(SR5) There will be a new high quality standard E-mount Zeiss zoom!
Image on top shows the A-mount (not E-mount!) Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 lens. A similar version is coming for E-mount.
Very well known sources confirmed that Sony will launch a premium quality standard zoom lens in 2013. I don’t have the exact specs and release date yet but I have been told it’s a ZEISS! I have been told it will be similar to the current Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 A-mount lens (Price and specs of the lens at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay).
Loading ...I kindly invite you to join the very active and growing Facebook community! And s ubscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream. You really will not miss all the news and rumors that will come from now on!
—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
Joe
5 months ago |Will it be full frame to be compatible with the FF NEX?
admin
5 months ago |no.
NEXfive
5 months ago |Yeah, 16-80mm High Quality E-Mount also for FullFrame NEX would make perfect sense if it includes Image Stabilisation.
derdide
5 months ago |16-80, could be yes. But 3.5-4.5 makes it definitely a no. Slow or variable aperture don’t match well with “high-quality”, both together don’t match at all.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |What absolute toss.
Now Hear This
5 months ago |Exactly. The current Sony DT 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* is a fantastic lens (Sharp, excellent color & contrast) , it’s only downside is the AF isn’t silent. Coming out with a E-Mount OSS version of that lens is what I’ve been hoping for since the NEX came out.
Vlad
5 months ago |Huh?
Meeran
5 months ago |If it was fixed f4 throughout its zoom range no one would have complained about it, but because it is variable zoom even though it is not that much different from f4 at the long end people complaining. I think NEX user should be happy with the focal length and it’s aperture. It is the best walk around lens. But the price it is a bit high unless three quality is exceptionally good other it is a no go for many
James
5 months ago |Don’t worry about the aperture range. The a-mount CZ16-80 has tremendous image quality and generates perfectly nice bokeh for all the normal uses of a ‘super-kit’ lens. Yeah, I’d like a few more aperture stops from time to time, but not at the expense of lens size/weight, particularly on a smaller e-mount body.
James
5 months ago |Another slow zoom? -_- Better release the “fast” G zoom…
crim
5 months ago |I’ve been planning to buy the DT 16-50mm f/2.8 for some time now. If there will be a similar Zeiss lens that is FF compatible and offers better IQ, I might consider. But it would have to be fast, at least f/2.8, to make sense to me.
bas076
5 months ago |Even if it will be as big as current 16-50 for A-mount? No, thanks.
crim
5 months ago |Baah, I misread the post. Thought it was an A-mount lens. It’s not for me then.
Hendrick
5 months ago |Aperture is too slow. Image quality could be great, but aperture is too slow and likely no OSS, so it will have limitations. For $999, it better be 2.8, even if the zoom range is not that great.
bas076
5 months ago |16-35? F2.8? OSS? Such a thing will be as big as babyzaiss. You need more then 0.5kg lens on your nex?
Vlad
5 months ago |I am pretty confident something better than the 16-80 can be done, without it being huge and heavy. Look at the 10-18, pretty impressive.
bas076
5 months ago |a) SEL-1018 is not small and 16-80 lens will be much biger
b) SEL-1018 is not so impressive in comparasion with Tokina 11-16/2.8 but more expensive.
Vlad
5 months ago |The 1018 is very impressive compared to the Tokina, because it goes wider (and also longer), seems to be very sharp, has OSS and it is less than half the size and weight. The only negative being a 1 stop difference. Seriously, how is that not impressive?
The 16-80 is 445 grams. The 16-105 is 470 grams and same size. While I certainly do not expect a 10-100 f/2, I believe that it can be improved – either made significantly smaller or slightly faster or slightly longer, etc. The 16-50/2.8 is 577 grams (only 122 grams more), but it is made significantly tougher and has weather sealing. Or take a look at Fuji’s designs – the 18-55/2.8-4 and the 35/1.4 – which are decidedly small for what they are, yet providing rather impressive quality.
john
5 months ago |Zeiss will never make OSS lenses.
Like Sony making anymore OVF DSLR’s
Now Hear This
5 months ago |Zeiss won’t make it, they’ll likely design it or approve the design/optical performance. Sony will make it, pay Zeiss for their name and stamp of approval and hopefully add OSS.
Spillicus
5 months ago |1st Zeiss stabilized, autofocus lens? Unstabilized wouldn’t be good, and I bet if it includes OSS it’s at least $1200.
wmima
5 months ago |It should be G lens. OSS is necessary for zoom lenses.
See4eye
5 months ago |What if this is also a pancake lens? As the Sony one?
Bogdan Ciobanu
5 months ago |f/3.5-4.5 $999 – very expensive, it doesn’t worth it!
Vivek
5 months ago |I am not sure what Sony are smoking but why would they want to charge $999 (surely, it will be 1500 Euros here)for a slow zoom?
Every day, with price indications like this, Canon and Nikon look far more enticing.
Maybe that is their strategy?
Almazar80
5 months ago |Have your priced high quality Nikon and Canon zooms lately? The new ones are not cheap. As with Sony, they are all victims of the relatively high yen valuation.
Vivek
5 months ago |The high Yen and Yuan affects everyone across the board. It depends where something is made and how much cut Zeiss is given for the label on the lens (the box invariably says it is Sony, btw, just like the 24/1.8). Still, I think Sony would have a tough time competing in terms of the pricing. “High quality” is yet to be determined. Fuji also make high quality lenses for their X mount. They are not exactly cheap but the build quality and the IQ are not cheap either.
Sahaja
5 months ago |Nikon’s 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G for APS-C is about $650. It was introduced 5 years ago and is slower at the long end. So about 35% more for a brand new Zeiss branded lens is to be expected. The price will come down a little after a while.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |Is trolling your strategy?
alphabart
5 months ago |Quote: .. I have been told it will be similar to the current Zeiss 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 A-mount lens ..
So no powerzoom for this baby. F4.5 @ 80mm isn’t that bad I guess.
ingo
5 months ago |3.5-4.5?
Meh, why not 2.8 only?
John Maverick
5 months ago |Because the NEX is a small camera system.
ingo
5 months ago |f2.8 and 20-50 would be sufficient for me.
crazydoctor
5 months ago |and why not a fixed f1.0 zoom?
archer
5 months ago |Rather disappointed that the standard zoom will be a zeiss. Not only will it cost a bomb it will also lack OSS.Would have rather preferred a 16-50 or 16-35 mm f2.8 sony zoom lens with OSS for ard 750$$. Would rather prefer a software corrected less expensive sharp lens with good micro contrast and color rendition rather than a very expensive lens with no CA, vignitting or distortion.
Bastuboi
5 months ago |I will buy it IF…
1. It has constant 2.8 aperture
2. It is PARFOCAL
Size or weight is not an issue. Just make it good for videography.
Rich_Gale
5 months ago |Give us a 24-70 straight 2.8. Enough of the regurgitated kit lenses.
Now Hear This
5 months ago |A 16-80 is not a regurgitated kit lens, it’s a high performance semi-pro/enthusiast lens. It’ll be half the weight of a bulky f2.8, half the price and size too. Many people complain the SEL18-200 is too big and bulky, imagine a f2.8 zoom with no wide angle, with about 50% more weight and much more bulk. a 24-70 is just a bad idea for NEX. IF you want f/2.8 maybe Sony will port over the A-mount 16-50 someday.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |LOL at all the people expecting something similar to the A-mount Zeiss 16-80, but expecting it to be f2.8.
Perspective and realism is a rare commodity around here.
max
5 months ago |+1 .not everyone here attends college haha
Abit77
5 months ago |(SR5) any new for 50/1.4 CZ SSM ?
LensIsAll
5 months ago |Wait till February.
RVN
5 months ago |TO SLOWWWWWWWWW
rikken
5 months ago |I think $999 official price means $848 in market price.
If so , 16-80 3.5-4.5 is very good lense.
bas076
5 months ago |For 1K$? No not good enough.
SeekyI
5 months ago |Definately too expensive, $1000. I would only pay that for an f2.8, stabilized, weather sealed, metal lens. It’s quite simple: for the same amount of money, you can get the approx. equivalent with FF coverage (Canon 24-105 F4 IS L) so a APS-C 16-80 F3.5-4.5 should be quite a bit cheaper, or faster, etc etc…
Gato
5 months ago |This is the lens I’ve been waiting for – an equivalent to the very popular Canon 24-120 or Nikon 24-105 for full frame – both of which are f4. Not a glamorous lens, but could be a real workhorse for pros on a tight budget. A photographer could run a small portrait or wedding business with only this one lens.
Joel Richards
5 months ago |I agree, IF it is full-frame ready and pin sharp wide open (at least for most of the range). That seems like a much better balance of size, IQ, and speed. If it is APS-C only then I agree with the haters it should be f2.8 at least at the wide end.
St.
5 months ago |I’ll buy it for $999 only if it’s f/2.8.
Otherwise – I’ll skip.
Chris
5 months ago |Make it constant f/2.8 or at least 2.8-4.
If it’s 3.5~4.5, major shame, major
St.
5 months ago |Agree!
When you say “high-quality” you definitely don’t have in mind f/3.5-4.5 lens.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |Weird, as the Zeiss 16-80 is actually a high quality lens.
LensIsAll
5 months ago |You definitely have no idea what high quality lens means. If only factor determining quality of the lens is it’s brightness then go buy some Korean glass, cause it’s available already and don’t speak again.
Sahaja
5 months ago |Constant 2.8? Nikon’s 10 year old 17-55 f/2.8 costs about $1,400 and weighs 750g.
A constant f/2.8 16-80mm would be much bigger, much heavier, and much more expensive. You want to put something like that on your NEX?
Slo-ho-mo
5 months ago |Yes. On my NEX-FS700.
Douglas
5 months ago |A Zeiss Kit lens? no thanks, too expensive… Give me a 17-50mm constant at f2.8 or f3.5 with OSS, and i will be really happy.
albhui
5 months ago |Is this new Zeiss zoom replacing the G lens currently on the Roadmap?
Guess the Zeiss lens and cameras (RX1 and RX100) are doing pretty well so Sony decide to put Zeiss label instead of G label on the upcoming zoom?
$999 would be very aggressive pricing…..
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |If it says Zeiss on the lens, then Zeiss will have designed it. You don’t just slap labels on a lens.
Mistral75
5 months ago |You don’t just slap labels on a lens? Let me laugh.
Think Leica-labelled lenses on Panasonic compact cameras, Zeiss-labelled lenses on Sony compact cameras, Schnbeider Kreuznach labelled K-mount lenses for Samsung DSLRs that were identical to their Pentax twins and many more…
Mistral75
5 months ago |You don’t just slap labels on a lens? Let me laugh.
Think Leica-labelled lenses on Panasonic compact cameras, Zeiss-labelled lenses on Sony compact cameras, Schneider Kreuznach labelled K-mount lenses for Samsung DSLRs that were identical to their Pentax twins and many more…
Vlad
5 months ago |Yep, thinking about it. All of the lenses you cited are great. So what was your point again?
butch
5 months ago |i love my 16-80. having one in Emount woudl be the only way i woudl move to a nex6. that said i think it will likly be too big for a NEX even at 3.5-4.5 let alone 2.8 fixed
its rare that the Z is not on my body and also rare that i feel that i have to have a 2.8f (sure there are times but not often)
that said a better build woudl be welcome on a nearly 1k$ lens
Dave Lively
5 months ago |If it is light, compact, has OSS and is sharp wide open across it’s entire zoom range I will definitely consider buying it. I do not want a 1+ pound piece of glass hanging on my camera. I switched to NEX because I wanted a camera that is smaller and lighter than my SLR. An extra stop is not worth the increased size and weight. Constant f2.8 zooms usually cost more than $1000 too. The m43 f2.8 zooms from Panasonic are about $1300 and not that impressive optically (compared to f2.8 SLR lenses) and do not have to cover the larger sensor of the NEX. I have the 50mm f1.8 for when I need fast.
Small, constant f2.8 and excellent optical performance are conflicting goals. Since I cannot have all 3 I would rather have small lens with great optical performance than an extra stop of speed.
Varn
5 months ago |+1
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |People lost their sense of reality? Asking for a 5x zoom with F2.8 constant aperture for a Nex system?
Hello-oooooo! Have you ever realised that fast zooms are, at most, 3x zoom? And that they are pretty big already?
If anyone ever used the original A-mount 16-80mm F3.5-F4.5 knows that it is a pretty good “kit” lens. Also, remember that NEX currently doesn’t have ANY ‘high grade’ zoom lens. I think a 16-80mm ‘baby Zeiss’ version for E-mount would be welcome.
mict
5 months ago |Most readers want 16-500 F0.95 OSS Macro lens.
I want 35 1.4 from zeiss. Why not to make it ZA?
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |And they want it to be small and compact and dirt cheap.
LensIsAll
5 months ago |small and cheap == poor quality
small and good quality == expensive
good quality and cheap == huge and impossible to get
silvrmn
5 months ago |Back when I worked, my marketing agency’s motto was “Pretium. Praestantia. Officium. Elege duo.” (Price. Quality. Service. Pick two.) It is axiomatic – lenses as well as advertising.
Varn
5 months ago |+1
SonyCyberPunk
5 months ago |man people here have unrealistic expectations..constant f/2.8 zoom?are you on drugs?then when its big, all ya’ll complain its front heavy for the smallish NEX..what a bunch of bellends
Little Monster
5 months ago |Pricey is the problem here.
pjpo
5 months ago |$1000 for variable aperture, no thanks. If that’s the best they can do, it’s a sign to dump NEX. Fuji has a great 18-55 f/2.8-4 for $600. Almost double the price for a slower lens? This is getting ridiculous. Maybe the tactic is to beat users’ expectations until they pay anything and give thanks. All others will leave. See, I’ve already given up on any hope of smaller lenses like Fuji and Samsung.
mict
5 months ago |Sony has 18-55 for 100 usd from ebay which has OSS. We are talking about 1k lens and not about kits.
My zeiss 24-70 is 10 sharper than my SAM 28-85. I am sure new zeiss will be sharp wide open, Good allinone lens for small budget.
pjpo
5 months ago |Just because the Fuji is sold with a body doesn’t make it a cheap (price and quality) lens. Metal construction, sharper than their 18mm f/2, and not exactly cheap at $699. I have 2 bodies, the E 18-55, and 16, and 24, and 30, and la-ea2, and cz2470, and 85, and beer can. It’s not that I’m trolling and unreasonable. I keep reading that either 1) if it has a blue label, it’s worth whatever price they ask and 2) faster, smaller lenses are “impossible” with an APS-C even when competitors are doing exactly that. No f/1.4, no fast zooms, only one pancake.
The la-ea2 seems to be the most under-appreciated piece that makes the kit fully viable as a modular system, so let me sing its praise for a second. Having true, fast PDAF is refreshing when it is needed and allows a NEX to fully serve as a space saving backup camera for pros or a convertible, flexible system for in betweeners like me. Without that singular piece, I’d be with an E-M5 or X-E1. The larger size with A lenses is more impressive to a client for paid work, but walk around lenses are more manageable for the rest of the time.
My hope is that Tamron makes an E version of their 17-50 VC, and Sigma does an E of their 30 1.4. Gosh, those should cost $1300/ea.
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |Are you comparing a 3x zoom lens to a 5x which is only 1/3 slower? Also, it’s a Zeiss.
mav
5 months ago |sony E is not only nex still cameras.. This is also a huge video tree – vg.. ea.. fs.. F.. series.. 16-50 2.8 would be a perfect standard and universal zoom for them.
mict
5 months ago |Buy one with A mount. If you dont care about size then adapter wont be a problem
mav
5 months ago |I know that. But adapter – additional costs and limitations. I read a lot of informations, and get only bad news, like AF working only on 3.5 or slower, using AF and iris control at the same time is impossible.
Still native glass is more more more more usable than any adapter. All works perfect. Still – what’s the point of making so many body’s and cameras and only few lenses, when all sense of using this product is exactly changing lenses? E lenses for now: very slow and still expensive.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |“I read a lot of informations, and get only bad news, like AF working only on 3.5 or slower, using AF and iris control at the same time is impossible.”
You mean with the LA-EA2 adapter? Wrong and wrong. Where did you read this “bad news”?
mav
5 months ago |check this: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?281101-A-warning-about-the-LA-EA2-adapter-with-FS100
i’m talking about video mode of course, and FS100 camera.
The Lotus Eater
5 months ago |I believe that is a limitation of SLT cameras with PDAF in general, not just the adapter.
mav
5 months ago |What a difference? I can’t use it like normal E lens as I said before.
This guy post a topic about FS100 camcorder. I don’t care about other SLT
ingo
5 months ago |+1 or 18/20-50 to save some weight.
Andyr
5 months ago |Of all the options they could have gone for, this is probably the least exciting… If there’s no OSS, it’s going to be an expensive good weather lens.
Hope the build quality’s better than the a-mount version!
Tom
5 months ago |Here is a dream….
The above Zeiss PLUS a 70-200 G lens for the E-Mount.
I currently have the SAL2470Z and SAL70200G with the adapter for my NEX-7. They are so heavy I had to get a grip extension. I got used to not shooting with OSS and have to say, an e-mount version of either/both w/o OSS sounds appealing.
Then again, the lenses I have would be NEX-9 ready… so why upgrade?
While dreaming, it would be amazing to have an E to A adapter that had stabilization. I know, I know, just a dream…
pjpo
5 months ago |Great idea! LA-EA4 full frame adapter with stabilization! I would buy one. As it stands, Sigma 70-200 OS is the only way to get a stabilized fast tele on a NEX.
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |How could be an IS system inside an adapter?!
If that was even possible, I’d buy it.
derek
5 months ago |I emailed Sony to work on E-mount 16-105mm f4.0 (constant f4) for everyday general walk around lens and only then I will be interested in fast zooms otherwise bring it on the prime lenses at f1.8 and below! …..like the 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8, 24mm f1.8 CZ and future 85mm f1.8.
I would even consider E-mount 16-50mm at f2.8
Here is the link of the current A mount lens 16-105 mm http://store.sony.ca/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=100803&storeId=20153&langId=200&productId=8198552921665233510
derek
5 months ago |http://store.sony.ca/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=100803&storeId=20153&langId=200&productId=8198552921665233510
derek
5 months ago |Maybe 16-105 f4 is too much to ask so I would like to change it to 16-80 f4
alphabart
5 months ago |Quote: The above Zeiss PLUS a 70-200 G lens for the E-Mount
What’s wrong with the E 55-210? I’d rather have a 300mm F/4 e-mount
Tom
5 months ago |The SEL55210 is an F4.5-6.3. The current amount 70200G is a constant f/2.8. If they could transfer that into a 70200G emount that is lighter it would be amazing. Should be possible seeing as how the amount is for FF and emounts are currently aps-c based.
Warning, personal opinion: I also don’t think the SEL55210 is nearly as sharp as the SAL70200G. Thus why I carry around the 20LBS (exaggeration) SAL70200G.
I know there is a trade off with emount lenses vs amount, but I think Sony now has enough adoption of NEX to kick up the lens quality.
jeff
5 months ago |How much will that weight
The A-mount one is 445 gram, too heavy
300 gram is most I will take
Little Monster
5 months ago |seems too pricey for what it is. why not make a G zoom like the fuji kit lens($699)? 17/18-55 2.8-4 OSS would be great. 16-80 f3.5-4.5 is good as well if it has OSS and not Zeiss = over $1000!
AG
5 months ago |If this a quality lens, it would be a step in the right direction for NEX. The current 16-105mm DT is a fine walk around lens that is priced competitively. Something equivalent to that would be great for E-mount. I would like to see a 16-50 f/2.8 as a reference lens.
b
5 months ago |I love my 16-80mm CZ for the A-mount, minus the fact I switched over to the NEX system recently. Adding the adapter is a bit annoying, so I’m all for it should it come out for the E-mount, with OSS however.
emountZoomsNeedOSS
5 months ago |Please – not another Zeiss lens for NEX without OSS … at least not on a zoom.
I always loved the SAL1680Z on my A580 and when I switched to NEX-7 used it a lot in the last months with the LA-EA2 … and thought a lot about selling it. One of the beauties of the lens is it’s versatility with the 16-80 range with decent sharpness and still wide enough apertures for almost anything where you wouldn’t prefer primes anyway (own the SEL50F18 and SEL24F18Z for that and in a very practical ) – however, already on the SEL24F18Z in low light settings OSS would be very welcome and it’s in my opinion only acceptable as it’s a wide angle lens. With much slower zoom up to 80 mm (or 120mm factoring in the crop factor), it will be only usable in ideal light settings or with a tripod – and the latter contradicts the biggest advantages of the compact NEX system.
If they add OSS, I will almost certainly buy it. Otherwise I might even consider the SEL1650PZ (even though reports claim poor performance on NEX-7) or wait until something better gets announced.
For those wishing for a constant f/2.8 zoom: Forget it; will not happen – would require a completely different design closer to the great but heavy FF SAL2470Z. Probably f/4 as with the SEL1080, but that’s no Zeiss lens.
If you don’t care for compactness and size – get an adapter and one of the beautiful existing lenses or forget about the NEX system altogether.
DtEW
5 months ago |Something this slow and this long without OSS just isn’t appealing to me, no matter what the quality (and it has to be damn high given the normal FL and high price). It’s a tripod-only or perfect-light-only lens. I’m sure it has a use somewhere by somebody… but my wallet ain’t itching for this one.
Thurin
5 months ago |I’m a m43 user and have been eyeing nex since a ‘fast G standard zoom’ has been put in the timeline. Now I know I won’t switch, as there simly is no alternative to Pana 12-35 f2.8 in this system. Pity.
Michele
5 months ago |Well, nice to see this news, but I’m really looking forward for rumors and rumors about the new 70/400 GII for A mount…. Please…
RA
5 months ago |The A-mount 16-80mm Zeiss gives nice performance but the build quality is quite mediocre and not durable. I hope the E-mount version would be better.
Robert Bell
5 months ago |I’m surprised how many people are saying they want it to be f2.8. Do you know how big that lens would be?
DtEW
5 months ago |I think people just aren’t spelling out the entire thought and are just sharing the most glaring dissatisfaction.
They may not care that it goes to 80mm, but would want a constant f/2.8 normal zoom, perhaps 16-50mm or 18-55mm. Those would still be large, but the general utility of the faster lens (esp. at the portrait end) makes up for it.
Neo NiGHTS ®
5 months ago |I can bet that if the post was ‘Sony is going to release a 16-50mm F2.8 for e-mount!’ there would be people complaining “Oh not! That’s going to be too big! What’s the point of releasing a big lens for Nex which is supposed to be small and pocketable? Please, Sony, release more pancakes!’
And you know the rest….. :p
DtEW
5 months ago |Actually, the front element of a constant f/2.8 16-50mm shouldn’t be that much different in size from that of a f/3.5-4.5 16-80mm. The entry pupil of both should be ~17.8mm at the long end. The front element is generally what determines the overall diameter of a retrofocus lens.
Mark
5 months ago |You learn to understand that there are lots of trolls and misinformed people on the comments. Just wait for the person with a bit of common sense to chime in and ignore the rest.
Sean Lancaster
5 months ago |I’d love a high quality f/2.8 zoom. But I don’t need it to be 16-80 . . . just give me 18 – 40/2.8 . . . or even 24 – 40 to keep it smaller. A slow zoom is of little use to me unless I want to shoot using a flash and I won’t do that.
Martin
5 months ago |is this Zeiss zoom the “mid-magnification zoom” from the lens roadmap for 2013?
Klaus
5 months ago |I’m also disappointed.
I want a fast standard zoom. Something like 16-50/2.8 or at least 2.8-4 with OSS.
Fuji can do it. Their lens is neither too big nor too expensive. There is no reason why Sony couldn’t do it as well.
mav
5 months ago |+1
Robert Bell
5 months ago |I guess its what your definition of not to big is in’t it. I think the fuji with the 18-55 is to big.
Sahaja
5 months ago |The Fuji camera is bigger so the lens may seem relatively small. The same lens on a NEX would seem bigger.
Almazar80
5 months ago |Out of curiosity, would people prefer:
a) 16-50mm f2.8-4 OR
b) 16-85mm f3.5-4.5
Assuming they are the same size, relatively speaking, and with OSS?
DtEW
5 months ago |A 16-50mm f/2.8-4 (max entry pupil = 12.5mm) should be SMALLER than than either Fuji’s 18-55 f/2.8-4 (max entry pupil = 13.8mm), not to mention this rumored 16-80 f/3.5-4.5 (max entry pupil = 17.8mm). A 16-50mm f/2.8 (max entry pupil = 17.9mm) should be around the SAME diameter as this rumored 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5.
Almazar80
5 months ago |Thanks for the explanation, but which lens would you rather have?
DtEW
5 months ago |Oh, I’d much rather have the 16-50mm f/2.8. Neither your listed 16-50mm f/2.8-4 nor the 16-85(80?)mm f/3.5-4.5 interests me much, even with OSS.
These are all considered one-lens solutions either when you can only bring one lens, or you don’t have enough time to swap primes. As such, your variable-aperture versions are all too close to existing kit lenses to make much of a difference.
I mean, my opinion might change if it turns out that either of these lenses gives me eye-gasmic results… but even in that circumstance it would be a tough sell because they don’t do anything MORE for me. They just do it better.
OTOH, a 16-50 f/2.8 is basically a lens you keep on your camera as your primary lens.
ingo
5 months ago |+1 or even 18-50 f2.8
B
5 months ago |16-85mm hands down. I want the extra reach more than the slight difference in F stop.
Joe
4 months ago |B)
Image quality and OSS please
Alien
5 months ago |Need a decent macro 60 or 100mm for our underwater small critter shots. So far behind Olympus, etc
davidlam
5 months ago |With EVF/LCD screen, f/2.8 or f/3.5 would not make too much of a difference if it can be used wide-open.
It would be better if it can keep the aperture@f/4 all thru the zoom range as I use manual flashes from time to time.
OSS is needed unless NEX sensor improves the SNR by 2 more stop, a clean ISO6400 for low light shooting.
If it weight less than 500g and can keep using the same 49mm filter size, it would be great.
ihuangyu
5 months ago |Good news. Now I can put my plan of buying a 18-200 on hold…
gisolury
5 months ago |If they don’t offer OSS, may be I just use 1680 + LA-EA2
Foxx
5 months ago |What is needed is a 24-105mm F4 FF!!
Foxx
5 months ago |new design!!!
ArtoS
5 months ago |Yes, if you mean SAL 24-105mm f/4.0!
andy
5 months ago |16-80 f3.3 with OSS e-mount ,please I do not care size ,weight. Do not ask me to go in A mount ,they do not have OSS . Or maybe sony should think to give us la-ea4 adapter with stabilization . Make it ,and I get straight away .
Just make it good for videography.
Mick
5 months ago |Re:”Do not ask me to go in A mount ,they do not have OSS”
Ever hear of Sigma? http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/os-lenses
Slingers
5 months ago |I’ve been waiting for the standard G zoom from the roadmap and if this lens is sharp it may be what I’m after. But was hoping for something like a 24-45 f2.8.
no logo
5 months ago |24-45 f2.8. it is too narrow . E- mount is crop mode need something like 16-80 but f2.8 or f3.5 at least .
Marsh
4 months ago |I’m hoping they can make it more narrow than the alpha mount 16-80. It’s about 4-6mm too wide to fit into a Nauticam NEX port with zoom gear. Otherwise, it would be a fantastic versatile lens underwater. Since it’s most likely using the same optics as the Alpha, making it thinner doesn’t appear too probable. Perhaps they can shave it down with the E-mount wire focus system and lack of a aperture collar?
Make it skinny Sony!
Jack
3 months ago |Is there any current information regarding a release date?