Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       end
  

Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options

  
 
dehowie
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


I think the original photo is an excellent point that yes Sony have come a lng way...but also how far behind they still are.
No adaptor can give the native performance by native glass and that is Sonyís biggest stumbling block.
Lenses make great images, cameras come and go.



Aug 06, 2019 at 06:49 PM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


dehowie wrote:
I think the original photo is an excellent point that yes Sony have come a lng way...but also how far behind they still are.
No adaptor can give the native performance by native glass and that is Sonyís biggest stumbling block.
Lenses make great images, cameras come and go.


What is missing for you from the current native Sony mount glass? I'd personally like a compact 300 f4 lens...but overall I'm pretty happy with the native lens choices.



Aug 06, 2019 at 07:03 PM
vdo1
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


chez wrote:
What is missing for you from the current native Sony mount glass? I'd personally like a compact 300 f4 lens...but overall I'm pretty happy with the native lens choices.


A 50ish AF APO macro (f/2 please).



Aug 06, 2019 at 07:16 PM
dehowie
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


chez wrote:
What is missing for you from the current native Sony mount glass? I'd personally like a compact 300 f4 lens...but overall I'm pretty happy with the native lens choices.


Here are my most used lenses.
800/5.6
600/4
200-400/F4
200/2.0
100-400/II
85/1.2
50/1.2
24-70/2.8
11-24
14/2.8
17mm tilt shift

I sell a lot of images and second tier lenses are not an option fall apart on edges or at decent rez ie 20mp plus.
I can find 3 Sony Lenses(600, 24-70 and 70-400) out of 11 that have the quality/capability to replace these.
The 600 is just becoming available and it seems they are chasing the big end with now a good collection of big glass but the short stuff is completely lacking.
Under 200mm of 6 lenses Sony off 1 the 24-70.
There are large gaps in Sonyís G lens lineup with numerous poor performers plugging holes that is very slowly being filled by G series high quality glass.
They have a long way to go and a lot of holes to fill with G series glass.




Aug 07, 2019 at 08:11 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


dehowie wrote:
Here are my most used lenses.
800/5.6
600/4
200-400/F4
200/2.0
100-400/II
85/1.2
50/1.2
24-70/2.8
11-24
14/2.8
17mm tilt shift

I sell a lot of images and second tier lenses are not an option fall apart on edges or at decent rez ie 20mp plus.
I can find 3 Sony Lenses(600, 24-70 and 70-400) out of 11 that have the quality/capability to replace these.
The 600 is just becoming available and it seems they are chasing the big end with now a good collection of big glass but the short stuff is completely lacking.
Under 200mm of 6 lenses Sony off 1 the 24-70.
There are large gaps in Sonyís G lens lineup with numerous poor performers
...Show more

I think for most people the Sony GM 85 f/1.4 competes very well with the Canon EF 85 f/1.2L and the Sony/Zeiss 50 f/1.4 competes very well with the Canon EF 50 f/1.2L. Yeah, the Canon lenses have an extra half stop wider aperture, but they also have quite a bit more spherical aberrations, and from f/1.4 and narrower personally I have a pretty strong preference for the Sony lenses, even though I do generally like these Canon lenses, of course YMMV.

Sony does of course have a 12-24 f/4 G lens that has quite nice performance. Yes, it is 12mm instead of 11mm, so if you really need 11 and adding a 10mm prime won't suffice, which is possible with Sony, then Canon does offer that extra mm wider in their zoom, but again I think it is fair to say there is substantial overlap between the Canon and the Sony offering here.

How about a 14 f/2.8? Well Sony doesn't offer one, but you can turn to the Sigma Art in this case if you shoot Sony. I don't really know how the Sigma Art and the Canon 14 f/2.8 lenses compare but the Sigma Art does get very good reviews.

Finally, there is a great 17mm f/4 TSE lens that can be used on the Sony quite easily--the Canon one. There are a number of drawbacks to using Canon lenses adapted to the Sony camera, but most of the drawbacks are about autofocus which clearly don't apply to TSE lenses. So, yes Sony does not make TSE lenses, but fortunately for Sony users they can pretty easily adapt the Canon TSE lenses, and even the Nikon 19 f/4 PC E, which generally has quite a bit better performance than the Canon 17 f/4L TSE.

So, I don't see the big holes at normal and wider focal lengths that you do. Personally, I see the absence of a 200 f/2 and a 200-400 f/4 as much more serious holes than anything that exists less than 200mm. Sure some people may have to have f/1.2 instead of f/1.4 for their 50 and 85, but I given that in my view you have to give up some performance at every other aperture to get that f/1.2 I think that isn't a very good trade off for very many people. And sure some people might absolutely have to have a zoom with 11mm instead of 12mm and couldn't make do by adding a 10mm prime, but again I think the number of those folks is going to be very very small.
In contrast, I think there are quite a few sports shooters and even some portrait shooter who really would want a 200 f/2 for some of their shooting and this lens is a full stop faster and available as a prime (as opposed to an f/2.8 zoom for Sony) and thus such a lens offers Canon shooters something that they would definitely miss with Sony. Similarly, I think there are a lot of sports shooters who regularly use the 200-400 f/4L and would find the Sony 100-400 a poor substitute with its slower and variable aperture as good as that lens is. So, I still see the holes being bigger in the longer lenses not in the shorter focal lengths.



Aug 07, 2019 at 09:51 PM
Artakha
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options




Steve Spencer wrote:
I think for most people the Sony GM 85 f/1.4 competes very well with the Canon EF 85 f/1.2L and the Sony/Zeiss 50 f/1.4 competes very well with the Canon EF 50 f/1.2L. Yeah, the Canon lenses have an extra half stop wider aperture, but they also have quite a bit more spherical aberrations, and from f/1.4 and narrower personally I have a pretty strong preference for the Sony lenses, even though I do generally like these Canon lenses, of course YMMV.

Sony does of course have a 12-24 f/4 G lens that has quite nice performance. Yes, it is
...Show more

I would just add that we donít have any excellent AF prime options wider than 18mm other than the massive Sigma 14mm 1.8. Iíd like to see one or two of some type in the same vein as the 24 GM. I would also like to see an 85 and 50 1.2 GM if only to update the 85ís AF and revamp the 50 closer to 24/135GM level. Wide open that will be a challenge but if itís better at 1.4 it would be a win. Also another ultra wide zoom at f/2.8 would be awesome. For that reason alone Iíve been eyeing the Sigma 14-24 but even wider like 10 or 12 would be super.

Sony is finally at the stage where there are options for most focal lengths without adapting and now they can fill the last remaining holes completely which is very exciting.



Aug 08, 2019 at 07:28 AM
dehowie
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


When an 85/1.4 does what an 85/1.2 does let me know.
And i dont mean that in an arrogant flippant way.
Seriously if you shoot with a 1.2 then go to a 1.4 its like comparing apples to an orange.
The difference is light years.
Ask Nikon guys who for years wanted 1.2ís as the depth of field difference cannot be made up for in post or by anything other than quality in glass and construction.
1.2 to 1.4 are light years apart.
Id love eye AF for them though but Af i can correct for a 1.4 will never ever be a 1.2 at close range..



Aug 08, 2019 at 08:33 AM
realVivek
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Decent, standard 35mm, 50mm lenses, fisheye, TS lenses...

Fred Miranda wrote:
What are we missing?





Aug 08, 2019 at 08:37 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


realVivek wrote:
Decent, standard 35mm, 50mm lenses, fisheye, TS lenses...



Actually we have so many options from 35 to 55 that it's time to focus elsewhere. Surely you can find something that works for you. What obviously is totally missing are slower short tele primes ( 200 2.8 and 300 f4 ) where we really don't have options.

I don't use TS lenses...but what is wrong using the great Canon lineup of TSE lenses?



Aug 08, 2019 at 09:03 AM
eke2k6
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


dehowie wrote:
When an 85/1.4 does what an 85/1.2 does let me know.
And i dont mean that in an arrogant flippant way.
Seriously if you shoot with a 1.2 then go to a 1.4 its like comparing apples to an orange.
The difference is light years.
Ask Nikon guys who for years wanted 1.2ís as the depth of field difference cannot be made up for in post or by anything other than quality in glass and construction.
1.2 to 1.4 are light years apart.
Id love eye AF for them though but Af i can correct for a 1.4 will never ever be a 1.2 at close
...Show more


https://www.slrlounge.com/canon-vs-nikon-showdown-battle-top-85mm-lenses/

Have a good look-see, then re-evaluate your light years argument.



Aug 08, 2019 at 09:10 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

lightskyland
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


dehowie wrote:
I think the original photo is an excellent point that yes Sony have come a lng way...but also how far behind they still are.
No adaptor can give the native performance by native glass and that is Sonyís biggest stumbling block.
Lenses make great images, cameras come and go.


You're joking, right?

Sony has 10x the number of native lenses as Canon and Nikon mirrorless systems.



Aug 08, 2019 at 09:12 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


dehowie wrote:
When an 85/1.4 does what an 85/1.2 does let me know.
And i dont mean that in an arrogant flippant way.
Seriously if you shoot with a 1.2 then go to a 1.4 its like comparing apples to an orange.
The difference is light years.
Ask Nikon guys who for years wanted 1.2ís as the depth of field difference cannot be made up for in post or by anything other than quality in glass and construction.
1.2 to 1.4 are light years apart.
Id love eye AF for them though but Af i can correct for a 1.4 will never ever be a 1.2 at close
...Show more

Seriously? I have several f/1.2 lenses (including one Canon) and you do get somewhat shallower depth of field with f/1.2, but light years a part just isn't accurate. The EF 85 f/1.2L and the 50 f/1.2L both are interesting, but they are relatively old designs at this point and have their challenges. Thus, it is not surprising that they were two of the very first lenses that Canon decided to remake with their mirrorless system. Even Canon is touting how much better their mirrorless versions are than the EF versions. I would say the EF versions have very nice rendering, whereas the mirrorless version have an incredibly modern looks with high contrast and sharpness and reduced aberrations. I think there are room for both looks, but if you like the mirrorless versions of the Canon lenses then in most instances you will prefer the Sony GM 85 and Sony/Zeiss 50 f/1.4 lenses over the EF lenses as well. This isn't a mirrorless thing really. It is whether you like lenses with high contrast/ high sharpness and reduced aberrations achieved through Aspherical, ED, and APD elements. If you do, then for everything except the extra half stop of shallow depth of field the Sony lenses are superior to the Canon EF lenses (but not the new mirrorless lenses).

So, you can take an unbalanced view and focus only on the half stop wider aperture or you can take a broader perspective and consider a number of different things that lenses bring to the table realizing that there are lots of trade offs and good reasons why each lens might be preferred by some people. When you take a broader perspective I think it is easy to recognize that some people might well prefer each brand but as a whole you cannot say that one brand is clearer better than another. Instead they both compete well with one another.



Aug 08, 2019 at 10:28 AM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Steve Spencer wrote:
Seriously? I have several f/1.2 lenses (including one Canon) and you do get somewhat shallower depth of field with f/1.2, but light years a part just isn't accurate. The EF 85 f/1.2L and the 50 f/1.2L both are interesting, but they are relatively old designs at this point and have their challenges. Thus, it is not surprising that they were two of the very first lenses that Canon decided to remake with their mirrorless system. Even Canon is touting how much better their mirrorless versions are than the EF versions. I would say the EF versions have very nice
...Show more


Isn't the difference between f/1.2 and f/1.4 only ⅓-stop, Steve? I know we are splitting hairs here but...



Aug 08, 2019 at 10:33 AM
abuford
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Did anyone mention the really good Venus/Laowa lenses?


Aug 08, 2019 at 11:16 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


AGeoJO wrote:
Isn't the difference between f/1.2 and f/1.4 only ⅓-stop, Steve? I know we are splitting hairs here but...


It actually could be either depending if the manufacturer cheats a bit as they round and what the next digit is. A third of a stop from f/1.4 (which is really 1.41) is f/1.29. Now you should round that to 1.3, but if you are lazy or want to make it look a bit better that might be rounded to 1.2. A half of stop from f/1.4 is f/1.22 and is appropriately rounded to 1.2. We rarely talk about such precision with f stops this fast, however, but it becomes useful to add another digit if you want precision. In practice, however, the difference is going to be very small and likely undetectable between f/1.22 and f/1.29 so I don't think the precision is at all useful and of course a manufacturer could make it 1.249 and still round appropriately to 1.2 and it would be more than a third of a stop and less than a half of a stop. For simplicity I think it is best to say f/1.1 is a third of a stop narrower than f/1.0, f/1.2 is a half of a stop narrower than f/1.0, and f/1.3 is two thirds of a stop narrower than f/1.0.



Aug 08, 2019 at 11:19 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


abuford wrote:
Did anyone mention the really good Venus/Laowa lenses?


Perhaps you missed it but Laowa was mentioned on my first post:

"Let's not forget Tokina Firin's line and Laowa who produced many outstanding and unique lenses for the E-mount"



Aug 08, 2019 at 11:28 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Steve Spencer wrote:
It actually could be either depending if the manufacturer cheats a bit as they round and what the next digit is. A third of a stop from f/1.4 (which is really 1.41) is f/1.29. Now you should round that to 1.3, but if you are lazy or want to make it look a bit better that might be rounded to 1.2. A half of stop from f/1.4 is f/1.22 and is appropriately rounded to 1.2. We rarely talk about such precision with f stops this fast, however, but it becomes useful to add another digit if you want precision.
...Show more

I agree and think half of stop is more accurate. (from f/1.4 to f/1.2)

The geek in me says the math goes like this:
N=sqrt(2^AV)

So if we calculate in one-third-stops from f/1.4, it should be: N=sqrt(2^0.666) = 1.259 or f/1.26
In half stop we have: : N=sqrt(2^0.5) = 1.189 or f/1.19 (which is closer to f/1.2)

It all depends on the aperture approximation from different lens manufacturers. Like Steve wrote, f/1.2 sounds better than f/1.3.

I need another coffee now.



Aug 08, 2019 at 11:46 AM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Fred Miranda wrote:
I agree and think half of stop is more accurate. (from f/1.4 to f/1.2)

The geek in me says the math goes like this:
N=sqrt(2^AV)

So if we calculate in one-third-stops from f/1.4, it should be: N=sqrt(2^0.666) = 1.259 or f/1.26
In half stop we have: : N=sqrt(2^0.5) = 1.189 or f/1.19 (which is closer to f/1.2)

It all depends on the aperture approximation from different lens manufacturers. Like Steve wrote, f/1.2 sounds better than f/1.3.

I need another coffee now.


Yes, your numbers are right and mine are off ever so slightly. I often simplify the formula so it is easier to calculate and I only need a square root function and not an exponential function. In this case I used that simplification rather than the correct formula and that is why our numbers differed (and I was wrong). Thanks for the correction. The precise number do show that a manufacturer could make a lens with an aperture of 1.249 and correctly label the lens 1.2, but that lens would be much closer to a third of a stop less than 1.4 than a half of a stop less than 1.4. Nonetheless, all this precision is way more than we need in practice, and we can just think of f/1.2 as about a half stop less than f/1.4 and f/1.3 as about a third of a stop less than f/1.4.



Aug 08, 2019 at 01:11 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Steve Spencer wrote:
Yes, your numbers are right and mine are off ever so slightly. I often simplify the formula so it is easier to calculate and I only need a square root function and not an exponential function. In this case I used that simplification rather than the correct formula and that is why our numbers differed (and I was wrong). Thanks for the correction. The precise number do show that a manufacturer could make a lens with an aperture of 1.249 and correctly label the lens 1.2, but that lens would be much closer to a third of a stop
...Show more

I didn't mean to correct your numbers Steve. This was also a question I had.



Aug 08, 2019 at 03:08 PM
Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Sony E-mount with 52 Sony lenses + numerous third party options


Fred Miranda wrote:
I didn't mean to correct your numbers Steve. This was also a question I had.


No problem whatsoever Fred. It was useful to post the formula and I don't mind admitting when I don't have things right--or at least that is what I tell myself . The point perhaps to remember is that the fastest aperture of any lens probably often doesn't fall on exactly a half stop or a third stop or even an a full stop, but rather probably represents a rounding off from a number that is as wide as the manufacturer can make it. Once you move off the wide open aperture, however, I would expect manufacturers to be very close the the actual values that are a half, third, or full stop.



Aug 08, 2019 at 03:35 PM
1       2      
3
       4       end






FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username      Reset password