How will Sony strike back?

As Peter C. says. Sony has been waiting for everybody else to catch up. Just check out ShareGrids' rental break down to see the figures from the las 30 days... and then go back through the years. '24, '23, '22. The last time any other camera bar a Sony was in the top three was back in 2022, when the Red Komodo got into the top three. Since then, the FX3 and FX6 have just dominated. And this is just the results from ShareGrid only, where they have 150,000+ members sharing over $1B+ worth of gear.

Chris Young

https://insights.sharegrid.com/
 
Last edited:
Just adding eVND for me in a FX3 style body. The FX6 gets too much "Do you have a film permit" / "Professional cameras are not allowed". The A7siii does not get a 2nd look.
 
I also wonder what happened to the PZ line-up refresh? There was the promo image of 3 new lens, but all we got was the very expensive C16-35 PZ repack a few years ago then the cheaper 16-35 PZ F4 more recently.
 
I think Sony have made it pretty clear they aren't going to bringing out any "serious" cine zoom lenses due to the price they would have to be. Their Sony FE C 16-35mm T3.1 G lens, whilst a nice lens has been a dud from a sales point of view, Hardly surprising at $5,500.

Sony knows serious filmmakers with serious budgets aren't going to be using E-Mount lenses but other well established cine lenses from other lens manufactures. For the rest of us, and for most of the day-to-day mass TV production line sausage machine output, Sony's existing S35 18-110 mm and FF 28-135 mm pseudo parfocal lenses do the job quite nicely. They are also cheap enough to replace if one gets trashed.

When the FX6 and Sony's 28-135 mm lens become fairly staple items on shows like Kaitlan Collins, "The Source" Sony really don't really see much incentive to produce much more expensive kit when many end users find the current crop of kit totally adequate. The very fact that their 28-135 has been around for ten years and is still going strong at $3K just confirms their market approach has been pretty spot on. Even Nikon have come out with their modern equivalent of Sony's now aging 28-135 mm clunker. Mine is hardly ever off the FX 6 for general TV work.

Chris Young

Someone on location sent me this:
 

Attachments

  • CNN 28-135.jpg
    CNN 28-135.jpg
    97.9 KB · Views: 3
I was watching the Conan O'Brien travel show on Netflix and in a few scenes where the other camera crosses into the shot, it looked like either a Sony FX6 or FX9 with an Angenieux zoom lens, which is a combo I've seen in a few other BTS of things.
 
A lot of travel shows are using the FX6 due to its size and low light sensitivity for vérité type shooting in restaurants and night scenes. The FX6 matches up with the Angie EZ2 22-60 mm and EZ1 45- 135 mm really well. I don't own them but have used them and I find them fairly nose heavy on an FX6, but that's to be expected on a 2.0 lb body. Superb glass though. A whole host of theatrical releases have been shot on those EZ lenses. Ridley Scott used them on Napoleon, House of Gucci and Gladiator II. Not that ANY lens could save Gladiator II! :)

Chris Young
 
Yeah, my 28-135 pretty much lives on the the FX6. It is a great combo for what I do at a price point that is more than acceptable. I'm not going to a Angenieux or even stuff like the Sony C16-35 PZ which to me is an overpriced repack of the older 16-35 2.8. As mentioned other mounts have been releasing similar more modern versions of this sort of lens. Would be happy to sacrifice some long of the long end for something wider as 28mm is a bit to long. Also to me the Autofocus on this lens seems to seek especially at the 12,800 base with ND on.
 
jmone said:
Just adding eVND for me in a FX3 style body. The FX6 gets too much "Do you have a film permit" / "Professional cameras are not allowed". The A7siii does not get a 2nd look.
Click to expand...
You could add the new Kippertie electronic ND adapter they just announced at IBC to your FX3?

Of course you wouldn't have native e mount with it in that case. But if you want PL lenses on an FX3, with eVND, now you can.
 
DustinSchmidt said:
You could add the new Kippertie electronic ND adapter they just announced at IBC to your FX3?

Of course you wouldn't have native e mount with it in that case. But if you want PL lenses on an FX3, with eVND, now you can.
Click to expand...
That thing looks cool, but the pricing is ridiculous.
 
Not sure how many of you caught this, but apparently at IBC, Samyung showed their prototype of
a native e-mount 28-135 F2.8 lens which could be quite interesting.

Screenshot 2025-09-16 at 12.49.19 PM.png
 
scorsesefan said:
That's a really compelling zoom range. 24mm would have even been more useful.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree while 24 vs 28 doesn't sound a lot it makes a big difference in enclosed spaces and when you add crop for 4k 60 and an additional crop for stabilization you'll find wider is always better.

While that's a great focal range the trade off is size, weight and price for a fast large zoom range.
 
Peter C. said:
I tend to agree while 24 vs 28 doesn't sound a lot it makes a big difference in enclosed spaces and when you add crop for 4k 60 and an additional crop for stabilization you'll find wider is always better.

While that's a great focal range the trade off is size, weight and price for a fast large zoom range.
Click to expand...
It’s rumored to not be that big, heavy, or expensive. While I agree that in principle 24 would be better than 28 (200 would also be better than 135 on the long end) trade offs obviously have to be made. I very rarely need anything
wider than 28. 28 is roughly equivalent
to 18mm field of view on Super 35
which is plenty wide for most shots.
If not, you can always do a little bit of
a pan move….its video after all, the
picture doesn’t have to stay still/locked
off. Maybe Sony will make a zoom to
match the Canon 24-105 F2.8? That
would be another interesting lens
especially if the lens had stabilization
for us FX6 users….
 
alaskacameradude said:
It’s rumored to not be that big, heavy, or expensive. While I agree that in principle 24 would be better than 28 (200 would also be better than 135 on the long end) trade offs obviously have to be made. I very rarely need anything
wider than 28. 28 is roughly equivalent
to 18mm field of view on Super 35
which is plenty wide for most shots.
If not, you can always do a little bit of
a pan move….its video after all, the
picture doesn’t have to stay still/locked
off. Maybe Sony will make a zoom to
match the Canon 24-105 F2.8? That
would be another interesting lens
especially if the lens had stabilization
for us FX6 users….
Click to expand...
I would love a 24-105 2.8 Sony equivalent. Canon makes a lot of zooms with OIS which I wish Sony would do, but I think it would add bulk to the lens.
 
scorsesefan said:
I would love a 24-105 2.8 Sony equivalent. Canon makes a lot of zooms with OIS which I wish Sony would do, but I think it would add bulk to the lens.
Click to expand...
Seeing as Canon has done it in RF mount, it seems like it is just a matter of time until Sony (or Tamron or Sigma since Sony actually
allows third parties access to the Emount ecosystem) makes that lens in Sony Emount. It's obviously possible so.....I'd think
it would be coming before long. Guess we will see. I am interested in a lot of these new lenses we are seeing. Seemed to be, in the
past there was a 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 zoom lenses which could all be F2.8 but that was the max aperture. Now we are
seeing all sorts of focal lengths and F2.8 is no longer the largest aperture on a zoom lens. Now we see lenses like
a 35-150 F2-2.8. Or a 28-70 F2. Or a 24-105 F2.8 & 28-135 F2.8 when the past versions were F4 versions. Seems to
be the mirrorless mount lenses actually have some innovation in them in so far as new zoom ranges and F stops available.
 
I was sixteen 1990 had not arrived. 28mm on my praktica. As soon as i met some 24mm folk i realized 28 was not it.

Add some odd crops and its so bad to be a nice interview lens to be paired with a 20 or 16-35
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top