TR Forums

The fact that Sony is now included, is something I find interesting. While you cannot really give credit to the A-Mount, the e-mount to many is the epitome of mirrorless. I not-so-secretly hope that Olympus fails this year and that Sony buys up their assets. If I got to look forward to their z-axis ibis with their glass and EVF..... I get giddy just thinking about it. Time will tell. It does seem likely that we will see some brands fall by the wayside. Oly seems like a prime candidate. Pentax, perhaps.

TheEmrys wrote:

The fact that Sony is now included, is something I find interesting. While you cannot really give credit to the A-Mount, the e-mount to many is the epitome of mirrorless.

In bodies, maybe. In terms of lenses, it is pretty bad. And the corner sharpness (even on their $1,000 Zeiss 24mm/1.8 ) is poor.

NEX-7 and its derivatives (6, 5R etc) may be great camera bodies, but Sony E-mount is one of the least serious systems I'd consider, ahead of Pentax Q, Nikon CX and EOS M. Wow, that's pretty bad company now that I write it out like that; in sony's defense, they're a lot better than those three, just not in the same league when it comes to m43 (with its huge stable of lenses) or Fuji X (with a small but highly desirable collection of compact, fast primes).

Canon and Nikon are in trouble. Nikon especially is in very poor financial shape with among the worst performances on the Japanese stock market this year.

The Sony a7R and to some extent the a7, are game changers. The a7R sports the best FF sensor, there is, is weather sealed, does WiFi b/g/n, weighs less that 500g with a battery and is about the size of my X-E1. It's also a screaming deal which was made to hang real nice glass on. The two real lenses for it are stellar, I have the Zeiss FE 35 2.8 and the Zeiss FE 55mm 1.8 tests as good as the Otus 55m when stopped down a bit. The wide range of Leica and Zeiss lenses available for it at very reasonable prices make what Sony comes up with irrelevant.

Impossible for me to pass on.

Voldenuit wrote:

In bodies, maybe. In terms of lenses, it is pretty bad. And the corner sharpness (even on their $1,000 Zeiss 24mm/1.8 ) is poor.

NEX-7 and its derivatives (6, 5R etc) may be great camera bodies, but Sony E-mount is one of the least serious systems I'd consider, ahead of Pentax Q, Nikon CX and EOS M. Wow, that's pretty bad company now that I write it out like that; in sony's defense, they're a lot better than those three, just not in the same league when it comes to m43 (with its huge stable of lenses) or Fuji X (with a small but highly desirable collection of compact, fast primes).

What are you talking about? The sharpness on the e-mount 24/1.8 is very well regarded.

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_carl_zeiss_sonnar_t_e_24mm_f_1_8_za_review/conclusion/

http://www.kurtmunger.com/sony_nex_carl_zeiss_24mmid316.html

I think you need to look at some of the excellent Sony lenses out there. CZ135, CZ85, DT 16-50/2.8 , 70-400G to name just a few.

As for e-mount, its a mirrorless system where compactness is king.If it can't be small, it won't be made. But the 35/2.8 and the 55/1.8 are both excellent. Shoot, the roadmap looks awfully encouraging. But every zoom will be f4. It has to be this way to keep it small.

TheEmrys wrote:

What are you talking about? The sharpness on the e-mount 24/1.8 is very well regarded.

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_carl_zeiss_sonnar_t_e_24mm_f_1_8_za_review/conclusion/

http://www.kurtmunger.com/sony_nex_carl_zeiss_24mmid316.html

I was talking specifically about the corners.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/carl-zeiss-24mm-f-1-8-sonnar-e-za-t--lens-review-21753

You can see that the corner MTF doesn't sharpen up until f/4 or smaller. Might be forgivable if the lens was faster (say, f/1.4 or larger), wider or cheaper. Seeing as this is a 35mm equivalent focal length, a bit disappointed as it's a focal length that should have been mastered by now.

Compare with Fuji 23/1.4, which is almost one stop faster and sharpens up in the edges from f/2 onwards. On top of which it has much less chromatic aberration.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/fujifilm-xf-fujinon-23mm-f-1-4-r-lens-review-23524

Or how about the Olympus 12/2, which is sharp wide open and only sharpens up further as you stop down (until you run into diffraction limit)
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/olymp ... view-17598

Or the panasonic 20/1.7 (a modern classic), which is a fraction of the price of the above lenses? (granted it has notoriously slow autofocus, but its imaging quality is just great, especially for the money)
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-20mm-f-1-7-lumix-g-micro-four-thirds-lens-review-17550

The Zeiss is not a bad lens by any measure, but it's the "best" lens in a rather unremarkable E-mount linuep, and is still not as good as some competing systems.

Seeing we are way OT already I will toss in a bit more. Sony clearly has their sights set on making life difficult for both Canon and Nikon. When I first saw the a7R specs I was stunned. It was a very hard and massive boot to the balls of both Canon and Nikon.

It leaves them very little room. The a7R as well as killing as a still camera has a world of hurt in store for Canon and it's very fine video capabilities. Sony would like their video crown back. The a7R does uncompressed 1080p/60/24 4:2:2 right to an HDMI recorder. It has adapters already for XLR microphones with continuous sound control throughout the video. Exposure is also continuously adjustable throughout the session. For later ... well it really does 4K 4:2:2 although that is just for stills right now. This from the company, no hackers involved. It's also very cheap for what you get.

The wireless API is exposed and we have already a primitive tethering capacity and the camera will happily dump what it takes to both your phone and the network. With WiFi b/g/n that will be pretty quick.

It kills.