Hmmmmmmmmmm

[SONYNUT]

http://photorumors.com/2009/06/27/tw...s-this-summer/

BUT I WANT AN UMPALUMPA, I MEAN A1000 NOWWWWWWW.

[DWessel]

http://photorumors.com/2009/06/27/tw...s-this-summer/

BUT I WANT AN UMPALUMPA, I MEAN A1000 NOWWWWWWW.

If the rumor comes to fruition, that's quite a line up of camera bodies. Too bad Sony doesn't seem to be coming out with an equal number of new lenses.

[DonSchap]

Well, if it were me making the call ... you would see a 24mm f/1.4, a 35mm f/2, a 200mm f/2 and a 400mm f/4 w/ a superior 2x T/C to compliment the 400mm.

As far as zooms go ... I;d have a well-designed 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 and a 50-150mm f/2.8 to broaden the offerings.

And then, a tilt/shift AF lens ... not MF. That would be revolutionary and put the SONY stuff on the map.

Just a look back to see what needs attention.

[laydros]

Well, if it were me making the call ... you would see a 24mm f/1.4, a 35mm f/2, a 200mm f/2 and a 400mm f/4 w/ a superior 2x T/C to compliment the 400mm.

As far as zooms go ... I;d have a well-designed 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 and a 50-150mm f/2.8 to broaden the offerings.

And then, a tilt/shift AF lens ... not MF. That would be revolutionary and put the SONY stuff on the map.

Just a look back to see what needs attention.

I think those primes would make a big difference in people wanting to shoot sony on the high end.

[dr4gon]

That big PMA lens I believe is 500mm F/4, so that'll be interesting.

What good is 50mm-150mm F/2.8 when the 70-200mm has got you covered in a nice package?

[DonSchap]

It is an either/or kind of proposition. Having both could be rather cool, just depends on the shoot. Although relatively light compared to other lenses of its class, the 70-200mm f/2.8 still weighs in at 42 oz. The 50-150mm f/2.8 would only be a nifty 30 oz. That's some weight savings, to be sure. When you are bounding around town ... slinging a 40+ oz. lens becomes a chore.

I feel it is a serious consideration ... but, that's just me. You are free to "muscle" anything you want to carry.

[Rooz]

And then, a tilt/shift AF lens ... not MF.

i dont think that's possible is it ?

[DonSchap]

Nothing like a challenge ...

[DWessel]

... the 70-200mm f/2.8 still weighs in at 42 oz. ... When you are bounding around town ... slinging a 40+ oz. lens becomes a chore.

Lugging the a900 with the Tamron 70-200mm slung around your neck can be a chore. I end up with the strap around my neck and carrying the camera in one hand.

But, I find it absolutely fascinating that when ever I'm carrying that combo, numerous people come up to me and ask if I'm a professional, who I'm photographing for and what I'm photographing. When I have the tiny Sony 50mm f/1.4 on the camera, no one bats an eye ... I'm just another shlub with a camera.