I'm looking to pick up an A7 soon (probably the A7s) and although I intend to use it with legacy lenses, I've been taking a look at native lenses to get a feel for what's available. It's been quite an eye-opener actually! I know from generally accepted wisdom that the range is still comparatively narrow, but I wasn't ready for the crazy prices: - The 24-70 f4 is reportedly optically and mechanically disappointing, but it's quite a bit more expensive than lenses like the Canon 24-70 f4 L or 24-105 f4 L which are probably better. You can get either of those Canon lenses for around $900 but the Sony is nearer $1200. - The smaller Sony wide/normal primes (28, 35/2.8, 55) are all astonishingly expensive for basic primes of only modest max aperture. Compared to primes from other FF formats they're all multiples of the price. For example, the 55/1.8 is about $1000; compare to, say, the Nikon 50/1.8G at typically less than $250. I won't even mention the Canon plastic fantastic/nifty fifty. - The Loxia and Batis primes are just jaw-dropping in price. Many are over a grand (US dollars) - $1200 for the 85/1.8? You can get the Canon 85/1.8 for a quarter of that. - The 16-35 f4 is almost the same price as the Canon 16-35 f2.8 and almost double the 17-40 f4. I could go on. There's not a single lens in the Sony line up that can be called a bargain. The 28/2 at $450 is the only one that gets close to its competitors. Now I realise that these Sony lenses are all new designs etc and some offer outstanding performance (but by no means all of them), but if I were thinking of building a native system around an A7 platform, I'd be into paying several times the price compared to a Nikon D750 or Canon 6D alternative. As much as I like mirrorless, such a big price differential would not convince me to change, let alone choose Sony from a zero start. As a platform for legacy lenses I can see the sense.