This is the new “Standard” lens. I’ve owned a sony 100 and a sony 400 for years. I’m a big fan of the sony 100, but I have to admit that I’m not a fan of the 400mm. Not only is it heavy, but its lens seems to be a lot more prone to flare than the 400.
The new Standard lens is lighter and more durable than ever, and it still features the excellent bokeh. The only downside is that you cant keep it on your camera, but I think that if you want to get a wider-angle lens that will work well with your camera, you might find the new Sony 400mm a better choice.
I just recently bought a new Sony 200mm lens and Im not a fan. The lens is heavy, the bokeh is great, and the auto-focus is awful. I think it would be better for most people if Sony just made a new lens, but I’m not sure.
My Sony 400mm is broken, and I don’t know if there’s a Nikon or Canon equivalent. But I’ve heard good things about the Canon 400mm f/2.8 IS USM lens.
The newest Sony lens, the Sony 400mm, is designed to work with the company’s newly announced 100-400mm zoom. It has an effective focal length range of about 100mm to 400mm, and an AF that makes it perfect for landscapes, portraits, and still lifes.
But that said, the 400mm is a fairly inexpensive lens which, while not the fastest at wide-open, is still effective and, in some circumstances, much sharper than the more expensive lenses in that focal length range. I’ve used it over and over again on my Sony RX100, and the 400mm is a very good wide-open option, especially if you are shooting in the center of a lot of subjects.
I am a big fan of the Sony RX100, and the fact that it has such an awesome lens. I am not a fan of the Canon 1000mm either. The 1000mm is very good at close-up, but is also really heavy, almost like a pancake if you are used to getting the full body, and the 1000mm is quite expensive. And it is so light and so slow that if you are shooting a long exposure, it is often not very effective.
I think the 400mm is a better choice for close-up work, but this doesn’t mean it’s not a cool lens too. The 400mm is great for long exposures and it has an awesome, long focal length. I am not a fan of the Canon 1000mm either. The Canon 1000mm is not very fast, and not that great with a wide open aperture. It is so slow that it is mostly useless for portraits.
The Canon 1000mm is a really good lens for portraits. There is also a Canon 400mm f/2.8 that is very good for landscape work as well. The Canon 400mm is good for wildlife and portraits. The Canon 1000mm is good for portraits and landscape, and this being a lens for sport, this is also a very good lens for sports shooters. I dont think the Canon 1000mm is a good choice to use in the more important sports like mountain climbing or running.