As suspected, it's crap
 

The latest data point for the Sony "pancake" lens. If this
sample is indicative, it's a crap lens.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1346/cat/82

As suspected, it's crap
 

On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 22:58:30 +0000, Bruce wrote:
: Rich wrote:
: On Dec 6, 9:27*am, "Bowser" wrote:
: The latest data point for the Sony "pancake" lens. If this
: sample is indicative, it's a crap lens.
:
: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1346/cat/82
:
: It is a piece of garbage because it was made too cheap in order to fit
: with cheap NEX system. How do they think they can make a 16mm prime
: lens cost the equivalent of $150 and have it work properly? The 20mm
: f1.7 Panasonic lens is $350, is a good lens, but only has to support a
: 4/3rds sensor size. The APS sensor is much wider, necessitating a
: much more expensive lens, guestimate about $400 if they cared to make
: a good one.
:
:
: The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 isn't all that good either. It has quite
: strong geometric distortion that is hidden (corrected) by the software
: in Micro Four Thirds cameras. But it is a heck of a lot better than
: that Sony POS.
:
: I wonder if Sony intends to introduce some Zeiss branded lenses for
: the NEX series? If Sony intends to rely on the junk optics (16mm and
: 17-55mm) that are currently offered, they are likely to deter serious
: photographers from ever considering NEX.

Unless both Nikon and Canon completely drop the ball with their forthcoming
mirrorless cameras, I can't see Sony succeeding in that market anyway.

Bob

As suspected, it's crap
 

On Mon, 06 Dec 2010 14:42:05 +0000, Bruce
wrote:

"Bowser" wrote:
The latest data point for the Sony "pancake" lens. If this
sample is indicative, it's a crap lens.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1346/cat/82


That's very disappointing. The NEX 18-55mm is also crap.

You just have to hope that the NEX 18-200mm is better, otherwise what
is the point?

I'd be surprised if it were any good. If you can't design and build a
simple pancake lens, what hope do you have for a complex zoom?


Despite all this, the NEX cameras and lenses appear to be selling
well.

As suspected, it's crap
 

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 19:55:23 -0800 (PST), Rich
wrote:

On Dec 6, 5:58*pm, Bruce wrote:
Rich wrote:
On Dec 6, 9:27 am, "Bowser" wrote:
The latest data point for the Sony "pancake" lens. If this
sample is indicative, it's a crap lens.

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1346/cat/82

It is a piece of garbage because it was made too cheap in order to fit
with cheap NEX system. *How do they think they can make a 16mm prime
lens cost the equivalent of $150 and have it work properly? *The 20mm
f1.7 Panasonic lens is $350, is a good lens, but only has to support a
4/3rds sensor size. *The APS sensor is much wider, necessitating a
much more expensive lens, guestimate about $400 if they cared to make
a good one.

The Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 isn't all that good either. *It has quite
strong geometric distortion that is hidden (corrected) by the software
in Micro Four Thirds cameras. *But it is a heck of a lot better than
that Sony POS.

I wonder if Sony intends to introduce some Zeiss branded lenses for
the NEX series? *If Sony intends to rely on the junk optics (16mm and
17-55mm) that are currently offered, they are likely to deter serious
photographers from ever considering NEX.

Zeiss compatible lenses have (finally) shown up at my local large
retailer. I think Zeiss is serious about this move.
Look at Olympus 35mm macro (which, if used over a normal focus range
could be in a housing 1/2" thick) or Nikon's 35mm f2.0. Both those
lenses are relatively cheap, and high quality. What I can't frigging
understand is WHY none of the writers on testing of lenses has offered
their opinion as to whether the sensor to lens distance is
incompatible with reasonably-priced wide primes. Is there not ONE
optical expert amongst them?? If it can't be done, then TELL people
this is the way it is, that a 16mm f2.8 lens HAS to be at least 2"
long and HAS to cost at $500.00. Tell them! The customer will
understand. Unless your only customers are creatures migrating from
purse-compatible P&S's.

Maybe Bob Atkins, who is (supposedly) an optics expert will weigh in
on this one someday. Until then, I don't need to be an expert to see
that the NEX system is pure garbage. Stupid undersized body, brain
dead control system, and crap glass. The trifecta of badnessosity.