The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Excellent review of the Zeiss 24-70 f4

hcubell

Well-known member
Regarding the distortion, it was absolutely to be expected and I am surprised that you were surprised! Distortion has shown itself in recent times to be one of the easiest compromises to make in complex, compact zoom design - the fantastic Olympus 12-40 has a lot of it too - because it is one of the most easily fixed in post. Purists don't like this and they are very welcome to that view: I prefer to assess the overall quality of the finished image.

In any event, no one is going to shoot these lenses for architecture unless they are very confident with corrections in post. In fact the wide angle Rodenstock lens I use on my Alpa tech camera with IQ180 back, my preferred solution for architecture, requires lens corrections. Nearly all lenses do, if you want perfect rectilinearity. And given that fact, the only issues AFAIAC are 1) the quality of the files after the correction... and 2) how much of the FOV do you lose by making corrections.

An advantage with the A7R is that you see in the finder the 'after' FOV and that the lens seems a touch wider than advertised at each focal length so as to allow for the post corrections FOV to be about right. You don't get that on a Rodenstock.

I will by buying a Canon 24 TSE to use for architecture on the A7R. You need the right tool for the right job. But in the meantime the 24-70 with corrections can be used for most work without problems.

Regarding AF speed: to me it seems fine, and generally very accurate. It isn't as fast as the very fastest DSLRs or the Oly E-M1 but it is usually least fast enough - however, lenses with slower maximum apertures can get a bit stresses out in low light.

For me the focussing systems on the A7r are good enough and flexible enough to meet my needs very well and in fact I get a higher keeper rate than I do with a D800E, though YMMV according to your style and subject matter!
Tim, I am also not troubled about the lens designers/manufacturers relying upon post-processing software being used to correct for lens distortion and other imperfections. However, while Adobe is quick to provide dedicated lens profiles for a multitude of lenses and will no doubt soon provide one for the Sony/Zeiss FE 24-70 zoom, Phase One is in another world when it comes to providing lens profiles for lenses in Capture One. (They still don't have lens profiles for most of the Hasselblad H series lenses.) That prevents me from using Capture One 7 with the zoom, even though it might otherwise offer a better raw conversion in certain other respects.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Phase are rather lacklustre in that - but I think DXO can probably do it to TIFFs exported from LR? For most of my use, corrections are really needed but I do really want to know that they're available when they are, like you!
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I posted somewhere here (and certainly in my review) a link to a Custom Profile I found that does a good job in LR for the zoom.
 

dierk

Well-known member
I will by buying a Canon 24 TSE to use for architecture on the A7R. You need the right tool for the right job. But in the meantime the 24-70 with corrections can be used for most work without problems.
I am not telling you anything new, Tim,
but if somebody is interested in the Canon 17mm TS-E on the A7R, you may find my post at Steve Huff on this combo:.
The Sony A7R with Canon 17mm/4 TS-E. Architecture Dream Team | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

and all 17mm TS-E images in my 17mm TS-E album at flickr

and here is this lens on the Leica M9!
 

Rand47

Active member
As an a900 owner with a huge investment in A mount high quality glass, my perspective (and optimism) regarding the A7 cameras and Sony in general is a bit jaded. I'm not buying into the FE system. I'm afraid of being cliff-hung yet again. I'm hanging in just long enough to see if this sensor makes it into an A mount body w/ IBIS. The a99 had zero appeal for me, though I tried hard to love it. EVF is flat out lousy compared to the OVF in the 900. It seems actually weird (and a bit irritating actually) that Canikon users can more easily opt for the A7r than Sony A mout users via the clunky SLT adapter. Argh!

OK, pout-rant over :)

Rand
 

Landscapelover

Senior Subscriber Member
Two stories for everything! I love the A99 with the Zeiss 85 and 135mm, the best combination. I actually bought the A99 just only for these 2 lenses instead of buying the Nikon version.

I hope the Nikon D800E and my MFD DSLR have EVFs.

My dream is Tech Cam with EVF. Is it possible?

Pramote
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I actually did the same switched out my Nikon versions of the 85 and 135 and went A mount. What I'm hoping for or planned on was a A99 replacement that is more like the A7r that can be better at AF usage and no lag shutter. No blackout and truly makes the current EVF better than the A7r. My bet its right around the corner and I'll have 3 lenses ready in the A mount for it. Its needs 36 mpx or more for me to jump on it. Wil see. But right now I want Sony to make a better adapter for the 7 series from the A to take advantage of the wider pattern of the AF points. That I need.
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
Well, I did something I always said I'd never do - set out on a five week trip with an untested lens.

I took my a99 with 70-400 G and the a7r with the EA4 adapter and 24-70 ZA, reasoning that if either camera malfunctioned I'd still be OK.

But on my way to the airport I dropped by the Sony Store where they just happened to have one (only one!) 24-70 FE OSS. Needless to say, I bought it. And I used it. Never tested it in a formal sense - just used it for five weeks and over 2,000 exposures. (The ZA never got mounted let alone used.)

The lens, as Tim has said, has epic distortion. I've never owned one this bad, but for my photography it is really not an issue. For the few shots I took of buildings or ones with straight lines, I switched to JPG (and RAW) and let the camera correct, which it does quite well.

In all other respects the lens in day to day use is an absolute winner. The OSS works very well - I have some maximum ISO shots in twilight at 1/15th sec. and they're noisy but very sharp. Landscape shots in normal light are crisp and contrasty with great micro-detail. I'm itching to make some 30 inch prints!

I find, now I'm at home and have downloaded the files, that f5.6 seems to be the best overall aperture for my shooting, though f8 is equally effective.

I'll post some shots in the next few days.
 

Viramati

Member
Well, I did something I always said I'd never do - set out on a five week trip with an untested lens.

I took my a99 with 70-400 G and the a7r with the EA4 adapter and 24-70 ZA, reasoning that if either camera malfunctioned I'd still be OK.

But on my way to the airport I dropped by the Sony Store where they just happened to have one (only one!) 24-70 FE OSS. Needless to say, I bought it. And I used it. Never tested it in a formal sense - just used it for five weeks and over 2,000 exposures. (The ZA never got mounted let alone used.)

The lens, as Tim has said, has epic distortion. I've never owned one this bad, but for my photography it is really not an issue. For the few shots I took of buildings or ones with straight lines, I switched to JPG (and RAW) and let the camera correct, which it does quite well.

In all other respects the lens in day to day use is an absolute winner. The OSS works very well - I have some maximum ISO shots in twilight at 1/15th sec. and they're noisy but very sharp. Landscape shots in normal light are crisp and contrasty with great micro-detail. I'm itching to make some 30 inch prints!

I find, now I'm at home and have downloaded the files, that f5.6 seems to be the best overall aperture for my shooting, though f8 is equally effective.

I'll post some shots in the next few days.

If you use Lr5.3 try 'enable lens profile correction' as the Fe28-70 it does a pretty good job

View attachment 80593
 

mlynds

New member
Hi everyone,
I'm new here but need some advice! I recently made the change from an em5 to the a7 and am really enjoying it. I have the kit lens and then a number of good legacy primes. I'm wanting to get a good native lens for the a7 and am tossing up between the 55mm 1.8 and the 24-70.
Which ones going to give me the biggest jump in image quality and be most worth the money? my legacy 50mm is a pentax smc 1.7.
I mostly do landscapes and adventure outdoor photography but do dable in a bit of everything and am leaning towards the zoom due to practicality while hiking and climbing but am wondering if it's worth the cost over the kit lens. I find the kit lens ok but not very inspiring, it gets the job done, but not much more.
I can't help but thinking the 55mm just sounds like the more special lens and more of a must have lens for the system. I'm quite partial to that FL and it sounds like one the best 50mm lens ever made which makes it quite appealing compared to the lukewarm reception of the 24-70.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Tough call get both but let me add I need the 24-70 for PR type work otherwise I would just go all primes. I'm not really a zoom guy as there is always in every brand a part or more of a zoom that is lacking. If I was not a working Pro than the zoom would only be a convenience factor and I would use it as truly a walk about lens and travel. But as far as quality and getting the most off that sensor the 55mm is really hard to beat. But again I'm a forced into a zoom shooter only by trade not by want. Rather not have it.

Since I have a 25 and 55 I would rather have a kick *** 35 1.4 with some real mojo in it.
 

philip_pj

New member
mlynds, the FE 24-70 zoom was always going to be controversial and you see many opinions, you can read the deicated thread for details. Many people see a midzoom as essential to what they do with the camera, others expect the earth for the money.

The FE55 is my go to prime because of its sheer performance, drawing style, versatility. It is everything you read about and more, for instance, the bokeh is very stylish and it does nice portraits as well as general and landscapes. It is special...and I think better value for money. You can get a cheap FD or OM 24/28 until Sony do one, for hiking and still stay light.
 
Top