Looking forward to Sony's new 28-60 F/4-5.6.....

because of the size, weight, and reported very good performance. I have a Zeiss 40mm on my A7RIII right now, but while not bad is still too big, and heavy, for the body in my estimation. If the new zoom is as good as claims it should be the perfect walk around lens if you're not a bokeh aficionado. Anyone else planning on getting this lens?

The Zeiss Batis 40/2 is the best lens overall that I have ever used. It's my son's favorite lens too, so I'm careful to check my bag for an empty space ;) If I were to choose a nice sized zoom for walk-about, it would probably be the 24-105 f/4.

I am quite reluctant to purchase a single prime lens for my A7R3 at this time (the already mentioned 40mm Batis, Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 50/2, and the Sony 35/1.8 are “prime” candidates), so the narrow range of the 28-60 doesn’t scare me off right away (and Dustin Abbott gave it quite an endorsing review). I do have the Sony 24-105/4 which makes it hard to justify the 28-60; especially at the quite high price of $500. I can go out with the 24-105 as the only lens; I doubt that to be true fir the 28-60.

Yeah, my primary interest is to have something a little more versatile, small, and light weight, which is still optically reasonable. It seems almost to good to be true, even having a weather sealing gasket on the lens mount. I do love the 40mm, but it's a bit limiting sometimes walking around. I'll never give the Zeiss up though I made that mistake once before when I sold off my Zeiss 35-70 f/3.4. I'm still kicking myself over that one.

I can't get excited about a 28 to 60mm lens, when the usual is 24-70 or 24-100mm etc. f5.6 at 60mm is hardly exciting either. I assume they make these lenses to sell as a kit lens to those who don't understand that the shorter the zoom range, the less useful they are, and to make them relatively affordable. Edited January 15, 2021 by Robin Smith

I can't get excited about a 28 to 60mm lens, when the usual is 24-70 or 24-100mm etc. f5.6 at 60mm is hardly exciting either. I assume they make these lenses to sell as a kit lens to those who don't understand that the shorter the zoom range, the less useful they are, and to make them relatively affordable.

True, but by that logic you can say any zoom range less than another is less useful, and then we'd all be attaching telescopes to our cameras.

One should bear in mind the main reason this lens exists is to be a kit lens option compact enough and good enough for the new, smaller Sony A7C body. That it can also be used with other E mount bodies is a plus, but it doesn't seem terrifically compelling unless you really really need the smallest possible walkabout zoom for street and simple travel use.

 

My first reaction was "seriously? wasn't the Nikon Pronea laughed off the face of the earth for offering a kit zoom with these specs 20 years ago?" The slow apertures might be less off-putting if the lens racked out to 70mm, but a 60mm f/5.6 in full frame doesn't exactly scream "use me!". I get that it will strike a chord with some people who just want a good quality compact "variable normal" for everyday use, but the dead slowness combined with limited range kinda kills it for me. 28mm is not my favorite focal length, but if I needed compact that badly I'd probably just take the 28/2 prime over this mini-zoom to at least have wider available light options.

 

More or less, this 28-60 is a modern update of the film era 28-50 minizooms, except those were a more reasonable fixed f/3.5. If the specs work for your style of shooting, its a nice new option to have. But given the max aperture constraints, I would have preferred a slightly different range compromise of 30mm-70mm or something (anything) other than 28-60. The utility of a slower than slow 60mm for FX that isn't a dedicated macro lens eludes me.

Edited January 15, 2021 by orsetto

The optical quality I've seen in multiple sample pics is very very good: if one can live within the aperture/focal range compromise, it certainly won't disappoint. Unexpectedly has some of that nice Zeiss-flavored 3D quality in focus falloff, bokeh is not bad at all for a slow midrange zoom, distortion and vignetting within the simple, easily corrected spectrum. Excellent little landscape/nature walk zoom, I imagine, but the fussy extend/retract operation and slow apertures will limit some types of street/travel shooting.

 

The heavily discounted price when bought with a new body makes this lens MUCH more attractive: no reason not to get it if you're in the market for a new Sony camera. But at double that cost as a standalone lens, it would require some serious thought.

Edited January 15, 2021 by orsetto

Whenever a short range zoom appears they rarely stay around for long, because they are just much less useful. It's like people suggesting a 70-135mm f2 or similar. It's not that no one will buy them, but few do. Most people, quite reasonably, get a 70-200mm f2.8 or f4 because they are much better value and more useful. If the zoom range is short, then at least make it fast, otherwise why not just get an f4 24-70? I think the Sony zoom is quite good, but my feeling is it should be, given the slow aperture and the limited range. Of course, if you are happy with the range and aperture then that's great, but I suspect most buying a not-cheap FF Sony would very shortly get itchy feet and want something more useful. The current zoom lens ranges are common because they represent over 50 years of experience of what most photogs want.

I think some of you are missing the point which is that it's light weight, small, and will be perfectly proportioned for a Sony A7RIV, A7RIII, or A7III. When you add to that, optical quality, weather sealing, and a zoom range that while limited covers most circumstances for a walk around, I see it doing well. The main downside as some have mentioned is that it's slow, and wont be any good if bokeh is your thing, but every lens has it's compromises no?