wolfloid wrote:
The lens availability seems to be a disaster to me. Still no 24mm one whole year later. what are they playing at? Zeiss seems no better, duplicating the two focal lengths that are already available, and failing on the wide front, or even on the short tele demand.
Is it really because of the idiot decision to have a thick (1.6mm) sensor stack that they are unable to make a decent, small wide, and therefore won't? I've resisted an A7/r so far because of all the body problems, and now this ongoing dearth of decent small lenses makes it seem foolish to move away from Canon, especially in the light of Canon's rumoured 24mm pancake....Show more →
The sensor stack Sony uses isn't thick. It's pretty average. The M4/3 stack is thick, particularly in relation to sensor size.
I still think the mount is too narrow, which causes problems. There are reasons why the mounts of M4/3, Fuji X, NX, EOS-M, Nikon 1 and NEX are so large relative to their sensor size.
These Loxia lenses are starting to look a little suspect. Is it possible Zeiss threw in ZM optics to these shells, and they'll just use software to fix color shift and vignetting? I surely hope they didn't ignore smearing.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Five in a year was always very ambitious, but what I worried about then I worry about even more now. That the new lenses will just be slight modifications of their ZM line. Unfortunately these first two lenses look exactly like that. IMO, that isn't so bad for the 50 f/2 which was at least decent on the Sony cameras, but I have worries about the 35. The ZM 35 f/2 was quite weak at infinity on the Sony cameras. I hope they were able to rework so that it has at least decent performance. I had hopes that they would really re-engineer these with floating elements and APD glass, but so far that doesn't look like it going to happen. I'm not going to panic too much, however. The first lenses offered in the ZF line were the 50 and 85 planers, which were not major revisions from the C/Y mount lenses, and then later lenses were new designs/bigger modifications. I hope the same is true with the loxia lenses. I would like to see some newer designs and some bigger modifications....Show more →
Correct. I can't really see why someone would go for a new - maybe even more expensive - Loxia E-mount lens version if there are the very similar Zeiss M lens mount versions already out there. Personally, I would rather get a M mount lens as sort of investment for later than an E mount lens which only fits to Sony mirrorless cameras. I don't see any issue of using an adapter to mount M lenses on Sony cameras (that's what I am already currently doing). I am quite sure that the M mount will continue to exist as it is, but I am not so sure what will happen to the E mount in a few years from now....Sony might change the mount/format again.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Five in a year was always very ambitious, but what I worried about then I worry about even more now. That the new lenses will just be slight modifications of their ZM line. Unfortunately these first two lenses look exactly like that. IMO, that isn't so bad for the 50 f/2 which was at least decent on the Sony cameras, but I have worries about the 35. The ZM 35 f/2 was quite weak at infinity on the Sony cameras. I hope they were able to rework so that it has at least decent performance. I had hopes that they would really re-engineer these with floating elements and APD glass, but so far that doesn't look like it going to happen. I'm not going to panic too much, however. The first lenses offered in the ZF line were the 50 and 85 planers, which were not major revisions from the C/Y mount lenses, and then later lenses were new designs/bigger modifications. I hope the same is true with the loxia lenses. I would like to see some newer designs and some bigger modifications....Show more →
I would agree that 5 in a year was/is ambitious, but they were the ones that set the expectation - so if they deliver less, it's a (small) disappointment. If they deliver a quick re-make of other models, that could be a slightly bigger disappointment.
My main concern now is that nobody has even been whispering about anything wider than a 35mm (other than the 16-35/4 that we don't know much about yet). Hopefully, this has nothing to do with some inherent problem with developing high IQ glass for the FF e-mount (i.e. short flange distance or sensor stack thickness, etc).
I don't like speculating and prefer to just wait and see what is delivered, but frankly this method of "fake leaks" to "rumor" sites as a form of drumming up free publicity on forums is quite annoying. I'd rather we just received a dump of official details. Then again, (lecturing myself) I could just wait 2 more weeks and ignore the noise.
I enjoyed the A7r with 35/2.8 but returned them for 2 reasons related to the 'system': waiting to see (1) where the native lens lineup is after a year or two, and (2) the 'fixes' to the A7r (primarily inclusion of EFCS and OSPDAF).
I'm sure Sony realizes that a fantastic 24mm or wider and 85mm or longer would finally complete their coming out - hopefully within 6 months we have that.
douglasf13 wrote:
The sensor stack Sony uses isn't thick. It's pretty average. The M4/3 stack is thick, particularly in relation to sensor size.
I still think the mount is too narrow, which causes problems. There are reasons why the mounts of M4/3, Fuji X, NX, EOS-M, Nikon 1 and NEX are so large relative to their sensor size.
These Loxia lenses are starting to look a little suspect. Is it possible Zeiss threw in ZM optics to these shells, and they'll just use software to fix color shift and vignetting? I surely hope they didn't ignore smearing.
douglasf13 wrote:
The sensor stack Sony uses isn't thick. It's pretty average. The M4/3 stack is thick, particularly in relation to sensor size.
I still think the mount is too narrow, which causes problems. There are reasons why the mounts of M4/3, Fuji X, NX, EOS-M, Nikon 1 and NEX are so large relative to their sensor size.
These Loxia lenses are starting to look a little suspect. Is it possible Zeiss threw in ZM optics to these shells, and they'll just use software to fix color shift and vignetting? I surely hope they didn't ignore smearing.
Oh, don't say that...particularly the part about relying on software correction. In any case, with the 35, software correction alone would not fix the smearing problem with the ZM version of that lens. If they ignore smearing, that lens will be a complete failure imo, which would really hurt the system.
Yep, that's where I got my info. Sony's sensor stack doesn't appear to be overly thick, although that doesn't account for the various materials the different manufacturers use in their stacks.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Oh, don't say that...particularly the part about relying on software correction. In any case, with the 35, software correction alone would not fix the smearing problem with the ZM version of that lens. If they ignore smearing, that lens will be a complete failure imo, which would really hurt the system.
Here I've been thinking these new lenses were going to be re-housed ZF designs, but I never imagined they'd just re-house ZM designs. I surely hope they figured out the smearing. Worries me, though, that we're only seeing the 35 and 50. Zeiss may have deemed those ZM designs as acceptable on the A7.
douglasf13 wrote:
Yep, that's where I got my info. Sony's sensor stack doesn't appear to be overly thick, although that doesn't account for the various materials the different manufacturers use in their stacks.
Optical math/physics is way over my paygrade, but just looking at 3 examples of the ratio of sensor stack thickness to flange distance, the Sony is very different:
disclaimer: i'm pretty sure i copied down the details correctly, but not sure if there is any value in comparing the 'ratio' - just found it interesting and frankly one of the reasons I took a wait and see approach to adopting the FF e-mount. I would have been happy with just the 35/2.8 or 55/1.8 for the past year and waited patiently for other focal lengths, but my concern was whether or not high IQ wide angle glass could/would developed for this mount.
Part of my reason in ditching my D800 was that i loved the 14-24/2.8 except for it suffering from major focus shift and i was hoping that either a MF lens w/ EVF or mirrorless AF system would be better - but if the IQ isn't there, then it's not worth it.
ecarlino wrote:
Optical math/physics is way over my paygrade, but just looking at 3 examples of the ratio of sensor stack thickness to flange distance, the Sony is very different:
disclaimer: i'm pretty sure i copied down the details correctly, but not sure if there is any value in comparing the 'ratio' - just found it interesting and frankly one of the reasons I took a wait and see approach to adopting the FF e-mount. I would have been happy with just the 35/2.8 or 55/1.8 for the past year and waited patiently for other focal lengths, but my concern was whether or not high IQ wide angle glass could/would developed for this mount.
Part of my reason in ditching my D800 was that i loved the 14-24/2.8 except for it suffering from major focus shift and i was hoping that either a MF or mirrorless AF system would be better - but if the IQ isn't there, then it's not worth it. ...Show more →
I'm not saying that Sony has the thinnest stack. The very old 1Dsii, and the Leica cameras, have much thinner stacks. I'm just saying that the Sony stack isn't ridiculously thick. I guess I should have said a little thicker than average.
What Sony does have is a relatively small throat very close to the sensor compared to other mirrorless cameras, outside of Leica. m4/3's 4mm stack doesn't seem to be an issue, because their lenses are apparently so telecentric that it doesn't matter.
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm not saying that Sony has the thinnest stack. The very old 1Dsii, and the Leica cameras, have much thinner stacks. I'm just saying that the Sony stack isn't ridiculously thick. I guess I should have said a little thicker than average.
What Sony does have is a relatively small throat very close to the sensor compared to other mirrorless cameras, outside of Leica. m4/3's 4mm stack doesn't seem to be an issue, because their lenses are apparently so telecentric that it doesn't matter.
Have you tried your 14-24 on an A7R?
btw, i wasn't trying to contradict you - i agree relative to other systems its not outrageous.
i just found the ratio interesting wrt to corner smearing concerns, etc.
i think sony's rumored FF curved sensor could be their solution to the corner issue and short flange distances. it is all of these points that leave me in a holding pattern - very curious/hopeful, but waiting on the sidelines.
ecarlino wrote:
a few months ago, Lloyd Chambers was speculating Sony would release an RX2 with a 50MP (possibly curved) with a fixed lens.
it will be interesting.....
All speculation at this point, but I doubt that an immediate A7R successor comes with a curved sensor yet. It will rather be a version which fixes some of the seen A7R issues and comes with linear (non curved) higher resolution sensor. I am mentioning it here because such new camera might hopefully also found a resolution of getting small wide angle lenses better attached to the E mount what was discussed above in regard to sensor thickness etc.We will see!
retrofocus wrote:
Maybe we will know more in a few weeks in case Sony announces the A7X with 50MP FF which is rumored currently...
Maybe that 50MP camera turns out to be based on the larger sensor used in the 645Z?
I think the rumor leaves the door open for that possibility:
"But there seems to be a very good chance that Sony will introduce a “high resolution” camera (around 50 megapixel). I yet don’t know if this is an A or E-mount (A7x?) or whatever. But good sources just said it is coming at Photokina."
retrofocus wrote:
All speculation at this point, but I doubt that an immediate A7R successor comes with a curved sensor yet. It will rather be a version which fixes some of the seen A7R issues and comes with linear (non curved) higher resolution sensor. I am mentioning it here because such new camera might hopefully also found a resolution of getting small wide angle lenses better attached to the E mount what was discussed above in regard to sensor thickness etc.We will see!
Agree (on all points - especially that it's all just speculation at this point).
btw (according to Lloyd) - it's likely that a large-format curved sensor (whenever it is released) will be a fixed lens camera b/c designing various focal lengths, particularly zooms, is tricky to impossible (within reasonable constraints). He also speculated they could use the medium format 50MP they've sold to others but their agreement may restrict them to a fixed lens camera. So, when SAR is rumoring about a high MP camera, i start to wonder if this could be it......
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Maybe that 50MP camera turns out to be based on the larger sensor used in the 645Z?
I think the rumor leaves the door open for that possibility:
"But there seems to be a very good chance that Sony will introduce a “high resolution” camera (around 50 megapixel). I yet don’t know if this is an A or E-mount (A7x?) or whatever. But good sources just said it is coming at Photokina."
I would love to see this, but I think Sony is leading in the FF sensor technology so well at the moment that they don't need to play out such card yet and rather do a more marginal step first in regard to the A7 series and show off with curved sensor in the RX line with fixed lens. But who knows, mabe we will see a big surprise
It seems very unlikely to me that Sony would replace the A7R so soon (I say replace because resolution is the distinguishing feature of the A7R, the A7 is the low cost all rounder, the A7S is the extreme lowlight / video specialist, if the A7X is 50 megapixels then what is the A7R good for (unless the A7X is considerably more expensive).
The mention of 50 megapixels does seem to hint to me something about the 50 mp CMOS sensor that Sony has been selling to Hasselblad, Pentax and PhaseOne. It's only a 55mm diagonal so a reasonably compact fixed lens camera is a possibility...
Matt Grum wrote:
It seems very unlikely to me that Sony would replace the A7R so soon (I say replace because resolution is the distinguishing feature of the A7R, the A7 is the low cost all rounder, the A7S is the extreme lowlight / video specialist, if the A7X is 50 megapixels then what is the A7R good for (unless the A7X is considerably more expensive).
The mention of 50 megapixels does seem to hint to me something about the 50 mp CMOS sensor that Sony has been selling to Hasselblad, Pentax and PhaseOne. It's only a 55mm diagonal so a reasonably compact fixed lens camera is a possibility... ...Show more →
Agreed. I would be very surprised if they already announce an A7R successor now at Photokina (also agree that a 50 MP sensor based FF model would definitely dump the A7R) - next year, yes, more likely. On the other hand, Sony surely wants to stay ahead of the competition in the FF sensor technology...
In the camera world this quick of a refresh is unheard of... But Sony is a traditional consumer electronics company who are used to revamping their lines or tablets, phones, computers, etc every year. I am reminded to the time i unboxed my A7r and i said outloud "this smells like a laptop" . If anyone has every smelled a brand new (non apple) laptop their is a distinct consumer electronics smell to it. The A7r shared that smell. My canon bodies never had this.
That and the fact that they have been iterating the A7 body with the a7s makes me prepared to not be surprised if they come out and replace the A7r.
It would be unheard of by any classic camera company, but sony has other revenue streams.
retrofocus wrote:
Agreed. I would be very surprised if they already announce an A7R successor now at Photokina (also agree that a 50 MP sensor based FF model would definitely dump the A7R) - next year, yes, more likely. On the other hand, Sony surely wants to stay ahead of the competition in the FF sensor technology...
douglasf13 wrote:
The sensor stack Sony uses isn't thick. It's pretty average. The M4/3 stack is thick, particularly in relation to sensor size.
I still think the mount is too narrow, which causes problems. There are reasons why the mounts of M4/3, Fuji X, NX, EOS-M, Nikon 1 and NEX are so large relative to their sensor size.
These Loxia lenses are starting to look a little suspect. Is it possible Zeiss threw in ZM optics to these shells, and they'll just use software to fix color shift and vignetting? I surely hope they didn't ignore smearing.
I think it is the combination of the sensor-topping thickness and the short register distance which doesn't work. For a DSLR this would probably be fine, but when you move stuff this close to the sensor, you really need the thinner filters.
