New Sony FE lenses

[Paulo Bizarro]

Just announced, the mandatory f2.8 zoom duo, plus the obligatory 85 f1.4 portrait lens.

Oh, and they belong to the new "G Master" lens line too.

[Dr Tone]

Don't forget the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters that work on the 70-200 f2.8

[Paulo Bizarro]

Don't forget the 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters that work on the 70-200 f2.8

Indeed. Here is just one link:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0359260536/sony-releases-three-premium-g-master-lenses-for-fe-mount

[Paul Roark]

Sony posted 10 & 30 lp/mm MTF data for the lens.  I forget the URL, but I grabbed the MTF and put it on the lower right corner of my usual collection of MTF charts for optics of interest to me.  The whole collection is posted at http://www.paulroark.com/MTF-charts.jpg .  These are all manufacturer posted charts.  Frankly, I've found the Leica materials to be the closest to the reality I see in my own less formal, real world testing.  The others may be more theoretical.  Comparing MTF charts from different sources can be problematic.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

[E.J. Peiker]

Sony's MTF charts are computer generated, not actual measured MTF values with a real lens.  Nikon and Canon also publish only computer generated MTF curves, not actual lens measured MTF charts:
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160204_1942-Sony-GM-fantasy-MTF.html

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, it is correct. I mostly feel that Sony MTF curves are designed by the marketing department rather than by the engineering department.

On the other hand it is also possible that Sony makes a really good lens. Possible? Absolutely! Probable?

Best regards
Erik

Sony's MTF charts are computer generated, not actual measured MTF values with a real lens.  Nikon and Canon also publish only computer generated MTF curves, not actual lens measured MTF charts:
http://diglloyd.com/blog/2016/20160204_1942-Sony-GM-fantasy-MTF.html

[DaveCurtis]

These new Sony lenses seem to be similar size/weight the the Canon/Nikon equivs. I was under the impression that with no mirror box the fullframe mirrorless versions should be able to be designed smaller and lighter.

[Eric Brody]

Dave, you've noticed the Achilles heel of full frame, with or without a mirror, image circle. The Sony A7R2 is a fabulous camera; it's smaller, but not lighter than my Fuji X T-1, but physics is physics. To cover the image circle, at least the diagonal of 24x36mm, requires a large lens regardless of the flange distance. For full frame that diagonal is about 43mm. For APS-C it is less, about 28.3mm, hence smaller lenses. Clever design can help, but cannot overcome physics and math. Even with smaller sensors, as lenses get longer, they get bigger. The Fuji 50-140 f/2.8 for APS-C is just about the same length as the full frame Nikon 70-200 f/4.

[BernardLanguillier]

Sony has clearly given up on the compactness aspect of their system with these lenses. The 85mm f1.4 I played with last Thu feels very similar in size the Otus (they had no equiped it with a lens hood to reduce somewhat the huge size feel I guess), which means larger than must FF f1.4 lenses. It does feel lighter and if slightly lower level build quality (still very good in absolute terms).

However the value here is the combination of very good image quality at f1.4 with eye detection AF. I believe that this may be the first system ever that provides a real opportunity to get a high success rate on such lenses used wide open.

Cheers,
Bernard