I know there is a topic on this so tell me if this is a bad question here, but is there a standard zoom that is better than this new Sony? I know Guy as posted previously on the Leica 35-70/2.8 (a heavy and expensive beast). But what about the 35-70/4 Leica or 35-70/3.5 Zeiss? The 28-90 Leica?? Is the (heavy) Canon 24-70-II better?
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!
Sony 24-70 F4 Lens
- Thread starter ecsh
- Start date
mjm6
Member
This should be testable by covering the contacts with tape or something for some shots, and comparing to unmodified lens shots. You'd probably have to do this wide open since the lenses have an electronic aperture. If you can get the lens into a mid-range aperture and then pull it off the camera, you might be able to shoot at smaller apertures.
Anyway, you could test the theory with a single aperture to see what the differences are.
---Michael
MikeEvangelist
Member
I have the Leica R 35-70 and it is excellent on the A7r. Quite moderately priced too (around $1000). The 28-90 2.8 is a spectacular lens if you've got ~$7000 to spend.
Here's a shot with the Leica 35-70, at 35mm, and a 100% crop.
Last edited:
mjm6
Member
The 35/70 f4 Leica is about the same prices as the Sony, so makes a good comparison. By most reports, it is an excellent lens, but clearly not nearly as wide as the Sony, so that is a problem for some people.
The 28/90 Leica is bigger, reportedly very nice, but the price is beyond that of an Otus, in the $6-7000 range.
The Contax Zeiss 35/70 is possibly an excellent candidate... You would want to get the f/3.4 version, MM-J. I don't think they made a f/3.5. Going price is in the $500 range for a nice one. Less if you find a person-to-person sale.
I'm still going through these decisions myself, so can't give you any personal experience on this, but that is what I have found so far.
mjm6
Member
One other thing, you may be thinking of the Contax Zeiss G 35-70 f/3.5 lens, which may be a good performer, but it IS NOT the lens that most people talk about when they refer to the Zeiss 35-70, so be careful to ensure you are getting what you think you are getting if you go the C-Z route!
There is also Zeiss zoom lenses that were contract manufactured for other camera mounts (Practika and others), which apparently is a pretty poor performer all things considered. Apparently, Zeiss in name, only.
---Michael
There is also Zeiss zoom lenses that were contract manufactured for other camera mounts (Practika and others), which apparently is a pretty poor performer all things considered. Apparently, Zeiss in name, only.
---Michael
Sorry, I was going from memory and said F 3.5 instead of F 3.4. Thanks for the correction. The 35-70/3.4 Zeiss was the one I mentioned. I hear it can be very good, but a shade awkward to use due to it being a push pull design and that changing focusing without altering focal length can be difficult. Having said this, I don't know if anyone has compared any of these alternative choices with the new FE 24-70. The MTF's of the Sony are pretty good, but don't really trust them to be a reliable basis for comparison with Leica and Zeiss lenses as they clearly don't account for diffraction limits and are calculated, not measured.
mjm6
Member
Right, one-touch zooms are a bit fiddly in that respect.
The Leica is also a bit wonky too, though. The front element recesses into the barrel in a way that makes putting filters on the lens somewhat difficult apparently.
Others have complained that it is also very touchy/temperamental in that it can be knocked out of alignment easily. I don't know about that.
My hangup with these options is that for me, the zoom should be the easy lens for real casual shooting. I think the 28-70 or the 24-70 with OSS and AF probably fits that requirement better, even though it probably gives up some performance to do that.
The Leica is also a bit wonky too, though. The front element recesses into the barrel in a way that makes putting filters on the lens somewhat difficult apparently.
Others have complained that it is also very touchy/temperamental in that it can be knocked out of alignment easily. I don't know about that.
My hangup with these options is that for me, the zoom should be the easy lens for real casual shooting. I think the 28-70 or the 24-70 with OSS and AF probably fits that requirement better, even though it probably gives up some performance to do that.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
The Leica 35-70 is a nice lens but get the F4. Here at 35mm as the start a easier lens to design and usually pretty good through the range . As I mentioned before anything starting at 24 and most 28 starts it usually is not good at these start levels but a level up. 24-70 usually 28mm its starts to get better. Same with a start like 28 its good at 35. But start at 35 most times it's pretty good right there as the design for lens aberrations is easier to design. You could find this scenario in almost all brands. Exceptions of course the Leica 28-90 R is stellar but again Leica built it to be that way along with weight, bulk and a big price tag. Most OEMS are trying to keep it inexpensive, easy to build, low cost to consumer and less weight and bulk. That's there priority. When Leica built the 35-70 and 21-35 and 28-90 was bottom line and I kid you not was bragging rights. That's what makes Leica tick and don't let anyone else tell you diffrent, that's there selling point. It goes through the whole system of cams from them , which is great in a way. Just needs money. Lol
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
:deadhorse:
I might have to try this. Nice idea
How would the Leica Elmarit-R 28mm E55 lens compare to the 28-90 at 28? I've looked at the MTF and other charts from Putts. They say the latter has about 1% more distortion (~3% instead of ~2%) and the MTF charts don't look as good on the zoom at 28. But I don't know if this would translate into significant visual differences in IQ from the two. Would it?
I'm thinking about getting either the 28 or the 28-90 for use on an A7r. I have the FE24-70. It's OSS is very helpful, and its IQ is stellar centrally, but corners and edges are not so good at the extreme ends. From ~28 - ~60 it's actually pretty good, but I suspect the Summarit-R 28 trounces it.
For a walk around travel zoom, the loss of stabilization would seem to make the 28-90 a tougher choice over the 28-90. Thoughts?
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
The size and weight alone on the 28-90 would be a curveball for a walk around. I'd give up a tooth for a Leica 28r but I'm already missing two. Lol
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Agree. They are not for the faint of heart. 7k for a zoom is just crazy. I had to sell mine as I was afraid to use it.
Guy Mancuso
Administrator, Instructor
Another forum member just bought one. Hard to find but I loved it with my DMR. About 2400.
Don't forget the Zeiss 25f2. I just bought a new one . Extremely good lens,maybe the best24/25 around. 1700 new and you can get one today from the big retailers. Zeiss 35 F2 also. Point is some very good primes out there. You don't have to buy Leica although they are great.
Don't forget the Zeiss 25f2. I just bought a new one . Extremely good lens,maybe the best24/25 around. 1700 new and you can get one today from the big retailers. Zeiss 35 F2 also. Point is some very good primes out there. You don't have to buy Leica although they are great.
Amen!
tashley
Subscriber Member
Might I add that unless you are on a tripod, OSS is extremely useful just for accuracy of manual magnified focus: it is tough to focus a non-stabilised lens at the longer focal lengths in mag view. This alone can make quite a difference, even ignoring the availability of AF.
jonoslack
Active member
Hi there.
I have the Leica f4, and it's a fantastic lens, good on the A7. I also have the excellent Contax Yashica 28-85 which is great, but rather big. Neither is as good as my much missed Leica R 28-90, but that was also big, and very expensive!