(SR5) HOT: 16-50mm f/2.8 SSM to be announced in late August for $799!
The new Sony 16-50mm is as good as the Nikkor AF-S 17-55mm (Pictured above). But the Sony is cheaper!
My sources are keeping me busy with many rumors. And finally I have some reliable info about the upcoming new High Grade Zoom Lens made especially for the new A77 which is coming in late August. I have been told the new 16-50mm lens has a constant f/2.8 aperture, SSM and will cost $799 only! I say “only” because the Nikon and Canon counterparts are much more expensive. Check for yourself:
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS costs around around $300 more at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
Nikkor AF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 $ is twice more expensive! Check at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
Good news or not? I hope it will be even cheaper if you purchase it as kit lens along the A77. The A77 body only should cost arounf $1000. Make the kit $1600 and it will become a hotseller!
Stay tuned on SAR! Don’t miss any rumors. Join us on Facebook, Twitter and follow our RSS-feed!
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!
Emopunk
2 years ago |I really hope it’s actually SSM. It was a pity to see Tamron 28-75 (what a great lens!) rebadged and ruined with SAM. They should have been putting SSM on that one too, improving build and weatherproofing the lens. It would have been a perfect G lens, to go in kit with full frame cameras. Let’s hope they learned something. Andrea, for what they say, are they planning weather sealing on next lenses? Or will we still have weather sealed cameras with non sealed lenses? A stupid thing, I’d say.
WhiteDesertSun
2 years ago |What Sony cameras are weather sealed? I’m a little lost…
But yes, weather sealed lenses would be awesome!
Edgars
2 years ago |Even if Sony not stated them as WS, A700 and A900 are pretty weather proof. I used both cameras in really bad weather conditions.
WS lenses should be a must for G series even if it cost 50-100USD.
PhotoNut
2 years ago |haha again. Why do you show a Nikon lens,have no real performance information about this new lens and then claim that this mythical Sony lens is better than the Nikon lens which you have probably never used?
I enjoy reading this site but sometimes I wonder why the admin insists on blowing up every story into tabloid territory in the process showing how little photography/equipment experience he or she has.
Okay so Sony is coming out with a lens that both Canon and Nikon have had an equivalent version out for several years and for which small third party lens makers like Sigma, Tamron & Tokina have had available now in several generations.
Clearly, if Sigma can have a larger and more complete lens collection for the Sony DSLR than Sony itself that tells you that Sony has significant problems in designing and engineering cost effective optical solutions. At the heart of Sony is still a large consumer electronics company not an optical or photographic company.
I a Sony user with at least $10K invested in Sony & A-mount gear but I am not really happy with the pace and direction of Sony’s photographic competence ,with the exception of course of sensor development which comes from Sony semiconductor not the lackluster Sony Digital Imaging division.
Ren
2 years ago |“Why do you show a Nikon lens”
Because no pics of the Sony lens are available…seems obvious enough.
“,have no real performance information about this new lens and then claim that this mythical Sony lens is better than the Nikon lens which you have probably never used?”
Let’s see…this is a rumors site, and he gets his information from people who HAVE used the lens, and other equipment before it’s on the market.
Over time it would seem that Andrea has figured out who his reliable sources are, and only gives SR5 status to the rumors that have been given by those sources, and/confirmed by them.
I think most here would agree that Andrea has done a pretty damn good job of weeding out the good rumors from the junk, however, his info is only as good as the info he is given.
He has gotten many things right, and as time goes on, he is getting better and better at providing information and/or an early look at what’s to come.
For my part, I say thank you Andrea. Your efforts are greatly appreciated!
Carl
2 years ago |If you want to change mount, hurry up and do it rather than stew in you resentment. Both you and the internet will be happier that way.
It’s not like I agree with every move that Sony has made since Konica Minolta signed that bit of paper, and I’m sure many other people here feel the same way, but we all have a reason why we’ve stuck with Sony despite their failings. If you don’t have such a reason and have simply stayed because you find selling your gear a pain, then you’re doing yourself a disservice.
Silver Surfer
2 years ago |Sony is making great strides. Minolta had already started shuttering their camera division when Sony bought it. The earthquake that hit Japan has sent all Japanese camera companies back, not just Sony.
2012 will be a great year for photography. New FullFrames cameras from Sony, Nikon and Canon.
New lenses will come out at the same time, too.
If you are not happy on this blog then I suggest Thom Hogan. He hates Sony, too.
Hogan writes complete crap and is frequently wrong.
If you want more technical help, then by all means check out Ken Rockwell.
Ken is really knowledgeable. He even stated on his blog that JPG is superior to RAW.
Andrea does an excellent job of presenting the news here. If you hate Sony so much, change camera systems or change blogs.
CIAO!
Steve-S
2 years ago |@PhotoNut –
You wrote:
“Clearly, if Sigma can have a larger and more complete lens collection for the Sony DSLR than Sony itself that tells you that Sony has significant problems in designing and engineering cost effective optical solutions. At the heart of Sony is still a large consumer electronics company not an optical or photographic company.”
The thing to remember is that Sigma has been building lenses for decades, and makes the same lens(es) for many different lens-mounts. They’ve had a LONG time to fill out their stable.
Sony is coming along, and they’re coming fast. Nevertheless, they can’t bring out everything at once!
- Steve S.
Orange
2 years ago |Oh! you are my friend, because you invested $10K to alpha mount.
I did a little more, and I enjoy Sony camera very much.
First, Sony brand gives me the best Fullframe camera, A900, at inexpensive cost. The camera with Zeiss lens gives me best picture, better than Nikon D700( my sub camera).
Second, Sony gives me very fast shooting camera, A55, at surprisingly inexpensive cost. You know, burst 10frame/sec requires $5,000 at Canon and Nikon.
Of cource, there is some limitations at bursting, but I manage to bypass the limitation, and get burst picture at 10frame/sec. I love it.
Third, Sony E mount camera, NEX-5, gives me the smalest, yet better picture quality than competitors. This camera is now my every day camera. I throw it in my bag in case I may meet good shutter chance.
NEX-5 is the best shutter chance camera.
Now, I’m waiting A77+16-50F2.8G, rumored $1,600.
This combination will be a real jump in Camera history.
* Very fast burst rate (may be 12 frame/sec)
* will be 24M pixel, still keeping very good Low-light capability
* Very high picture quality with F2.8 kit lens
* Finally, cost is low enough
If you look for Canon, you will see $5,000 for 11frame burst.
Renato M.
2 years ago |So this means there is a possibility that the A77 and the A65 will be announced in August as well or it’s unrelated?
I’m also wondering about NEX PRO and NEX-7.
NEX FULL FRAME (24x36)
2 years ago |Hey Andrea!
Is this a FullFrame lens?
Any word on a possible FullFrame NEX, With E Mount?
I’ll pass on it if it has A (Alpha) mount.
Keep Up The Great Work!
Irfan
2 years ago |There is no Nex fullframe, nor do I expect any for 2 or 3 years.
Anonymous
2 years ago |+1. In my opinion, there won’t be a full frame NEX for another 3-5 years. Sure, the technology is available for one right now, but Sony needs to profit from the current APS-C NEX as much as they can.
admin
2 years ago |It is not a Fullframe lens!
Sky_walker
2 years ago |pancanikonpus
2 years ago |what to pity? this price this ssm, this aperture this focal length =pity?
acolyte
2 years ago |Is this the most expensive DT so far?
If they want to go all out they should’ve made a FF one, but well we can only ask so much :\
Pity though.
Steve
2 years ago |Sony has a very nuice full-frame lens in the CZ 16-35/2.8.
It would be nice if it had some weather proofing.
I always keep it in my bag
Not as much reach as a 16-50, although most photographers still needs something like a 24-75/2.8 to fill-out the range
I do wish the CZ was lighter and cheaper, but since I alreay paid for it, I guess that issue is over for me at least
Price sounds right for this new lens, hope it’s good optically
Joel
2 years ago |Why is it a pity? You’ve already got the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 FF equivalent.
Davide Atzei
2 years ago |The nikon lens in a full frame one, but the sony?
kybel
2 years ago |nikons lens is DX not FX
Don'z
2 years ago |nikon 17-55 f2.8 is DX only
someone
2 years ago |nikon 17-55 is a DX, the FX is 1635.
camilo
2 years ago |nikon 17-55 f2.8 is DX.
Don'z
2 years ago |hmph… not ZEISS lens?
Terryfried
2 years ago |I would rather pay less for a G series. whats in a name unless you are a snob. I want best lens I can aford with my A77 and this looks like it.
WhiteDesertSun
2 years ago |G series lenses are not to be underestimated!
Wishmaster
2 years ago |Will it be G-series lens, or standard?
Terryfried
2 years ago |it has SSM so will not be standard. looks like a G series to me.
Lollo
2 years ago |If is not FF, why bother?
zstan
2 years ago |because more than half of the people out there shoot APS-C?
Carl
2 years ago |A FF 16-50 would be pretty kick arse, though. 16mm is nice and wide.
Pacman
2 years ago |Argh! then go get the 16-35 /2.8! Damn! Are we talking on same language here?!
if you can’t wait for 16-50/2.8 for fullframe then shift to other brands! NOW!
WAKE UP PEOPLE!
Beachrider
2 years ago |NOBODY has a 16-50/2.8 fullframe, NOBODY. Stop talking like it can be found with another brand. IT CANNOT
Carl
2 years ago |I own the 17-35G…
No other brand makes a full frame 16-50ish lens either, not even Sigma who make pretty much everything aside from T/S lenses. Would make for an interesting point of difference. I’m not expecting it to happen though, and Sony have more pressing gaps to fill.
Pacman
2 years ago |@Beachrider your not the gods of Photography. I say it again “if you CAN’T wait for 16-50/2.8 for fullframe then shift to other brands! NOW!”
[NOBODY has a 16-50/2.8 fullframe, NOBODY.]
BECAUSE THEY DON’T KNOW HOW TO DO IT!
Carl
2 years ago |Not wanting to stand in the way of your shouting match, but designing a 16-50 is not appreciably harder than designing a 16-35, just as a 24-85 is not appreciably harder than designing a 24-70. It’s just more expensive to do while retaining the same level of quality.
acolyte
2 years ago |I am using 16-105/3.5-5.6 here. I use the 16mm but don’t use 60mm+. Sounds like this one’s a winner for me. Too bad it’s not FF, but I’m staying APS-C for a long time.
WyldRage
2 years ago |It’s probably over 90%.
Terryfried
2 years ago |because its the best lens for A77. not all of us after the A77 will be getting a A99 in 2012. like not all canon 7D user’s have a 5d as well. Hence Nikon and cannon equivelemce are not full frame.
roman
2 years ago |I have to agree.
Originally I wanted to switch to fullframe… but now I prefer stay with APS-C or maybe start using NEX system in future.
The Lotus Eater
2 years ago |Fool Frame?
lollo
2 years ago |I know all of the above, you smart boys.
Yet, a full frame lens woks on both FF and APS/c.
The aps/c instead…
As for the fool frame comment above… If only you could understand….
The Lotus Eater
2 years ago |I understand, but it seems you don’t, hence the “fool frame” comment. Do you have any idea of the size and cost of a full frame 16-50mm f2.8? I’ll help you – it certainly wouldn’t be anywhere near $799.00.
lollo
2 years ago |1599$ for a full lens and 799 for half lens.
Carl
2 years ago |More like $3000 list.
The Lotus Eater
2 years ago |Lollo, was that figure plucked out of thin air? Do have a source or did you make some kind of comparison with other lenses that helped you reach that price?
Even if your $1599 is correct, I’d consider that excessive and out of reach for a good proportion of APS-C users. An APS-C only 16-50mm f2.8 makes the most sense.
Dr. Tom
2 years ago |I thought it was previously stated that all future lenses would be full frame capable???
Beachrider
2 years ago |No.
acolyte
2 years ago |I’m sure there was a rumor CZ said something like that. I can’t remember about Sony.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |If you want FF, then you have to pay $799X2
I will take a SSM for $799 with constant f2.8 any day as an APS-C user
acolyte
2 years ago |And all you get is the Nikon DX one for that price eh.
Joel
2 years ago |Honestly, are half the people here morons?? Full frame shooters have had the Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 for a while now. This is simply the sensor crop equivalent of that lens. A great many crop shooters (think A700 and upcoming A77 owners) have been crying out for a pro lens such as this for portrait shooting. Why the hell is this a bad thing? Morons..
zstan
2 years ago |SSM!!!! oh yesssss… is it G or Zeiss btw?
or just a standard DT lens?
Spoon
2 years ago |SSM means G or Zeiss. In this case probably G.
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |or will it be Rokkor?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Hexanon. That’s my vote in latest plebiscite.
acolyte
2 years ago |SSM DT/G.. Hmm.
That’ll be a unique combination.
Jabez
2 years ago |I have the CZ 16-80 on my A33 and the Tokina 16-50 2.8 on my Nikon D90. For me the 16-50 is just too short at 50mm for my style of shooting, so I need to carry an additional lens most of the time.
reinz
2 years ago |this not fullframe lens? i will skip it :p i would prefer buy 16-35mm ^^ but if this a full frame lens, i would definitly buy it!!
Borg
2 years ago |Get real Reinz!
Spoon
2 years ago |Check the size and price of the 16-35, add atleast another 50% to both and you get the idea. No thanks.
Disinto
2 years ago |I thought it would be a CZ lens?!
Terryfried
2 years ago |I believe it has been said elswhere that CZ are concentrating on FF so this will be G series. it may even replace 1680Z leving CZ pro FF only with G series for Genral Sony Pro lenses.
Alpha55
2 years ago |For the moment I cannot see ANY G or Zeiss lens for APSC other then the 16-80.
It was said that CZ would concentrate on FF lenses, so??
Will we have the FIRST APSC G series???
RTI
2 years ago |There’s no 18-80 in Sony line-up. What’s the hype regarding 16-50(5)/2.8 being a FF lens, I bet 80% of the people here, don’t even imagine how much would such a lens cost and how big would it be, look at any FF wide-angle lens (and yeah 16mm on FF is wide, you can call it fish-eye) take a good look at minolta 16/2.8 prime lens – see it’s price…
Maximus
2 years ago |Fisheye is no question of focal length but of the optical construction of the lens. The Sigma 12-24 for fullframe is no fisheye, the Sony 16mm is a diagonal fisheye
RTI
2 years ago |Well, I know what a fish-eye is
I meant it can even be a fish-eye )
Carl
2 years ago |Rectilinear, not fisheye.
Maximus
2 years ago |it is a fisheye-lens that has the 180° angle of view just in the diagonal on Fullframe:
http://kurtmunger.com/sony_16mm_f_2_8_fish_eyeid104.html
zeifan
2 years ago |It’s a G not Zeiss?
Terryfried
2 years ago |The big news is that it has the SSM everyone was asking for. and in a A77 kit together with a 70300G will make the base of my ideal system.
santela
2 years ago |with that price tag and not being a Zeiss, it’s highly unlikely that it’ll be as good as the Nikon version… after all, the nikon 17-55 DX is only the best normal zoom out there for APS-C.
acolyte
2 years ago |‘normal’ but low-light. Let’s wait for the first 3 reviews
Sebastien
2 years ago |Hi Andrea,
Can you ask your about 16-50 data please ?
Weight, filter size, ssm ..
Nikko
2 years ago |how about the official price of 16-80?
E
2 years ago |Are we seeing Sony moving out from Hi Grade lenses with Sony brand name?
Most new lenses are ‘good-value’ lenses, but not exotic ones.
I have no problem with that, if they use the Zeiss brand for hi-Grade stuff.
There have been a gap between kit zooms and the stellar lenses for a long time, and it is starting to be filled.
/E
Beachrider
2 years ago |Remember that Zeiss is letting lenses be made for a lower-premium than they get on Nikon/Canon (and they only let MF lenses go, there). The Zeiss rumors are out for Sony (200 f/2 for >$$$$$, 50mm, more), they just seem tied to the 2012 FF camera activity.
Carl
2 years ago |A 200/2 would not cost five-figures. Even the overpriced Contax Aposonnar didn’t cost that much back in the day, and the 180/2 Summicron barely reached that level.
Maximus
2 years ago |Do you know what you have to pay for the 200/f2 Nikkors and Canons ?
add 25% on that price for a Zeiss 200 f2 SSM
Carl
2 years ago |They’re both around $6000.
My December
2 years ago |Hopefully its gonna be a G lens, or at least performs like a G lens. I’m really skeptical about this one, since it is a freaking KIT LENS.
Waiting for full specs. If it impress me, I’ll get this one instead of the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 EX OS HSM that I have planned earlier.
RTI
2 years ago |I don’t really get it; You want that “G” on the lens, or you want a good lens?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |December – did you seen what lenses were sold as KITs for Alpha 900?
KIT LENS DOESN’T HAVE TO BE CRAP.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Thank god it’s SSM not stupid SAM crap.
I was very worried it’s gonna be SAM after checking the prototype (it had characteristic silver ring of SAM lenses), but now I’m very happy
acolyte
2 years ago |No picture? +_+
1piece
2 years ago |More like “as bad as 17-55mm f/2.8″ as it probably won’t come with water-proof; dust resistant; nor anti-internal-reflection coating. And it’ll just be another mid-place junk you place between then 18-55 (kit) and the 1635ZA + 50/1.4 combination… Serious photographer would probably still consider Tamron/Sigma/Tokina alternatives as they have better C/P. Worst thing that could happen is that this lens is an exact copy of Tokina 16-50/2.8 but cost more… The exact same problem between Sony 18-250 and Sigma 18-250…
dusterhuffer
2 years ago |what? the sony 18250 is a relabled tamron, not a sigma….
and even thats not completely true, the sony uses a steeper AF transmission.
and what do you think every element used in lenses since around the ’50s is coated with? yes, an “anti-internal-reflection coating”…
the nikon marketing department might make you believe they reinvented the wheel, but their nano coat is nothing new, just an improvement.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |It’s doubtful that it’ll be a copy of the Tokina 16-50 as that’s a Pentax design which Tokina licensed (Pentax and Tokina had a design sharing deal for a while, Pentax got the 12-24/4 design and a lot of barrel design help for the original D-FA’s and the DA*’s, Tokina got the optical designs for the 10-17 fisheye, 16-50, 50-135 and 35 macro).
The Sony 18-250 design comes from Tamron, not Sigma, as do several other lenses like the 28-75 and 11-18. Note those deals both predate Sony’s ownership (Konica Minolta rebadged several Tamrons) and Sony is a minority shareholder in Tamron.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |What’s up with these “re-branding inferiority complex”??? Sony doesn’t rebrand lenses anymore for quite some time now… yet people assume lenses are re-branded designs even if their optical design is completly different. They read name and assume it’s rebranded lens. Whut?
Yes, in past there were few lenses with optical designs borrowed from Tamron – Adam listed examples very nicely. But it’s not happening anymore, and Sony actually knows how to design a good lenses people – did you forgot that lens design team moved to Alpha from Minolta division?
Beachrider
2 years ago |I will look to see, but I don’t think that Konica sold the Minolta lens-shop to Sony. Sony just contracts to them for some of the work (300mm, 80-200mm 2.8, 70-400mm, more).
The 35/1.8, 30/2.8 macro, 50/1.8, 85/2.8 look to be original Sony creations. We haven’t seen a new zoom lately, though.
BMan
2 years ago |The 85 2.8 seems to be a “borrowed” zeiss design. Look at the Sonnar 85 2.8 for C/Y mount. Similar weight, construction, size, specs
Even the IQ is similar (superb in both cases).
Beachrider
2 years ago |85/2.8 is certainly a Sonnar-style lens, but Sony’s is longer, fatter and Sony’s MFD is half the MFD of Zeiss’s 85/2.8.
They are ‘cousins’, but one is definitely ‘prettier’
Carl
2 years ago |Actually, a number of Minolta designers now work for Sony, including their design chief Tetsuya Arimoto.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Beachrider – Yes, they did sold it. Not entire obviously, cause… JVC (if memory serves me well) still releases some rare compacts with Konica-Minolta lenses (note: noone is sure if these are new designs or just re-use of patented KM solutions which company still owns) but all the DSLR-lenses designers moved to Sony. You can even still feel some of Minolta spirit in some of new, unconventional designs, like the 50mm f/1.2 patent.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Sony is making this lens only for me – I am happy!
acerlim
2 years ago |it’s cheaper than the 16-80 ZA, wow….
Adam Maas
2 years ago |More expensive, not cheaper. ZA 16-80 is $749, 16-50 will be $799
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |wow, unaaceptable at all!
SonyA77
2 years ago |No doubt it will be 799GBP and 799EURO too…sigh…
Really?
2 years ago |How is this a good price? I’d rather get the Tamron and save $300. Whats the point?
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |SSM!!!
Spoon
2 years ago |I had about zero doubt about the SSM part, as video asks for it, faster focusing asks for it and a higher end camera certainly deserves it. Sony knows that too.
Misi
2 years ago |Hi,
After the release when will it hit the stores?
Br
Spoon
2 years ago |In theory this could mean the complete kit could be priced around $1499 to $1599. Fingers crossed, not holding my breath, but hey…
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Sounds mouth-watering!!!
acolyte
2 years ago |After a few years of waiting, I don’t mind dishing that $$, given I’ll use that 70% of my photography time.
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |Fantastic SAR! thank you Admin!
pancanikonpus
2 years ago |if sold off my 600D + 50mmf1.8 ~roughly get $800, mygod, need to work on another $800 =.=|
Carl
2 years ago |What are you buying next? A K-r?
S Pimenta
2 years ago |AND THE NEX LENSES?!!
I AM STILL WATING…. AHHH! :O
kg
2 years ago |Supersonic – nice but optical and mechanical much better than my existing Tamron 17-50/f2.8 less than 300€? Sigma and Tokina have also existing good products here missing maybe something like 16-80mm f/2.8 for $799 listprice.
More important for me would be a 35mm f/1.4 like Samyang but with AF.
Adi
2 years ago |Sounds good, especially if they sell it with A77 for $1600 as a kit. I don’t think I would buy it for $799 as a lens alone, however… Just hope that the price in Canada would be the same ( even if CDN $ is higher than US one for quite some time we still see here the prices for many electronic products 10-20 higher than in US -maybe because they have to add the manuals in French, I suppose).
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Agree with you mate. Sony Canada should adjust the price with the US – it is not justifiable at all pricing higher in Canada.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Tell that to Australian users. They have prices taken from sky – no idea why Sony pricing policy works this way, discriminating some regions. But well… it’s not only an issue with Sony but global market as such.
Back in past: US buys more DSLRs than Europe – US gets cheaper cameras because of this, says Sony.
Currently: Europe buys more DSLRs than US – US still have cheaper cameras, Sony says nothing.
Baudelaire
7 months ago |This elegant and deisrcet pair of rhodium-plated button gucci uk will add sparkle to your outfit. They are covered in clear crystal pave and reflect the light in magical ways. gucci outlet will send you a coupon in the post to use in their upon only after you type a achieve. The gucci bags are customarily somewhat many than the ones in the stores.
butch
2 years ago |while looks like it could be a great lens its shorter then i would have use for. i guess since i cant hope for a 16-80 upgrade to SSM (ziess “no new crop sensor lens” )
also a “handshake” type lens say 20-120mmf3.5-4.5 SSM for the FF woudl fit my type shooting well even on a crop sensor. im not betting on that one.
makes me wander if i even need the A65 if i cant get SSM glass i want for the video anyhow
Beachrider
2 years ago |SSM on FF would have to be the 16-35 f/2.8 CZ, for now. Who knows what Sony might announce when their new FF camera(s) get announced in 2012.
Just because it keeps creeping in…
Canon and Nikon ONLY go down to 24mm in the FF+zoom lenses. Sony goes down to 16mm RIGHT NOW. It looks like Sony is attempting to continue the Minolta-trend of better-targeted, better-priced lenses than the other-two.
butch
2 years ago |im not saying that i need the FF but since CZ said more more crop lens i was just hoping for a nice 5x midzoom
i have a A330 and think i might have to get the A65 but i worry that the 16-80 will be a bit loud in video
Sky_walker
2 years ago |It’s gonna be loud. Yes. But you can always get something like Sigma with OS and HSM. Optical stabilization will relax in-body stabilization making sensor bit cooler what means less noise – which is always a welcome addition. And ultrasonic motor won’t hamper your videos.
Remember: Sony isn’t Canon, they don’t cripple compatibility with 3rd party lenses intentionally.
Mason
2 years ago |Beachrider are you on crack? Canon 17-40, 16-35, etc. I am a sony user with $5000+ invested in glass, don’t get me wrong, but it’s fanboys like you that give sony users bad reputations
Maximus
2 years ago |not to forget the outstanding Nikkor 14-24 2,8, what a beast.
Beachrider
2 years ago |That Nikon lens is not FF, either. AF-S means APS-C in Nikkor-speak.
Carl
2 years ago |AF-S means it uses a piezoelectric ring motor (like SSM). AF-D means it has distance encoding. FX means 135 format. DX means APS format.
The 14-24/2.8 is a full frame lens. So is the 16-35/4 VR.
And for Canon the 16-35/2.8L II and 17-40/4L are likewise.
Beachrider
2 years ago |None of those Canon lenses are FF (fullframe). Put your personal crackpipe away.
Steve-S
2 years ago |@Beachrider…
Please investigate your claims, especially before stating them in insulting ways! It’s possible you have been mis-informed. The facts are easily available.
Canon’s EF-mount actually differs for aps-c, and is called the “EF-S” mount. Their “EF” lenses can go onto their crop-sensor bodies, but their “EF-S” lenses (intentionally!!!) do not fit onto their FF bodies. Canon’s FullFrame (“L” aka pro-grade) offerings:
8-15/4 Fish
16-35 (v.I & v.II)
17-35
17-40
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_lens_mount#Zoom
Note that Wikipedia maintains a SEPARATE list of Canon EF-S lenses.
Nikon’s “aps-c” format are “DX” lenses. If it doesn’t SAY “DX” then it’s a FF lens. Although some are formally listed as “FX,” Nikon 35mm-film lenses from before the digital era & FF/APS-C split have neither FX nor DX in the name! Nikon’s FF wide-zoom list:
14-24mm f/2.8G IF-ED
16-35mm f/4G ED VR
17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nikon_F-mount_lenses_with_integrated_autofocus_motors#Nikon_Nikkor:_64_lenses.5B3.5D
As you can see, Canon and Nikon BOTH sell FF wide-angles that give more options than what Sony has in the Alpha stable.
Maximus
2 years ago |xou have no idea, what you’re talking about. In Nikon terms, DXmeans just forAPS-C and FX means also for ful format. The Nikkor 14-24 2,8 is a Full-Frame lens!
I’m a Sony usr but these are just the facts!
Steve
2 years ago |To me, this sounds like a standard lens or even an f2.8 kit type lens.
Just because it has SSM doesn’t make it a part of the G lens family and the price point of this new lens (although too expensive for many) is very cheap.
Andrea, did your sources say that it’s a G?
RTI
2 years ago |Hmm, could it be re-branded lens? with SSM…
Steve
2 years ago |This is a very quick overview of other APS-C F/2.8 lenses around the same range.
You can see the pricing with the exception of Sigma and a Tammy that I didn’t show is around the same price-point as this new Sony.
Sony rebranded a Tamron to get its 24-70 F/2.8 full-frame /APS-C compatible a few years ago; Is Sony doing the same thing here with this lens?
The pricing make me think so
Pentax 16-50mm F/2.8 APS-C $1,499.00
Sigma 17-50mm F/2.8 EX DC OS HSM APS-C $699.00
Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM APS-C $1,120.00
Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED DX APS-C $1,470.00
Terryfried
2 years ago |On line discount pricing at Amazon is down from £1,327.99 to £979.97 for Nikon
and down from £1,209.99 to £780.98 for the canon. So not much dearer in the real world.
Terryfried
2 years ago |It is about the same price as the 70300G so G series would be logical. and how about the pair as a twin lens Kit.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Not to mention the Pentax used to be $800 new, it’s almost doubled in cost in the last couple years.
FMJ
2 years ago |you mean the Tamron 28-75 right?
Sony’s 24-70 is the CZ
but there isn’t any 16-50 out there sony can rebadge!? except Pentax.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |And of course the 28-75 was in the line before Sony, as the KM 28-75/2.8. Sony brought it back with a completely new barrel and SAM focusing(well, really Tamron BIN focusing, but the same tech as SAM)
santela
2 years ago |tokina has one
FMJ
2 years ago |if its as good as the Canon, i say it s a good price for Sony brand lens, not 3rd party.
and hey, street price could lower eventually…. right?
Futile
2 years ago |Dimensions will determine how useful it is.. and Image Quality vs the Zeiss 16-80mm will determine if I’ll get one.
If this lens is big then I’d rather save for the 16-35mm. If its not then, I’ll be looking to see how much of an improvement it is over the Zeiss (ie… no vignetting)
Steve
2 years ago |At some point it comes down to how serious of a photographer you are and if you plan on or hope to move to a bigger sensor like a full-frame someday.
If you don’t earn some or all of your income taking pictures or never plan on a full-frame camera then a lens designed only for APS-C is an okay choice.
Good lenses are a lasting investment as cameras come and go every few years now but a good lens is one that you attach on cameras years from now.
I still use a Minolta 85mm/F1.4 that I purchased in the early 1990’s and don’t plan or need to replace it till Sony/Zeiss updates its coatings and moves to SSM.
If I purchased this reported Sony Alpha a77 supper-camera at 24MP and incredible ISO performance I would want the best optics. Optics that I could still uses on a 50MP FF dream camera that will surely come soon within a few years
Futile
2 years ago |I agree, and this is the main reason I’ve tried to keep with FF optics over APS (where possible).
Steve-S
2 years ago |@Steve (gee, that seems odd to write…
–
I wish we could get away from the idea that FF (and larger formats) are “more serious”.
For most sports/action, FPS is a higher priority than the resolution & dynamic range of the larger formats, and the low-resolution file-sizes allow MUCH higher frame-rates. Top-of-the-line action models from CaNikon have tended to be EF-S/DX models. High-resolution (but low-fps) models are INFERIOR for this use!
Portraiture, fashion, landscape, and other uses tend to favor the larger formats.
Also, as you mentioned:
… Good lenses are a lasting investment as cameras come and go every few years now but a good lens …
… but a good lens can be sold a couple of years down the line for probably 80%-90% of what you paid for it!
Buy *GOOD* glass (that’s what you need NOW) and don’t worry so much about the aps-c vs FF — if you abandon aps-c, just sell those lenses!
One of the REAL marks of a pro shooter, in business & successful, is the cold-blooded cost-benefit analysis without much regard for rhetoric (such as what a “serious” photographer is “supposed” to use).
- Steve S.
sopp
2 years ago |Tokina 16-50 OEM for Sony ??
Beachrider
2 years ago |The Tokina would be a fast way for Sony to get this lens built. The reviews on-the-net for Tokina indicate caution about CA. I don’t really understand how-much caution or whether it would affect the lens’s status as a ‘G’ lens.
zstan
2 years ago |If this lens has a longer MFD than my Tamron 17-50 i won’t be switching man. The a77 i presume will have stronger motor to drive my screw driven Tammy and SSM may not be needed for my case, yet.
Gary G.
2 years ago |The SSM feature has been included on G and Zeiss lenses only. My understanding is that this lens is going to be a standard Sony lens. It’s going to be SAM.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Many thanks Andrea for the 16-50/2.8 lens info. Hope we will get a good deal with the a77 as a combo
acolyte
2 years ago |Yup combo price please, Andrea/sources!
Walt
2 years ago |It’s awful for Sony to offer such a short zoom range. Should have been a upgraded 16-80 or even better a 16-105G. That would be useful enough to deserve a place in the system.
I have the 16-35 for a short range zoom in that range, and it does not see a lot of action.
butch
2 years ago |i heard that the 16-105 was a good (no not great) lens so it might be a odd choice to upgrade it might be the same for the 16-80 but they both beg for SSM with all the cams going to be adding video
wander if you could add SSM to the 16-105 and keep the cost near the 16-80CZ
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Short zoom range + constant f/2.8 = good size and acceptable price.
Long zoom range + constant f/2.8 = huge size and high price tag.
Guess which one is a better option for a KIT lens? Focus on the price.
Nick
2 years ago |I agree with Walt – ideally I would also prefer a longer zoom.
but here’s a thought…
with a 24 Mp sensor you can 2x crop at 50mm to give effectively 100mm field of view
and still have 6 Mp to play with – not ideal but not too bad.
But of course you’ll still lack the telephoto short depth of field effect.
f2.8 at 50, cropped by a factor of two would look like 100mm at about f8-f11.
(depending on focussed distance).
Given that cheap long zooms need to be stopped down at the long end anyway,
you might not be losing as much as it first seems.
(desperately trying to persuade myself that this lens is OK – as in SSM there’s not really
any other choice ! – just keep an 85 in your pocket I guess…).
Gary G.
2 years ago |Actually it’s as useful a range as 18-55mm, 17-50mm, or 24-70mm. Since it’s a f/2.8, you got to figure in weight. There is no single perfect lens. At some point, you’ll need to compromise.
mat
2 years ago |Walt, just want to say it is good to see you here. Your knowledge and the way you share it is greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Beachrider
2 years ago |I wonder about the ‘need’ for f/2.8 with 24MP sensors. I have always understood the usefulness of f/2.8 in low-light, shallow-DOF and other scenarios. I just wonder if ‘diffraction limitation’ will set in ‘earlier’ than with previous APS-C sensors. There are a lot of lenses that show diffraction limitation at f/11 or even f/8 (depending on FL and other things). Perhaps diffraction limitation will now set in at f/5.6 or f/4.5? We may need f/2.8 to ‘work’ such a high-MP sensor.
…Just musing…
Maximus
2 years ago |diffraction comes from the physical diameter of the iris, the smaller the more diffraction. Wheither the lens starts bei f2,8 or f5,6 does not make a difference
Steve
2 years ago |I use several f/2.8 on my a850
CZ 16-35f2.8, CZ 24-70f2.8 and a CZ 135f1.8 and I tell you truthfully I wish my 2.8’s would open even wider….
If you can afford a fast lens, get one, it makes a big difference on FF or APS-C
Osang
2 years ago |Holy macaroni! $799? Nahhh
Andrew
2 years ago |What happened to the mobile site???????
Carl
2 years ago |Looks like they got hacked again.
James C.
2 years ago |For that price, it better have SSM. IF not, then the Tamron would probably represent better value. Though the 28-75mm f/2.8 was SAM and priced at a ridiculous $799.99. That lens was a lame rebadging of a Tamron.
Hopefully Sony will actually improve quality and value.
RTI
2 years ago |I’d get the screw-drive older minolta or tamron over SAM anytime…
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Agreed.
Andy
2 years ago |I hope the price of this lens along with the A77 are correct otherwise there will be lots of dissapointed Alpha users, just like there are Sigma users, who were told the SD1 was going to be the same price as the Canon 5DII but it ended up being 3x the price.
NEX5
2 years ago |Now if they will make this lens in E-mount that would be something I could burn my money on… There is a G-grade zoom on NEX roadmap for 2012.
Brendon
2 years ago |I was seriously considering the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 but with this in the picture I am going to wait. I want to get the Sony A77, so if this lens is the ‘kit’ lens which means even cheaper than $799 effective price then I so want it. I hope the performance is better than the Tamron 17-50mm which is very sharp but lacking the micro contrast and ‘pop’ that I am looking for.
If the IQ is about the same as the Tamron then I will probably skimp and get the Tamron only or save up and get a 24mm f2. The 24mm prime has really nice micro contrast and the bokeh is very nice to boot. The Tamron 17-50mm has a bit harsh bokeh that I didn’t like. I don’t really need SSM but its surely nice to have.
I have no idea why some people are complaining about this lens not being a FF lens since no one has managed to make a FF UWA lens with this much zoom range.
YTlin
2 years ago |Would this new len has the same design as Tamron A16?
If it is, the price is not really good for me.
Don’t forget that Sony has some lens which have the same design as Tamron lens.
ABETTERDJANDPHOTOGRAPHER
2 years ago |We got our 2nd SONY SLT-A77 and 16-50 lens in today. We already knew the camera was exceptional (we had our 1st one for 3 weeks) but we were really surprised at what a dream the SONY 16-50 is! We have our review and 1st sample photos up http://www.abetterdj.net go to the SONY MINOLTA tab.