Announcement: Sony FE 4-5.6 / 28-60

On September 14, 2020, the Sony FE 4-5.6 / 28-60 (SEL2860 E-mount) lens was announced.

Sony FE 4-5.6 / 28-60 (SEL2860 E-mount)

Sony FE 4-5.6 / 28-60 (SEL2860 E-mount)

Key features include:

  • Mount: Sony FE for full-frame mirrorless cameras
  • Lightest, smallest zoom lens for full frame mirrorless cameras
  • Folding case
  • Focal length: 28-60 mm (EGF for Sony E APS-C cameras is 42-90 mm)
  • Maximum relative aperture: F / 4-5.6
  • Aperture Limit: F / 22-32
  • The minimum focusing distance depends on the focal length, 30 centimeters at 28 mm and 45 centimeters at 60 mm
  • Maximum magnification ratio: 1: 6.3
  • Optical design: 8 elements in 7 groups of which 3 are aspherical elements
  • Diaphragm blades: 7 pieces, rounded
  • Linear focus motor
  • The weight: 167 grams
  • Protected enclosure
  • Sample Photos on the official website
  • Price: about $ 300 when buying a kit along with Sony a7c... Prices for modern Sony lenses can be look at this link

Appearance

All Sony FE Lenses and Cameras

Fixes:

  1. Sony FE 20 mm F / 1.8 G
  2. Sony FE 24 mm F / 1.4 GM
  3. Sony FE 28 mm F / 2.0
  4. Sony FE 35 mm F / 1.4 ZA
  5. Sony FE 35 mm F / 1.8
  6. Sony FE 35 mm F / 2.8 ZA
  7. Sony FE 50 mm F / 1.4 ZA
  8. Sony FE 50 mm F / 1.8
  9. Sony FE 50 mm F / 2.8 Macro
  10. Sony FE 55 mm F / 1.8 ZA
  11. Sony FE 85 mm F / 1.4 GM
  12. Sony FE 85 mm F / 1.8
  13. Sony FE 90 mm F / 2.8 Macro G U.S.
  14. Sony FE 100 mm F / 2.8 STF GM U.S.
  15. Sony FE 135 mm F / 1.8 GM
  16. Sony FE 400 mm F / 2.8 GM U.S.
  17. Sony FE 600 mm F / 4 GM U.S.

Zuma:

  1. Sony FE 12-24 mm F / 2.8 GM
  2. Sony FE 12-24 mm F / 4 G
  3. Sony FE 16-35 mm F / 2.8 GM
  4. Sony FE 16-35 mm T / 3.1 PZ G cine
  5. Sony FE 16-35 mm F / 4 ZA U.S.
  6. Sony FE 24-70 mm F / 2.8 GM
  7. Sony FE 24-70 mm F / 4 ZA U.S.
  8. Sony FE 24-105 mm F / 4 G U.S.
  9. Sony FE 24-240 mm F / 3.5-6.3 OSS
  10. Sony FE 28-60 mm F / 4-5.6
  11. Sony FE 28-70 mm F / 3.5-5.6 OSS
  12. Sony FE 28-135 mm F / 4 G PZ U.S.
  13. Sony FE 70-200 mm F / 2.8 GM U.S.
  14. Sony FE 70-200 mm F / 4 G U.S.
  15. Sony FE 70-300 mm F / 4.5-5.6 G U.S.
  16. Sony FE 100-400 mm F / 4.5-5.6 GM U.S.
  17. Sony FE 200-600 mm F / 5.6-6.3 G U.S.

Sony Alpha E-mount Full Frame Cameras:

Materials on the topic

  1. Full-frame mirrorless systems. List of all cameras and lenses to them. Mirrorless fever, discussion, choice and more
  2. All cropped mirrorless cameras, discussion of systems
  3. Mirrorless crop that has stopped or is stopping its development
  4. Fallen Digital Mirror Systems
  5. JVI or EVI
  6. Simple and clear medium format
  7. Smartphone Impact
  8. All announcements and news
  9. What's next?

Here on the site, comments do not require any registration. In the comments, you can ask a question on the topic and you will definitely be answered, and you can also express your opinion, leave your feedback or describe your experience. For the selection of photographic equipment, I recommend E-Catalog. Many little things for the photo can be found on AliExpress.


Material prepared by Arkady Shapoval. Do not forget subscribe to my instagram.

Add a comment:

Comments: 31, on the topic: Announcement: Sony FE 4–5.6 / 28–60

  • Victor

    Full-frame descendant of the SEL1850?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      It has a folding body, so it looks more like a 16-50

  • Konstantin

    Soon kit lenses will have a fixed hole of 5.6 in all focal lengths! Darker and darker lenses - progress!

    • Rodion

      Should be large and light, small and dark.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Whales with 5.6 on the long end seem to be the norm. Specifically, you can hardly find fault with this decision because of 5.6 (this is not even 6.3 or 7.1, like other manufacturers)

    • Pokemon

      Yes, the Manufacturers tore a vest on their chest, beat themselves with a heel in the chest, shouting about the merits of the UPC and new bayonets, and meanwhile whales are becoming plugs for the bayonet.

      • Pokemon

        And there is no way to release whales with at least 3.5-4.5 luminosity under ff, they drive darkzums, which are then sold in batches to Avito.
        Nikon's new kit 24-70 / 4 after the release of 24-270 / 2.8S is completely poured onto Avito.
        Looks like people did not go. In the reviews I heard that there are still norms for shooting video, but not for photos. For the people with him do not like the picture.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Nikon will be released on 24-105 / 4 soon

      • Arkady Shapoval

        In principle, whales have this function. And optics, even with 3.5-4.5, is already a different level.

        • Alexey

          not in this thread, but with these parameters - there is a canon 35-135 3.5-4.5, a very good glass from an earlier time. now it is inexpensive, the picture is more than suitable immediately with an open one.

    • wj

      Well, there are after all f / 2.8 zooms on the m4 / 3 system, which are actually f / 5.6 in full-format equivalent and nothing, no one has died yet :)

      • twm

        Recalculation of aperture ratio for crop lenses (or for FF glasses on crop cameras) - is there a valid argument for such an occupation? With EGF and viewing angle, the situation is obvious.

        • wj

          Well, of course there is an argument - recalculation allows you to better understand what depth of field we are dealing with. Well, how much information / light is actually being captured.
          After all, f / xx is a RELATIVE aperture, which often leads to confusion when comparing different formats. Unfortunately, the ABSOLUTE hole size hasn't caught on in the photo community.

          • Roman

            The relative aperture determines two important parameters at once. Light transmission (corrected for light transmission coefficient, taking into account circuit loss) and depth of field. What is the meaning of the absolute size of the hole is not clear.

            • Rodion

              The absolute size of the hole is precisely related to the depth of field, it looks like.

          • twm

            I understand the depth of field conversion. I also understand that the bare number f does not tell the real aperture of the lens: the real one (which is the T-stop) depends on the optical scheme, types of glass, enlightenment, which together give the light transmission coefficient, - Roman has already said about this.

            I understand that not every manufacturer reports the real light transmission for their optics. :)

            And I mean, I understand that two different lenses with the same f-number can end up with different exposure. It doesn't matter if it is two SF glasses or two M4 / 3 lenses. But I honestly do not see what information the recalculation of the f-number will give in terms of light transmission.

            • Alexey

              I have three different 50 1.4s (for different systems), and yes, yes, they all have noticeably different light transmission, if I put them on the canon and in LV using ML I look at the illumination in different parts of the frame. and the canon also “twists” the exposure for the native 50 1.4, if it has an open hole. but no one writes anything about this, yeah))

            • Alexey

              Well, the T-stop is important when shooting MOVIES.

          • twm

            > what information will be reported by the recalculation of the f-number in terms of light transmission
            Unless to get a “cropped” depth of field (with the same framing / angle of view) on the FX camera, I have to cover the aperture more (?) ==> catch a slower shutter speed, but this is obvious .. like.

    • Maksim

      If the lens is light, it will be expensive and heavy. and people like you will whine about it.

  • wj

    When Nikon's 24-50 / 4-6.3 came out, they just poured mud on him in the comments.
    But Sonic's 28-60 for some reason are not very criticized, although its + 10mm at the long end is much less useful than Nikon's + 4mm at a wide angle.
    It is interesting.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      It's not that dark and $ 100 cheaper, a regular whale. In the case of Nikon's and 6.3 and only 50 mm at the long end and a horse price tag.

      • wj

        The 1/3 stop difference is not a big difference. And it is not clear what is there with the real t-stops and with vignetting - perhaps there is no real difference at all. Or maybe it is, on the contrary, even more than 1/3 of stops. Unknown. It is necessary to wait for comparative tests.

        For prices: if you take the lenses separately, the Nikon MSRP has $ 399, and the Sony has $ 499. I do not understand where you found the savings from Sony. And the prices of the whales are identical - 300 bucks surcharge for what kind of dormouse what kind of nikon. This is all MSRP.

        There are no huge advantages to the extra 10mm on the long end. It's only 39,6 ° vs. 33,4 ° horizontally (6,2 ° differences that can sometimes be compensated for by simply stepping forward).
        Plus, again, it is unclear what is there with focus breathing, which can change the real angle of view in one direction or the other, depending on the focusing distance. Usually, if 50mm is not enough, then 60mm will not save the picture.
        But 24mm versus 28mm is 73,7 ° vs. 65,5 ° (already 8,2 ° difference, which is more and which can be compensated much less often, for example, in confined spaces).

        • Arkady Shapoval

          With this approach, many indicators can be leveled. If the difference is small, then it is not. But this is the wrong approach. Most likely I was wrong about the mentioned MSRP.

          • wj

            I bet that it will be possible to notice the difference between the pictures taken at some ideal 50 / 6.3 and at 60 / 5.6 only in specially created conditions, and even then if you know where to look. If you look at real lenses, then there is still a lot of extra things that can come out, which turns out to be more important. For example, it turns out that someone stupidly lathers at the far end more. Or the bokeh is disgusting. Or the flare is stronger. Etc. Therefore, I would not overestimate these 1/3 stops in isolation from other parameters. And I certainly would not call one lens better than the other just based on this difference, without the opportunity to compare them directly in practice in different operating conditions.
            And so, both lenses have more similarities than differences in their passport performance characteristics. And comparing them is more of an academic exercise, hardly anyone will seriously make a choice between systems based only on the characteristics of both of these lenses.

            • Onotole

              Don’t worry - both lenses under discussion are the finest marketing shit, for those who finally don’t get it and don’t want to. And figuring out which shit is better / worse is not the most rewarding task.

              • wj

                I have enough good shots for all kinds of whale shit :)
                Though I am certainly not one of those who "does not want to cut it."
                So your classification doesn't work very well in my case :)

              • Onotole

                It also works, but the fact that you believe that good pictures can only be obtained with good equipment (and vice versa) only confirms my words about “cutting in”.

    • Pokemon

      Yes, the same thing.
      Cameras are getting better and more expensive.
      Premium fast lenses are getting better and more expensive.
      Whales have become gags (well, who in their right mind would hang something dark on the Z7 or R5 or A7Rm4?)
      Something good and inexpensive is not enough.
      Under the Sony there is an inexpensive Tamron 28-75mm f / 2.8 Di III RXD (A036) Sony E under the UPC mount, which has become very popular due to its affordable price.

      • Rodion

        Well, if the whale were a cheap pancake like 40 / 2.8 or even 35/2 - who would buy expensive high-aperture lenses?)

        • wj

          Yep, cheap pancakes and expensive high-aperture lenses are still products for different scenarios, not directly competing. In film times, when zooms had not yet become widespread, all sorts of 50 / 2.0 whales coexisted calmly with their faster 50 / 1.4 counterparts.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog Author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2020

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2020/09/anons-sony-fe-4-5-628-60/comment-page-1/