gdanmitchell wrote:
I’m currently a Canon user who is likely to move to Sony, probably when the rumored A7RVI arrives. I’ve been haunting the Sony forum for the past few months to try to get a handle on Sony World, in particular on the lens options that would most likely align with my (well-defined) needs.
One thing that strikes me about this forum is the huge number of threads about non-Sony lenses. My experience with other bands has been to rely almost entirely on native brand lenses, and that strategy has worked very well for me. I’ve been trying to understand why there is so much interest in the third-party lenses here. Some possibilities occur to me:
1. Do Sony users feel that Sony lenses are somehow deficient by comparison to third-part optics.
2. Third party lenses are cheaper than Sony products.
3. The third-party products fill gaps in the Sony lens line-up.
4. Something else.
I’m interested in the thoughts of current Sony users.
FWIW, my answers to your quesions are:
1. I cannot actually know what all Sony users feel, of course, but I believe the answer is no. Sony make some fantastic lenses. Some third party lenses are fantastic too, and every now and then a third party may make a lens which is at least arguably the "best" in its category. However, I see no reason to consider that Sony lenses, as a class, are deficient relative to third party lenses. (Of course, what is "best" depends on your preferences and exactly what you want to with a lens so it is difficult to define "best", at least without being very specific about the parameters and their relative importance, but let's not get bogged down in that for now.)
2. Often that is true, and obviously that can lead to a lens seeming better value. However, please do not take "better value" as a code for "not as good but the price makes it worth considering anyway if you are budget conscious". No doubt that may be the case for some specific lenses, but each lens should be evaluated on its merits.
3. Sony has a fairly complete line-up of lenses these days so I doubt that, for many people, third party lenses are filling requirements that couldn't be filled with a Sony lens. There may be some exceptions to that, eg I don't believe Sony has any tilt-shift lenses. Also, third party lenses sometimes offer somthing a little different, eg the Tamron and Samyang 35-150mm lenses, but I don't think that necessary equates to saying that Sony has a "gap" in its lens range.
4. I think the answer is that people in the Sony system generally seem to be more open to the idea that a third party lens can be as good as or even better than a Sony lens and to try to assess all lenses on their merits rather than come from an entrenched position that Sony lenses will always be better.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I’m currently a Canon user who is likely to move to Sony, probably when the rumored A7RVI arrives. I’ve been haunting the Sony forum for the past few months to try to get a handle on Sony World, in particular on the lens options that would most likely align with my (well-defined) needs.
One thing that strikes me about this forum is the huge number of threads about non-Sony lenses. My experience with other bands has been to rely almost entirely on native brand lenses, and that strategy has worked very well for me. I’ve been trying to understand why there is so much interest in the third-party lenses here. Some possibilities occur to me:
1. Do Sony users feel that Sony lenses are somehow deficient by comparison to third-part optics.
2. Third party lenses are cheaper than Sony products.
3. The third-party products fill gaps in the Sony lens line-up.
4. Something else.
I’m interested in the thoughts of current Sony users.
My answers to your quesions are:
1. I cannot actually know what all Sony users feel, of course, but I believe the answer is no. Sony make some fantastic lenses. Some third party lenses are fantastic too, and every now and then a third party may make a lens which is at least arguably the "best" in its category. However, I see no reason to consider that Sony lenses, as a class, are deficient relative to third party lenses. (Of course, what is "best" depends on your preferences and exactly what you want to with a lens so it is difficult to define "best", at least without being very specific about the parameters and their relative importance, but let's not get bogged down in that for now.)
2. Often that is true, and obviously that can lead to a lens seeming better value. However, please do not take "better value" as a code for "not as good but the price makes it worth considering anyway if you are budget conscious". No doubt that may be the case for some specific lenses, but each lens should be evaluated on its merits.
3. Sony has a fairly complete line-up of lenses these days so I doubt that, for many people, third party lenses are filling requirements that couldn't be filled with a Sony lens. There may be some exceptions to that, eg I don't believe Sony has any tilt-shift lenses. Also, third party lenses sometimes offer somthing a little different, eg the Tamron and Samyang 35-150mm lenses, but I don't think that necessary equates to saying that Sony has a "gap" in its lens range.
4. I think the answer is that people in the Sony system generally seem to be more open to the idea that a third party lens can be as good as or even better than a Sony lens and to try to assess all lenses on their merits rather than come from an entrenched position that Sony lenses will always be better.
Mar 03, 2026 at 07:30 PM
Previous versions of JD07's message #16997148 « Observation/Question about Forum Lens Topics »
