If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Crap! | SteveB[_5_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 11 | January 13th 09 02:44 PM |
What's all this digital crap doing here? | David Nebenzahl | 35mm Photo Equipment | 24 | August 12th 08 08:43 AM |
Too cute or Crap | JimKramer | 35mm Photo Equipment | 6 | July 17th 07 12:52 AM |
SUSPECTED FRAUD WARNING! | Frank Malloway | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 6 | July 4th 03 09:17 PM |
SUSPECTED FRAUD WARNING! | Frank Malloway | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | July 3rd 03 04:36 PM |