 50mm/f1.8 has OSS and then many of the posters write about it NOT having OSS………….does it or doesn’t it ?
Is image stabilization common with 50mm lenses?
Looking at 50mm lenses on B&H I don’t see image stabilization
The most expensive and many say best 50mm for the Sony A-mount is the Sigma at about $500.00 USD and it doesn’t have stabilization is nor does the others for different mounts.
As far as price, if the lens is any good at all $350.00 is not that high of a price.
Canon and Nikon are much more and a Zeiss manual cost $1,000 more than this new Sony E mount lens.
Personally, as an a850 shooter if you want a 50mm I think the NEX users would be better off with the new a77 and the Sigma 50mm/f1.4 with that nice big and heavy 77mm front element. Or better yet put a Zeiss 85mm/f1.4 and that would be a hot setup
Booe
10 months ago |If I were in charge for planning, the first lens would have been usual double gauss 33mm, i.e. 50/1.8 for FF SLR downscaled 1.5 times. That would have at least smaller than SLR’s 30-35 mm.
Jon
10 months ago |WHAT IS THE EXPECTED PRICE FOR THE NEX-7 AGAIN?!
extra|ordinary
10 months ago |After reading all these comments, I’m beginning to feel like I am the only person who is excited about the NEX-7 + Zeiss 24mm combo.
Allan
10 months ago |Yes ! especially if you looking the price of the combo !! At this level of price every one will probably looking for a A77 better than the Nex 7 !
I hope now for a NEX 6 with manual advantage at lower price ! don’t care about a 24 mp sensor ! the 18 is good enough !!
bene
10 months ago |All that is left if the shutter sound is not too loud. I’ll be happy. Nex 3 scares my subject at times. Legacy lens user
Erational
10 months ago |JON: That’s supposed to be $1200. USD
pancanikonpus
10 months ago |guys, we are gonna going with single digit day to left countdown
nandadevieast
10 months ago |They should make a 16mm Mark II, or at the least, improve the optics of their existing 16mm.
GH
10 months ago |The 16mm has already been shown by a couple of users to perform better on the NEX-C3. I think part of the problem all along was the NEX-3/5′s sensor edge performance.
Allan
10 months ago |1200 $ for the nex 7, is it without the Zeiss ??
the zeiss is on its own 999 $ !!
any idea ?
Leovideo
10 months ago |1200 $ for the nex 7 body only
Allan
10 months ago |wouah !!! i will see for the zeiss but i’m out for the nex 7 … not a good news !!!
too expensive !!
Simon
10 months ago |It’s a BIG leak, indeed . They better be stellar quality + a dslr-sized e-mount body is needed. NEX could replace alpha dslr cameras in the long term. No way these huge lens set ups will be a complement to existing dslr cameras.
Btw…can’t believe the 55-200 lens is even longer then the 18-200 superzoom! As it has been reported before it seems to be difficult to design stellar quality lenses with the the NEX’s exremely short flange distance..but..shouldn’t the lenses at least be a little smaller than common APS-C lenses?
Really looking forward to the upcoming, compact nikon system!
Booe
10 months ago |It’s not lens that should be smaller, that’s camera + lens that should. Nikon Q system won’t be smaller because it has bayonet oversized compared to sensor. It will have tiny lens in massive barrel – which, I think, user is supposed to rotate. Even for NEX’s 16/2.8 barrel dominates, so nothing could be done to reduce it
Cisto
10 months ago |50mm F1.8 and CZ 24mm/1.8 both comfirm have OSS？look in picture showing no OSS label in Lens. it is very sad if both withot OSS.