Lens Sharpness and prices

[rpcrowe]

Lens sharpness is certain is not the only criteria on which to judge a lens and, I am not sure if the DXOmark tests can be judged as a reliable indicator of relative sharpness. However, since I have been transitioning to Sony gear, I have noticed one certain thing: Sony lenses (especially full frame lenses) are pretty darned expensive They are generally more expensive than their Canikon counterparts...

Brian Smith Pictures did a survey of compatible lenses from the Big Three:
https://briansmith.com/sony-fe-lense...n-nikon-glass/

[Manfred M]

Sony as far back as I can remember appears to have a company policy that they will price their products at a premium when compared to other companies, even back in the days when they were just an electronics company. Canon or Nikon increase their prices, Sony will boost theirs as well to ensure that their market position as a "premium product". Apple does the very same thing with their products.

When it comes to lenses I absolutely curse the camera reviewers because of the great emphasis they place on sharpness. Unless one prints large format, one is paying for resolution one does not use as the down sampling algorithms for our computer display cannot take advantage of what our lenses deliver (even the cheap ones). Most of what we see as sharpness in images is actually micro-contrast from applying sharpening algorithms like the unsharp mask.

[rpcrowe]

I think that Sony is pricing their products because they can sell them at those prices. This is especially true of full-frame mirrorless gear. Although, the little A6400 is offering some pretty astounding capabilities at a relatively decent price. If they didn't sell and the Sony marketing folks could put their finger on price as a reason, I am sure that the prices wold be reduced.

And different sensors will produce markedly different scores for equivalent lenses... However, I enjoy seeing a crisply sharp image whether I need such sharpness for what I do with the image or not.

Perhaps comparing sharpness in lenses is somewhat like comparing kiloton equivalencies in nuclear weapons. How big a bomb do you need to destroy a city? The ones dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of the Second World War were minuscule compared to today's bombs but, they did a pretty darned effective job on those cities...

[Shadowman]

Sony may also consider their particular lenses "legacy" similar to Nikon gold ring lenses which have premium prices.

[DanK]

Most of the Sony lenses are quite new, so they can’t be legacy equipment.

At least some of the comparisons at the link Richard provided are with Canon’s premium lenses, including some of the best L lenses, and they were cheaper than the corresponding Sony lenses


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk