>>4113079But bro, sony has so many lenses! They have a dozen actual lenses that cost more than everyone elses, and then even more expensive versions of those lenses, and then a bunch of shitty chinese clones that cost as much as everyone elses!
>>4112865Look at FIRST PARTY lens costs now, without shilling any meike samyang or whatever junk without properly working autofocus.
Snoy full frame:
18mm? Nope.
21mm? Nope.
Sony SEL28F20 FE 28mm f/2 $448.00
FE 50mm F1.8 $249.99
Sony Planar T* FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA $1,498.00
FE 85 mm f/1.8 $599.99
Sony FE 100mm F2.8 $1,499.99
Canon full frame mirrorless:
18mm nipe
21mm Nope
Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM $289.99 (cheaper and faster)
Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM $149 (cheaper)
Canon RF50mm F 1.2L USM $2099 (more expensive but faster)
Canon RF 85mm f/2 Macro IS STM $99 (cheaper, slightly slower, macro)
Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 L USM $2599 (more expensive but faster)
RF100mm F2.8 L MACRO IS USM $999 (same speed and macro, cheaper)
Canon has a way better lens lineup. If you want to spend money on top quality you will be spending money, yes, but let's be real the canon lenses are superior and no one spending four figures on a lens should complain about spending more for a better lens. If you are not a professional who can write these things off as tax expenses, canon still has a superior lens lineup. But bro, closed mounts, muh broken scamyangs, muh manual meikes, my soft and CA ridden tamrons, muh dull and flat sugmas!
