The Sony RX200 camera to have a faster 28-100mm f/1.8-2.8 lens?

Sony RX200 with 28-100mm f:1.8-2.8 lens
Sony filed a patent for a 10-36mm f/1.8-2.8 lens designed for a 1" sensor (28-100mm equivalent). This lens could potentially be used in the future Sony RX200 camera (the current RX100 II model has a 28–100 mm f/1.8-4.9 lens).

This entry was posted in Sony and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • David G.

    Nice. This would make a great travel camera even better.

  • http://2epicbits.com/ theSUBVERSIVE

    This is the main let down for such a great camera and sensor for me, the slow aperture, so if it’s true I might buy this “RX200″. When you g lose one stop from 28mm to 35mm, that’s too much. I really don’t mind the additional bulkiness, I hope it comes with the new codecs and video stuff from recent Sony cameras. And this is also an answer to Canon’s G1X II – except that it seems that Canon couldn’t let go of not innovating with poor video feats and not blazing fast AF.

    • llkk

      Don’t need the extra stop at those focal lengths with a 1″ sensor. (But if you owned one and used it you already would know that.)

      • http://2epicbits.com/ theSUBVERSIVE

        Why don’t you need an extra stop because it’s a 1″ sensor? I don’t see any correlation between these two things.

        First because an extra stop is always welcomed, in any low light situation if you take a pic outside the 28mm and lose a stop or more the IQ changes a lot. With a f/2.8 aperture at the tele end, this can give you a decent enough bokeh for portrait and if you want to make videos, you can use f/2.8 all across the board zooming in and out and it would feel like a constant aperture camera like the RX10.

        You don’t lose just 1-stop and then it’s ok, you lose 1-stop @35mm, another @55mm and another near the end. 3-stops is a freaking lot of light to lose, how you don’t need the extra stops?

  • Dino Brusco

    Any hope to see a 24-90 with same specs?

    • http://2epicbits.com/ theSUBVERSIVE

      I don’t think so, it would be nice though.

  • george

    I think that’s a typo, it should be 28-1000mm, to compete with the rumored Nikon P700 :)

  • saywhatuwill

    hmmm, glad I waited buying that camera.

    • Eric Calabros

      and another day in next year a f/1.8-2 patent apears and you will be glad waited buying RX200

      • http://2epicbits.com/ theSUBVERSIVE

        You wish Sony works like that…

        And what’s the point of a f/1.8-2 lens? LOL. Besides that would be quite bulky.

      • saywhatuwill

        Oh you mean like the RX1? Yeah.

  • nozomi

    I’m waiting for the Hasselblad version so I can have a good laugh.

  • Sony, Why no 24mm – Xmm ? ? ?

    Why doesn’t these kind of rather expensive enthusiast pocket cameras have a lens starting at 24mm equiv., Sony tell us, why???
    I don’t want the 100mm on the long end, especially if it’s not sharp, 80mm is ok as long as we get 24mm on the short end, those few mm are crucial to make this camera become a true enthusiast camera, after all we can’t change lens on this camera, just too much money.

    • Sony, Why no 24mm – Xmm ? ? ?

      Just clarifying, I am assuming this lens is for the next RX100 camera, that’s where my critique goes to.

    • madmax

      I totally agree. This just was my first thinking reading the post. 24 mm is a lot more interesting wide end than 28 mm. I´d like to see a compact with a let´s say 21-84 eq. lens.

  • Stema

    A 24-70/1.8-2.8 with manual zoomring, selfie tilt lcd would suit me better :(

  • G1X

    Major disappointment in the lens starting at 28mm instead of 24mm.

  • Ishkabibble

    This camera would be THE most awesome Selfie cam on the market!!

    • teenIsDumb

      and you, one of the most awesome stupid teenagers on the net.

  • upy ours

    The “major disappointment” is not the starting from 24mm it’s the people who want such a toy camera.

    • Global

      Wrong. This isnt a toy camera, this is the perfect pocket/belt camera for traveling the world on a shoestring weight limit and for any place you cant easily take a dslr or even mirrorless and simply cant fiddle with lenses.

      I want this camera. And if it started at 24mm/1.8 and ended at 135mm/3.5, i wouldnt even think twice.

      • upy ours

        May be you can’t think at all

    • Ring

      Exactly. Have you tried handling that ridiculous ring? It’s so bad it’s embarassing.

  • RAS

    Let’s hope it has a built-in, rangefinder-style EVF, too!!!

  • Shamael

    why do they not reduce the length, a 24/75 is more than you need.

  • Back to top




// B&H PopView code