Leaked image of Sony 18-110mm f/4 G E-mount lens to be announced Sep. 9th 2016

Appears to be cluched like the current Sony's 28-135mm f/4. Also the same filter size, 95mm.

Unlike the 28-135mm the rumored lens has focal length marks.
 
The current Sony E PZ 18-105mm f/4 G OSS Power Zoom Lens works great on the a6300.
<span itemprop="name">
 
Great news. ( Although it would be greater news were it a f/2.8. )

Not so good of news for re-sale value of the Sony 24-135mm. It just became largely a doorstop. The Sony 24-135mm can join the Cabrio 19-90mm for a good cry in a beer. Both lenses seriously undercut by their own maker.

The question is...would you rather an f/4 18-110 or an f/2.8 17-75mm ( speed-boosted Canon 25-105mm mark II ). The Canon lacking par-focal and manual iris but better matching a Canon 70-200mm. Hmmm.
 
JPNola said:
The question is...would you rather an f/4 18-110 or an f/2.8 17-75mm ( speed-boosted Canon 25-105mm mark II ). The Canon lacking par-focal and manual iris but better matching a Canon 70-200mm. Hmmm.
Click to expand...


It is a good question.

Now my booster+nikkor 28-85 lacks a bit at the ability to fill a frame and defocus the backgroud. (aka Im always craving an actual 85 not a boosted 85 (about 50))

This is because a little mentioned 'attribute' of speedboosters is that they work against the minimum focus distance.. or rather it stays the same but because your image just got 'looser' you need/want to get closer to fill the frame the same amount

BTW the 24-105 is nothing like T4 at the long end.

S
 
It is going to be very similar, in my view, to the SONY 18-105mm f/4 as seen here:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1001011-REG/sony_selp18105g_18_105mm_f_4_g_lens.html

The things I will be looking for is, does the lens jump around the 95mm mark when doing a zoom. The 18-105 does. Second does the focus ring behave like a proper geared lens and not a fly by wire lens, otherwise you are paying more for the lens only to be rehoused.

EDIT:

Also is this lens that can be used on a full frame sensor or in Super35 or crop mode. It says in the copy of the leaked image that it is APS-C only but this has to be confirmed.
 
The Sony would have a 6:1 zoom range opposed to the 24-105mm's 4:1. I'd likely take the range over the (questionable) speed. Need to see how each performs shooting against the Sun as it's one scenario where the Speedbooster'ed zooms fall apart.

Even if I pickup a 18-110mm, or similar, I'll hold on to the 28-135mm f/4 as it's a useful focal length for multicam.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Stone said:
otherwise you are paying more for the lens only to be rehoused.
Click to expand...

You'd be paying more to have infinitely variable iris. That is something I very much value. I shot a Walk & Talk segment this past week and it sucked having to choose between allowing the exposure to be under / over as the level of light changed or perform nasty stepped iris change while the person was speaking.

Not to be overlooked is the fact that the Sony 18-110 does not trombone when zooming as does the Canon 24-70mm and many other zooms. The Sony 18-110mm is never going to have much appeal with the "cinema lens" crowd who shoot higher-end productions ( commercials, music videos ). They will want something faster, something with mechanical focus, and something absent any electronic image correction. But for Run & Gun shooting / reality tv / most video work the Sony 18-110mm II hits the mark. Particularly if priced around $1500. Being par focal is huge for R & G and for shooting sports / action. Manual / infinitely variable iris is also huge for that sort of shooting where subjects often move between areas of hugely varying light level. Being able to "snap zoom" and not have to refocus, that's a big plus.
 
Some perspective here-

Consider that the beautifully done video linked above was shot with a $1600 camera / lens combo.

It wasn't that long ago that it would have required a camera upwards of $50,000 to create video of that quality and look. We truly are spoiled with all the technology available today and the comparatively low cost of the technology. For $350 we can have a camera that can shoot 4k and 120 fps. That's just ridiculous.
 
I would like this lens, but the focusing system could be an issue and like others say IQ. Still it could fit really nice on my FS7 and a7rii.
 
I'd wager its performance will be similar if not the same as the 28-135. If you don't like the aesthetics of that lens then you probably won't like this S35 version.
 
JPNola said:
Some perspective here-

Consider that the beautifully done video linked above was shot with a $1600 camera / lens combo.

It wasn't that long ago that it would have required a camera upwards of $50,000 to create video of that quality and look. We truly are spoiled with all the technology available today and the comparatively low cost of the technology. For $350 we can have a camera that can shoot 4k and 120 fps. That's just ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Which camera will shoot 4k and 120fps for $350?
 
FrameFarmMedia said:
I'd wager its performance will be similar if not the same as the 28-135. If you don't like the aesthetics of that lens then you probably won't like this S35 version.
Click to expand...
If the IQ is at par with the Canon 24-105 I'll take it since thats the lens it replaces in my kit.
 
k0bayashi said:
A lot of you will be disappointed when you find out the price tag on Friday....
Click to expand...

Well that is quite the cliff hanger.

I'm guessing $3200.

Let's start a price-guessing pool. If you go over by $1 you are eliminated. Like on "The Price is Right".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top