« Canon G1X and Fujifilm X-Pro 1 | Main | Eve Arnold 19122012 »

Tuesday, 10 January 2012

Comments

Boring stuff but at least "faster and more compact than your kit zoom".

They seem to be identical lenses, just in different mounts. Isn't that short-changing m4/3 users, as m4/3 lenses can be made smaller and lighter than E-mount lenses?

Slow.

That 19mm looks nice. Personally I think the trade off between speed and a frame free of distortions is definately worth it, but then I shoot alot of architecture. Lets hope the rest its optical qualities are up to par!

Boring...

That's what I initially thought but the 30mm may be a better performer than the Contax G 28mm/2.8 I was planning to use as a leave-on-the-camera lens on an upcoming NEX-7. Of course, it could be faster but its wide-open performance remains to be seen. So count me as interested. 45mm-equivalent is a really sweet spot.

I'm confused and probably ignorant as well.

Why is this sigma 19 f2.8 so much bigger than the 20mm f1.7 from Panasonic?

The panasonic pancake lens is an excellent performer. In what way is the sigma lens useful given the availablity of the Panasonic lens?

Hmmm. Whatever happened to f2? I always liked f2.

Fully agree with David above. This makes sense for NEX but nothing at all on m4/3s. Of course easy for Sigma to make one lens and port it to several systems. This focal length range is now really nicely covered in m4/3: 2.8/17 from Olympus, 2.8/19 from Sigma, 1.7/20 from Panasonic, 2.8/20 T/S from Arsat, 1.4/25 from PanaLeica, 0.95/25 from Cosina. And if someone is still missing a choice, a total of nine different zooms covering this focal length. Competition is funny thing. There are also 12 and 14 mm primes and two 45mm primes. Plenty of lenses but not too many actual choices.

Seems that they would work better on NEX, since 60 mm is not that interesting and m4/3 already has a 20/1.7. NEX does, however, lack in the lens department.

Please Sigma, let's have a 10mm f/2.8! (14mm equivalent on the NEX cameras, woo-hoo!)

And, Tamron? How about a series of "Adaptall III" lenses that can be switched between all the mirrorless cameras!

Having seen how sharp the NEX 3 can be with a good lens, a reasonably sharp and well behaved autofocus lens with a nice look ( whatever that means ) that is not priced not priced like a ZEISS would be a hit.

Since when is f/2.8 slow?. Particularly with cameras that perform at ISO 1600 and beyond. Do that many people really take pictures in un-lit coal mines?

2.8 is slow... Add me to the list of people who don't understand why everything has to be 1.4 or 2.8. What happened to 2.0???

2.8 is maybe not so slow anymore when most zooms are 3.5-5.6, or worse. But 2.8 is still slow. 2 is ok for a small fixed lens, and probably the best compromise between size, quality and price. 1.4 is sometimes useful but should not be considered normal for most people. I think 1.7, 1.8 is pure marketing, making it sound much better than 2.

Oskar said: "...since 60 mm is not that interesting..."

Actually, this is the most interesting one for me. During nearly 30 years of landscape work, using 4x5, 6x7, 35mm, APS-C and now m43, the 35mm-equivalent of 60-65 has been my favorite. Around 75% of my keepers have been made in this range. Just the way I see, I guess.

Having a good 30mm prime for my m43 camera will be very nice. I'll be watching the reviews on this one.

Toto said: "They seem to be identical lenses, just in different mounts. Isn't that short-changing m4/3 users, as m4/3 lenses can be made smaller and lighter than E-mount lenses?"

This might be a good thing for m43 users. If the image circle will cover a larger NEX sensor, then the m43 images should have less edge/corner softening and vignetting. At 1.5 inches and 4.8 oz who would complain about size or weight?

The comments to this entry are closed.