Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

3 … 5 6 end

Archive 2017 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

rsrsrs
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

virtualrain wrote:
Edit: not to start a brand war, but doesn't Fuji offer a nice sensor with similar DR with a very nice 16-55 (24-85) lens that is almost ideal here?

Yes, had it once, its very good.
But the first questions of my customers to my A7: "so small, is it really a full frame camera?"
I know its stupid², but crop sound to them like crap.

Sep 13, 2017 at 03:30 AM

Alaarx
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

I think people are starting to bark up the wrong tree here. Im not looking for a decent compact zoom on a decent sensor such as the Fuji. Those are a dime a dozen.

I want to throw my money at an apochromatic, flat field, stunning zoom and match it to an incredible sensor such as found in the D850 or A7RII. I will pay over 2k for the privilege and it can be 35-70 and F4.5 if need be.

This lens does not exist.

Sep 13, 2017 at 03:36 AM

dgpfotografia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

virtualrain wrote:
Do you guys wanting a small fast zoom really need full frame? Maybe what you really want is a small sensor with better dynamic range and enough pixels to support your printing needs. Perhaps you don't need the large image circle?

Edit: not to start a brand war, but doesn't Fuji offer a nice sensor with similar DR with a very nice 16-55 (24-85) lens that is almost ideal here?

I don't think wanting a small zoom, like f4 and a Full Frame is contradictory. With independence of the lens, at same technology, a Full Frame sensor will have always lower noise and better DR than its DX equivalent.

I shoot mainly landscape, around f8. I would bought the 24-70f4 over the 2.8 GM if the f4 was not so problematic to find a decent one, and save the money for some primes... I would really love a 24-105f4 from Sony, G lens, that has the same quality than the GM at f5.6 and f8... that will be more versatile to me than the 24-70GM. Add the 100-400 GM and the 12-24f4, and I have really neat kit for the 99.9% of my photographs. (for the 0.1% with the loxia 50mm + a macro lens I will be covered, and maybe a fast wide for astro... )

Sep 13, 2017 at 04:08 AM

Charlie N
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Alaarx wrote:
I think people are starting to bark up the wrong tree here. Im not looking for a decent compact zoom on a decent sensor such as the Fuji. Those are a dime a dozen.

I want to throw my money at an apochromatic, flat field, stunning zoom and match it to an incredible sensor such as found in the D850 or A7RII. I will pay over 2k for the privilege and it can be 35-70 and F4.5 if need be.

This lens does not exist.

As others have mentioned, have you tried the contax 35-70?

Extremely competent through its range.

Sep 13, 2017 at 04:37 AM

Alaarx
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Charlie N wrote:
As others have mentioned, have you tried the contax 35-70?

Extremely competent through its range.

I actually borrowed one for a couple of weeks. Good to excellent throughout the range, low CA, easy to flare (although mine didn't come with a hood) and pretty punchy. Probably about as sharp as the FE 24-70/4. A long way away from world class optics like the Loxia 21 or Canon 35L II however.

Sep 13, 2017 at 05:16 AM

genji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

ytwong wrote:
Maybe there is a market for Loxia 35-70/3.4

28-70 would be better
24-70 with same quality like the Contax 35-70/3.4 would be fantastic.

I'm a happy owner of the Contax 35-70/3.4 lens.

Although my preference is for the 28-45/2.8 that David suggested, I accept that it would be a niche lens compared to a Loxia 35-70/3.4. With one proviso -- any zoom must have separate zoom and focusing rings. I would never buy a push-pull zoom, no matter how appealing its other qualities.

Sep 13, 2017 at 05:35 AM

Alaarx
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

I would prefer 28-70 is I had to be specific

Don't need F3.4 though, what a speed demon!

Sep 13, 2017 at 05:46 AM

genji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Alaarx wrote:
I would prefer 28-70 is I had to be specific

Don't need F3.4 though, what a speed demon!

OK, in order of preference:
1. 28-45/2.8
2. 28-70/4
3. 35-70/3.4

Sep 13, 2017 at 06:25 AM

SoundHound
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Many modern lens designers favor a larger image circle for less vignetting and edge fuzzies (larger elements that are not used at the extreme edges). This makes for a bigger objective. Note the use of 82mm instead of 77mm filters on, popular, newer 24-70 zooms.

The OP's desires tend to favor older, smaller designs which might not have the IQ he desires (EX: legacy Nikkor 43-86 F3.5) He envisions a boutique zoom lens that would cost too much to make and sell in small qualities. Likely way over the $2K he is (but others are not) willing to pay.

Sep 13, 2017 at 06:46 AM

chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Nah, from 24-70 there are so many great primes that I really don't need a slow zoom, especially for my landscape photography. I just can't see myself paying big bucks for a slow zoom.

Sep 13, 2017 at 07:00 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Just FYI sigmas 24-35 F 2 is not slow but it is big,heavy and you need a adapter but it will not disappoint. It's very good

Sonys 24-70 F4 if you can find a good copy which I never was able too is nice and small, light and not very expensive. But your going to play the lottery finding a good copy of one but at F8 it should be nice for landscape work.

Just not a lot of choices here . The GM 24-70 is outstanding but again big, heavy and not exactly hot dog money.

Sep 13, 2017 at 07:27 AM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Yeah, I'd love a high IQ slow zoom... for family outings. When you're going to a theme park, or the beach, or wherever, you don't need a shallow depth of field (in fact, context of the surroundings is important to include) and generally, light is ample. So, wasting money, size, and weight on a fast or even moderate-speed lens is pointless.

I'm actually considering the 24-240 for these purposes but it's MUCH heavier than I'd want. The upside is that the 42 MP of the α7RII, when downsized to what a normal family photo ends up being, is more than enough to provide sharp, crisp details.

For me, the other option is to pick up a slow normal zoom like the 24-70 f/4 and pair it with my 70-300 but this too, is heavier than I'd like.

A 28-140 f/4.5-5.6 (or even constant f/5.6) would be great! Especially if the size/weight could be kept to a minimum while also giving great IQ (for those shots where I actually do care about really good IQ). This plus a small flash and a 35/2 would be a great family kit and (theoretically) lightweight/small making it very convenient.

Sep 13, 2017 at 07:41 AM

WestTexas Sky
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Add me to the list of interested in this concept. As a landscape photographer who shoots full frame on the A7R, I want small lenses. The GM lenses are as big as a GM (maybe a Chrysler). I want small lenses under 500 grams.

Love the Loxia lenses and the Voigtlander wides. I would love a similar line of small zooms. Variable aperture is ok for me as I usually shoot at f/8 or f/11 anyway.

I also like the idea of a lens similar to the 16-50 kit lens for the crop sensor bodies.

I was not impressed enough with the 24-70/4 to pay the asking price. But that is the biggest in size I would find acceptable. Even the 16-35/4 is too front heavy on the gen 1 bodies.

Until they can make that I will make do with a few small primes.

Sep 13, 2017 at 08:06 AM

coase
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

I love the idea, but Sony understands that they probably couldn't charge big money for it and sell enough. So your only hope is for Zeiss to do it, because the Zeiss label tax, can help justify a pricey but slow and compact zoom. As for me, I know I'm not going to get the smaller even if less optically perfect FE lenses that I want for FF that don't cost too much.

Sep 13, 2017 at 09:31 AM

Matt Grum
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

The problem is one of marketing and economics. f/4 zooms have generally always been the cheaper alternative to f/2.8 zooms, so trying to market something slower than f/4 for more than the cost of an f/2.8 zoom would be very difficult, even if it was superb optically. Ultimately with photography (and consumer goods in general) something with a smaller market is going to cost more (even if each unit costs less to design/manufacture), so if it doesn't appeal to the mass market then it will not be affordable.

Sep 13, 2017 at 10:39 AM

mreynolds767
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Add me to the interested list.
Don't even need F4
F5.6 / F6.3, etc... is fast enough for the lens I am dreaming about.

Need faster, fine I bring a faster, heavier lens I already own. Just want something that can deliver the best IQ when weight and size is a factor. I have never understood the saving the best glass for only the fastest lens.
I think many owners will pay for quality not just speed.

Sep 13, 2017 at 10:49 AM

ytwong
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Probably about as sharp as the FE 24-70/4. A long way away from world class optics like the Loxia 21 or Canon 35L II however.
I don't have L21 or 35LII to compare with, but I can say adapter is very important.

I took a cheap adapter (but not the cheapest I can find on the web) to Tokyo, purchase the Contax there, I was not satisfied with the quality (focus mark was off, and weak corners). I had no idea what the problem was (both lens and adapter were new to me) so I had 2 choices, get a good adapter or return the lens. At the end I brought the best I could find in Japan, Rayqual and I'm really happy with that. Perfect infinity focus and sharp images.

The 35-70/3.4 basically replace the FE 55/1.8 when I travel.

Sep 13, 2017 at 11:08 AM

jmmaher
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

I would love a small, light f/4 zoom

Sep 13, 2017 at 11:34 AM

Justin Stone
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

The 24-70 GM does everything. But I can see the point of a 24-70 f5.6 for a nimble combatant.
Viramati wrote:
Going for a long hike in the Alps today and will take the 24-70GM as I find that with the right strap that the weight just isn't an issue (and I'm in my 60's and not as fit as I used to be).

Sep 13, 2017 at 04:38 PM

Chris_88
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · I would really love a stunning IQ, slow normal zoom.

Matt Grum wrote:
The problem is one of marketing and economics. f/4 zooms have generally always been the cheaper alternative to f/2.8 zooms, so trying to market something slower than f/4 for more than the cost of an f/2.8 zoom would be very difficult, even if it was superb optically. Ultimately with photography (and consumer goods in general) something with a smaller market is going to cost more (even if each unit costs less to design/manufacture), so if it doesn't appeal to the mass market then it will not be affordable.

Agreed with Matt. I also wonder about how a maker could market/sell a comparatively slow lens that is priced in the same category as the faster (24-70) 2.8 zoom, without a lot of criticism.

Point in case: the 135 2.8. Just look at all the negativity (way too expensive for 2.8 glass, even by Zeiss' standards) that surrounded the announcement of that lens, and we're talking about the Big Blue label, not everybody's favorite punching ball. Granted, the lens' performance has found it many(?) fans here on FM. However, my impression is the price has deterred many from getting one, despite very positive reviews by Fred, Guy and David.

On the other hand, of course, Zeiss has enjoyed plenty of success with highly corrected designs that balance speed and size (Loxia 21, 85 and the Batis 25, 85). It will be interesting to see whether that success will encourage them to revisit primes longer than 135mm and/or zooms again.

Edited on Sep 13, 2017 at 04:55 PM · View previous versions

Sep 13, 2017 at 04:54 PM

1 2 3 … 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 5 6 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.