The APSC Lens That Doesn't Exist…

Hi Alex, My A6000 and ZV-E10 say yes please. Currently using Pentax screw mount primes with an adapter to cover the 50-130 due to their compact size and the images they produce.

I have been wondering about the same thing. I guess it would be something like the Fuji 50-140 F2.8, huh? That is not light ... it is roughly over a kilogram, which is actually quite a similar weight as the Tamron 35-150 f2.8! Ideally I would expect such a lense to be lighter for APS-C (like 800g maybe?).

Silly question, but should I just buy full frame lenses for my APSC camera? Seems like there are few downsides and a much wider range of lenses...

I need the large aperture and reach for shooting HS Track and Cross Country meets with high shutter speeds. For night meets, the E 4.5-6.3 70-350mm G OSS doesn't really cut it. I turn the ISO up, but get images that are strange and ghostly. An F2.8 70-200 APS-C equivalent would be a God-send.

Fuji has a 50-140 2.8 lens to cover that range on apsc.

Along with this lens, don't you think a APSC specific super telephoto zoom lens is missing. This will be amazing for wildlife & sports enthusiasts who use APSC camera and want a compact lens with similar reach like 200-600mm but not have to carry the huge full frame telephoto lens. I mean, c'mon why hasn't anyone thought about this? 🥲

Will young man

I'm not sure that you are aware of this but you probably are

Sigma does have an 18-400
That is just a little over half size of that lends you showed
And just as wide
As for aperture I do not remember
Nikon also makes 1
However I don't think Sony made 1 at least not that I can remember

Have a good day

18-105mm f2.8 oss would be great

I agree with your thoughts on this. I have actually been looking for something like this recently, but did not find anything that I was very excited about. I saw the Sony 18-105, but it's F4 and not as sharp as it could be, but at least its a constant aperture. There are others that are more telephoto with variable apertures, but like you said, they just don't work as well in low light. I have the Sony 70-350, which I would probably keep for certain conditions, but I would actually love to have either an APSC lens at about 50-150mm f2.8 or even something like the Sony 18-105 but at f2.8. The f4 lenses are still not too bad, but they are just are much harder to use in low light conditions, which makes them less usable. I hope the lens companies will listen to this as it is a need and I am certain it would be very popular.

There's the excellent 35-100mm F2.8 OIS with MFT :)
From a Sony a6700/Olympus EM5-3 user

the thing i want more is for sony to do another 24-200 f4, i shoot 40mm when i am doing street, but i need something like this for travel, and the last super zoom has been out for ages

It's my biggest disappointment since I bought sony APS-C mirrorless that I can't change my sony 18-135 for better lens (too weak performance in corners). I've got sigma 18-50 2.8 and I can't expand my equipment by low weight and sharp lens with focal lenght up to 120-150 mm.

Tamron already has a 35mm-150mm f/2-28 lens. It's a full frame, so about the same at the telephoto range as a 70-200mm, and a little bit wider at the wide end.

What I've always heard people say is that once you get into telephoto range it's physically impossible to make the lenses much smaller or lighter due to physics. Not sure if that's true, but it's an argument I've always heard when people ask for a fast telephoto lens which is also small.

I think the reason why it's not made is because Sony won't make (aside from the fx30) a truly professional APSC body , one that has dual slots. I adore their APSC line and shot with one for many years. But when I took my hobby to a professional level I had to have redundancies and that means recording on two cards at the same time. Most of the 70 to 200 2.8 lenses are used for specific type of work such as weddings and while there are plenty of photographers shooting these once in a lifetime events on inadequate equipment, established photographers usually won't. Especially when someone can just grab the full frame version for their APSC body.

"showering" 😂

The Sigma 50-135 f2.8 is really appealing for me and my A6400. I value the video format, Arthur, what you're talking about is extremely important: voicing the wants of people. Also I loved the point about the good enough mindset, which is lacking and the otherwise values are sickening the enviroment and our mental health.

The only thing against it for me is that the advantage of a 70-200mm f/2.8 on FF is that you get a shallow DOF for portrait work. On APSC the f2.8 will only give the DOF of 135mm, so nothing like as creamy in the background. Not sure if optically and mechanically they can make something wider, even if just f2, but I think that would ruin the cost saving.

I was looking for a telephoto lens to pair with my sony a6600 for sports photography and videography. All the available lenses are bulk. I personally visited stores and after looking into the sizes of those lenses finally ended up buying sony e 75-350 g lens. Even that lens is bulk, but small compared to other options available on market.

i think samyang has a 35/150 fullframe 2.0 to 2.8 that comes close

Fuji 50-150mm f/2.8. They make it, but only for Fuji X mount. Although I am a fan of your channel, I don’t have a Sony. I have a Fuji xt4. I don’t own the Fuji 50-150mm because it is too expensive, I do have Fuji’s 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 zoom, which is very affordable. I’m hoping Sigma will make an APS tele-zoom (not a converted full-frame). Thank to your channel, I already have Fuji mount versions of Sigma 10-18, Sigma 18-50, and Sigma 56/1.4.

50-135 doesn't exist because 18-105f4 OSS exists. F4 is enough for daylight and sun dusk condition. So may be more interesting better version in short telephoto range is 55-210f4 OSS PZ.

I think the lens makers focus on full frame because they can make so much money on a single lens. This is especially true of the camera vendors themselves. Canon never made L glass for EF-s lenses or EF-m, only for EF full frame cameras. People don't want to spend five figures for an APS-c lens or a micro four thirds lens. Now, I am sure that the top quality glass is more expensive to make. But they are still going to earn more per unit on the larger formats (imagine what a long fast telephoto would cost for medium format). I think that really high quality glass for small format cameras represents a problem for the first party vendors. If Sigma makes a f2.8 150mm micro 4/3rds lens with fluorite elements, Ed glass elements and with top build quality and precision, it will be much smaller and less expensive to make. The problem that this represents is, "Why should I shell out five figures for a full frame f2.8 300mm lens?" There's only smaller bokeh balls as a downside and who needs large bokeh balls at 300mm? Sure, there's the crop factor. Full frame lenses routinely have 50-60 megapixels so you can crop. Perhaps that's why the camera vendors are not making small sensors with high pixel density. If there were 30MP M43 sensors or 45MP APS-c sensors, that full frame advantage would largely evaporate. And for video, you are shooting to a standard like 4K or 8K, so the pixels are already binned. Here's something funny. Olympus just released an f5 to f6.3 150-600mm super telephoto for M43. And people are complaining about it! At $2600 they say it is too expensive. But price out any lens with full frame mount that has a 1200mm reach and a f6.3 aperture. It would be a king's ransom. But I hear the argument (mentioned also here) that it's really an f12.6 lens. But if that were true, it would have terrible problems autofocusing, and it would need two stops more light or four times longer exposure. Funny thing is it focuses fine and doesn't seem to need any more time than an f6.3 lens on full frame. I think the camera vendors want to keep the good glass restricted to full frame. That's why we had to buy Sigma glass for our Canon M cameras. I think it is also why the camera vendors are much more hostile about who can make what sort of lenses for their new cameras.

Yes, I would buy something like that.

Perfect lens for me would be an f2.8 version of the Sony 18-105g. Cheers!

Fuji gang loves the 50-140 f2.8, but given the age of the lens, there's an opportunity for Sony or third parties to make a competitive alternative, namely something without an audible hum in operation and a better lens hood.

The APSC Lens That Doesn't Exist... In Sony system !
I shoot fuji APSC and the 50-140 f2.8 is kind of a legendary lens for us ! A little bit heavy and bulky, but at around the price point you predicted and EVERY time i use mine, I am simply stunned at the quality compared to any other lens... I shoot in dark environements, so every time at 2.8 and this thing is razor sharp...

I do think a third party one will come eventually, cheaper (around 800 to 1k) and much lighter, but as it will compete with the Fuji at least in X mount, it needs to be very good in quality for it to do well, so that's why nobody is in a hurry to make one

Excellent video ! 👏🤞
Changed from RX10 iii to A6700. Good enough is good enough. 😎💪

I wouldn't oppose to sigmas 18-35 and 50-100 f1.8 being re-released for mirrorless, even with just the adapter inside. They should do it

Wouldn't the Tamron 70-180mm 2.8 Di III VC VXD G2 be close to what you're looking for? I mean i don't have it, i'm researching "my next lens to buy" and since there's also a tamron 17-70 f2.8 those two lenses could cover a lot of needs a photographer has, wouldn't they?

By the way, i've watched a lot of your videos over the years and am pretty greatful for them!

Sigma is cooking this kind of lens, so maybe this year...

What about a quality macro lens for aps-c. The 35 mm Sony sucks and the 90mm F2.8 is way too expensive and big for aps-c

My A6400 is my travel camera and I didn't like the size of the 70-350mm. Which is why, like you, I don't want a full frame 70-200mm, either. I hope the rumors are true that Sigma will fill this niche soon.

I was a little bit unsure about the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 (kept thinking about going for the tamron).

Now it barely leaves my camera...

I would love a sigma big brother to said lens, similarly slimmed down...

As a matter of principle, I’m not switching to full frame and three years ago I waited for Tamron 17-70, I hope I’ll wait for 50-150/2.8)

joss

Waiting for 18-300mm f1.4 oss with size of 18-50 sigma 😂

😂 A 70-200f2.8 equivalent apsc would be bigger and more expensive than the small format version. Stupid!

It's been 10 years, i'm still looking for a replacement for my sony 55-210 F5600, i've basically given up by now.

got me for my full frame the samyang 35-150 f2-2.8 honestly compared to my sigma 24-70 its just as sharp

I want a small 100mm to 135mm (~150mm to ~200mm) f/2 prime. The Olympus 75mm (~150mm) f/1.8 prime is awesome and no other platform has anything similar. The size and weight of a 70-200mm lens is often prohibitive and longer primes can be far more practical.

Separately, aperture equivalence does matter for more than just DoF. f/2.8 is not the same on APS-C and FF, because the light is being projected onto a fraction of the surface area; ISO noise will be roughly 1 stop higher, depending on what bodies are being compared. There are a lot of people that will not be satisfied with f/2.8 on APS-C, because it will roughly have the low light performance of an f/4 FF lens.

I was more thinking of a Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 macro for aps c, with an 2x extender. You can use it for travel, portraits, soccer, hiking and put on the extender, if you sometimes do bird watching. Should be small enough, pretty cheap and good enough for many things.

What do you think of the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, which also features VC? Despite its shorter zoom range, it could be a viable option if you're also considering carrying the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8.

Couldn't you just get an x mount convertor for your Sony APSC body and get the Fuji XF 50-140mm F2.8?

I would buy it because it would be perfect in events for candid shots instead of lugging a big 70-200/2.8.

Do some more of these "casual" videos! This made me think about what lenses I have in a slightly different way

you could just buy the 35-150 tamron you get a winder view on both ends

Help me understand your F-stop argument. FF lenses are designed to direct light across a FF sensor while APSC lenses are designed to direct light across an APSC sensor. When APSC lenses are used with FF sensors, you get vignetting (the circle of light is concentrated onto a smaller surface area). So, conversely, when a FF lens is used with an APSC sensor, isn't some of the light coming through the lens getting directed beyond the edges of the smaller sensor?