Using double standards is not something new. Particularly, people are very forgiving when it comes to MILCs. With Pentax? It's usually "this is Pentax, I don't like them, I'll think hard of the reasons why". IMHO.
So, with Sony, their lenses are fast and excellent - even the ones that aren't. According to Photozone, though, even G lenses can be "a little" disappointing - while a tested GM lens gets 3 stars for its optics.
Michael Zelbel's story is an interesting one, and a win for Sony. A customer who maybe was convinced to switch by the promise of being able to use his lenses; and when he couldn't, guess what, Sony sold him a bunch a new lenses.
---------- Post added 26-06-17 at 04:01 PM ----------
Originally posted by normhead The only people who care about this are those who think only modern lenses are good. This is simply a marketing ploy by people who want to sell you glass. The first part of advertising, convince you what you have isn't good enough. This is done by introducing terms like "modern." a loosely defined term seeming to mean "designed in the last 5 years" but with no standard based on optical quality or utility. It's used to avoid the terms like "excellent" or "good" and is particularly usefull for companies without legacy glass, like Sony.
Since I am occasionally using this term - and request more such lenses from Ricoh Imaging.
The definition "designed in the last 5 years" is no good. Instead, how about "lenses with optics designed for high-resolution imaging sensors (as opposed to film), with high measurable qualities while (preferably) also having a pleasing rendering, and with silent, reasonably fast in-lens AF motors"?
This is more about the end result than an arbitrary time limit. I want lenses to match my K-1 and its replacement; it's as simple as that.
The 50-200 is out; pedestrian optics, screw drive and it also predates the DA* 200mm by 3 years. The DA* 200mm is almost there, except for the somewhat high PF and the slow SDM motor. We can consider the DA* a modern lens, albeit one needing an update. The DA* 300mm's only weak point, IMO, is the slow SDM motor.
And of course, you shouldn't be comparing lenses in different classes. The 55-300 RE PLM doesn't have to beat the DA* 300mm's sharpness and rendering.
Of course, I've seen the term being used in the wrong way - just like you say, manufacturer with "modern lenses" even though some of them are nothing special, optics-wise. Watch out for sheep in wolves' skins.
Last edited by Kunzite; 06-26-2017 at 06:03 AM.