Sony ZA 24-70/2.8 opinions solicited re: landscape

[edwardkaraa]

No different than the Zeiss 24-70/2.8 (that I see) in that regard.

Thanks again, Tony. That sounds interesting because the 24-70 is perhaps the lens with the most Zeissness in the ZA line. I will have to do some more research about it....

 

[Tony Beach]

Thanks again, Tony. That sounds interesting because the 24-70 is perhaps the lens with the most Zeissness in the ZA line. I will have to do some more research about it....

You're welcome Ed. As for the "Zeissness" of the 24-70, I just didn't see any differences at its wider focal lengths and other wide angle lenses that I have used, including the Schneider Super Angulon. I think part of that is that most of the wide angle photography I do tends to minimize qualities I find more easily distinguishable in a lens such as how it handles bokeh and flare -- I'm less certain what a drawing style really is and would be interested in side-by-side comparisons between lenses that demonstrates it.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Well, I have moved to Sony after two decades of using Zeiss lenses. The 24-70 showed the same 3D and high micro contrast rendering that I used to expect from my previous Zeiss glass. The 16-35 wasn't too bad either. Perhaps because both zooms are Contax N reincarnations. The 24/2 for instance has a different high micro contrast style, probably a higher frequency contrast, which gives it a rather Leica look than Zeiss. I have no comparisons to show, especially that I sold my zooms in favor of primes over a year ago, but these are my observations from using the lenses regularly over a period of time.

 

[ryc]

Hi Mark,

You can see some of the landscape pictures I took with this lens both with A700 and with A900 on http://www.zeissimages.com/index.php

I just started uploading today.

I really love this lens for landscape photography.

Cheers, Bob.

Try this url instead

http://www.zeissimages.com/picman

 

[picman]

Try this url instead

http://www.zeissimages.com/picman

Thanks ryc, you are right , so much better

 

[fotografz]

Based on your input here, I'd rent the Sony/Zeiss 24-70/2.8 again and test it against the Tamron you already own. It should outperform the Tamron in most cases, but only you can determine that based on your requirements. I've found that methodology to be the only way to really figure this stuff out ... and often the differences are far more obvious than speculating based on other's opinions ... and sometimes they are not.

If you are truly getting more mental about IQ, it may be time to move up to the lower end of Medium Format capture. As good as it is, you can only go so far with a small format capture before hitting the wall. Depending on your actual requirements and applications, throwing more and more cash at that wall in a search for higher IQ tends to eventually become be an exercise in futility. :deadhorse:

-Marc

(BTW, I own two A900s and all of the Sony/Zeiss FF AF lenses, as well as the 70-200/2.8 APO, and while excellent for my wedding photography, wouldn't even think of using any of it for landscape, macro, or other commercial work).

 

[kit laughlin]

Hello from Milano, Marc:

I can second your

As good as it is, you can only go so far with a small format capture before hitting the wall.

And the A850/900 with the Sony Zeiss lenses is (for my tastes, at least) as good as it gets in the smaller format.

Slippery slope, indeed.

 

[fotografz]

Hello from Milano, Marc:

I can second your

And the A850/900 with the Sony Zeiss lenses is (for my tastes, at least) as good as it gets in the smaller format.

Slippery slope, indeed.

Yep, to all of the above.

Prior to the A900s and Zeiss optics, I shot with a Canon 1DsMKIII & L lenses, CY lenses, and some Leica R lenses ... and then a Nikon D3X with all the best nano coated optics plus some stellar ZF lenses. Subjectively, the Sony/Zeiss just has the look the other systems couldn't produce.

In short, IMHO the A850/A900 and Zeiss is "the wall" ... on the other side of that wall is Medium Format digital

-Marc

 

[dhsimmonds]

Keep the Tamron and by the 16-35 CZ. You won't regret it.

This is the lens that I use for landscape work on my A900. It is really excellent and I use it in preference to the 24-70 CZ although the latter comes into it's own for more general work including a bit of street photography. I should add that the 24-70 does vignette a bit at 24mm whereas I have never experienced vignetting at any FL with my 16-35ZA.

 

[Tony Beach]

In short, IMHO the A850/A900 and Zeiss is "the wall" ... on the other side of that wall is Medium Format digital

Still waiting for this: http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/images/pages/Tilt_Shift_engl.pdf
These lenses will almost certainly take 135 format photography to another level for landscape and studio photography.

 

[ptomsu]

This is the lens that I use for landscape work on my A900. It is really excellent and I use it in preference to the 24-70 CZ although the latter comes into it's own for more general work including a bit of street photography. I should add that the 24-70 does vignette a bit at 24mm whereas I have never experienced vignetting at any FL with my 16-35ZA.

Still scared what Sony will do with their next gen FF sensor - if that is coming sometimes.

 

[my_photography]

Still scared what Sony will do with their next gen FF sensor - if that is coming sometimes.

Let's hope Sony doesn't do something stupid.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Let's hope Sony doesn't do something stupid.

I doubt it would, but it will almost certainly do something that we photo traditionalists are not going to like :ROTFL:

 

[alphaman]

I think it's an excellent choice and I love mine, however it is big and bulky so may not be ideal if you need to cram loads of kit into a small backpack.