Fujifilm is quite popular as a travel system and there is a good reason for it and it isn’t necessarily APS-C. Fujifilm introduced a compact set of lenses, affectionately called Fujicrons by the users, named after the Leica Summicron. Instead of putting out lenses with wide open apertures of 1.4 or even f/1.8 like most of the full frame brands, Fujifilm introduced good quality f/2 lenses that were compact, with fast AF and good quality optics.
With full frame and Sony, everything to date has been developed with f/1.4 and f/1.8 apertures with the exception of the 35mm f2.8, a nice compact lens that mirrors the weight and dimensions of Fujifilm 23mm f/2. The problem in Sony’s lens line up is that the 35 f/2.8 is where Sony’s Fujicron equivalents stop. That means if you want to go light, people tend to go with travel zooms like the 24-105 instead of going for 2 or 3 compact primes. This is great if you have the budget for the 24-105mm, or if you’re a zoom users, but not if you’re a prime user or have a limited budget. The advantage with small primes is they still have a larger aperture than a travel zoom so you’re getting better sharpness and low light ability.
I’d like to see Sony introduce more additions to the range, a 24mm f/2.8 and 50mm f/2.8 to complete the combo. You could argue for a 16mm f/2.8 and 85mm f/4 but it would be great just to see the others initially.
What this would start to offer is compact travel options along with alternatives for street photography. If I’m travelling overseas, I’m happy to go with some lightweight lenses.
Why would Sony want to do this?
The one advantage they have is your users don’t have to go to other brands or APS-C to get compact travel options. Fujifilm is a popular brand for travel photos so it would be good to be able to buy lenses in your range without having to go to Fujifilm.
It offers customers a cheap set of entry level primes, but a set of primes that are still decent optical quality.
Maybe there is a market, maybe there isn’t but like most photographers, I’m selfish and I look at what I need. Hopefully it’s something Sony or a third party consider.
Last week I picked on Fujifilm in first of the Sony vs Fujifilm series; Today, it’s Sony’s turn to feel the heat. The topic this week is “Kaizen” which is the Japanese word for “continuous improvement” or “good change”, I’m not 100% sure because different website say different things and I’m too lazy to research the exact translation.
“Kaizen” as a concept in the case of Fujifilm, is a series of firmware updates Fujifilm continues to put out for years after a camera is released to improve the functionality of the camera subject to the limitations of the hardware, something none of the other manufacturers I’m aware of do, where most of the firmware updates are solely to fix bugs and in some cases, not at all. As far as I know, the A7rii hasn’t had the star-eater issue fixed, somewhat of a disgrace if you’re an astro shooter.
Over the coming months, I thought I would put together a list of articles about what these two brands can learn from each other, in an effort to steer away from the whole X-T3 vs A7iii arguments that seem to have become the usual click bait these days.
I know people are going to get offended with whatever I write, that’s the nature of camera gear these days. This is not intended to be a personal attack on either, simply some learnings offered based on my experience with both because both have the opportunity to improve in a variety of ways.
With both Nikon and Canon having released systems recently, quite a few people have contacted me to find out why I went Sony, so I would put together was some reasons behind the selection of Sony as opposed to Nikon and Canon.
Just to be clear, from a brand perspective, I have nothing against Nikon and Canon, they have great camera gear. I left Nikon previously and my reasons related to mirrorless. If I was with them now, they might be the logical choice. I saw mirrorless as the future about 3 Years ago. Unfortunately Nikon wasn’t talking a thinking of mirrorless at the time. I was unhappy with their lack of transparency, not the gear.
So, if I considered both, where did they go wrong?
Glass is glass, or at least that’s what you normally think. To a large degree, you would expect the focal lengths to at least stay static, but that’s not always the case has my recent move from Fujifilm to Sony shows.
There are the obvious items, like the availability of lenses in specific focal lengths, If it’s not available, it’s not available, but that played less of a factor than I expected.
I saw a video by Tony and Chelsea entitled “What’s the best mirrorless camera for shooting sports”. I guess what annoyed me about the video is that it seemed like the usual bloggers excuse to get as many mirrorless cameras into a single video, with links of course to purchase them via an affiliate link.
Commercial interests aside, what also concerned me about the article was the value of one piece of functionality over another. There are four things that typically differentiate a camera for sports: autofocus, high ISO capability frame rate and buffer. It’s not to say they are the most important for everyone, but every sports camera has had these over other non-sports orientated models.