This topic is in the 2013 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2013Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
p.68 #1Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?
Oct 15, 2013 at 10:54 AM
p.68 #2Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jman13 wrote:
That's really not worth the small increase in image quality for going to full frame, especially since the fast lenses will not get me any extra depth of field or light advantage in low light (since the Fuji's are faster).
Don't you want to find out how significant that increase in IQ actually is before you make decisions on the relative merits of your Fuji vs. the new Sony, since it's possible the Sony gives a really big increase in IQ?
That's really not worth the small increase in image quality for going to full frame, especially since the fast lenses will not get me any extra depth of field or light advantage in low light (since the Fuji's are faster).
Don't you want to find out how significant that increase in IQ actually is before you make decisions on the relative merits of your Fuji vs. the new Sony, since it's possible the Sony gives a really big increase in IQ?
Oct 15, 2013 at 10:58 AM
p.68 #3Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I believe they are Sony-produced lenses.
Remember, if they were new Zeiss-produced lenses, they'd have funny names referring to some bird genus. :-)
Remember, if they were new Zeiss-produced lenses, they'd have funny names referring to some bird genus. :-)
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:04 AM
p.68 #4Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jeff Kott wrote:
Don't you want to find out how significant that increase in IQ actually is before you make decisions on the relative merits of your Fuji vs. the new Sony, since it's possible the Sony gives a really big increase in IQ?
Yes and no.
My comment was in relation to the point that I honestly believe that the majority of current systems have reached a point where image quality is sufficient and nearly indistinguishable for 98% of what I shoot. Will a 36MP FF sensor with a great lens produce files with far greater detail and potentially better tonal gradation than my 16MP Fuji? Yup. Will I ever see that difference based on the output I typically produce? Not likely.
I'm not saying that other people may not have a use for significantly higher resolution bodies and such, but I very rarely print larger than 24" wide. I think even in a 30" print at typical viewing distances, the distinction between a D800 with the best glass and the OM-D E-M5 is pretty minimal. Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that? Given the VAST majority of my prints are in the 12x18" range, with only a handful here and there at 16x20, 20x30, etc, and the need for significantly better image quality than what I get out of my current cams is pretty minimal. Of course, every photographer is different, and for those who really push the limits of their cameras and/or print very large, this'll be a very nice step up.
With all that said, I am contemplating picking one up (the A7...the extra resolution of the A7r would just be wasted with me and would simply take up more room on my hard drive) with the 24-70/4 if I can acquire the funds.
Jman13 wrote
That's really not worth the small increase in image quality for going to full frame, especially since the fast lenses will not get me any extra depth of field or light advantage in low light (since the Fuji's are faster).Yes and no.
My comment was in relation to the point that I honestly believe that the majority of current systems have reached a point where image quality is sufficient and nearly indistinguishable for 98% of what I shoot. Will a 36MP FF sensor with a great lens produce files with far greater detail and potentially better tonal gradation than my 16MP Fuji? Yup. Will I ever see that difference based on the output I typically produce? Not likely. I'm not saying that other people may not have a use for significantly higher resolution bodies and such, but I very rarely print larger than 24" wide. I think even in a 30" print at typical viewing distances, the distinction between a D800 with the best glass and the OM-D E-M5 is pretty minimal. Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that? Given the VAST majority of my prints are in the 12x18" range, with only a handful here and there at 16x20, 20x30, etc, and the need for significantly better image quality than what I get out of my current cams is pretty minimal. Of course, every photographer is different, and for those who really push the limits of their cameras and/or print very large, this'll be a very nice step up.
With all that said, I am contemplating picking one up (the A7...the extra resolution of the A7r would just be wasted with me and would simply take up more room on my hard drive) with the 24-70/4 if I can acquire the funds.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:09 AM
p.68 #5Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
carstenw wrote:
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?
ZF, ZE, ZS, ZM (except for 2, expensive exceptions) and Touits are built by Cosina in Japan, and ZA are built by Sony in Japan.
The Zeiss lenses actually built by Zeiss in Germany, like the Otis, cine lenses, and a couple of ZMs, are much more expensive. Leica-like pricing, on those.
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?
ZF, ZE, ZS, ZM (except for 2, expensive exceptions) and Touits are built by Cosina in Japan, and ZA are built by Sony in Japan.
The Zeiss lenses actually built by Zeiss in Germany, like the Otis, cine lenses, and a couple of ZMs, are much more expensive. Leica-like pricing, on those.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:10 AM
p.68 #6Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Taylor Sherman wrote:
I believe they are Sony-produced lenses.
Remember, if they were new Zeiss-produced lenses, they'd have funny names referring to some bird genus. :-)
It also looks like Sony hasn't knocked "Carl" off yet.
It's nice to see that someone still sees some historical relevance to using his name.
http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/SonyA7r35f2_8.jpg
I believe they are Sony-produced lenses.
Remember, if they were new Zeiss-produced lenses, they'd have funny names referring to some bird genus. :-)
It also looks like Sony hasn't knocked "Carl" off yet.
It's nice to see that someone still sees some historical relevance to using his name.http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5540407/SonyA7r35f2_8.jpg
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:12 AM
p.68 #7Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jman13 wrote:
With all that said, I am contemplating picking one up (the A7...the extra resolution of the A7r would just be wasted with me and would simply take up more room on my hard drive) with the 24-70/4 if I can acquire the funds.
Wow, after all this time, it turns out that you do have an open mind.
With all that said, I am contemplating picking one up (the A7...the extra resolution of the A7r would just be wasted with me and would simply take up more room on my hard drive) with the 24-70/4 if I can acquire the funds.
Wow, after all this time, it turns out that you do have an open mind.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:13 AM
p.68 #8Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
douglasf13 wrote:
ZF, ZE, ZS, ZM (except for 2, expensive exceptions) and Touits are built by Cosina in Japan, and ZA are built by Sony in Japan.
The Zeiss lenses actually built by Zeiss in Germany, like the Otis, cine lenses, and a couple of ZMs, are much more expensive. Leica-like pricing, on those.
I believe someone said "otus" is built in Japan.
carstenw wrote
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?The Zeiss lenses actually built by Zeiss in Germany, like the Otis, cine lenses, and a couple of ZMs, are much more expensive. Leica-like pricing, on those.
I believe someone said "otus" is built in Japan.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:13 AM
p.68 #9Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
I wonder how long it will be before the A9 takes shape with 54 megpixs.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Emacs
Offline
Activity
[X]
Details
p.68 #10Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
carstenw wrote:
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?
I BET they are not only built, but designed too by Sony, just like overpriced crap 24/1.8
update: not just overpriced – OVERPRICED. Costs 4-5 times more than Canon 22/2: significantly worse performance, much higher weight and size.
Edited on Oct 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM · View previous versions
Are these lenses actually being built by Zeiss, or are they built by Sony, as previously? Who sets the pricing?
I BET they are not only built, but designed too by Sony, just like overpriced crap 24/1.8
update: not just overpriced – OVERPRICED. Costs 4-5 times more than Canon 22/2: significantly worse performance, much higher weight and size.
Edited on Oct 15, 2013 at 11:22 AM · View previous versions
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:20 AM
p.68 #11Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jman13 wrote:
Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that?
Besides pretty much everyone who goes to a gallery or museum, I don't know. Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!
Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that?
Besides pretty much everyone who goes to a gallery or museum, I don't know.
Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!Oct 15, 2013 at 11:21 AM
p.68 #12Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jeff Kott wrote:
Wow, after all this time, it turns out that you do have an open mind.
I'm very opinionated, but I do have an open mind...I've never had brand loyalty (I don't see a point in it). I shot Canon for 8 years, ditched it for Micro 4/3, first with Olympus cameras, then Panasonic cameras, now a mix of both. I added Fuji earlier this year and have gotten rid of several of my redundant m4/3 lenses to build a nice Fuji kit. If Sony offers a great product at a price that makes sense, I'm on board. Right now, the 55/1.8 looks insanely overpriced to me, even if it performs well...I just can't justify that kind of money on a relatively slow normal, but the rest of the system looks decent. The 24-70 plus adapted manual focus lenses (of which I've already got a fair few) will work well, especially because I know how well Sony's focus peaking works and I know how good the EVF is (since it's rumored to be the same one in the Oly E-M1).
I don't think I could bring myself to go ALL to the FF E-mount because the size just will be too much once you start going into the telephoto range. My Fuji 55-200 is about as large as I ever want to go again for a native lens for regular use. I hated lugging around my FF Canon kit to the point where it started ruining the fun of photography.
Edited on Oct 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM · View previous versions
Jman13 wrote
With all that said, I am contemplating picking one up (the A7...the extra resolution of the A7r would just be wasted with me and would simply take up more room on my hard drive) with the 24-70/4 if I can acquire the funds.I'm very opinionated, but I do have an open mind...I've never had brand loyalty (I don't see a point in it). I shot Canon for 8 years, ditched it for Micro 4/3, first with Olympus cameras, then Panasonic cameras, now a mix of both. I added Fuji earlier this year and have gotten rid of several of my redundant m4/3 lenses to build a nice Fuji kit. If Sony offers a great product at a price that makes sense, I'm on board. Right now, the 55/1.8 looks insanely overpriced to me, even if it performs well...I just can't justify that kind of money on a relatively slow normal, but the rest of the system looks decent. The 24-70 plus adapted manual focus lenses (of which I've already got a fair few) will work well, especially because I know how well Sony's focus peaking works and I know how good the EVF is (since it's rumored to be the same one in the Oly E-M1).
I don't think I could bring myself to go ALL to the FF E-mount because the size just will be too much once you start going into the telephoto range. My Fuji 55-200 is about as large as I ever want to go again for a native lens for regular use. I hated lugging around my FF Canon kit to the point where it started ruining the fun of photography.
Edited on Oct 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM · View previous versions
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:23 AM
p.68 #13Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Besides pretty much everyone who goes to a gallery or museum, I don't know. Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!
Yes, but would they really see major issues with a 16 megapixel image at 30"? I know when I view those up close they look just fine. Unless you are seeing the two with identical images side by side, you won't really notice much. From my experience, 16MP tops out around 30". I have a 40" print from my 1Ds II and that's a step too far...it starts to look a little mushy up close.
Jman13 wrote
Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that? Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!Yes, but would they really see major issues with a 16 megapixel image at 30"? I know when I view those up close they look just fine. Unless you are seeing the two with identical images side by side, you won't really notice much. From my experience, 16MP tops out around 30". I have a 40" print from my 1Ds II and that's a step too far...it starts to look a little mushy up close.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:25 AM
p.68 #14Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
mogul wrote:
I wonder how long it will be before the A9 takes shape with 54 megpixs.
Rumor is, it's coming sooner than later- within the year, certainly in time for Photokina next year.
I wonder how long it will be before the A9 takes shape with 54 megpixs.
Rumor is, it's coming sooner than later- within the year, certainly in time for Photokina next year.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:26 AM
p.68 #15Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Jman13 wrote:
Besides pretty much everyone who goes to a gallery or museum, I don't know. Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!Yes, but would they really see major issues with a 16 megapixel image at 30"? I know when I view those up close they look just fine. Unless you are seeing the two with identical images side by side, you won't really notice much. From my experience, 16MP tops out around 30". I have a 40" print from my 1Ds II and that's a step too far...it starts to look a little mushy up close.
I'm sure it would depend on subject matter, printing and so on. A well executed portrait, maybe not. A highly detailed landscape. Probably. If one is printing 30"'s often, it would certainly make sense to have more than 16MP's so their is less risk of pushing the image further than it really can go imo. For high end work, I would probably feel better at less than 24"'s or so on the long end if restricted to small format 16MP. Everyone has their own quality requirements though and, like mentioned, size is also extremely subject dependent in my experience.
Tariq Gibran wrote
Jman13 wrote
Go up close and examine the print from 6" away? Yeah, you'll see differences for sure. But who does that? Frankly, I have never seen anyone not do that, whether a painting, photograph or 3d work. I'm sure there must be non art lovers somewhere who do it though...like my dad who can "do" the Guggenheim in 5 minutes flat!I'm sure it would depend on subject matter, printing and so on. A well executed portrait, maybe not. A highly detailed landscape. Probably. If one is printing 30"'s often, it would certainly make sense to have more than 16MP's so their is less risk of pushing the image further than it really can go imo. For high end work, I would probably feel better at less than 24"'s or so on the long end if restricted to small format 16MP. Everyone has their own quality requirements though and, like mentioned, size is also extremely subject dependent in my experience.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:37 AM
p.68 #16Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
2400 Euros for the 7r
That is the same price as the Canon 5D MkIII.... So, no aggressive pricing for Europeans. And a lot of faith to take that leap as well... Think I will skip this turn.
That is the same price as the Canon 5D MkIII.... So, no aggressive pricing for Europeans. And a lot of faith to take that leap as well... Think I will skip this turn.Oct 15, 2013 at 11:39 AM
p.68 #17Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
ceder wrote:
2400 Euros for the 7r That is the same price as the Canon 5D MkIII.... So, no aggressive pricing for Europeans. And a lot of faith to take that leap as well... Think I will skip this turn.
But the better direct comparison to a 5D MkIII would be the cheaper 7 with 24MP's, not the 36MP 7r.
2400 Euros for the 7r
That is the same price as the Canon 5D MkIII.... So, no aggressive pricing for Europeans. And a lot of faith to take that leap as well... Think I will skip this turn.But the better direct comparison to a 5D MkIII would be the cheaper 7 with 24MP's, not the 36MP 7r.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM
p.68 #18Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
Based on previous Sony releases, what's the time typically between announcement and availability? Strongly considering the 7 by itself for use with my adapted lenses, then I'll probably pick up the 24-70 if I like the camera....if I do, I'll probably be going barebones with m4/3, which I'll stick to for macro work and long and light telephoto work.
Oct 15, 2013 at 11:59 AM
p.68 #20Our prayers have been answered: Nex-FF in 2 months
So, maybe great prices in Japan and the US, not in Europe for some strange reason...
Oct 15, 2013 at 12:00 PM