Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: New PRIME glass

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    New PRIME glass

    Along with the gang-busting SLT cameras, SONY also release three new lenses:

    • 85mm f/2.8 SAM (Full frame)
    • DT 35mm f/1.8 SAM
    • CZ 24mm f/2 Distagon Planar T*


    I picked up the 85mm lens, because my other lenses either did not have AF in them or it took too long to "get there" with the MACRO's focus screw rate. Even with the (thank goodness) "limit switch", it was nearly unbearable.

    The IQ seems to be pretty decent ... and for the price (the alternative is nearly $1000 more), it is a definite bargain for the length, if you cannot pop for a 70-200mm f/2.8 right away.

    Just something to chew on, while you are awaiting your new SLT-α55.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-16-2010 at 02:11 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Why even bother with the 85mm F/2.8? Don't you have that range easily covered with AF by the Tamron 70-200/2.8. For an 85mm prime, F/2.8 is hardly desirable.
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Cool Just weight ...

    Unfortunately, weight is a consideration with the TAMRON SP AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD. Although the TAMRON is the "lightest" in its class, it is still a good 42-44 ounces, when you are slinging it around. Arguably, the SONY G SSM is worse, yet, at 53-ounces.

    This AF 85mm f/2.8 only weighs in at a feisty 8-ounces and uses the same filters as the 50mm (also 8 oz). Therefore, it is a very cost-effective addition to your lens bag. The Zeiss 85mm (23 oz) may give you f/1.4 ... but, if you are not ready for the added DOF issues with that aperture ... it may not be the best solution, either.

    The PRIME advantage in this case is truly reduced weight ... by two+ pounds. Tell me a six-hour hand-held shoot does not takes its toll with that. If you do not need to zoom for proper frame, due to location limitations ... that really is a waste of effort and needlessly taxes your wrists. I carry the four lighter lenses (50mm, 85mm, 135mm, and 200mm) and swap, using the old "two-step" for framing ... like they all did, back in the day. Again, location dependent. That's the luxury of having both types of lenses.

    Admittedly, the Zeiss AF 135mm f/1.8 (35 oz) is not that light, but the SONY MF 135mm f/2.8 STF (26oz) is. You get your creamy bokeh and convenience at the same time, but you're the one doing the focus. That can be a tough call ... so you have both in the bag. Why not ... the bag sits on the floor, right?

    Again, we all shoot differently ...
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-16-2010 at 03:46 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    you have the tamron 90/2.8 which is probably far better optically and essentially covers the same range at the same speed. and didnt you buy some hunk of junk fast 85 a while ago ? hows that POS working out for ya ?

    oh well, i suppose sony should be happy that at least theres someone buying their stuff just cos its new and its got a sony badge on it. lol
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Red face New or not ...

    it is small, light, pocket-able ... w/o the caps the lens it 2.25" long. Nice and short for the length. On the a700, it is the shortest "effective" 135mm lens I have ever seen. If you do not have this focal length ... a good choice when you still need some extra coin left in your change purse. But, then again Rooz ... you pay for what you get. With some lenses ... you even pay more than what you get for it.

    I've already done a few shots with it ... the contrast is slightly light, compared to the Rokinon (Samyang) MF 85mm f/1.4, which I feel really has an IQ on par with the Zeiss-version. I mean if you do not mind manual focus ... it is the budget-lens of the year. Unfortunately, with subdued lighting, I have found that MF can be a "MF", hence this subtle fix in the line-up.

    The SONY 85mm f/2.8 SAM 55 is zippy in AF. It does get it right in subdued light and that is a blessing, indoors. So say what you will, for under $300 ... it does a decent job. The next one up is ... around $900 ... the SIGMA 85mm f/1.4 DG EX HSM, then the SONY Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 at $1400, both are over 20-ounces and require 77mm filters.

    In fact, here is the new 85mm f/2.8 SAM mounted on the α700 ...

    Name:  a700-SAM-85mm-f28.jpg
Views: 1557
Size:  278.1 KB

    EXIF: α850 w/ Rokinon MF 85mm f/1.4
    @ f/8 - 1/125 sec - ISO-200 - M-mode - Subj Dist: 4 ft - Light: Metz 76 5-MZ flash (ceiling bounce)


    Here it is up against the TAMRON SP AF 90mm f/2.8 Di MACRO w/ the MACRO's focus "limit" switch engaged ...

    Name:  90f28Macro-vs-85f28.jpg
Views: 812
Size:  321.7 KB
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-17-2010 at 12:20 AM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,421
    its a nice light tidy little package. i just dont see the point of such a slow prime personally.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554
    It is all about size, filter size and weight ... as an f/1.4 would have to have a ... let's see ... 85/1.4 = ~61mm first element. That's about the size of most 70-300mm f/4-5.6 lens front elements.

    Anyway ... it goes to work on Saturday.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,760
    noted

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,554

    Thumbs up SONY DT 35mm f/1.8 SAM

    The new SAL DT 35mm f/1.8 SAM lens came in, today. SONY shipped them out, yesterday.

    Name:  a700-w-sony35f18.jpg
Views: 1779
Size:  330.1 KB
    A700 w/ SAL DT 35mm f/1.8 SAM

    The key thing to remember about this lens is that it is an "APS-C only" lens, making the focal length effectively 52mm on the crop-sensor cameras.

    Upon quick inspection, it focuses a lot closer (6-inches closer) than the 50mm f/1.4 and seems to be pretty quick with that focus, too.

    Again, to me, it is not all that loud, but it is not SSM. It will probably show up on the a33 and a55 video recording's audio when you are in AF mode and using the internal microphones.

    It is kind of funny to see the 85mm f/2.8 next to the 35mm f/1.8 ... they are are nearly of identical height. If your reach into your bag blindly, you will not be able to tell these two apart. The 50mm f/1.4 is noticeably shorter and has a shallower lens shield, so you should be able to distinguish it, in the dark.

    For $200 ... it can solve some issues.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 10-01-2010 at 04:31 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr & Sdi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •