I really wish Sony would update the 35mm F1.8 and 50mm F1.8 with linear motors. For my use cases, F1.8-F2 strikes the perfect balance between weight and speed.
I have the 35mm F1.4 GM (too heavy) and the 40mm F2.5 (perfect in size but wish it was F2 at least).
I also have the Viltrox 50mm F2 Air - it’s great except the AF just isn’t up there with Sony first party linear motor lenses.
In an ideal world, I’d love a 35-50mm F2 in the size of the 24-50mm F2.8 (my “if you could only have one lens”).
When do we think Sony will update these lenses, if ever?
The only two lenses I would be interested in would be (1) a 24-120/4 with as good or better quality than the Nikon version, and (2) a 28/1.4 GM as small and as light as they could make it.
I agree with you, OP. I specifically want a pair of 28mm and 35mm G series lenses, either f1.8 or f2. They can be a little bit bigger and heavier than the 24/40/50 Gs to accommodate the extra speed, but they should still be relatively small and light. I'd say maximum 60mm in length and 250 grams weight-wise. Anything larger or heavier than that becomes cumbersome to carry on an A7C-series camera. These should have at least 0.25x macro for some close-up image capabilities and be sharp across the frame from wide open. Basically miniature versions of the 35mm f1.4 GM.
I don't own a single G series lens but if these two were made I'd pre-order both of them. And if I could only have one, I'd go with the 35.
They already have 16, 20, 24, 40 and 50 - It makes sense for them to come out with a 28 and a 35 too. And yes, adding a new G-series 50mm f1.8 around a similar size/weight would be nice too (and I'd definitely buy one).
Completely agree with @jaygould and @mudlake: the 28mm focal length is a weak spot in the Sony's lineup of primes. To be fair, Nikon and Canon aren't any better. I suppose their historical sales data says that 24 and 35 are more popular.
I'm a small-shoulder-bag-two-lens kind of person and IMHO the 28+50 combo is a bit more versatile than 24+35.
old-gregg wrote:
Completely agree with @jaygould@@ and @mudlake@@: the 28mm focal length is a weak spot in the Sony's lineup of primes. To be fair, Nikon and Canon aren't any better. I suppose their historical sales data says that 24 and 35 are more popular.
I'm a small-shoulder-bag-two-lens kind of person and IMHO the 28+50 combo is a bit more versatile than 24+35.
The 24 + 50mm combo is arguably a bit more versatile than 28 + 50
If Sony would only bring the high end WL Zoom that Emount deserves - maybe the rumoured 100-400 GMII f4 which performs admirably with the 2xTC without major issues and stays below 2kg.
I would also fancy the updates 35mm f1.8 or finally a great 28mm f1.8.
But first and foremost I would like to see from Sony an updated Subject recognition. I feel that they could do better. World class tracking, but you need to show the camera where the bird is - seriously?
I still want something like, say, a 60-90/2.0 or a 45-90/2.8, or a 55-110/2.8.
For medium-distance landscape or citiscape sorts of things, one doesn't have much of a choice where your feet can go. So a small amount of zoom would be worth a lot.
davidjl wrote:
I still want something like, say, a 60-90/2.0
To me a 1.5x zoom doesn't make sense. That's just an APS-C crop that you can reach with a button on the camera. I'd rather have a 60mm f1.4, which would be equivalent to a 90mm f2.1 after the crop. The size of these two hypothetical lenses would probably be about the same. But with the prime you'd get a brighter aperture from 60-85mm "for free". More versatility and value.
This is why I'd rather have the 16mm f1.8 G than the 16-25mm f2.8, for example.
Unless you're shooting 4k video and you cannot crop the footage without losing the 4k resolution. Or is there another situation I'm missing where a 1.5x zoom is better than a faster prime lens?
Updates to existing lenses I would purchase or seriously consider purchasing (in order of personal priority):
Sony 12-24/4G II
Sony 100-400 GM II
Sony 24-240G II (can be 24-200)
Sony 28/2 G II
Sony 12-24/2.8 GM II
Sony 50/2.8 Macro II
New lenses I would love to see:
f2/ UWA zoom at a reasonable weight (preferably 12-24/2) - that is excellent all around, including for astro
Sony 500/5.6 - size of Sigma or smaller; sharp, fast, takes TCs. - better close focusing than the Sigma
28/1.4 GM - equal to or smaller in size than the 35/1.4 GM - but if I could only have one, I would take a very small 28/2 G
A 50-135/2.8 G to go along with the 16-25 and 24-50.
My overall ask:
A new, high quality UWA zoom (starting at 14 or wider) - can be f/2, f/2.8 or f/4;
A new, high quality superzoom - will trade aperture for size, but want it to be light, responsive and sharp 20-200; 24-200; 24-300; 28-300; 28-400
An update to the 100-400 GM
A 28 street lens
A lightweight and affordable tele prime for birding which does reasonable close focusing
"Or is there another situation I'm missing where a 1.5x zoom is better than a faster prime lens?"
When you want to frame the image when you are shooting the image. And when you actually want the full res of the camera, e.g. for larger prints.
This idea comes from actual experience in landscape/citiscape photography, where the stupid 24-70 standard zoom and the stupid 70-200 zoom both leave me without flexibility at a focal length I like to shoot at, namely 70mm.
I think a high quality 35-300mm G super zoom as a companion to my 16-35mm would be nice. As a light weight, two lens landscape kit
An emphasis on image quality over maximum aperture would be my preference. As I’d be usually on a tripod.
A one lens solution wider than 24mm appears to be quite challenging to design. Without making compromises. As is evident by the Sigma 20-200mm.
I’m already pretty happy with my 16-35mm. So 35-200, 300, maybe even 400mm would be the next best thing for me
I’m not a lens designer. So I don’t know what’s in the realm of possibility. But 35mm to as long as possible while maintaining very good to excellent image quality would be my wishlist lens
