Never Wait for Vaporware

Never, ever, ever wait around for a vaporware lens to materialize. Make sure the camera you want has the lenses you need for your work available now—right now—such that you can buy what you need immediately and replace it easily if it's lost or stolen. Waiting and hoping for future products is a fool's errand.

-

When I got into photography in a serious way in 1980, Contax, the brand of camera I'd chosen after careful thought, offered large, heavy, expensive, fast ƒ/1.4 glass in the 35mm moderate-wide-angle and 85mm moderate-telephoto focal lengths, as well as two-stops-slower lenses in the same focal lengths that were small and light. I started out with the Planar 50mm ƒ/1.4, but (after thinking about it for a year!) replaced it with an 85mm and a 35mm. I couldn't afford the fast lenses, so I bought the 85mm ƒ/2.8 Sonnar T* and the 35mm ƒ/2.8 Distagon T*.

I liked the angles of view, but found both lenses generally too slow. Note that I was shooting mostly Plus-X, a nominally ASA 125-speed film that I shot at E.I. 80. With a K2 yellow filter that cut out an additional 2/3 to 1 stop of light.

So next I tried the famous Planar T* 85mm ƒ/1.4. I loved it—any geek enamored of lenses could not help but be starstruck by its gleaming expanses of glass—but I discovered a curious psychological phenomenon: for the intimate, "plain" portraits that I was doing at the time, it wasn't as suitable, because I found it tended to intimidate my sitters. A young teenaged girl explained it to me succinctly: she said it made her feel "stared at," and like the camera was going to see every pore and pimple and imperfection on her face. "Like a giant eye," she said.

The petite, unintimidating, affordable Contax 85mm ƒ/2.8 Sonnar T*.
(Photo snitched from a 2012 eBay auction.)

Okay. Lesson learned. But I still needed something a bit faster than my ƒ/2.8 Sonnar. I needed something that wasn't slow but wasn't fast—something right in the middle. So I figured I'd just wait for the Contax ƒ/2 middle-tier lenses to come out. It was bound to happen; Zeiss had had an 85mm ƒ/2 and 35mm ƒ/2 for the Contarexes, and Nikon had lenses of all three speeds in 35mm in its then-current lineup of AIS Nikkors: ƒ/1.4, ƒ/2, and ƒ/2.8. It had been, by that time, ten or twelve years since the RTS. How long could it take? I'd just wait.

So I waited. And waited. And waited.

And, eventually, I began to bitch about it.

You know—the sorts of complaints we hear far and wide across the vast parish of the 'Net about all the new stuff that's always being introduced. Doesn't have enough of this! Has too much of that! Not what I want! Needs more! Needs less! Changed too much! Not changed enough!

I'm not immune. I've been doing the same exact thing since 1985, when I realized what I really needed was a 35mm ƒ/2 and and an 85mm ƒ/2 for my Contax SLR. Human nature. Well, geek nature, at least.

But here's the thing. You don't know just how much I bitched and moaned and kvetched and kvailed about Zeiss/Contax's failure to make at least a 35mm ƒ/2. I switched to Nikon in '88, and have been a brand nomad ever since, but did that stop me from complaining about my former brand of choice? No. I complained in magazines, on forums, in lectures, here, to Contax, to Zeiss, to God in prayers—pretty much anywhere I could find someone, or a deity, I thought might listen.

I was still waiting in 2005, when Kyocera, which bought Yashica in 1984, pulled the plug on Contax, and the brand itself came to an end.

Lesson learned: you should never count on vaporware lenses to materialize. Not even ones that are on the roadmap. Make sure the camera you're thinking of buying has all the lenses you need for your work available now—right now—such that you can buy what you need immediately and replace it readily if it's lost or stolen. When you shop, look at the lenses first, and make sure everything you want is already available—real lenses, in boxes, in stores, order-able and obtainable. Wait for nothing. Count on nothing.

I wish old Mike could have counseled young Mike on this!

Mike

[This "From the Archives" article first appeared on TOP in 2012. I thought it would add to the recent conversation. It's been revised here to bring it up to date. —Ed.]

Original contents copyright 2019 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

Please help support The Online Photographer through Patreon

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Huw Morgan: "In today's world, it's better to put your faith in open standards. Linux beats out Windows in the data center. Android outsells Apple in the phone market and offers many more handset choices. In the current full-frame camera world, we have Sony offering an open lens standard and Canon and Nikon choosing not to. It's no coincidence that great third party options from Sigma, Tamron, Samyang, Zeiss and others have proliferated in the Sony world over a short period of time while Canon and Nikon mirrorless users wait for their vendors to get a full range of lenses to the market. And the prices! Tamron and Sigma offer fantastic lenses for Sony at half the price of native lenses. Canon and Nikon are asking premium prices for Z and R lenses with no third-party competition. Great for the vendors, not so good for us."

John Camp: "One of the more mysterious lens non-events in the current photo world is Nikon's inability to deliver any lens for the Z system longer than an 85mm. A 70–200mm has been on the 2019 roadmap ever since the Z's came out, and 2019 is on its last legs, and the lens hasn't even been officially announced yet. Many of us Nikonians were astonished that the lens wasn't available on the release of the Z's. Yet, more than a year later, nothing. (The thinking among us consumers is that you'd start with a 24–70mm and a 70–200mm, as well as perhaps a 28mm or 35mm, a 50mm, and an 85mm. But whatever the sequence of the other lenses, the two zooms should be there at the creation.) Something is going on here, but, like Mr. Jones, I don't know what it is."

Bear.: "To the contrary, Mike, I try always to wait. Waiting is the only real cure for GAS. I have also saved a small fortune by not buying—um—stuff—that I can definitively (if retrospectively) prove that I did not need."

Howard: "Great advice. When I decided to buy a full frame mirrorless last fall, I wanted the Nikon Z7. I read Thom Hogan’s review of it, and especially the 24–70mmƒ/4 lens, and thought 'this is all I need.' And then I decided to explore a bit more before buying. I looked at the new Canon R and the Sony A7RIII. I read Thom Hogan’s review again and of the Sony cameras and lenses. At the end of one of his articles, he said that if you were getting into a new mirrorless now for still photography and didn’t want to adapt lenses you already owned, he would recommend Sony over Nikon. That tipped me to the Sony and I’ve been ecstatic with it, especially the incredible array of lens options."

Ray Maines: "So true. My personal story is too lengthy to retell and is essentially meaningless besides, but my conclusion is the same as yours. Hopes and dreams are different than actual products. Buy what works for you right this very minute."

Jan Steinman: "I almost got the Contax bug in the mid-'70s. But I was concerned about the lack of resources for the young system—as well as the astronomical prices for the Contax lenses that existed. So I went with Olympus, who already had a good start on a line of ƒ/2 primes. And I've been fairly happy ever since. I even struggled through the dark 4/3rds days. I got into Olympus partly because it was small and light, and here were these huge lumps of plastic! I could not pack as much 3/4rds gear into the same bag that I had packed a lot of OM-System gear into. But I suffered through it. 'They gotta get smaller eventually.' There was a glimmer of light with the introduction of Micro 4/3, but no viewfinder! So I waited and waited, still shooting 4/3rds, but with waning interest, until finally the camera I wanted came out, the OM-D E-M1 Mark II. And I've been happy as a clam since. So sometimes, waiting does pay off."

Comments

[Steve Rosenblum]

Mike-
I agree with the sentiments you described in this post. However, I must quibble with your use of the term "Vaporware". Vaporwear means a product or features that are announced by a company but never delivered. To wit from Wikipedia "In the computer industry, vaporware (or vapourware) is a product, typically computer hardware or software, that is announced to the general public but is never actually manufactured nor officially cancelled. Use of the word has broadened to include products such as automobiles."
Did Contax announce the f/2 lenses and not deliver, or were they products you hoped for but they just never made?

[Zack Schindler]

I also play with amateur radio (FCC call sign N8FNR) and find a lot of people on ham radio sites bitch too about wanting this or that. One guy still complains about a software update he wanted from a certain company that he never got 15 years ago. And to top it off he no longer owns the radio.
If you have any interest in ham radio this is my current radio. It is a network appliance and has no knobs. The one I have is on the first photo. https://www.flexradio.com/flex-6400/

[Eolake Stobblehouse]

" a curious psychological phenomenon: for the intimate, "plain" portraits that I was doing at the time, it wasn't as suitable"

It's interesting. I once walked around Copenhagen, taking portraits of two friends. I used a 100mm Takumar. And one of them observed to me that the camera was much easier to face when I had that distance it gave. (I took half-body shots.)

Eolake

[Jerzy]

85 1.4 has another distracting feature: at certain angle model can see big photographer's eye behind viewfinder. But it's very fine and rewarding lens :)
Still waiting for 28-85/2.8 for Contax...

[Glenn Allenspach]

One night last spring, I was relaxing in the main room of the Historic Cascade Lodge on the north shore of Lake Superior. My A7rIII was resting on the table with a Zeiss Batis 25mm. 67mm filter diameter and a tulip style hood for those not familiar. The very size of the thing prompted a stranger to strike up a conversation with the opening line, “That’s quite a lens.”

I also own some of the Zeiss Loxia lenses for this camera. 52mm filter and compact metal hoods. They never attract attention to themselves.

[Olybacker]

Of course, instead of kvetching and kvailing about the lack of Zeiss 35mm and 85mm f2s Mike, you could have done the really sensible thing and switched systems to Olympus. ;-)

Happy New Year.

:-)

[s.wolters]

I had a Contaflex, a Contax T and a Contax G1.

In 1972 my aunt gave me her old Contaflex when I started my study at art school. Traded it in to make a Canon FTb affordable.
Years later the chique pocketable Contax T was a disappointment. The 38mm f/2.8 Sonnar was not as good as I expected and above that the handling of the tiny rangefinder mechanism was rather fiddly diddly. My fiancee couldn’t handle it at all, so I swapped it with an ugly tiny Safari Green plastic Yashica T4 with a 35mm f/3.5 Tessar. In theory a step back, but if I had to choose I would go for the T4 again. That one never disappointed me.
The Contax G1 and its lenses were a dream. Especially the 45mm f/2 Planar was a stunner. Also had the 28mm and the 90mm lenses but the majority of my shots were made with the 45mm (and the surprisingly good 35mm on the T4!).
I was not the only one that expected that the Contax bodies would get digital successors. Maybe I am wrong, but at the back of the lenses there were contact points that had no function in combination with the G1 or G2. There were rumors that they were for the digital cameras which would be coming soon. Yes, waiting and hoping for future products is a fool's errand.

[John Robison]

And a corollary to that advice is, ‘never wait for the mkII version’ that is, rumor has it, just a few months away from introduction. The Next Big Improved model will always be on the horizon, probably the next three iterations of the current model are in development at any one time.
If you want to take pictures now, just buy the current model that meets your needs.
And when that mkII comes out, just ignore it. Or, alternatively, if it has that super wizz bang feature you just ‘need’, then a wait a year for the mkIII model and then buy the mkII for half the introduction retail.

[Jamie Pillers]

WAIT... are you saying I shouldn't wait for the Fuji 27mm f2 WR lens?? I already bought a new piggy bank just for that purpose!

[Kenneth Tanaka]

Just take the effin' picture with whatever you have. Really. There's nothing more vaporous than the photo lost to some purist nonsense. You've either made the images or you have not. Nothing. Else. Matters. Period.

[JG]

Did you actually use both the Contax 85/f1.4 and f2.8 lenses wide open? Assuming Contax had released the 35/f2 and 85/f2 lenses you coveted, would you have used them wide open as well?

I ask, because I often find photographers who claim they need a piece of gear to address a particular issue (usually technical in nature, such as your example of needing a higher shutter speed to compensate for using a filter) instead of admitting they want it just because, often do so as a way to rationalize its purchase, not because they can't possibly take their photos without it.

And Yes, I'm guilty of having done this as well, although from this side of the camera, it certainly didn't -- doesn't? -- feel that way at the time, even if it later turns out to be precisely the reason I made the change. (*´∀｀*)

[Steve Higgins]

"Make sure the camera you're thinking of buying has all the lenses you need for your work available now—right now—such that you can buy what you need immediately and replace it readily if it's lost or stolen. When you shop, look at the lenses first, and make sure everything you want is already available—real lenses, in boxes, in stores, order-able and obtainable."

So what happens if everybody does that?

No cameras with new mounts, i.e. DSLR companies going mirrorless or from APSC to FF. What company is going to risk bringing out a new camera with a whole new range of a dozen or more lenses, when it may not catch on, leaving them with a load of stock they won't make their money back on?

And even if they did, there is bound to be a group of photographers complaining that their favorite lens isn't there.

Of course, it's possible I am being overly cynical/pessimistic. There MAY still be enough rebellious early adopters to make the new kit viable...

Alternatively, they can do what they do now. With a new model the companies have a few basic lenses and an adapter so that the buyer can use their older lenses with the new body until the range builds up?

Or, in my case, can actually afford a long lens for my (obsolete) Nikon-1 V2 - an AF-S 55-200mm lens with the FT-1 adapter works pretty well. :-)

[Richard Parkin]

The featured comment is spot on except for “Android outsells Apple”. I hate to say this but that is comparing apples and oranges, or maybe lemons ;-). Android doesn’t manufacture anything.

[Speed]

When I was marketing industrial instruments one of our salesmen coined a phrase about missing features -- "This one doesn't have it but yours will."

It was an internal joke with a large grain of truth. We were always improving our products and adding features but never fast enough for our customers or our sales force.

[Speed]

The other side of "This one doesn't have it but yours will" was the customer's frequent, "All you have to do is … "

[Scott]

@Richard Parkin

"Android doesn’t manufacture anything."

Neither does Apple. All of its manufacturing is contracted out. But “Android outsells Apple” is still a true statement, as it doesn't imply manufacturing — just sales.