same ccd, 4k cheaper, but wheres the lens ?

July 26, 2009 10:39 AM

whats the selection of wide angle lenses for the sony alpha 900 ?

I'm fairly baffled by this - but the possibility of getting a full frame 24mp dslr for 4k less than the nikon d3x is a source of great interest to me - but i'm noticing a real lack of lenses - i know theyre zeiss/minolta compatible - should i just hunt down minolta lenses on ebay ? are there any definitive answers about lenses for the new(ish) full frame sony ?

I'm not really worried about getting a f2.8 lens or anything - its more for outdoorsy landscape types of stuff.

posted by sgt.serenity to technology (2 comments total)

Zeiss doesn't make a lens mount, they make lenses with all sorts of mounts though. Sony does license technology and designs from Zeiss, though, and together they do make a couple AF lenses. A 24mpx body requires you get the best glass, otherwise you're just going to be wasting your money. I have no idea what kind of kit Sony has out right now, but I'm very sure their consumer-level lenses will leave you frustrated on a full frame DSLR. Minolta lenses on ebay would be the thing to look for.

Now, if you're looking for maximum lens selection and a 20mpx+ body, consider a Canon 5D mkII. It's 22mpx, a cheap $2500 and will (with non-optical-element adapters) take Nikon, Contax/Yashica, Minolta/Sony, Pentax, Olympus OM, m42, Leica R, Pentacon Six, etc, etc mount lenses. Pretty much everything but old Canon FD lenses will go on there with a cheap adapter. One of my main lenses is a Carl Zeiss 28mm f/2.8 T* Distagon that came on a C/Y mount, I use it all the time on my 5D (mkI) and it's just razor sharp. Cost me $200... in Europe! (where everything is more expensive).
posted by jedrek at 10:52 AM on July 26

You need to go to dyxum and check out the lens database. And join the forum while you're at it, it's one of the best forums by far.

The best wide zoom is the Zeiss 16-35/2.8 but that will cost you a bundle. There's a 17-35/2.8-4 which is of decent but not magnificent quality but very low price and there's a 17-35/3.5 G which is about halfway between the other two. You can also get a 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8 (crap), 28/2, 35/2 (both very sharp), and 35/1.4 G (magic bokeh). And there are lenses from the third-party manufacturers.

btw, it's called the "Alpha" mount, that being the name that Minolta gave to their (D)SLRs in the Japanese market. They called 'em Dynax in EU/AU and Maxxum in US; Sony decided to go with Alpha world-wide when they bought Minolta's camera division. Alpha is the only mount you'll get autofocus Zeiss lenses on.

One more thing: Sony is a couple of months from releasing an A850, which some think will be a cheaper full-frame, perhaps a D3 competitor. Lots of speculation but the only concrete info at the moment is that there will be an A850 because there's a placeholder for it on the Sony website.

Ignore the "you must have the best glass for 24MP" naysayers - the pixel pitch for 24MP on full frame is actually coarser than it is for 12MP on APS-C. So an A900 is a lot less harsh on your lenses than an A700 or A350, at least in the centre. Obviously if they have poor corner performance you'll find that out quickly.
posted by polyglot at 12:57 AM on July 30