4 ms·

Bodies are uber cool (and that comes from a guy shooting stars and nature with Nikon D750 every weekend), but Sony lenses portfolio is pathetically small at thi

Bodies are uber cool (and that comes from a guy shooting stars and nature with Nikon D750 every weekend), but Sony lenses portfolio is pathetically small at this moment. You know, the other half of the whole quality equation camera. Where is cheap all-around high quality 24-120? Cheap and yet superbly sharp 20mm 1.8 or better? Yes, you can find some, but cheap ain't part of description. Size and weight isn't everything (otherwise everybody would be shooting with cell phones or gopro-likes). I don't mind my 2.5kg setup when backpacking for weeks, I don't mind it when hiking/ski touring. I know what I get in return. For climbing/skiing/paraglide gopro is anyway much much better. Also, you can't cheat physics and have big sensor complemented by lightweight tiny lens and expect good result. Now if Nikon would come up with these electronics in in their FF D line, I would take it even if they would weight the same.

ipsum2 9y ago
> Also, you can't cheat physics and have big sensor complemented by lightweight tiny lens and expect good result. Noob here, how does it work with traditional 35mm film cameras, or the Leica digital full frame bodies that have small lenses then?
- CydeWeys 9y ago
  Cheap, good, lightweight, choose two. The Leica lenses are insanely expensive. Also many are manual only, which saves in size and weight.
- matwood 9y ago
  Fixed focal length lenses are also easier to make. My Nikon 35mm is inexpensive, light, and takes great pictures. The downside is I have to zoom with my feet.
URSpider94 9y ago
You don’t have to cheat physics to get a much smaller lens with mirrorless. Without the room for the reflex mirror, the rear element of the lens can be much closer to the image plane. This makes it MUCH easier to build a really high quality 50mm or shorter fast lens in a small package. Yes, if they’re Leica, they can be very expensive, but Cosina makes some beautiful lenses under the Voigtlander label that will knock your socks off for less than $500. If you really want to blow your mind, check out the Voigtlander 12mm and 10mm full-frame lenses - try that with your SLR! DSLR’s are at a major disadvantage for focal lengths of 50mm and shorter.

ipsum2 9y ago

> Also, you can't cheat physics and have big sensor complemented by lightweight tiny lens and expect good result. Noob here, how does it work with traditional 35mm film cameras, or the Leica digital full frame bodies that have small lenses then?

CydeWeys 9y ago
Cheap, good, lightweight, choose two. The Leica lenses are insanely expensive. Also many are manual only, which saves in size and weight.
matwood 9y ago
Fixed focal length lenses are also easier to make. My Nikon 35mm is inexpensive, light, and takes great pictures. The downside is I have to zoom with my feet.

URSpider94 9y ago

You don’t have to cheat physics to get a much smaller lens with mirrorless. Without the room for the reflex mirror, the rear element of the lens can be much closer to the image plane. This makes it MUCH easier to build a really high quality 50mm or shorter fast lens in a small package. Yes, if they’re Leica, they can be very expensive, but Cosina makes some beautiful lenses under the Voigtlander label that will knock your socks off for less than $500. If you really want to blow your mind, check out the Voigtlander 12mm and 10mm full-frame lenses - try that with your SLR! DSLR’s are at a major disadvantage for focal lengths of 50mm and shorter.