Waiting for 18-200mm f1.2😂

Can it’s support the fx30 , with cage, with the sigma 18-35 and adapter mc11?

Because Tamron and Sigma do it better, at a better price. Let third party legitimize a platform and the questions dissipate.

Hello! I need some advice. I have the Sony 6700 and I wanted to know if the SONY FE 16-25 G is a good option in terms of image quality compared to the Sigma 10- 18 2.8. Money is not a problem nor is the distance range, I would just like to know if there is a noticeable difference between the 16 - 25 in terms of image quality.

I hear a lot of reviewers harping on the minor negatives of this lens, but I'd be ecstatic to get the kind of shots shown in this video from a $200 lens. You'd recoup your money on a single portrait shoot, and after a couple more you could afford to get a lens of even higher quality if you chose to upgrade.

This is why I always tell ppl looking for apsc to just go with MFT instead. Nobody really makes good apsc lenses so you're stuck buying the large expensive full frame ones which kind of renders the point of apsc invalid. At least with MFT they actually produce high quality lenses that take advantage of the smaller sensor.

finally a proper explaned vid covering the models. i was so confused at first w it all. THANKS

Well said 👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

I think Sony is leaving the low price apsc lenses to third party esp chinese firms as the prices and margins are very low now. So it makes sense for Sony to concentrate on high end apsc and full frame lenses.

The Wüsthof Classic 8-Inch Chef’s Knife was launched in 1886 for $3 (around $150 in today’s dollars). Still costs about the same. It’s a lens and works the same. Nothing has changed. People are still using lenses made in the 1940s. Why make a new lens when it works perfectly? Some things are timeless like that.

1:23 best aperture clicks I've heard so far

I shoot both Sony and Fuji. Sony for FF and Fuji for APSC. Honestly, 2024 has been a wild shift in the camera space. I believe at this moment, Fuji owns the APSC crowd. These guys could hardly keep up demand on their cameras, not to mention their lens lineup for the X Mount is plenty for both 1st and 3rd party. I'm sure this is also the reason why Fuji wont even touch the FF market. They know their audience.

Tommorrow i will get this lens for $707 offer price..😊

I really want a remade PZ 18-105 f/4

Answer? $$$$$$$

Shame on Sony for not treating APSC seriously

Interesting. Hmmm. Compare image quality and autofocus to the tiny series Samyang 35mm f/1.8?

I went the full frame route because I wanted dual SD slots, and because it seemed like Sony supported those bodies more. However, I still keep an APSC (a6400), since the lenses are just as good (imo), are more inexpensive and are way more portable. It's common for me to bring my sony 11mm 1.8 (one of my favorite lenses) on my 6400 when I'm going somewhere scenic, and I need something I can fit in a small bag. I also like that I can attach my full frame sigma 70-200 2.8 and get a 105-300mm 2.8 focal range. If I could do it all over again, I probably would stick to just APSC, since you have companies like Viltrox making amazing, yet inexpensive, glass, and because I could have gotten a backup 6400 for $700, instead of spending $1,300 on my a7iii. The third party support is quite stellar

100% I've resorted to buying mostly full frame lenses because there simply aren't emount APSC lenses that I need. The problem with full frame (besides the price) is that they are bigger and heavier. Why should I lug around a huge telephoto with glass that I'm not using? There's not even a single f/2.8 APSC telephoto lens available from any manufacturer. No zoom or even prime other than some expensive, completely manual cine lenses. As a concert video producer, I'd snap a lens like this up instantly.

They made the Sony A6700 too good and regret it. People are buying it up with APSC lenses. Forget Sony APSC lenses. Sigma and Viltrox are making some insane ones!

I have always used my full frame lenses on APS-C camera and have not missed having a second line of lenses not compatable with full frame. I can understand user with only APS-C bodies though. Why should Sony compete in a APS-C market with the lenses already produced by third party? On my A6700 I love the 50mm f/1.2, 135mm and even the 600mm f/4.0 is sometimes hooked up. There is a permium line available thus small, with the APS-C 70-350 and the 15-55 f/2.8. also I cannot agree on the lesser build quality on GM lenses. Is a choice they made to keep the weight down. My lenses would not be ran over by truck so I favor weight over metal build.

This video hits onto the realization I came to two years ago: Sony (and to an even larger degree, Canon and Nikon) is not really interested in making a complete system of high-quality APS-C lenses. Why should they? For all three companies, their goal isn't to keep you on an APS-C system. _If_ you're the type that _really_ wants to stay on APS-C, want better quality, and are willing to pay for it, you have only two choices: use third-party lenses, or just use first-party full-frame lenses and deal with the added bulk/weight. Of course, after you start using FF lenses, pretty soon you're going to decide that you might as well get an FF body - the end. Two years ago, I decided to stop playing that game and went to Fuji X. I love camera, and I love that Fuji has every incentive to make damn good lenses that are designed specifically for APS-C.

As long as Tamron / Rokinon / Sigma exist, I don’t need Sony glass

Let's start by saying that your Sony 35mm f1.8 has been downgraded in price when we factor in inflation. By keeping the price the same, they are reducing it in real terms every year. About APS-C, what about Fujifilm? They are committed to APS-C. They routinely upgrade/replace old lenses with new ones. They're constantly producing new cameras or upgrades of old ones. APS-C isn't going anywhere. That said, I'm sure Sony/Canon/Nikon would love to be able to drop their APS-C lineup and go 100% full frame. It makes me laugh to see someone lugging around a heavy, expensive FF kit, when all they do with their photos is to put them up on social media. A 1/2" sensor is good enough for that job. Unless you're a pro or an amateur who makes really big prints, FF is nothing more than a fashion statement. A M43 sensor is more than enough for Joe and Jane Average.

The 35 was my first prime, too! I paid $350 American, i think. Shoot, I'll sell it now!

why only for sony?😭

No margins.

11mm 1.8

We are getting GTA 6 before a 50-150mm f2.8 for sony APSC

I think we’ll get some cool APS-C glass in the next 3-4 years, but I think all the best lens manufacturers are trying to stun people with cool new lens options (Sigma, Tamron, Canon, Sony have all tried to “reinvent” the 24-70 this year… it’s smaller lighter, or has a longer reach, or has a brighter aperture) These innovations will trickle down to APS-C, but not immediately.

I would like an 18-105 f2.8 from Sony for my FX30. While I wait for my wish to come true, I purchased a Viltrox 27 F1.2 and this is a great lens.

All I want from Sony APS-C is to release and sharper and just better version of their 70-350 G Lens…. That lens sucks so bad compared to its full frame counterparts (actually the 70-300 G is also pretty terrible) Sony, please, give me a lens that is twice the price but has an extra 50% of performance. 🙏🙏🙏 the 200-600 is goofy big on crop bodies, but it’s sort of the only reasonable native choice.

Holding the price steady for 10 years is basically a discount. $500 doesn't go nearly as far as it did in 2015.

Maybe there are enough already?

Simply, they know that nobody will buy their expensive APS-C lens over third-party ones.

They leave that to the pro's. 😅

Sony isn't in a cheap lenses business anymore. And they know how their current lenses sell. They can't compete with cheap viktroxes on price/performance anymore, ni reason to waste resources - they utilize the native brand strategy and benefit from buyer ignorance and 'fanatism' (you can find people praising all bad lenses just because they are from Sony, like the horrible 24-240 FF for example). So there's a basic lineup from Sony for APS-C, and most APS-C customers will barely pay for G quality/price level, and even less for GM - but that's what Sony is willing to mage and want to sell. Meanwhile the system isnopen enough, basically it works just fine - you can get your viltrox or other without some Sony half quality lower price attempt alternative. Yes there are pros and other APS-C users that would pay Sony price for an excelent lens from Sony, but that's a more vocal minority than real common APS-C customers. And lastly, there's no reason to stay at APS-C if you're a serious buyer/user, with so many small and not expensive FF lenses and small FF cameras, the once possible 'myth' of an APS-C size/price/performance sweetspot is gone.

For me i use either MFT or FF, APSC gets so little love from manufactures.

1- Minimal profits for APS-C compared to F.F. lenses. 2- APS-C buyers often are more price sensitive then F.F. buyers and expensive APS-C lenses usually don't sell that well. Your ending statement is spot on. Sony wants you to "upgrade" to Full Frame

0:19 Oh, look at all those video titles. As a M43 user I can sympathise. 😅

I'm sorry to break it to ya but if you're looking for passion, sony ain't it. Also if you want apsc glass that actually looks good come on over til fujifilm - it will be fun and your pictures will look much better ;)

Agreed, Sony has lost its way in the APSC arena. Instead of trying to fight against the iPhone competition. they just throw up their hands, hoping the 3rd party manufacturers will keep their boat afloat. Sad.

Sony still sells bodies without ibis so the 1.8 oss lenses are filling a current demand. I plan to get one myself!

brands other than fujifilm treat aps-c as a stepping stone towards full frame, and have the expectation the majority of aps-c purchasers will never move past the kit lens. they don't give a shit, and fuji actually giving a shit barely matters since they charge almost full frame prices regardless. the unfortunate reality is that no matter the intrinsic advantages of m43 and aps-c, full frame is almost always best simply due to the extrinsic advantages of the market

I had several APS-C Sony cameras, but whilst the bodies were updated, Sony simply dropped development of APS-C lenses in favour of full frame cameras, and lenses. For me personally as a hobbyist photographer APS-C is the “sweet spot” for price and weight, the lenses are generally smaller, lighter, and less expensive. I abandoned Sony in favour of Fuji who are continually are innovating in APS-C bodies, and lenses.

do you have a recommendation for sony apsc lens that equivalent with 70-200 f2.8 in full frame? thank you

I dont shoot APSC anymore but I love your channel and agree with your sentiments. I feel like things are just moving away from APSC sadly. On a different note, your set and lighting are phenomenal!

This lens is garbage. Constantly focus hunting and the AF is slower than grandmas driving.

Comparing an outdated smartphone to an outdated lens makes me think you understand very little about how phones or camera lenses actually work.

The 70-350 is the only sony lens I have. All my other lenses are viltrox, sigma, tamron and TTArtisan. I'm om with that.