How about a low light solution that might be great?

[DonSchap]

As we all know, fighting low light imaging is a science until itself.

It appears that SONY may just release a CZ 24mm f/1.4, which would be one of the brightest and deepest DOFs at f/1.4 around. A terrific ‘low-light lens’, ditch the flash and this would be the one to have in your lens bag.

How good is it?

Compare these various lens DOF results* at 10 feet:

CZ 24mm @ f/1.4 = 2.8 feet
35mm G @ f/1.4 = 1.4 feet
50mm @ f/1.4 = 0.65 feet
CZ 85mm @ f/1.4 = 0.22 feet
CZ 135mm @ f/1.8 = 0.11 feet

How about 20 feet?

CZ 24mm @ f/1.4 = 13.1 feet
35mm G @ f/1.4 = 5.71 feet
50mm @ f/1.4 = 2.75 feet
CZ 85mm @ f/1.4 = 0.94 feet
CZ 135mm @ f/1.8 = 0.37 feet

Ask yourself, "What kind of focus that would be for the little one's recital?"

* These measurements are only on the APS-C sensor DSLRs.

[Rooz]

certainly looks like a very nice lens, i'd love a lens like that in a nikon mount. although i think it will be cost inhibitive for 99% of people. it will likely come in at over $2k.

ditch flash though ? no...wrong thought process.

[dr4gon]

As we all know, fighting low light imaging is a science until itself.

It appears that SONY may just release a CZ 24mm f/1.4, which would be one of the brightest and deepest DOFs at f/1.4 around. A terrific ‘low-light lens’, ditch the flash and this would be the one to have in your lens bag.

How good is it?

Compare these various lens DOF results* at 10 feet:

CZ 24mm @ f/1.4 = 2.8 feet
35mm G @ f/1.4 = 1.4 feet
50mm @ f/1.4 = 0.65 feet
CZ 85mm @ f/1.4 = 0.22 feet
CZ 135mm @ f/1.8 = 0.11 feet

How about 20 feet?

CZ 24mm @ f/1.4 = 13.1 feet
35mm G @ f/1.4 = 5.71 feet
50mm @ f/1.4 = 2.75 feet
CZ 85mm @ f/1.4 = 0.94 feet
CZ 135mm @ f/1.8 = 0.37 feet

Ask yourself, "What kind of focus that would be for the little one's recital?"

* These measurements are only on the APS-C sensor DSLRs.

Got a source for this lens speculation?

From a Dutch forum, I hear that May 18 is being touted as a release day for new Alpha gear. ( http://www.cameralabs.com/forum/view...e35384c94e1289 )

From the Sony UK Support site, at least 2 models of an A330 Y and L kits, and 2 lenses 50mm F/1.8 and a 18-55mm.

Photoclubalpha

[DonSchap]

Arguably, SIGMA's 24mm f/1.8 (D) EX Aspherical DG DF Macro ø77mm-filter comes close and for $479, seems affordable. As a mid-grade alternative ... you lose a third-of-a-stop of light, but the DOF gets a bit bigger.

@ 10-feet it is 3.88 feet

@ 20-feet it is 17.5 feet

This is one SIGMA I would seriously consider ...

Then there is the Super Wide SIGMA 20mm f/1.8 (D) EX Asperical DG DF RF for $569, but the optical distortion can be a little rough. It is decidedly heavier, with a ø82mm filter.

@ 10-feet it is 5.82 feet

@ 20-feet it is 30.6 feet

Got a source for this lens speculation?

For the time being, let's just go with the gut. This particular Zeiss lens is being requested at higher levels.

[Honest Gaza]

As we all know, fighting low light imaging is a science until itself.

Compare these various lens DOF results* at 10 feet:

How about 20 feet?



Ask yourself, "What kind of focus that would be for the little one's recital?"

I could be wrong here Don but isn't 24mm Focal length a little on the short side. I've been to lots of school presentations over the years with 3 kids and I have to tell you, getting within 20 metres is hard enough, let alone 20 feet

[Rooz]

Arguably, SIGMA's 24mm f/1.8 (D) EX Aspherical DG DF Macro ø77mm-filter comes close and for $479, seems affordable.

canons 35/1.4 runs at around $1200 and their 24/1.4 runs at around the $1700 mark. so, given zeiss' pricing, i'd expect it to be very close to the $2k mark. expecting it to come it at under $1k is completely unrealistic.

[laydros]

I think I was just saying about a week ago that a good 24mm is just what Sony needs.

canons 35/1.4 runs at around $1200 and their 24/1.4 runs at around the $1700 mark. so, given zeiss' pricing, i'd expect it to be very close to the $2k mark. expecting it to come it at under $1k is completely unrealistic.

I'm fairly certain Don was saying the Sigma was different option for <$500, not that the CZ 24 would come in that cheap. If it did, both of us would probably be switching to Sony.

I expect, and I'm sure Don does as well, that a Zeiss 24 would be out past $1000 like you said. However, the Canon 135 runs around $1000, and the faster Carl Zeiss is only about $400 more, so I'm hoping that a 24 for Sony would come in a little under the $2000 mark.

I could be wrong here Don but isn't 24mm Focal length a little on the short side. I've been to lots of school presentations over the years with 3 kids and I have to tell you, getting within 20 metres is hard enough, let alone 20 feet

Yeah, this would be more like a shot of someone you are sitting beside at the bar, or a shot of someone at a concert when you are on stage. The 50 (on crop), 85, and 135 are going to serve more for school presentations, concerts from the crowd, etc. I'd rather see a GOOD 24 and a KILLER 35, since most people buying this glass are buying it for full frame.

I still think if Sony wants to ride with CaNikon, the first thing they need to do is beef up the middle section. Do more for the "prosumer" with an A700, that isn't quite ready to step up to a set of full blown $1500 glass. However, one of their big benefits is CZ glass, and they need to do a better job utilizing it. A good 24mm would be a good step in the right direction.

[laydros]

I think I was just saying about a week ago that a good 24mm is just what Sony needs.

canons 35/1.4 runs at around $1200 and their 24/1.4 runs at around the $1700 mark. so, given zeiss' pricing, i'd expect it to be very close to the $2k mark. expecting it to come it at under $1k is completely unrealistic.

I'm fairly certain Don was saying the Sigma was different option for <$500, not that the CZ 24 would come in that cheap. If it did, both of us would probably be switching to Sony.

I expect, and I'm sure Don does as well, that a Zeiss 24 would be out past $1000 like you said. However, the Canon 135 runs around $1000, and the faster Carl Zeiss is only about $400 more, so I'm hoping that a 24 for Sony would come in a little under the $2000 mark.

I could be wrong here Don but isn't 24mm Focal length a little on the short side. I've been to lots of school presentations over the years with 3 kids and I have to tell you, getting within 20 metres is hard enough, let alone 20 feet

Yeah, this would be more like a shot of someone you are sitting beside at the bar, or a shot of someone at a concert when you are on stage. The 50 (on crop), 85, and 135 are going to serve more for school presentations, concerts from the crowd, etc. I'd rather see a GOOD 24 and a KILLER 35, since most people buying this glass are buying it for full frame.

I still think if Sony wants to ride with CaNikon, the first thing they need to do is beef up the middle section. Do more for the "prosumer" with an A700, that isn't quite ready to step up to a set of full blown $1500 glass. However, one of their big benefits is CZ glass, and they need to do a better job utilizing it. A good 24mm would be a good step in the right direction.

Edit: after this post I hopped over to Google Reader, and Photography Bay posted that the Sony UK support site had listings for the products dr4gon mentioned above, a 50/1.8, 18-55, and an A330. Sounds like a nice beginner kit.