Sony lens: a strange product ??

[pikey]

Looking through the Sony website I came across this; a lens costing £4,500, yet the camera it fits is £400.

Link

This seems to come under the category "confusing"!

Can anyone explain? (Does it fit other cameras? / Is the a100 suitable for this? / Is it in advance of bringing a more suitable camera out later? / etc...)

Ben

[megy]

Most camera manufacturers do the same, the price is pushed up due to the quality and quantity of the glass, the aperture for such a long lens and also as they know that(although in small numbers) there will be people wanting them, mainly sports and pap photographers.

[pikey]

But surely those professional photographers wouldn't be in a £400 Sony...

??

[megy]

It will fit onto any Sony or (i think) Minolta body.

Try googling a price on this, Canon EF600mm f4.0 L IS USM, over 5 grand i think, and will fit onto theit £100 budget film camera, all the way up to the 4 grand top of the range full frame digital camera.

[megy]

Go to any major sporting event and you will see the top pro's using these lenses, podium ceremonies at GP's and you will see loads all lined up.

Watch the vid in the link here and see why they are so expensive. www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=354950

[pikey]

Oh, I'm not questioning the price of the lens, I'm questioning the fact that anyone spending £4,500 on a lens is likely to have a camera that cost more than £400.

Sony only make the 1 camera it fits on (I think)

[megy]

Sony bought out Konica Minolta, and have taken over, therefore it will be a re-badge version of the old Minolta 300 F2.8 lens, there will still be people out there who have the older Minolta film and digital cameras that may want this lens. The old Minolta film cameras were very good, so the lens will fit them. Also, as you assume, no doubt Sony will be bringing more cameras onto the market.

[tybalt]

pikey said:

Oh, I'm not questioning the price of the lens, I'm questioning the fact that anyone spending £4,500 on a lens is likely to have a camera that cost more than £400.

Sony only make the 1 camera it fits on (I think)

Sony recently bought Konica-Minolta, and took on their lense lineup (rebranded as Sony). The Alpha 100 is not be their only camera - they will be making more expensive models in the years to come. Camera bodies are frequently cheaper than high quality lenses.

Beaten to the post by the chap above me, but same points made.

Edited by tybalt on Thursday 15th February 14:39

[megy]

I agree with what you are saying, it does seem a little reverse economics to spend more on the lens than the camera, but its been like that for many years, even when Sony finalise their range, i should imagine there wont be a camera costing more than that lens, but if you want the aperture at that focal length thats what you pay, the camera(nowadays at least) is just a sensor that captures the image, the lens is the vessel to modify and magnify the light.

When are you buying the lens then?

[pikey]

megy said:

When are you buying the lens then?

Not for me, I bought a Minolta 70-300 off ebay for £82 and think it's great! Having no skill means you're happy with the cheap things

Mind you, being bonus time and tending to buy at least one thing I'd like but don't need at this time of year, I have got my eye on the Carl Zeiss 85mm. Of course, I should learn how to use the camera and exhaust the limit of lenses I have first (instead putting the money into the mortgage?!). But there again... I don't know how to drive the Cayman properly and I like that lots



I won't really - it'll be like a learner skiier in all the best stuff. I'll look like a knob (or more of one!!)

[RobDickinson]

As said old Minolta lenses with a smattering of Zeiss.

Big fast glass is expensive no matter that the mount.