It’s big and it’s heavy, but…

[MrSMW]

I think I ‘need’ it…

More (exclusively actually for me) for stills than video.

2 years ago, I was running around with an S1R + battery grip + Leica 24-90 as my ‘one & done’ stills unit.

It had 3 principal faults.

1. Weight; it was 2.8kg in the hands.

2. Using an APSC crop on the 47mp sensor, I could extend the focal length to 135mm with something like an 18mp file but that was not quite long enough for my needs ideally needing something within the 150-200mm range.

3. F4 at the longer ends which is a bit slow for a 90mm lens.

Roll forward to 2024 and swapped that rig out for a trio of f2.8 zooms on the Sony A7R5 with the heaviest combo being approx 1.75kg with the 70-180mm, but that lens being a tad long for more general use.

Sigma offer their 28-45mm f1.8 which primarily for indoor use would be PERFECT for my needs, but lacks a longer companion such as a 45-90mm f1.8, but even this would not give me the reach I need.

Step forward Sony with this constant aperture f2 50-150mm.

Does it cover all my focal range needs?

No because it starts at 50mm, but covers everything beyond and then some because with the 61mp sensor on my A7R5 and APSC cropping, I can reach 225mm with a 26mp file.

Is it big? 

Yes, but not ridiculously so and it is internal zoom and unless it’s a short extension, I can’t abide long zooming lenses.

Is it heavy?

Yes, kinda…and more than the 1kg self-imposed limit I would prefer but it covers 50-‘225’mm. At f2. Without extending. Or lens swaps. It would be approx 2.5kg in the hand as a combo with the baseplate I have on the A7R5.

Three criticisms:

1. Why white only? Some of us would prefer to be more discrete and maybe they will follow up with a black one or someone like Alphgvard will have a skin soon?

2. No Arca Swiss built into the detachable tripod foot. That’s a bit of an oversight IMO.

3. Price. Despite US trade tarrifs, it’s still more in the UK and EU than the US… At least according to launch prices.

So will I be getting one?

I think yes, though it may have to wait until next year when they are beginning to appear on the used market, for financial reasons but I don’t think I am going to see a better option than this in my working lifetime.

One & Done? Nope, but I have my Nikon Zf with 20-40mm f2.8 for the wider stuff and 40mm f2 for candid when I don’t want to be poking a white canon in peoples faces, plus if I ever decided to hop over fully to Nikon bodies, this new lens will work adapted on say a Z8 no problem.

[Ilkka Nissila]

I think an intermediate range like this would be good for portraits, where a 70-200 might not always be short enough and is a bit too head shot focused, while the 24-70 is a bit short for narrow head shots but otherwise is good. 50-150 mm sounds good, though because of the f/2 aperture, this lens is quite big and heavy. It has no in-lens stabilization so the stabilization is only in the body.

 

I personally understand why manufacturers don't pre-fit their lens feet or cameras with quick-release dovetails as these can be uncomfortable to hold in the hand and there are so many different, incompatible systems.

 

I would prefer something like a 40 mm to 135 mm range with f/2.8 aperture as the images from the f/2 zooms don't appeal to my sense of aesthetics and the focal range would be easier to get a full-body image if needed in a pinch. It would also be smaller and lighter than the 50-150/2.0.

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

a 70-200 might not always be short enough and is a bit too head shot focused, while the 24-70 is a bit short for narrow head shots but otherwise is good. 50-150 mm sounds good

Exactly. I have a second smaller/lighter camera for wider stuff but it's always a choice I have to make otherwise, ie, do I go short (up to 75mm) or go longer but accept I can't go wider than 70mm, which is almost always far too tight.

The Tamron 35-150 exists but extends too long when zoomed out and is just a bit too 'geeky' as is it's Samyang sister, so a pretty hard no for me.

There's a compromise, there always is and if it's to be a bit of size and weight, so be it.

I mean I was looking at the Sigma 105mm f1.4 fairly recently and the Nikon 135mm f1.8 Plena and whilst the latter is a little smaller and lighter but barely faster and FAR less flexible, the former is 300g heavier. And has zero flexibility. OK, it's faster, but that (beyond a point) is not the primary factor for me.

A relatively fast: 50/70/85/105/135/150 all in one single lens?

I just need to find the funds!

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

It would also be smaller and lighter than the 50-150/2.0

I'd have been happy with a 50-150/2.8 had it maxed out at no more than 1kg, but if it was over, I'd suck up that extra weight and have that extra stop.

[ND64]

Chinese competition is getting serious so Japanese are trying to take advantage of their only weakness: fast, unconventional and complicated zooms. Its more about showing six pack muscles of expertise. The results are expensive niche lenses that you have to be rich rat in recession economy to buy, and gym rat to hold for more than 30 minutes. Of course "competition is good", but I'm afraid they run out of weird ideas in the not too distant future. 

[MrSMW]

58 minutes ago, ND64 said:

you have to be rich rat in recession economy to buy, and gym rat to hold for more than 30 minutes

Well I am one of those, but not the other...

[Ilkka Nissila]

4 hours ago, ND64 said:

Chinese competition is getting serious so Japanese are trying to take advantage of their only weakness: fast, unconventional and complicated zooms. Its more about showing six pack muscles of expertise. The results are expensive niche lenses that you have to be rich rat in recession economy to buy, and gym rat to hold for more than 30 minutes. Of course "competition is good", but I'm afraid they run out of weird ideas in the not too distant future. 

I think personally that while I can make the 24-70 & 70-200 combination to work for me, a lot of the time something in-between would be useful, as I mentioned before, in portraiture. In the 1980s and 1990s, there were still a lot of lenses with intermediate ranges such as 50-135/3.5, 75-150/3.5, 35-135/3.5-4.5, 35-105/2.8 etc. but somehow these disappeared and standard zooms started at 24 mm and telezooms at 70 mm, 80 mm, or 100 mm. In portraiture a range that is between the two (24-70 and 70-200) would be ideal. I think the reason why 24-70 became the standard "pro" zoom is that when the first digital SLRs came with 1.3x, 1.5x, and 1.6x sensors they needed the standard zoom to have shorter focal lengths, so instead of a 28-105 or 28-80 they would make a 24-70 and 24-105. Of course, then came lenses like the 17-55/2.8 specifically for 1.5x / 1.6x sensors. But anyway the 24-70 range stuck and now some photographers would consider a zoom that starts at 28 mm too limiting even "useless". This I don't agree with, and I'd be happy to have an in-between range zoom such as 50-150 or similar. To me this sounds a very practical lens and not at all weird. However, the f/2.0 maximum aperture does make it a bit big and heavy and I can see the objective is to replace primes for some users. If it becomes popular, perhaps they can make an f/2.8 zoom with a similar range.

 

The f/2.0 makes the lens expensive as well. I notice a 4600 EUR initial price in Finland (incl. 25.5% VAT) vs. $3900 (not including VAT) at B&H. This seems absurd considering the tariff situation, it's like they slapped on the price increase from the tariffs on both regions instead of just where it is actually applied. I think it's completely unrealistic to expect most European customers to even consider this lens at a 4600 EUR price point. I would expect the price to fall rather quickly if Sony wants to sell these lenses.

[MrSMW]

5 minutes ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

The f/2.0 makes the lens expensive as well. I notice a 4600 EUR initial price in Finland (incl. 25.5% VAT) vs. $3900 (not including VAT) at B&H. This seems absurd considering the tariff situation, it's like they slapped on the price increase from the tariffs on both regions instead of just where it is actually applied. I think it's completely unrealistic to expect most European customers to even consider this lens at a 4600 EUR price point.

Yes, the conspiracy theorist in me says they increased the prices for the rest of the world in order to sell cheap to the US market taking into account any tariffs.

Based on current pricing including tariffs, stuff still seems to be cheaper in the US?

8 minutes ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

instead of a 28-105

That has been the other option I was considering, but decided it was neither long enough nor fast enough (the Sigma f2.8) and whilst I could live with one or the other, both didn't make sense compared with what I have which is the Tamron 28-75 and 70-180 f2.8's.

11 minutes ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

I would expect the price to fall rather quickly if Sony wants to sell these lenses

I don't think I have any option but to wait until these are sub 4k euros either new or used from somewhere like MPB.

Paired with the Sigma 28-45mm f1.8 for indoor/low-light scenarios and paired with my Nikon Zf with 40mm f2, I think I will have my perfect set up for stills. Perfect as in I can't realistically expect that 50-150 to be any smaller or lighter because...well, physics.

[maxJ4380]

On 4/23/2025 at 3:44 PM, MrSMW said:

1. Why white only? Some of us would prefer to be more discrete and maybe they will follow up with a black one or someone like Alphgvard will have a skin soon?

 

 

Your welcome  😉

[eatstoomuchjam]

4 minutes ago, maxJ4380 said:

 

 

Your welcome  😉

Why stop with spraypaint?  Hose that sucker down with line-x and never worry again about scratches!

 

[maxJ4380]

5 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Why stop with spraypaint?  Hose that sucker down with line-x and never worry again about scratches!

 

I hadn't considered that.. if it comes in clear your could do the lens as well. Bonus points for the all in one glow / blemish remover filter. Wedding photos will no doubt sell like hotcakes !!