sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
How many lenses do you need/want? I just need 3 or 4 and Sony will has 2 out of the 4 and the other 2 will be out soon. That's all I need. And of course a spare battery or two.
Thom Hogan - More Nikon Shooters Leaving The Ranks To Shoot Other Brands
- Thread starter sonicbuffalo_RIP
- Start date
- Status
It's different for all but I need "choice". Not 3, not 5 but plenty. Out soon also doesn't do it for me. I'm not buying based upon hope.
I've been considering Pentax before I got the Nikon and there too I decided not to based upon choice. That and the fact I rather have a company that not goes down before my items arrive. Even when Pentax is older than me, it just didn't feel as reliable as the two dinosaurs.
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
I don't know what kind of camera you are using since you didn't list it in your profile. What I will say is if Sony promised the new lenses and are supoorting their new full frame mirrorless line, then I take their word for it. I just think you have a jaded perspective on Sony. They might have deserved it in the past but are well past that nonsense now. As they grow into their niche, I'm sure you will reconsider your stance. I like smaller is better concept. I don't know if you remember or read my posts in the past but I had at one time the Holy Trinity of Nikon's lenses, as well as a few others for full frame and DX. Everything I owned was big, heavy, and bulky. I am glad those days are over. I get the same quality, if not better, and save myself 20 lbs. less gear. I'm quite satisfied for now.
The future can definitely be a bubble if a company is not careful. I think Sony is putting some very innovative features into their cameras and they're really not showing any signs of letting up. I just hope Nikon follows suit. Alas, they are just features, what I'm looking for is glass and that's one big reason I like Nikon's ecosystem. Like all good consumers I will continue to watch Sony and see how their arsenal grows. I have a Sony mirrorless NEX-6. Terrific camera and I do like the features, but anytime I go out to snap some pics my D600 or D7100 always wins out. The only time I picked the Sony is on business trips where snapping pics is a time filler and not the main reason I'm on the trip. I use the tools that best suit my needs.
Some years ago the banks promised me a great return too. Ha, how did that turn out?
I don't have a jaded perspective on Sony. They might very well make good cams and lenses but having only a couple available is so nineties. Limited choice only benefits those who define the price. What if the lens they promise s*cks b*lls? Should I then just wait two, three years until they developed a better one? That sounds like a plan.
There's plenty to complain about considering Nikon and their lenses but at least I got choice and don't even have to buy their brand. I too can buy used and there's plenty of that. The moment Pentax or Sony get there, I might consider them. Now it's too early.
Btw, I don't list my gear because it is not important.
Last edited:
It's good that other companies push the technology forward because the dinosaurs seldom move fast. There's things about Nikon that annoy me greatly. Take my 200mm micro as an example. It's a fantastic lens but anyone that owns one will tell you the same about that flimsy "limited-full" switch that is on the lens. It's embarrassingly bad. It makes you wonder if the guys from development took a day off and let the cleaning lady finish that. That it is bad isn't the worst part; that this lens is more than 2 decades in the making and still has that laughable switch is. The same with the lens hood. If I buy a 100$ Tamron, I get a lens hood and a cup of coffee. A 1500+$ Nikon for which the lens hood is a MUST, apparently can't include it. Seriously?
Let's not even talk about the fancy socks they deliver these days to stuff your lens in.
New companies are needed to push and hurt the dinosaurs. From time to time they need to wake up and adapt.
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
Sony is hardly a new company....as we speak Sony alone has over 35 lenses for their 'e' mount cameras. That doesn't include others like Tamron, Sigma, or any 3rd party lenses. That also doesn't include what's about to be released in November. I'd say they are well on their way to a good selection of FF lenses.
One thing I'm curious about Sony glass. When they finally do come up with some fast glass I wonder if they will have any innovation for size and weight. I mean for camera bodies, taking the mirror mechanism out allows you to make a smaller and lighter body. But good glass is good glass, it has weight to it. It has to be a certain length and diameter to allow enough light. If you compare Nikon's 70-200mm f4 to Sony's 70-200mm f4, they're essentially the same size and weight. I think the Sony is shorter by 3mm and weighs about 10grams less (2 nickels). If you put stock in dxomark then the Sony could be considered somewhat inferior to the Nikon.
So one thing that will pique my interest is if Sony can make some glass that's as fast, as sharp and still make them smaller and lighter.
So one thing that will pique my interest is if Sony can make some glass that's as fast, as sharp and still make them smaller and lighter.
I'm going to leave here and start an oly thread for my experiences. As far as lenses, they have 99 out currently. The Oly trinity in Fx equivalent is 14-28, 24-80 and 80-300, all 2.8, pro build and weather sealed. They are also working on a 600mm f4 for next year (along with the 14-28). These are all probably about 3/4 or less than the size of the Fx/Dx equivalents.
As far as I know, they haven't even got a lens that allows me to get a full of my mailbox when I'm standing in the doorway. Like I said; too early.
I checked their page and they offer 19 E-mount lenses, the "soon" included. A 30mm macro lens? What should I do with that? Take shots of bugs being squashed by my glass?
Last edited:
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
For me, it's not about what Thom Hogan says, or "shooting what the pro's use" (Seriously Thom? Did you really just say that??) it's about shooting what feels right for me and what delivers the shot I'm visualizing in my head. Size be damned, weight be damned, I want my shot and I'll use what I'm comfortable using that gets me there. Mirrorless is not, in my opinion, "better"; it's different. It's an evolution. It may be "The Future" but that doesn't mean it's better. Even if it *is* better I'm still perfectly happy with DSLR. I just am and I don't really give a rodent's airborne backside if there's something "better"; I'm busy working on my art, less my craft and I don't need to feel like I'm on the razors edge at this stage in my photography to improve my art.
There's a strong "geek quotient" in photography that appeals and draws many to photography and some people I know put that aspect of photography first which, to my mind, puts the proverbial cart before the horse. In my mind Photography is an an art and that's why I pursue it. Cutting edge tech is fun, even exciting. And at some point maybe I'll wind up shooting mirrorless, who knows. Then again, maybe I'll die clutching my woefully out of date DSLR... As long as I feel I grew along the way I'm happy. It really is all about the final product, not how you got there. So yeah, I'll be sticking with DSLR for the next few years at least.
But yes, I'm happy Thom and whoever else who decides to adopt the mirrorless format have found something that works for them. Great. Go forth and actuate. But please... A nail in the coffin of DX? Such over the top, needless hyperbole smacks of desperation and more garners my pity than anything.
....
There's a strong "geek quotient" in photography that appeals and draws many to photography and some people I know put that aspect of photography first which, to my mind, puts the proverbial cart before the horse. In my mind Photography is an an art and that's why I pursue it. Cutting edge tech is fun, even exciting. And at some point maybe I'll wind up shooting mirrorless, who knows. Then again, maybe I'll die clutching my woefully out of date DSLR... As long as I feel I grew along the way I'm happy. It really is all about the final product, not how you got there. So yeah, I'll be sticking with DSLR for the next few years at least.
But yes, I'm happy Thom and whoever else who decides to adopt the mirrorless format have found something that works for them. Great. Go forth and actuate. But please... A nail in the coffin of DX? Such over the top, needless hyperbole smacks of desperation and more garners my pity than anything.
....
I still think Nikon will produce a Pro Dx, or bring the D7100 successor as close as possible. They might not want to, but if they don't, they are helping to fill Canon's pockets. Look at what we all spend on glass, the body is almost insignificant in the long run. A pro Dx body will lock in more lens sales, make it mirrorless and they might just pick up a bit of market share over Canon's latest pro Dx.
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
Here's what Sony currently offers:
11 x APS -C Zooms
6 X FF - Zooms
10 X - APS -C Primes
7 X FF - Zooms
and I'm sorry....it's 34 lenses.
I guess you got to give them a call then. I checked the Sony site's "E-mount lenses" and could buy 19 different ones. Not that it matters much.
You can check it yourself if you like:
E-Mount Lenses - Lenses Sony Store - Sony US
Last edited:
There is something to be said about size and weight. It does make a difference in some instances. But I always get a kick when it comes up because it always brings me back to my cycling days. I remember guys looking to drop $100's to $1,000's of dollars just to save grams off their bikes when they could clearly stand to lose 10-20lbs off their body.
I will now go to my favorite bass guitar forum where the attributes of Fender, Ibanez, G&L, Gibson and many others will be similarly discussed. And, similarly, there will be no consensus.
Great music is made with any and all of these, just as great pictures are taken with Sony, Nikon, and my the old Kodak Brownie I had when I was a kid. I just pick the camera that suits my needs without feeling I have to knock the other product. But, then, if we all did that, what would there be to talk about?
Oh, wait, I guess we could talk about the practical aspects of taking pictures, with any camera, which makes way more difference than which particular camera we use.
Okay, sorry, back to the big fight, guys.
Great music is made with any and all of these, just as great pictures are taken with Sony, Nikon, and my the old Kodak Brownie I had when I was a kid. I just pick the camera that suits my needs without feeling I have to knock the other product. But, then, if we all did that, what would there be to talk about?
Oh, wait, I guess we could talk about the practical aspects of taking pictures, with any camera, which makes way more difference than which particular camera we use.
Okay, sorry, back to the big fight, guys.
There is something to be said about size and weight. It does make a difference in some instances. But I always get a kick when it comes up because it always brings me back to my cycling days. I remember guys looking to drop $100's to $1,000's of dollars just to save grams off their bikes when they could clearly stand to lose 10-20lbs off their body.
I always get a kick out of the folks out on a casual ride (all they could muster) and all decked out in their spandex outfits!
Nero
Senior Member
I always get a kick out of the folks out on a casual ride (all they could muster) and all decked out in their spandex outfits!
I do too as long as they're not the type of person that shouldn't wear spandex....ever.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk 4
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
OK....so I'm counting the ones that Sony has announced and haven't yet began selling. My bad, but they are well on the way to making good on their FF's. You have your viewpoint and I have mine. No big deal. I just happen to like Zeiss glass and Sony sensors.
- Status