Image courtesy of http://sonyalphalab.com

Sony E Mount Strategy -Revisited

February 11, 2016 in Camera Gear, Sony A7, Sony A7II

I wrote a piece on Sony's lens selection and strategy back in late 2013. With the announcements of Sony's new G Master FE lens line, It feels time to revisit this topic. A little over 2 years later, while some of my criticisms have been answered, some still linger and new ones have appeared.

In that article, I suggested Sony develop some fast zooms to win over the pro DSLR crowd, but I kind of assumed they would have attended to the rest of the line in the meantime. Between then and now, they have released 7 FE lenses. I've added a basic description of each.

28mm f/2 (entry level Prime lens)
Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 (Mid level constant aperture)
Sony FE 24-240 F3.5-6.3 OSS Lens (All in-one travel zoom with variable aperture)
Sony FE 28-135mm f/4 G PZ OSS Lens (Very large power zoom -primarily a video lens)
SONY FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS Lens (Pro level long zoom- Sports, Wildlife, and studio)
Sony FE 35 F1.4 ZA Lens (Pro level Fast Prime with manual aperture ring)
Sony FE 90 F2.8 Macro G OSS Lens (Mid level macro)

You might look at that list and think, "What are you complaining about?"

I look at that list and see a lot of compromise and a lack of direction.

Some Examples

When I think of a camera system, I picture a robust and standard mount that accepts a whole range of lens offerings offering consistent quality and design philosophy. This is one reason photographers have put trust and money into Canon's L series, Nikon's FX series and Leica's M mount lenses. There's a consistency to how they work, look, and feel. Prices also have some consistency and predictability.

Sony's FE line seems disjointed, and inconsistent. Not only are there big holes in the lineup, but the variance in design and price between lenses is really weird. For example, the 28mm f/2 is a very solid lens and has a good reputation for image quality and build. It's priced at $450, which seems like a pretty good deal and is appropriately priced for a no-frills lens.

If you move to the next traditional focal length of 35mm, there are two lenses which both have some good qualities and are well loved by many Sony shooters, but just don't make sense in a system. The 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss lens is slower than the 28, and close to double the price. These two lenses are awfully similar in image quality, but don't seem like they belong in a system together. Different finish, different branding.

Add in the 35mm f/1.4 and things get really confusing. Is there an upper line of fast Zeiss lenses with dedicated aperture rings and absolute focus on image quality? No? You mean this is the only one? See what I mean? This lens has almost nothing in common with either of the two I've already mentioned which would indicate that it belongs to its own "set" of lenses.

How about a 50mm, the standard Normal focal length prime lens? I see a good mid-high end model in the Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8. Is there an entry level 50 matching the design and price point of the 28mm f/2? Nope. Is there an f/1.4 model that matches the high end 35? No, that one doesn't exist either.

Let's say you want an ultra wide or a super wide angle prime lens for astrophotography or low light interior shots. The entry level 28 is the widest prime in the Sony lineup and if you want to shoot wider, your only option is a 16-35mm f/4 zoom.

Are you starting to see some inconsistencies?

Marketing Strategy

Even from a marketing perspective, this random strategy makes little sense. From my (admittedly) anecdotal view, there's a healthy market for sub $1,000 fairly compact lenses. I know of very few A7 owners that don't own the 55 or the 35 f/2.8. Though there's clearly a place and demand for the development of higher end lenses, I'd wager that Sony is leaving money on the table by not having a larger stable of standard primes.

It seems there's a psychological barrier holding a lot of people back from the idea of spending more on a lens than the cost of the body. Though experienced photographers know that glass is a great place to invest, there is a very broad (arguably larger) market of newer enthusiast photographers who would rather buy 2-3 good lenses for $1,500 than one great lens.

So, though I know it's unlikely to draw Sony's attention and seriously change their plans or philosophy, I'd like to offer a roadmap which actually makes sense and addresses many different types of photographers.

Conveniently there are great pieces in the current lens lineup to guide us. Here's to development of a system which is optimal for shooters and gives Sony some great price points to drive wider adoption and good-will with photographers.

FE lenses

FE 28mm f/2 with UWC attached photo coutesy sony.com

This is a lineup that should resemble the 28mm f/2 . Smooth, satin finish bodies, a single focusing ring, simple branding and fairly quick apertures. On this line, I'd avoid OSS and apertures faster than f/1.8 or f/2 to keep the body size under control. These should all be in the $300-$700 range. Here are my suggestions.

21mm f/2
28mm f/2 (current model)
35mm f/1.8
50mm f/2 or f/1.8
Fisheye is already covered with the adaptor for the 28mm

Sony Zeiss Lenses

image coutesy of http://lenspire.zeiss.com

Sony and Zeiss have a great history of collaboration and I really hope nothing happens to jeopardize it. There are some great Sony Zeiss lenses, but there just isn't a consistent direction. The 3 zooms are similar, but the primes are all over the place.

I'd move towards a set of prime lenses modeled after the 35mm f/1.4 Distagon with prices in the $800- $1600 range. Satin/Matte finish, Zeiss Branding, T* coatings, and dedicated aperture rings for the primes. I know a lot of photographers prefer to use zoom lenses to cover the broad ranges and then add a couple key primes in critical focal lengths. This line should reflect that.

14mm f/2.8
21mm f/2
24mm f/2
35mm f/2.8 (current)
35mm f/1.4 (current)
55mm f/1.8 (current, but ready for an update)
85mm f/1.8
90 f/2.8 Macro (current, though branded as a G model and priced like a Zeiss?)
135mm f/2
16-35mm f/4 (current)
24-70mm f/4 (current)
70-200mm f/4 (current, though branded as a G model and priced like a Zeiss?)

Sony G Master

This is relatively new line (they haven't even shipped the first 3 lenses yet as I write this). It seems Sony is really aiming to compete with the high end L glass from Canon, and the upper end FX lenses from Nikon with this set. I predict this being a much more speciality oriented set. Aperture rings, high end speciality glass and designs, with a distinct visual design. In some ways this line doesn't have to be that complete. This is the place to go all-out and try new stuff.

16-35mm f/2.8
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.4 (Current)
16-35mm f/2.8
24-70mm f/2.8 (current)
70-200mm f/2.8 (current)

So, that's my proposal. It's a lot, but there really is a lot of room for improvement. Some of these aren't exciting, but would be great pieces to add if they have real long term plans for E-mount. Go take a look at the primes lenses available on just about any other system and this doesn't feel like a lot.

Other Makers

I really believe that Sony needs to offer their own complete line of lenses. That said, its great to see other companies get into the E Mount business. There are a few, but the only one that has really made a commitment to this mount is Zeiss.

There are a handful of other lenses with native E Mount, but these Zeiss lenses are the only serious peers and compliments to Sony's offerings. Zeiss has even gone so far as to publicly discuss their relationship with Sony and the differentiation between the Sony Zeiss collaborations and their own lenses.

Sony doesn't really do the same, which isn't all that surprising. Thankfully, these Zeiss lenses fill gaps between the Sony lenses and in-fact the Loxia lenses offer truly unique character and beautiful design and handling. If the Sony 55 is sometimes reviewed as "clinical" in it's rendering, the Loxia 50 seems full of character. As tests come in on the new Sony G Master 85, it will be interesting to see how it compares to the Batis 85, which is also really new.

My take on it? The Zeiss lenses offer some upgraded character, handling and build, but image quality is very similar to the Sony Zeiss lenses. It remains to see if the G Master lenses represent a significant upgrade.

What about APSC?

People express so much concern over Sony's lack of new APSC lens development and view it as a sign that APSC is dead or not a priority to the company. I suggest Sony cease marketing and making APSC-specific lenses and begin moving toward a universal E mount that can be used on both sensors. Perhaps keep the base model zooms and either the 21mm or 16mm pancake. This gives customers an easy and inexpensive way to get started, but removes the confusion and simplifies the upgrade path in a way that no other camera maker does.

New 50 and 35mm models in the FE base line could take the place of the current 50mm f/1.8 and 35mm f/1.8 models.

The Future

Sony is most certainly pushing the envelope with the Alpha series. New bodies are coming out quickly and many photographers are deciding that Mirrorless is finally ready for professional use which makes it a great time to land an upgraded lens strategy. It will show established photographers that Sony is willing to support a full system, making it easier to switch and it will allow new photographers to grow with this mount and system.

Coatings

November 05, 2015 in 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, Camera Gear, Film

I was just doing some organizing, cleaning and such and the different colored reflections from the anti-glare coatings on my Zuiko lenses made for a really cool scene.

St Johns Bridge

October 25, 2015 in 80mm, Camera Gear, Hasselblad, Film

I've been in Portland far too long to have never posted a photo of this bridge. It's also middle-of-the-day light, but I don't care. I stopped on my way to visit one of my offices and drop off this roll. Sometimes you just shoot with what you've got.

Old Gear

October 21, 2015 in 35mm, 2015 Daily Photo, Camera Gear, Sony A7

Using a new-old lens to shoot some old gear. Olympus OM Zuiko 35mm f/2 with an adaptor on my A7.

Sony RX1rII Announced- Kind of my Holy Grail Camera

October 14, 2015 in 35mm, Camera Gear, Gear, Photography, Tech

I've made it no secret over the years that I love the 35mm focal length. I've owned quite a few different 35mm lenses, but there's one that has been out of reach for a number of reasons. The fixed Sonnar 35mm f/2 that comes built into the Sony RX1 and RX1r. They haven't made this lens available for E Mount because the rear element almost touches the sensor and just wouldn't be feasible in an interchangeable design.

I seriously considered this camera when I moved to full frame with the A7 last year, but as much as I wanted that lens the lack of articulating screen and EVF made the choice clear.

As of today though, that's no longer the case. Sony announced the RX1rII and it's everything I hoped it would be. The backlit, 42 megapixel sensor that comes in the A7rII, the same beautiful Sonnar lens, a pop up T* coated EVF, and an articulating LCD. It even has the 399 point phase detection for imporoved autofocus.

A few different friends have heard me say that if they made an RX1 with an EVF and an articulating screen, I'd figure out a way to get one.

I'm pretty sure this camera could easily cover 90% of the shooting I do. They don't ship until mid November and the price is $3,300 USD. That's a lot, but considering you're getting everything but the 5 axis stabilization from the A7rII, and the exquisite Sonnar lens, I don't think it's too riduculous of a price.

I'm looking forward to the hands-on reports and image samples. Obviously, I'm seriously considering reconfiguring my kit.

If you are interested, you can preoder from B&H here. Amazon has a page up, but isn't accepting preorders just yet.

Thrift

July 15, 2015 in 2015 Daily Photo, 35mm, Camera Gear, Sony A7

Of the numerous shops along Hawthorne, one stands above all else in terms of sheer volume of "antique" stuff.

My First Hasselblad Medium Format Prints

April 12, 2015 in Camera Gear, Hasselblad, 80mm

I posted a photo of the Hasselblad 500C/M that I picked up a few weeks ago and have been really anxious to see if I have any idea what I'm doing. I just got my first couple rolls developed and printed and I'm really happy with the results.

Because I do most of my sharing online, I usually get the negatives scanned and forego the prints, but considering tradition and the advice of Jim at Blue Moon Camera, I had prints made of these first few photos with this camera.

...but I still wanted to share, so I went a little meta, and took digital photos of the prints.

One thing I've learned already- I shouldn't have been so intimidated by this camera. It's big and mechanical and somewhat foreign, but all the same basic principles apply here. It's still shutter speed, aperture and film ISO.

One thing that was a little disconcerting, is the maximum Shutter speed of 1/500. When you are metering and want to shoot with your aperture fairly open, what do you do when the meter says you should be at 1/2000? The simple answer is you just shoot at 500 and everything will turn out fine within reason. Film has lots of headroom.

There is something magical about shooting with this camera. Looking down into the viewfinder is like nothing I've ever seen and it really does give you an immersive sense of what the final image will become. As soon as I opened the envelope and saw the first 2 prints – the ones from the beach – I was hooked. Now I just need to figure out the workflow to do this on an ongoing basis and keep the costs reasonable.

Luckily I've got a great lab with reasonable prices, but I'll probably figure out a way to scan my own negatives for convenience and cost if I'm going to shoot a lot of film.

The color prints were made with Kodak Ektar 100 and the black and whites with Kodak Tri X 400.

I also picked up 3 rolls of my favorite film thus far, Portra 400 and will be taking this kit to Maui next week.

So, my foray into medium format film = Success!

The Basics of Photography: Getting Started with Manual Controls

March 20, 2015 in Camera Gear, Photography

Years ago I took a shot at learning how to take photos with a big camera with manual controls and it was a big mess of "try everything and hope something works".

...and I was shooting on film. But times have changed and with digital, there is literally no additional cost involved in shooting 50 versions of the same photo.

But that's not very rewarding and I wish that someone had given me a couple basic lessons to get me started.

So, after figuring this stuff out by trial and error over the last few years, I wrote this guide as a primer. I'll go over the basic settings on your camera, tell you what they do, how they work together and when it might make sense to use automatic modes.

Ready? Get out your camera and follow along. Also, here sort of a director's note: On each image in this post - and generally across my site - you can find the EXIF data, or the exposure information for the photo embedded in the black border. I started doing it awhile ago because I'm always curious when looking at the photos of others and have learned a lot by paying attention to these details.

Aperture, Shutter Speed and ISO- A Three Legged Stool

There are 3 basic settings that are common to most every method of making photos. Shutter Speed, Aperture and ISO. My film cameras literally only have these three settings. Modern digital cameras have a lot more things you can adjust, but these are the basics and everything else is just a variation. In order to manually control one, you need to understand how all three work and how they affect each other.

The Mode Dial

Your camera probably has a few modes on a dial or in a menu labeled M, A, S, P and some green label or box that represents Full automatic. I'm not going to talk about Automatic or P – which is Program mode as they both leave most of the decision making to the camera. While there's a time and place for that, we're dealing with more of a hands-on approach here.

M stands for Manual, where – surprise, surprise – you manually choose all three settings. The other modes are presets that allow you to choose one (or more) of the three parameters and allow the camera to take care of the rest.

If you are a real hands-on sort of learner, Just pick one parameter and take the same photo at every setting to see what it does. Do this with shutter, aperture and ISO. Start with fairly neutral settings across the board. Shutter at 100, aperture at 5.6, ISO at 100.

So with that, lets talk about the big three

Aperture

The aperture, is the camera's iris, which controls how much light is allowed to reach the sensor or film. It might be helpful to think of the way a human iris constricts when you go from a dark room to bright daylight. The aperture measurement number, also called the f/stop, is a measurement of the lens's focal length divided by the width of the aperture opening . The "f" stands for Focal length. A smaller f/stop number means the aperture is larger or more open. A larger number means that the iris is constricted, often referred to as "stopped down"

While the aperture controls the amount of light that reaches the sensor of the camera, It's also important to note that the aperture also controls depth of field. Depth of Field is the term we use in photography to describe how much of the scene is in focus.

The wider your aperture is set, the narrower the depth of field. This would be useful for a portrait where you want to isolate the subject of your photo and have the background appear blurry and out of focus. It's possible to have such a narrow depth of field that a person's eye ball is in focus, but the end of their eyelashes are blurry.

The more stopped down and small your aperture is, the wider your depth of field. This is how most landscape photos are made, where there are a lot of important details in the photo that should all be in focus.

How does this apply to your camera gear?

Most lenses for modern cameras have the ability to stop down to f/18 or f/22 which makes them well-suited to landscape photos. Most any kit zoom lens will do great for this purpose, but a lot of people move to a dedicated camera because they want to make photos with blurry backgrounds or they are wanting to shoot in low light. If this is your goal you will want to open up the aperture as wide as possible.

The lens that comes with most intermediate level cameras is a basic zoom. This type of lens usually has a maximum (largest) aperture of f/3.5 when it is at its widest focal length and f/5.6 when you are fully zoomed in. Remember how the f/stop is focal length divided by the size of the aperture? Because the focal length changes with a zoom lens, you actually need a larger aperture opening at longer focal lengths to get the same f/stop. Unfortunately while zoom lenses are available with larger apertures, that larger opening requires larger glass, more weight and a higher price.

If you are planning to take lots of photos of people and find that you aren't getting a shallow enough depth of field from your kit zoom lens, I would strongly recommend making your first upgrade a prime fixed focal length lens such as a 50mm f/1.8. Most camera systems have a pretty affordable 50mm lens in the $200-$300 range. This type of lens has a much larger glass element and a larger aperture for better low-light performance and narrow depth of field. As a growing photographer, this will open up all sorts of options and show you the value of a good fixed focal length prime lens.

While not specific to aperture, focal length also has a large impact on depth of field. Shorter focal lengths with a wider angle of view such as 18mm have a naturally large depth of field. A longer focal length like 50mm has a tighter field of view and will also have smaller depth of field at the same aperture setting. You can use this to your advantage by changing to a longer focal length to get a shallower depth of field.

The A mode allows you to concern yourself only with Aperture while the camera chooses the shutter speed for you. If you use a larger aperture, the camera will choose a faster shutter speed to compensate for the extra light. If you use a smaller aperture, it will do the opposite and choose a longer shutter speed.

Shutter Speed

The shutter is a curtain that controls how long the image is exposed to the sensor (or film).

A slow shutter spead (anything longer than about 1/80 of a second) will allow more light to reach the sensor and is useful in low-light conditions. A shorter shutter speed, is useful in bright, well lit conditions and can also be useful to avoid blur caused by people moving – including you, the photographer. If you get into the 1/1000+ range, you can get great stopped motion shots of sports and other fast paced stuff.

Playing with the shutter speed is one of the most common ways to experiment with composition. You can leave your shutter open to capture the motion of water, clouds, people, cars....pretty much anything. But, remember that because the shutter is exposed for longer, it will also be affected by any movement of the camera. Get yourself a tripod.

You can use the S or TV (Time Value) setting to focus on Shutter speed and let the camera choose the correct aperture. If you choose a fast shutter speed, the camera would likely open up the aperture. If you choose a longer shutter, the aperture would stop down.

ISO

ISO is the sensitivity of your sensor or Film. The numbers are based on the rating system for film sensitivity. Film comes in different sensitivities which are optimized for different conditions and our digital cameras have settings to match. The higher or lower sensitivity of the sensor is achieved by varying the amount of electrical charge to the sensor. Because of this increase of power to the sensor at higher ISO settings, you may start to notice more noise or grain. More sensitive higher ISO film has more grain. Because of this, I don't shoot film any higher than 400.

Though I positioned ISO as one of the 3 main factors, I'd recommend using it as a sort of baseline that you change less often. When you shoot with film, the ISO is something you would only change when you put in a new roll of film. When you set the ISO on the camera (or meter), your general metering and exposure is shifted based on the film you are using. Though a digital camera has the ability to change this with the push of a button, I think it's better to reserve ISO changes and mostly rely on Aperture and Shutter speed for achieving correct exposure. I generally stick with ISO 100 but change it when I'll be shooting at night, or moving between indoor and outdoor.

In addition, I personally feel that with digital cameras the higher the ISO, the more you are compromising on color. Most sensors have a base ISO of 100 where the color is most accurate. On every digital camera I've used, I see some shift in colors as you move upwards of ISO 400. Just something good to remember.

In light of the above, I recommend that you start with ISO set to 100. Aperture and Shutter speed have a much larger effect on composition and it will serve you better to start with them. Starting with ISO 100 gives you a baseline understanding and a sense of how your camera sensor handles light.

Here are some guidelines:

ISO 100 is good for bright daylight and good lighting conditions and the resulting images have little to no noise or grain and color is most accurate.

ISO 400 is still good in moderate to bright light, but can be used in overcast and indoor situations with very little noise.

When you get up to about 1600 or 3200, you can shoot in low light, and even night time scenes without a flash if you use a longer shutter speed. You will probably find that above 3200, the sensor noise starts to be an issue and because the sensor is now able to pick up more light than your actual eyes, colors can get a little weird. Because of this, if there is a shot that I really like, but has issues, sometimes it's perfectly usable in black and white.

The high ISO response is so good in many modern cameras, many people just set the camera to auto ISO and forget about it, just be aware of color. Most modern cameras allow you to set ISO to auto in all of the P, A, S, and even M modes.

I've mentioned film quite a bit here because it's the legacy that all this came from and I still shoot film. I prefer ISO 100 for Landscapes and ISO 400 for People and the darker, more overcast parts of the year. That may be an oversimplification, but it has worked well for me. It has the added benefit of removing one more variable as well. However, in order to make sure you know these are just guidelines, here are a couple examples of the opposite.

Kodak Portra 400 on the 4th of July in bright afternoon sun.

A portrait with Kodak Ektar 100 on a cold, morning just before Sunrise — A portrait with Kodak Ektar 100 on a cold, morning just before Sunrise

Remembering what's important

Though there's a value to being gung-ho about this and only shooting in full manual, keep in mind what's important. While you are learning how all this works, don't be afraid of using some automatic mode features in situations when the stakes are high - important events. You probably got this camera to capture photos of things that matter to you, and you really don't want to miss an important shot because you are fiddling with your camera. Eventually this stuff will be second nature, but while you are still learning, don't be afraid to let the camera help so you don’t have to worry about it as much, and can just focus on the shot or the thing you’re doing.

As you learn the different variables, you can slowly move more and more towards full manual as your go-to.

I hope this helps, and please do reach out if I can answer any questions that come up as you are learning!