@shadowblade - seems like you’re completely wrong calling the 2 primes available at launch slow and midrange. There’s already a review of 35/1.8 and photographer’s jaw dropped (his own words). You can also look at specs and charts yourself.
Releasing 24-70/4 lens as part of the system is a good move as it’s a kit lens and as a part of kit it’s offered with good discount. 2.8 zooms will be as large as current versions so there’s no need to rush.
I said slow, not midrange.
Regardless of their optical quality, there is a big role 35mm and 50mm lenses in the f/1.2-1.4 aperture range which a f/1.8 simply can't fill, no matter how sharp it is. Leica's Summicron lenses might be sharper, but there are a lot of applications where you just want the increased background blur of the Summilux. These lenses are Nikon's Summicrons.
In another sense, they're a bit like the Zeiss Batis 135/2.8. A sharp lens and solid optical performer, but just not fast enough for a lot of pro use - not when everyone else offers a 135/2 or 135/1.8. These potential buyers are waiting for the faster lens.
How could such a lens be cheap?
It is likely to beat the Otus while being 2 stops brighter.
No it's not.
The extreme geometries and optical design required for such fast lenses make them expensive and difficult to manufacture, as well as limiting their optical performance compared to less-extreme lenses.
Leica's Noctilux lenses are horrendously expensive. They're also just about the softest lenses in Leica's lineup. They're expensive because they're hard to design, hard to make and hard to sell profitably in large numbers.
I am not sure why they wouldn't be able to survive in the mirrorless world. They have just come up with 2 bodies that are overall very close, if not better than the 3rd generation of Sony bodies at competitive pricing levels with a more future proof mount. Not sure what you are worried about?
One. Card. Slot.That alone takes it out of 'very close' contention. Many pros, and any others similarly interested in not risking loss of photos, simply won't consider them.
Other than that, the Z7 is pretty much a mirrorless D850, which itself is pretty much an A7r3 with a mirror. So I'd expect their performance to be pretty similar, give or take a few features on each side (eye focus, better weather sealing, pixel shift, etc.).
The position of the Z6 depends on its price. If it's cheaper than the A7III, it would make for a very good introductory full-frame camera, with a 24-70/4 kit lens. If it's priced significantly higher, it will struggle against the A9 and A7r3.
No doubt the single card issue will be fixed at some future point. But the next generation is almost certainly at least two years away, and will be competing against next-generation Sonys. Even now, these are new cameras competing against an almost one-year-old product, a third of the way into its life cycle - you'd
expect them to be better.
The mount isn't really more future-proof - just bigger. It's still not big enough for a medium format sensor (technically, you could just fit a 33x44mm sensor behind a 55mm throat, but that leaves very little margin for lens design). And, if you can fit a 400/2.8, 600/4 or Leica Noctilux lens onto a Sony E via an adapter without edge clipping or major vignetting - and you clearly can, since many people have been doing exactly that over the past five years - then you can equally design such lenses native to the E-mount.
