08-03-2011, 05:51 PM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1312358335' post='10354']
I think there's also a bit of a misconception here regarding the potential sizing.
MFT lenses are not really smaller than their FT counterparts. Just take the
Olympus 14-42mm (classic) vs Panasonic 14-42mm
Olympus 40-150mm (classic) vs Olympus 40-150mm
Even the Oly 70-300 (classic, a relabeled Sigma full format lens) is not any bigger than the Pana 100-300mm.
Those MFT lenses that are substantially smaller are either pancakes or smaller because they are underdesigned.
Consequently NEX lenses will barely be smaller that conventional Alpha DT lenses.
Or in other words - NEX lenses will always be bigger than MFT lenses anyway (exceptions apply, of course).
The latter isn't even 100% correct - assuming you got lenses with the same depth-of-field potential the size will be the same. Thus you'd think of the Zeiss 24/1.8 as a MFT 18mm f/1.2. Frankly I doubt that this one would be any smaller. Just think of the Voigtlander 25/0.95 (equiv. to a 33mm f/1.3 - take the Sigma 30/1.4 DC as a reference).
[/quote]
Klaus, I fully understand the trade-offs being made but at the end of the day, manufacturers still miss my sweetspot on quality/price. Aiming either too cheap or too expensive (I'd say the 20mm f/1.7 & Olympus 9-18 are notable exceptions in terms of size/performance/price but a tad low on build quality and still a tiny bit too expensive).
The sony 16mm f/2.8 could have been that tiny bit larger to get better performance.
The panasonic 14mm f/2.5 is plain uninteresting as it's too compromised on perfs and 14mm is overlapped by a million mft lenses with no decisive speed advantage. Could have been a tad bigger, the 20mm size wouldn't have been a shocker but they decided to make this lens a statement for the GF2.
The Sony 24mm... well, it's too early, but definitely looks big.
But there is hope as it seems that both the 12mm f/2 & 45mm f/1.8 are finally getting there : not overly small but still very compact (no, it doesn't have to be a pancake! it's still too big to fit in a pocket), likely higher build quality, likely high image quality but at an "exclusive" premium for the 12mm, also being made a statement for the "classy" e-p3... I wish brands wouldn't play this fashionista tune so much.
Hopefully Sony will find converge towards that balance.
Just my 2 cents.
-S
I think there's also a bit of a misconception here regarding the potential sizing.
MFT lenses are not really smaller than their FT counterparts. Just take the
Olympus 14-42mm (classic) vs Panasonic 14-42mm
Olympus 40-150mm (classic) vs Olympus 40-150mm
Even the Oly 70-300 (classic, a relabeled Sigma full format lens) is not any bigger than the Pana 100-300mm.
Those MFT lenses that are substantially smaller are either pancakes or smaller because they are underdesigned.
Consequently NEX lenses will barely be smaller that conventional Alpha DT lenses.
Or in other words - NEX lenses will always be bigger than MFT lenses anyway (exceptions apply, of course).
The latter isn't even 100% correct - assuming you got lenses with the same depth-of-field potential the size will be the same. Thus you'd think of the Zeiss 24/1.8 as a MFT 18mm f/1.2. Frankly I doubt that this one would be any smaller. Just think of the Voigtlander 25/0.95 (equiv. to a 33mm f/1.3 - take the Sigma 30/1.4 DC as a reference).
[/quote]
Klaus, I fully understand the trade-offs being made but at the end of the day, manufacturers still miss my sweetspot on quality/price. Aiming either too cheap or too expensive (I'd say the 20mm f/1.7 & Olympus 9-18 are notable exceptions in terms of size/performance/price but a tad low on build quality and still a tiny bit too expensive).
The sony 16mm f/2.8 could have been that tiny bit larger to get better performance.
The panasonic 14mm f/2.5 is plain uninteresting as it's too compromised on perfs and 14mm is overlapped by a million mft lenses with no decisive speed advantage. Could have been a tad bigger, the 20mm size wouldn't have been a shocker but they decided to make this lens a statement for the GF2.
The Sony 24mm... well, it's too early, but definitely looks big.
But there is hope as it seems that both the 12mm f/2 & 45mm f/1.8 are finally getting there : not overly small but still very compact (no, it doesn't have to be a pancake! it's still too big to fit in a pocket), likely higher build quality, likely high image quality but at an "exclusive" premium for the 12mm, also being made a statement for the "classy" e-p3... I wish brands wouldn't play this fashionista tune so much.
Hopefully Sony will find converge towards that balance.
Just my 2 cents.
-S