Posts: 442
Threads: 25
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
1
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1305654920' post='8440']
This is definitely way more a drawback of your budget and needs than of Canon's line-up, I'm afraid.
-- Markus
[/quote]
It's probably a marketing choice from Sony who is quite strong in the (large volume) entry-level market. A cheap 85/2.8 totally makes sense for that kind on cameras, as well as the recent 35/1.8DT, 50/1.8DT, and 30/2.8DT Macro.
A 85/1.8 is more for lazy old FF users like me who think a Zeiss 85/1.4 is too heavy for hiking <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />. Or for "advanced amateurs" (a700 & future a77), but Sony is still very weak in that market and might not have enough volume to justify that lens.
After coming back from my last trip, I decided to buy a Minolta AF 100/2. It's a very good lens but it's a pain in the a.. to find and more expensive than a brand new Canon/Nikon.
[quote name='popo' timestamp='1305651886' post='8426']
End of the day, all the above comparison is pretty pointless. [/quote]
You only find one who will disagree. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
DNFTT.
So let's list what we are talking about here
Canon 85mm F1.8
Weight 425g
Launch price $650, street price (new) $450
min focus distance, 0.85mm
Nikon 85mm F1.8
Weight 380g
Launch price $550, street price (new) $490
min focus distance, 0.85mm
Sony 85mm F2.8
Weight 175g
Launch/Street price $249
min focus distance, 0.6mm
And you said that all these lenses are equal optically from F2.8 and up. So for F2.8 and up, you have twice the weight in the bag for what?
[quote name='oneguy' timestamp='1305712608' post='8486']
So let's list what we are talking about here
Canon 85mm F1.8
Weight 425g
Launch price $650, street price (new) $450
min focus distance, 0.85mm
Nikon 85mm F1.8
Weight 380g
Launch price $550, street price (new) $490
min focus distance, 0.85mm
Sony 85mm F2.8
Weight 175g
Launch/Street price $249
min focus distance, 0.6mm
And you said that all these lenses are equal optically from F2.8 and up. So for F2.8 and up, you have twice the weight in the bag for what?
[/quote]
Please please stop for a moment and try to explain to this community what your point is <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':unsure:' /> If you have a certain type body, you buy lenses for that body. That's all! So what if some other manufacturer has a different, lighter, better, cheaper lens.
I would like our moderators to delete all the input that has no point, is insulting or otherwise just makes this Forum less and less pleasant to visit. Thanks in advance!
[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1305714593' post='8491']
I would like our moderators to delete all the input that has no point, is insulting or otherwise just makes his Forum less and less pleasant to visit. Thanks in advance!
[/quote]
I 100% agree. Usually I have no interest in what Canon/Nikon are doing (with lenses or cameras). I would not even bother posting in such threads and whine about them, but one poster here forced me to behave just like he does.
Not pleasant, is it?
I guess the point is that if you want cheapest possible camera / lens combo, go for Sony :-)
Also, I've just realised - you're concentrating on 85mm f/2.8 gap and completely ignore yawning, I would even say shocking gap in the Canon / Nikon line-up: Sony has autofocusing 500mm mirror lens! Which is 5 times lighter and 10 times cheaper than any equivalent AF Canon or Nikon lens!!!!!11
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
[quote name='Lomskij' timestamp='1305716199' post='8494']
I guess the point is that if you want cheapest possible camera / lens combo, go for Sony :-)
Also, I've just realised - you're concentrating on 85mm f/2.8 gap and completely ignore yawning, I would even say shocking gap in the Canon / Nikon line-up: Sony has autofocusing 500mm mirror lens! Which is 5 times lighter and 10 times cheaper than any equivalent AF Canon or Nikon lens!!!!!11
[/quote]
No, they don't. In all their wisdom, Sony dropped that special niche lens from their line up.
Posts: 8,000
Threads: 1,850
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
49
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1305719216' post='8496']
No, they don't. In all their wisdom, Sony dropped that special niche lens from their line up.
[/quote]
Well, Canon and Nikon dropped the 85/2.8 from their lineups too. This is just a matter of perspective.
I think the discussion was about "a gap" in lens line-up... I don't believe that there exists any kind of a "decision authority" as a common sense for such a case... Photographic choices are always subjective. But there are some objective facts also... If one needs a shallow DoF, in general one must get a bigger sensor + faster primes (or APS-C sensors + by all means faster primes). And if one does not need shallow DoF in portraits, this is a subjective choice, which OTOH cannot overrule a simple fact that he /she would better check why portrait photographers use faster primes with less spherical aberrations.
I don't know the Sony compatible lens line-up. But when it comes to Nikon, I don't understand why posters all stick to 85mm FL... Is it the only choice for portraits? There are affordable manual focus 100mm, 105mm, 135mm secon hand choices (f/1.8, 2.5 or 2.8 Ai & Ai-S and even pre-Ai models), with which you can get tack sharp results at wide open with very pleasant background blur. Also not to forget the older AF 85mm f/1.8 (non "D" version) as a cheaper auto focus alternative...
So my point is, it is really hard to find a "gap" in a lens line up, which can be accepted by all (FL, price for new / second hand, f-stop, MF vs. AF, bokeh, etc...)... Furthermore, it is pointless to try to find such a gap, unless one try various lenses with different FLs and speed... E.g. one who never used faster than f/2.8, cannot judge the advantage of having min f-stop of f/1.8 in portraits... or one who never saw the creamy background blur of 90mm f/3.5 APO Lanthar, can be very satisfied with the bokeh of AF 85mm f/1.8D...
Serkan
Posts: 6,715
Threads: 236
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
22
05-18-2011, 12:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-18-2011, 12:52 PM by Brightcolours.)
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1305720974' post='8497']
Well, Canon and Nikon dropped the 85/2.8 from their lineups too. This is just a matter of perspective.
[/quote]
They did?
I do not remember a normal Nikon 85mm f2.8 lens... f1.8 MF, f2 MF, yes. They still have their 85mm f2.8 PC. And Canon still has its TS-E 90mm f2.8.
Canon had a 85mm f2.8 soft focus for the FD mount. Gor Ef they did not "drop" the soft focus lens, they still have it as 135mm f2.8 SF.
My point was that Sony had one niche product in their line up which made it interesting (very compact and affordable 500mm), but now it is not in the line up anymore. Of course, yes, how it rendered could be a bit yuck. But that is not what the lens' strong points were about...
|
