Your opinion about: Zeiss ZA Vario-Sonnar T* 24-70mm f/2.8 SSM

[LuisAugusto]

It seems that isn't getting to much attention, however every single tested have showed that this lens is outstanding, probably the best standard zoom available for any mount.

Here is photozone opinion.

alphamountworld reviewed it too.

All dyxum reviews say it's outstanding.

Here are some quotes from dyxum users:

user: AdamJ
compared to: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L and new Nikon 24-70 f/2.8G Nano

-positive:Super Sharp. The sharpest zoom I have ever owned, period. Fast AF. Comfortable weight balance.

-negative:
Overpriced compared to competition. Bokeh is sub-standard for price range.

Price paid: 1749.00

comment:
...First I must say that I have never encountered a sharper zoom lens anywhere within this range on any manufacturer. There is no doubt to me that it is a great all-around lens and it is the primary lens that I use.

user: OG
compared to: Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM

-positive: everything

-negative: nothing

Price paid: 1550 Euro (new)

comment:
Compared to the Canon (i use the 24-70 L also for work), the Zeiss is like a Leica compared to a Tamron.
I cant say much about this lens because it would be waste of time.
If you have the money, go and get it, and if you read ANY negative fooling about it, don't run away with the idea!

 

[ChickenFriedRyce]

Personally, the only time I'd be buying this lens is if I won the Powerball lottery. But I'm too young to play haha.

This lens would be such a treat to even try out. But it probably is paradise to own. If I ever do improve my skills (or pick some up) in portraiture and have some money to spend, I'd get it. But there are alternatives. Right now, I think for a "portrait zoom", I'm about to fall on the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. I've heard, for the money, there is probably no other lens for the quality. And it has a circular aperture compared to the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8!



I doubt there are going to be anymore replies to this thread because very few people on this forum shoot with Sony (or Minolta). And if there are, I don't think they're going to be here.

 

[croomaniac]

i've hold and tested this lens inside the Sony Style, and it is heavy, big and super fast!~ the lens is just amazing, put some poison in me.. anyway, i'm dreaming of this lens and when the fund is there, i'll definately buy it on top of any lens..

i'm also eying for 70300G.. both produces superb image quality and colours..

 

[notelliot]

who makes it? zeiss, cosina, or sony?

 

[LuisAugusto]

who makes it? zeiss, cosina, or sony?

Designed by Zeiss, manufacturer by Sony.

 

[Iron Flatline]

There have been a number of articles in the pro press that are noticing that top-of-the-line lenses for Canon and Nikon can no longer keep up with the sensors. The L lenses from Canon are not good enough for the 1Ds Mk III anymore, and it is being recommended to use Zeiss and esp. Leica lenses.

 

[ChickenFriedRyce]

That's quite interesting because Sony should be announcing/releasing a Full-Frame body not too long from now. But I, personally, don't think it will be a success. I hope they improve and stop packing in 24+ megapixels onto a sensor, even if it's FF. I guess they'd take advantage of the Zeiss glass, but you'd have to have some serious cash to support that FF body.

 

[LuisAugusto]

That's quite interesting because Sony should be announcing/releasing a Full-Frame body not too long from now. But I, personally, don't think it will be a success. I hope they improve and stop packing in 24+ megapixels onto a sensor, even if it's FF. I guess they'd take advantage of the Zeiss glass, but you'd have to have some serious cash to support that FF body.

24 Megapixels are quite useful for studio photographers, they are the same public that buy 21 MP canon cameras. And, the low light performance will be better than that one found on the A700, because even when it has 24 MP, it has less pixel density. Nikon is going to do it too with the D3X. Indeed, Sony needs to fill the lineup and make a lower pixel FF, but that doesn't mean the current is a bad option.

But I don't care too much about new cameras, I won't be buying another in at least 2 years, what I care about is glass, and that CZ 16-80 + 70-300 G are just a beautiful combo (and technically, for the IQ delivered, it's a cheap combo), I'm already saving for it However I need a cheap tele-zoom by time being, so I'll buy a 70-210 as soon as I get home, not the beercan, tough.

My 50mm F/1.7 it's really overated, and the range is useless in cropped cameras (bad portrait range, poor minimum focus distance=poor macro, not enough tele), in FF it would be a very usable range but the IQ will be quite suckier, it's far from sharp below F/2.8 above that it's good, at F/8 even excellent if you ask me.

The last I said it's not in context, I just let a little frustration went out.

 

[Early]

Here is photozone opinion.

Viewing the bokeh of this lens on page 2 would kill it for me. I don't care how sharp it is otherwise.