(SR5) More bits about the 16-50mm lens.
The trusted source that told me first about the 16-50mm lens performance wanted me to share you some updated info about the upcoming Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 SSM lens:
He told me to reassure you that the 16-50mm lens is not a “reworked tamron”. (Click here to see that lens on eBay). Sony chose to start with 16mm (instead of the 17mm from the Tamron) to “prevent consumers from comparing to the existing tamron”. Yeah it is slightly vignetting at 16mm but don’t forget “The key word is “slightly”…not “extreme bad” vignetting!”. And what he tested “was a prototype. Not the final production model.”
Thanks “Source” for clarifying that! I am sure all our readers will appreciate it!
lhkjacky
2 years ago |So the newly designed lens will have a better IQ than the Tamron’s?
Wishmaster
2 years ago |Hopefully!
Thanks Andrea for this information
frosti7
2 years ago |i hope it will be on par,
but it’ll definitely have better AF, more suitable for movies
PhotoNut
2 years ago |Okay, so Sony decided to take the Tamron SP 17-50mm f/2.8 and extend it to start at 16mm instead of 17mm. However, since the Tamron wasn’t originally designed for this, it adds a bit of extra vignetting not present on the Tamron, right? Did I summarize you well?
Remember what Rumor means:
“a statement or report current without known authority for its truth”
IMHO, I don’t trust your “Trusted” source. Nobody who has been given a pre-production model to test under NDA (as they all are) is going to be monitoring rumor sites and attempting to “correct” the talk there.
Here are three simple questions for your trusted source:
1. What is the filter size of the lens?
2. Can you manually focus the lens when the camera is in AF mode?
3. When you load up RAW pictures taken with this lens into Sony Picture processing software, is the lens recognized as Sony 16-50mm f/2.8? What about Lightroom?
Waiting for an answer.
RTI
2 years ago |Obvious troll is obvious…
PhotoNut
2 years ago |Are you “Trusted” anonymous source? Figures.
Spoon
2 years ago |Are you the source? Because you’re the one baselessly assuming again, even though the message you replied to contradicts your theory. Based on the available camera/lens shot, the filter thread is larger than 67 mm (probably 72). Go figure.
admin
2 years ago |Guys please…trust me! Sony did test many prototypes and of course specs can change! SAR is a rumor website and it has to deal with that. We are talking about products when they are sometimes months before the final announcement. Those are the same guys that allowed me to ost rumros about the new translucent technology almost one year before the announcement. In future keep in mind that we are almost always taking about non finalized products.
The Lotus Eater
2 years ago |No, the rumour clearly states that it is NOT a “reworked Tamron”.
Tanglefoot
2 years ago |cmon…. logical deduction here
1. Will be bigger than 62mm (one of the issues with the 16-80) smaller than 77mm as thats huge, afaik Sony dont make any 72mm threaded lenses which leaves 67mm.
2. Yes. As you can with all Sony lenses with inbuilt motor.
3. No. The lens isn’t released & will only be included in software updates after it had been released.
Dude
2 years ago |Sony does make 72mm lenses.
Like the 20mm, the 135STF taken over from Minolta, and the 85mm Zeiss.
They only recently started to add 67mm with the Tamron rebrand 28-75.
What does mean nothing in real world tho…
An earlier rumour said it’s 67mm size.
But don’t ask me about trust worthyness^^
Carl
2 years ago |The 24mm Zeiss as well.
72mm was one of Minolta’s most used sizes, so lots of legacy glass uses it. 28-70G, 28-135, 85G, 80-200, 200/2.8, 200 Macro, etc.
Brandon
2 years ago |Do you not understand the term “reworked”? If you do, do you not grasp a sentence that negates that very claim?
Stay away from this forum; You have added nothing intelligent.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |Thanks kindly Andrea for all your hard works. Much appreciated
Sky_walker
2 years ago |and thanks for the source to clean this case up. Maybe less people will see everything in bad light… *glares at posts above*… ok… you can’t make everyone happy. But be sure that between few whiners there’s lot of people happy from the news
Sylwiusz
2 years ago |Well, with these parameters it won’t be a reworked Tamron 17-50/2.8 but it could be still a reworked Tokina 16-50/2.8
Eventually just like its twin: Pentax DA* 16-50/2.8 which is SSM equipped and weather sealed just like this rumored Sony…
Ex Alpha
2 years ago |Just to further stir the pot, compared to other 17mm lenses that I have used…the Tamron has a noticeably wider field of view. I think that some reviewers have picked up on it as well.
I would actually welcome a rebadged Tamron 17-50 if it used HSM/SSM/whatever you wanna call it. I have the VC version for EOS and it is fantastic other than the lack of FTM focus and loud focus motor. I also had the lens on Alpha and it was fantastic as well. Maybe more so due to the smaller size.
Minoltian
2 years ago |If it is a new lens, not a Tammy re-badged, the lens weight will be around 600-700 grams (like Canon 17-55/2.8 weight)
Erational
2 years ago |PhotoNut has a valid point. That’s not the definition of trolling. If software automatically recognizes the lens as the Tamron- we know what Sony’s game is. Sony has CONSTANTLY tried to get out of putting R&D money into lenses even with the world over decrying the lack of lenses. They only want to put their money into Sensors. All we have to show for it is the Easy Choice line. Everything elce is; Rebadged Tamrons, recoated Minolta’s and Zeiss-designed ZA’s. This is not acceptable. Sony- SPEND MONEY ON NEW LENS DESIGNS !
We need newly-designed 35mm F/1.4 and 50mm F/1.4 primes, not 20/25 year-old designs. The Sony 50mm F/1.4 back-reflects from the sensor because it’s a design meant for a film camera. The Easy Choice 50 f/1.8 is a APS-C model. How can a camera company call itself world-class, yet not have a decent full-frame standard lens ?
Froo
2 years ago |You act as if the G tele zooms doesn’t exist, or that the extremely good Zeiss lenses and the cheap-but-good easy choice lenses doesn’t matter. In fact, Sony have extended the lens lineup tremendously from the Minolta days. The real lineup-killers were Konica, not releasing a single native lens except the kit 18-70.
harpo
2 years ago |I agree froo. I own the SAL 70-400 and it seldom leaves my camera despite it’s size.
Carl
2 years ago |New designs were happening under Konica, they just didn’t release the bloody things. They had a 24/1.4 design and a replacement for the 28-70/2.8 patented. Unfortunately Sony went with Zeiss for both.
Froo
2 years ago |I have never heard of that 24 (you have a source?), but the 28-70 SSM was shown way back in the Minolta days and not at all a Konica design. They didn’t release it because everyone else released 24-70/2.8s way before they could release theirs, making that lens obsolete long before it was shipped.
Carl
2 years ago |http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2011-03-27#english
It measured great, too. Oh well.
Froo
2 years ago |Carl, that patent application was entered long after KM sold their assets to Sony. Additionally, it is the Nikon 24/1.4 (the patent was a joint filing by KM/Nikon and the lens has surfaced in Nikon mount).
Carl
2 years ago |Patents don’t appear for years after they are written for confidentiality reasons.
Minolta’s designers have been laid off and most work for Sony now. If the patent was written after the sale, it would have listed Sony as co-author.
The design is a Nikon/Minolta co-design like the 200/4 Macros are. In the macro’s case, Nikon and Minolta opted for slightly different optical formulae, so I’d imagine the same would have been true if this lens ever made production.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Erational – Photonut, and so do you aren’t really aware of how big corps work, I guess.
“Sony has … tried to get out of putting R&D money into lenses … They only want to put their money into Sensors.” – Ok, let me clarify something for you: Sony is made of few divisions/companies – each of them has it’s own budget, people, management. Sony Semiconductors is division of the Sony making sensor. They earn money, divide it into their own needs and send rest to Sony Crop central. Semiconductors have their own R&D budget and their own R&D team. Sony Digital Imaging is a division which incorporates Alpha design team. It has it’s own budget and R&D teams. They split money between few branches of their work – E bayonet and A bayonet between others (yes, this includes compacts). Than the A-bayonet team has to split money between Lenses R&D, bodies, marketing, production, etc. So, the point is that: Money can’t be moved from lens design to sensor design. It doesn’t work this way.
“Sony 50mm F/1.4 back-reflects from the sensor because it’s a design meant for a film camera.” – o_O UH?
“Nobody who has been given a pre-production model to test under NDA (as they all are) is going to be monitoring rumor sites and attempting to “correct” the talk there.” – Photonut, your deduction amazes me. So.. you think that if he broken the NDA now he sits in a corner crying? Or hiding all days in Russian tundra? Sure it’s possible that the guy checks the reaction of people to what he send, even from pure curiosity. And when he sees total nonsense like what you spread about lens being Tamron-rebrand (which was obvious it wasn’t even long before this SR5) he has a right to send a replay to it, doesn’t he?
Froo
2 years ago |Actually, the back-reflection part is true, and that is an embarrassment. A hotspot can be seen in the middle of images due to lens-sensor reflections, this is true for the old Minolta 50/1.7 as well.
Spoon
2 years ago |No, he doesn’t have a point. He states baseless assumptions as facts. Foe example, weeks ago I already said the lens thread was larger than the Tamron one, most likely 72mm. In that sense the rumors, including the latest one seem trustworthy.
Swemba
2 years ago |Are your sources ever going reveal the manual control options in video mode. Im guessing since nobody ever talks about it, it’s not going to so I’m saving my money for nothing.
lollo
2 years ago |It is not going to happens.
the fs100 , the VG10 and future VG20 are the cameras Sony intended for that use.
I’m not happy about it either….
Swemba
2 years ago |I guess Canon is going to continue to dominate that market then. My friends with Rebels constantly scoff at my lowly A55 because of it’s inability to shoot proper video.
Swemba
2 years ago |I guarantee you the VG-20 which will be around the price of the 5D Mark 2 will be completely unable to compete in the video quality department even with it being years newer.
FS100 is irrelevant because of it’s price point. I can get very similar video quality with a 5D that costs half the price.
I’ve already taken the pictures of my camera and lenses and am very close to craigslisting my Sony stock to switch to Canon…
Dan K
2 years ago |18-55
16-105
cz 16-80
cz 24-70
70-300G
70-400G
35/1.8
85/2.8
50/1.8
30/2.8 macro
24, 85, 135 cz’s
all of those are sony originals, neither rebadged tamrons nor recoated minoltas. they are some pretty good lenses at their respective price points. yeah there are holes (as you mention, a new ~50mm full-frame G or CZ would be at or near the top of the list), but many of the sony-designed lenses are very respectable offerings. and I’d be surprised if the new 16-50 didn’t fall into that category as well.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |It already does even from sole price point: water sealing + ssm + 16mm at wide angle… unless they made it noticeably worse than Tamron 17-50 (which despite of some people claims isn’t exactly a… stellar lens) – it’ll be a big hit lens! ^^ At least: I hope so.
Dude
2 years ago |Sadly the 16-80CZ never got a good reputation.
That might be the reason this new lens is a Sony brand “only”.
People go crazy about names like Zeiss and believe products wearing this names should be in every point be better than mass brands.
Than again there are even people beliving that the A-Mount Cz lenses are no real Zeiss stuff compared to the “cosina made” Zeiss MF lenses.
People are so crazy about brand image sometimes that they forget about real world results…
Mel Z.
2 years ago |People who own the 1680z lens like the lens for the most part. I own one and I think it’s an excellent lens. It’s incredibly sharp and it’s optical performance is better than most walkaround zoom lenses.
Price factor is another argument, but you can pick up a used one for a more reasonable price.
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |cz 16-35?
And CIPA must have thought enough of Sony’s contribution to the 28-75 (widely thought to be a Tamron rebadge) to present Sony with its annual award for the “Best Expert Lens” for the year during which it was introduced–the same award that had been won by the 70-400G the year before.
PhotoNut
2 years ago |You’re wrong about Sony designed lenses list.
18-55 – OK. But that is just a cheap consumer crop lens
16-105 – OK. Also a crop lens.
cz 16-80 – No. Zeiss
cz 24-70 – No. Zeiss
70-300G – Ok. But slow lens
70-400G – Ok. Slow lens
35/1.8 – Ok but for consumer crop sensor
85/2.8 – No. Based on Zeiss Contax 85mm f/2.8
50/1.8 – Ok but for consumer crop sensor
30/2.8 macro – Ok but for consumer crop sensor
24, 85, 135 cz’s – No. Zeiss
So what you see is that the only Sony designed lenses are either slow zooms or plastic consumer crop primes — nothing serious for FF users.
Compare that to Canon or Nikon. Even Samsung has better lens choices for their mirrorless NX cameras than Sony has for its NEX line
BMan
2 years ago |Your point?
I think that it is pretty much general “knowledge” that Sony is using the Zeiss brand for it’s FF lenses to get the semi-pros and studio shooters interested. The whole Sony FF lineup is geared towards that!
Also there are not many holes in the lens needs for studio/landscape/wedding photography in the sony system. Ok, the 50/1.4 and 35/1.4 need updating but that is it! The A900 and A850 are not made for some fast telephoto action and the lens lineup reflects that!
As for why sony is creating cheap DT primes rather than very expensive primes for pros?
There are maybe a couple of thousand FF sony DSLR-s in the world!
There are probably 30 times more APS-C sony DSLRs (or more even).
So you think it would be smart to pour resources into a lens that will have a target audience at least 10 times smaller and will have high production costs, or rather spend the same amount of development money on two el-cheapo lenses for the masses which might bring you in loads of revenue for further development of new lenses.
I’m sure sony could design all the “standard” fast lenses that you’re whining about, but their strategy is sound! First cater those people who will bring you loads of dough $_$! Then you can pour loads of cash into the prestigious lenses that are mostly there for bragging rights.
And I also strongly believe that the new rumoured 16-50/2.8 is a sony design. If they’d go for a rebrand, they would have just used the 17-50 directly, it would be MUCH MUCH cheaper. (remember, profit is always the primary factor in anything that a big company does)
As for the vignette. Find me a zoom with the effective FL of 24mm at the wide end that DOES NOT vignette and I will tip my hat to you and leave you alone. Most zooms at 24mm effective FL will vignette (1.5 to about 2.5 ev in most cases), some quite heavily even (look at the canon 24-105L – $1.000+ – for example).
Gabriel
2 years ago |16~50, 17~50, it’s only a millimeter more. And i don’t care if it’s a tamron, a sigma, a sony, a zeiss or a kid design. What’s matter is the IQ. More concerns is the 50mm tele, it’s a bit too short. All fast zoom are 17~50, no real 21 century innovation, like a 16~64 macro, or a f2 zoom, or a fiber carbon high end zoom. No, in photography, DSLR manufacturer are very convervative. There is innovation in sensor, in board functions which correct lenses defect like vigneting, CA, distortion, flare. Software cost less than glass i guess. And Sony produce lenses for NEX too. Hard to put research on NEX, APS-C and FF at the same time. So take a third party lenses, do some trick to gain 1mm and paint it Sony is the fast and easy way, and if the lenses is good, who cares ?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |You can’t take lens and add 1mm. It doesn’t work this way. You can block lens to have less range, but not really add anything, especially if we talk about wide angle.
Rob
2 years ago |Umm, now much do I have to pay for a Nikon body with a 25 megapixel sensor? About 3-4X what my 850 cost. How many lenses can I get for that $6000 difference? Let me tell you my friend, it’s a lot. So, you can jerk off telling me what’s available in the stores, and I’ll just reply by telling you what’s in my photo bag.
Froo
2 years ago |As said before, obvious troll is obvious.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |I wondre what happen with this summer-trolling? It used to be calm place with people focused more on looking on a bright sides than trolls…
Carl
2 years ago |It did? Early on it was just a place to get together and vent about the lack of an A750.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Ok… I should have added: in the huge areas between rumors about A750.
hehehe
But never the less I hadn’t got an impression that ppl whined much here, not till recently.
I don’t know… maybe it’s just A77 which lures trolls and other creatures. ;]
Carl
2 years ago |I just means that A700 users (and former A700 users) are well fed up by now.
Even as someone who shoots a full frame camera and is in no rush to upgrade, it’s clear that Sony has made a right shambles of the process from start to finish.
As this place has been the primary source of information about the when, what and how of the A77 (much to PhotoNut’s dismay), it’s just natural that this place will be the centre of the storm.
I’d expect, once it and the NEX-7 are out and people get back to the job of taking photographs (a novel concept as always), the heat will die down somewhat.
john
2 years ago |If you think we have trolls now..wait till these cameras are actually released.
Carl
2 years ago |IF they ever get actually released.
Whoops, looks like I just trolled myself.
kalpurush :)
2 years ago |I wonder how many lenses a pro photographer needs?
Sony has top class CZ and G class lenses for the pro and a few are on the way…
Think how many years took for Nikon and Canon to build up the lens collections? Why so rush?
Another question: Can anybody efford to have all the lenses?
Just relax and ejoy your life
Bruce Ramage
2 years ago |Isn’t it great we have the luxury of having strong opinions about this kind of thing?
Dulaney Ward
2 years ago |Cyrus
2 years ago |Perhaps stupid question:
How the source can be categoric about the lens origin?
And confirming for surr that is not rebranded Tamron?
PhotoNut
2 years ago |My friend, you make a very, very good point. How can a mere tester know the design origins of a preproduction lens unless that tester is intimately involved with the company that made it.
This is why I don’t like the “Trusted” status of this person. He or she clearly has a vested interest in convincing us of some things about Sony lens and camera. He or she is not just an impartial reviewer of this rumored hardware. If he or she was they would stick to the facts and not focus on convincing us of how it is not a Tamron or other 3rd party clone especially since they provide zero evidence to that.
I object to anonymous people being called “Trusted” when they are clearly trying to influence what I believe in the guise of giving us rumor morsels. There is a name for this practice and it is (used to be) called Propaganda. Or today, Marketing, brand promotion and advertising.
BMan
2 years ago |You’re on to something here!
These “trusted” sources are only CaNikon marketing people who discovered that if they hype up a release of a competitive product, then even if the newly released product is 2x times better than what they can offer, most people will feel extremely let down (because it won’t deliver on the “promised rumours”) and will rather buy their shitty overpriced gear.
For the slow witted: Hyping something up with beefed up specs will result in more negative backlash than not hyping at all.
So only two explanations exist: Either the “trusted sources” are retards, or they are CaNikon marketeers.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |So, the guy who told about SLT ages ago was Canon spy? Man… FBI should hire you!
BMan
2 years ago |English is not my primary language, so perhaps the sarcastic tone got lost. But I was completely sarcastic
Sky_walker
2 years ago |hehe, cool
English ain’t my primary language either, so… spotting the irony is twice as difficult 
We should make official SAR irony tag. Like… [irony] [/irony] which will change font to Comic Sans and color to pink.
Spoon
2 years ago |Your own “trusted” theories have been debunked so many times, that the hypocricy in your post above is nothing but laughable.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |How? That’s very simple : filter diameter, lens lenght, lens width, notable weight difference (although it doesn’t work with SSM vs screwdrive lens comparsion), different focusing mechanics (IF vs lack of it, behavior of lenses (rear moves or not, etc.) ), different zoom behavior (observe lenses, and in non-engine lenses you can compare rotation fo zoom ring), compare minimum focusing distance.
KC
2 years ago |Totally agree with you. Just take a ruler and you can easily measure the front and rear glass elements and you can tell if its a Tamron 17-50!
Rob
2 years ago |IMHO, the Canikon trolls are out bleating anything negative they can imagine in order to dissuade people from spending their money on the best value system on the market. They can bleat away about lens selection, but ignore that most people will never own the exotics they say “make” a system. They themselves will never own those lenses, but knowing they exist somehow makes them feel superior. When it comes to value, Sony is the way of the present and future. Please read this essay from Luminous Landscape for an informed treatment of the subject:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/quality-vs-value.shtml
Dave J
2 years ago |It does not matter if it is Tamron or not to me. I mean why should I if it can take a great photo? Carrying Sony brand will help to hold its resale value somewhat better than Tamron and that might be it.
Anyways, the vignetting issue isn’t actually something we can ignore even if it is “slight”. I bet a lot of people will gonna have filters on this thing right after they buy it. What if you are taking shots with ND and/or pol filters any many do all the time? In no time, it will turn to an “Extremely bad” vignetting. This is a serious design flaw. The only good news is that it is a prototype, which they might have some time to redesign things, although the time to the release date is really tight, if the release date rumor is in fact correct.
BMan
2 years ago |Please find me a zoom that has 24mm effective focal length at the wide end and hasn’t got even slight vignetting.
Canon 15-85 – check (very strong vignette)
Canon 24-105L – check (uber strong vignette)
Canon 24-70L – check (strong vignette)
Nikon 24-70 – check (moderate vignette)
Nikon 16-85 – check (slight vignette)
Sony 16-80ZA – check (average vignette)
Sony 16-105 – check (moderate vignette)
Sony 24-70ZA – check (strong vignette)
…
So, I’m waiting for a 24-XX(X) effective zoom that doesn’t vignette at 24mm.
You say it’s a “serious design flaw”. Obviously the highly praised best-of-class canon L lenses have this serious design flaw, nikkors which are supposed to be top notch glass as well. Even the Zeiss zooms have this …
Some people …
Mar
2 years ago |Olympus 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5, 12-60mm f/2.8-4.0 and 14-35mm f/2.0 don’t
BMan
2 years ago |You fail. Olympus’ 14mm == 28mm effective, not 24! And there is A lot of difference in those 4mm.
Also even the mighty $2k 14-35/2 has a 1 ev vignette at the wide end.
To avoid such issues one would require HUGE lenses with similarly HUGE prices. And the issue is SW correctable in 20 seconds anyway, so noone would pay the price – literally!
Dave J
2 years ago |Maybe I should have been a bit more clear on this. My inception on the vignetting is actually blocked area by physical stuff like lens barrel etc. I mean, no one cares about the vignetting at f/2.8. One actually uses them regulaly knows that and it is not even worse mentioning IMO since the vignetting has been there for an eternity for every single fast zoom lenses.
The fact that it is being mentioned a lot bothers me and leads me to think it must be not the vignetting that is very normal for the zoom lens that is this fast, and people keeps talking about tamron helped(or not) me to think it must be a design issue of the lens as a whole, not just optics.
Erational
2 years ago |Sky_Walker; I see that you are not aware of the phenomena of sensor back-reflection. Unfortunately, it affects the Sony 50mm F/1.4, Minolta 50mm F/1.4, and Minolta 50mm F/2.8 . It is REAL, not imagined. I will be glad to email anyone outdoor pictures ruined by these blue-purple blobs in the center of my families’ photos. Here is a site detailing the phenomena :
http://thesybersite.com/minolta/sensor-reflection/
On resource allocation; Sony has the ability the to shift resources from one development team to another. They really do not need to a different body with the exact same sensor and try to call it a new product- every 6 months. A good example would be the Sony A35, which for all practical purposes is the A55 model. THAT needless body change is money that could be funneled into changing 25 year-old lens designs. One doesn’t see the other camera companies wasting money on their lineup this way. Every camera company makes sure their lenses are current, so why can’t Sony ?
I am no big supporter of the E-mount, but they still have about as many lenses as they have had new NEX cameras. That’s insane. It doesn’t matter how great a camera’s body is if there is a lack of decent lenses to use with that camera. People have said Sony doesn’t make money on their lenses, I am not privy to those financial details . But, I do know a camera company can not compete with lenses aimed at only the lowest and highest price points.
acolyte
2 years ago |Relax Andrea, you made this website to inform rumors, so it shall be. Let people who want to downplay it, use it against you, or make a big fuss about it do what they want. After all, its about the rumors. The senseless discussion doesnt affect the site’s quality much, tho it’s great you read a lot of our comments
as your site gets more popular, more and more also want to attack it – just keep it going 
keep up the good work! Wont comment much till a77 is out 
JS
2 years ago |I’m still new to the site, but I’m grateful to see what’s on the horizon from Sony. I can’t for the life of me get why people come just to stir things up on a rumor site.
Personally, I’m excited about the direction Sony is going and could care less that they don’t have a million lenses (how many 50mm at different apertures does one need, if we’re comparing to say, Canon). And for those who are so disappointed, seems that the easiest solution is to switch systems. In the meantime, I can fill any lens void through CZ and Minoltas and other since having a Sony badge on my lens doesn’t affect my photos.
FullFrame NEX (24x36)!
2 years ago |Hi Andrea!
Please tell us more about the new NEX E5!
Features/Pictures/Availability/Price
Keep Up The Good Work!
Many Thanks!
Erational
2 years ago |If people don’t complain, nothing changes. You folks that think nothing ill should be said of your sacred cows shouldn’t read any comments section anywhere- it will ruin your day.
Sony needs to realize it can’t be considered a real camera company when it refuses to update it’s lenses for 25 years. Throwing a new coating on a lens and calling it new is hucksterism. But for many lenses that is exactly what they did. I own a load of of Sony and Minolta lenses. I know Sony can do better than this trickle of lenses they release, often based on other’s designs. If someone out there doesn’t want more out their chosen camera company, please don’t negate others’ desire for better products.
Having two standard lenses that create fat blobs of color in the middle of folks’ photos is not satisfactory. The 50mm f/1.4 is THE STANDARD. It’s the most-used prime lens, after which would be the 35mm for APS-C cameras.
Sony may again be selling old wine in new bottles. Rebadging Tamron lenses, tweaking them and selling them for a handsome premium, is nothing new for Sony. The unknowing public gets stiffed with a big bill for Sony’s slight-of-hand. If anyone out there thinks that is admirable corporate behavior – you must be a shareholder of Sony’s.
The lens in discussion here may be 3 TIMES it’s original retail price ! A more silent motor drive doesn’t justify such an outrageous price increase. Personally, I hope Sony has started with a clean slate and not done such a malignant act.
Rick
2 years ago |I somewhat agree with your statment.. however we cannot discount the fact that great glass is “great glass” 10-20-30 years old I dont care. I just sold my 25 year old Canon 85mm F1.2L lens because Canon changed their mount and I have given up on film.
That lens was “old” and can still destroy most of the “new” lenses coming to market.
I would love to see some of the “great glass” of the past tweeked for modern camera’s. All glass has personality, I would rather see old great glass polished to perfection and supercharged. Than some new and improved plastic toy thing.
Just my opinion!
Carl
2 years ago |Sony hasn’t been making cameras for 25 years. Minolta, though, is certainly a worthy target for such criticism, but that point is somewhat moot now.
Rick
2 years ago |Thanks for the info Andrea!! I am anxious to see how it performs.