Archive 2014 · Sony FE 24-70 lens
p.8 #1Sony FE 24-70 lens
My 24-70 is on the way from Adorama, yay! I can test it against 28-70 FE and/or Minolta 35-70 when it gets here. I'm really curious how it will hold up.
I might actually go back down to APS-C NEX - I miss the itty bitty form factor - and would also like to see how the two FE's look on 5N (though I'll probably pick up a NEX7 or A6000 if I go that route).
I might actually go back down to APS-C NEX - I miss the itty bitty form factor - and would also like to see how the two FE's look on 5N (though I'll probably pick up a NEX7 or A6000 if I go that route).
Feb 28, 2014 at 09:41 AM
p.8 #2Sony FE 24-70 lens
mco_970 wrote:
My 24-70 is on the way from Adorama, yay! I can test it against 28-70 FE and/or Minolta 35-70 when it gets here. I'm really curious how it will hold up.
Ooh, testing against the Minolta is a good idea. Maybe I'll try that as well. Do you have the macro or non-macro version? (assuming you mean the famed MD 35-70 3.5 and not the Maxxum or AF or something)
My 24-70 is on the way from Adorama, yay! I can test it against 28-70 FE and/or Minolta 35-70 when it gets here. I'm really curious how it will hold up.
Ooh, testing against the Minolta is a good idea. Maybe I'll try that as well. Do you have the macro or non-macro version? (assuming you mean the famed MD 35-70 3.5 and not the Maxxum or AF or something)
Feb 28, 2014 at 11:36 AM
p.8 #3Sony FE 24-70 lens
Yeah, I have the MD f/3.5. Not sure if I'll keep it or not, though it does have macro at 70mm, which is super-useful for hiking, etc. 
Feb 28, 2014 at 11:50 AM
p.8 #4Sony FE 24-70 lens
My 35-70 has a small advantage in the corners and the difference increases as you zoom in.
The SEL2470z has more contrast and is more resistant to flare.
mco_970 wrote:
Yeah, I have the MD f/3.5. Not sure if I'll keep it or not, though it does have macro at 70mm, which is super-useful for hiking, etc.
The SEL2470z has more contrast and is more resistant to flare.
mco_970 wrote:
Yeah, I have the MD f/3.5. Not sure if I'll keep it or not, though it does have macro at 70mm, which is super-useful for hiking, etc.
Feb 28, 2014 at 01:01 PM
p.8 #5Sony FE 24-70 lens
Looking forward to trying this lens out.
I was really looking forward to trying it out on Thursday, when UPS said it would arrive. However, the tracking site says it has been in Bedford, IL since Wednesday night with "train missed connection" as the status.
Bummer!
I was really looking forward to trying it out on Thursday, when UPS said it would arrive. However, the tracking site says it has been in Bedford, IL since Wednesday night with "train missed connection" as the status.
Bummer!
Feb 28, 2014 at 01:01 PM
p.8 #6Sony FE 24-70 lens
This lens seems to be completely predictable.
Sony has clearly a methodology which it is following with E-mount design, only slightly modified for FF.
In every lens design compromises need to be made. The main swings are between sharpness, distortion, size and contrast (although this is a partnership with coatings).
Sony have given sharpness and size the priority which is perfectly understandable. They figure that software can correct distortion but not the other issues.
Generally all E mount lenses, especially zooms, have above expected distortions.
The issue with software fixes is that they reduce corner resolution. Additionally many soft corner issues are actually field curvature so are more pronounced close up.
On balance Sony have done the right thing by this lens IMHO for those that want a sharp lightweight walk around. Sony assume that serious landscape or portrait folk will probably use primes.
I expect Sony at some point to produce a high quality f2.8 zoom. But don't expect much price or weight difference from the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 II (the current benchmark for mid range zooms)
Sony has clearly a methodology which it is following with E-mount design, only slightly modified for FF.
In every lens design compromises need to be made. The main swings are between sharpness, distortion, size and contrast (although this is a partnership with coatings).
Sony have given sharpness and size the priority which is perfectly understandable. They figure that software can correct distortion but not the other issues.
Generally all E mount lenses, especially zooms, have above expected distortions.
The issue with software fixes is that they reduce corner resolution. Additionally many soft corner issues are actually field curvature so are more pronounced close up.
On balance Sony have done the right thing by this lens IMHO for those that want a sharp lightweight walk around. Sony assume that serious landscape or portrait folk will probably use primes.
I expect Sony at some point to produce a high quality f2.8 zoom. But don't expect much price or weight difference from the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 II (the current benchmark for mid range zooms)
Mar 05, 2014 at 02:02 AM
p.8 #7Sony FE 24-70 lens
I've had the 24-70 for over a week now and have been testing it continuously. I really like this lens! Colonelpurple's field curvature analysis is spot on. This is most evident at 24mm where my tests are showing that F11 is the optimum f-stop when corner sharpness is a consideration, if it isn't in F5.6 works well. I ran a heads up test against my 14-24 Nikon at 24mm with the Nikon slightly edging out the Zeiss at the corners but the Zeiss was sharper everywhere else. From 27mm to 35mm F6.7 looks the best and from that point on 5.6 is the best f-stop. When I did my tests with the Zeiss lens I made sure stabilization was turned off which does make quite a difference. When shooting the lens with stabilization on it's important to hold the shutter button half depressed for a little longer than you normally do to let the lens stabilization solidify itself. I also did a series of studio shots in fairly close and actually found that the field curvature wasn't much of an issue. The zoom in the studio is capable of producing some rather fantastic results. I mostly shoot prime lenses but did use the Canon 24-70 version 1 for quite a long time for people in the studio and from what I remember the Zeiss 24-70 is superior to that lens.
Mar 05, 2014 at 08:47 AM
p.8 #8Sony FE 24-70 lens
My first impression is also positive. Really nice color and contrast... Definitely reminds me of the good old CY35-70.
Definitely reminds me of the good old CY35-70. Mar 05, 2014 at 09:21 AM
p.8 #9Sony FE 24-70 lens
In my view curvature of field is not an issue with the FE 24-70 f/4. The main issue with the corners is astigmatism and it's easy to test this. Just find a flat field subject and square your camera to it. Then focus on one extreme corner and shoot at f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11 apertures.
To me, there are almost no differences between these apertures when checking the focused corner at 100%. The center looks excellent even focusing on the extreme corner giving evidence of lack of field curvature. When stopping down, I see a great improvement at f/5.6 in the center of the frame with excellent contrast and resolution (rivaling primes). Stopping down to f/8 noticeably reduces micro-contrast but overall center image remains excellent.
To me, there are almost no differences between these apertures when checking the focused corner at 100%. The center looks excellent even focusing on the extreme corner giving evidence of lack of field curvature. When stopping down, I see a great improvement at f/5.6 in the center of the frame with excellent contrast and resolution (rivaling primes). Stopping down to f/8 noticeably reduces micro-contrast but overall center image remains excellent.
Mar 05, 2014 at 10:19 AM
p.8 #10Sony FE 24-70 lens
I compared it to my Canon 24-105 IS, sigma 12-24 (at 24mm), Canon 24 TSE II, a manual focus Tamron 28mm, and both the 55 1.8 FE and 35 1.8 FE. It was not a scientific test - simply took tripod mounted pictures of a messy living room with each lens at each aperture (OS and IS were off).
As compared with the 24 - 105:
I found it was quite similar in performance to the Canon 24-105 when stopped down to 5.6 and f8 - the 24-70 FE had similar performance at 24mm, a bit stronger at 35mm,a bit weaker at 50mm and a bit weaker at 70mm (I didn't try 60mm). Neither was particularly strong at the edges/corners, but they were similar. If I look at the series of pictures I took with each lens at each aperture (over and over), the variation between shots with each lens at a particular aperture is not much different than diffences I see between these two lenses at a given aperture...so my non scientific conclusion is that the differences between these lenses are relatively small (other than a obviously greater amount of chromatic abberation in the 24-105). Both are compromises (compared with primes). I find both of these lenses have similar color and contrast. I'm happy with both and especially the 24-70 because it is relatively light and small.
As compared with primes and sigma zoom:
At 28mm, the Tamron is sharper stopped down at the center than the two zooms (less contrast though). At 24mm, the 24 TSE II blows all the zooms away by a long shot from edge to edge, so much so that it almost seems like it has way more depth of field at a given f stop - and no, I have not tilted it. Likewise, as expected, at 55mm, nothing compares to the 55 1.8 FE and at 35mm the 35 2.8 is the best of the lot. The Sigma is worse than all of them both in the center and the edges/corners at 24mm (but of course it has 12mm).
In conclusion:
If I plan on taking a long hike, I'll take just the 24-70 FE so that I can hike further and get to more interesting places to photograph. If I want the best quality I'll take the TSE 24 II, 35 2.8 FE, and the 55 1.8 FE (and maybe a macro 100mm and/or the sigma for ultrawide). I feel I have the best of both worlds.
Edited on Mar 05, 2014 at 12:30 PM · View previous versions
As compared with the 24 - 105:
I found it was quite similar in performance to the Canon 24-105 when stopped down to 5.6 and f8 - the 24-70 FE had similar performance at 24mm, a bit stronger at 35mm,a bit weaker at 50mm and a bit weaker at 70mm (I didn't try 60mm). Neither was particularly strong at the edges/corners, but they were similar. If I look at the series of pictures I took with each lens at each aperture (over and over), the variation between shots with each lens at a particular aperture is not much different than diffences I see between these two lenses at a given aperture...so my non scientific conclusion is that the differences between these lenses are relatively small (other than a obviously greater amount of chromatic abberation in the 24-105). Both are compromises (compared with primes). I find both of these lenses have similar color and contrast. I'm happy with both and especially the 24-70 because it is relatively light and small.
As compared with primes and sigma zoom:
At 28mm, the Tamron is sharper stopped down at the center than the two zooms (less contrast though). At 24mm, the 24 TSE II blows all the zooms away by a long shot from edge to edge, so much so that it almost seems like it has way more depth of field at a given f stop - and no, I have not tilted it. Likewise, as expected, at 55mm, nothing compares to the 55 1.8 FE and at 35mm the 35 2.8 is the best of the lot. The Sigma is worse than all of them both in the center and the edges/corners at 24mm (but of course it has 12mm).
In conclusion:
If I plan on taking a long hike, I'll take just the 24-70 FE so that I can hike further and get to more interesting places to photograph. If I want the best quality I'll take the TSE 24 II, 35 2.8 FE, and the 55 1.8 FE (and maybe a macro 100mm and/or the sigma for ultrawide). I feel I have the best of both worlds.
Edited on Mar 05, 2014 at 12:30 PM · View previous versions
Mar 05, 2014 at 10:25 AM
p.8 #11Sony FE 24-70 lens
I want to add that I also tried using my TS-E 24mm II with a Kenko 1.4x pro 300 teleconverter for an effective focal length of 34mm. I found that this combination is sharper than the 24-70 FE lens at F5.6 and f8 although colors don't have the same pop, contrast is a little less, and there seems to be some glare (I haven't flocked the metabones yet so this may be why). It makes me wonder if some of the lost contrast and color pop would be there if I had the canon 1.4x III instead of the Kenko 1.4x . Still, by adding contrast and vibrancy in post processing, the results are pretty similar and it adds the option for a 34mm tilt shift (although I haven't experimented with this combination tilted or shifted yet).
Mar 05, 2014 at 12:05 PM
p.8 #12Sony FE 24-70 lens
I have found similar results as mentioned by Fred-- suggesting this is astigmatism. However I would also state that the lens suffers from a great amount of barrel distortion-- more than I have seen with Canon and Nikon 24-70 zooms (although have not tried on Sony). The CS6 beta raw converter has a fix for this that works well.
Fred Miranda wrote:
In my view curvature of field is not an issue with the FE 24-70 f/4. The main issue with the corners is astigmatism and it's easy to test this. Just find a flat field subject and square your camera to it. Then focus on one extreme corner and shoot at f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11 apertures.
To me, there are almost no differences between these apertures when checking the focused corner at 100%. The center looks excellent even focusing on the extreme corner giving evidence of lack of field curvature. When stopping down, I see a great improvement at...Show more →
Fred Miranda wrote:
In my view curvature of field is not an issue with the FE 24-70 f/4. The main issue with the corners is astigmatism and it's easy to test this. Just find a flat field subject and square your camera to it. Then focus on one extreme corner and shoot at f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11 apertures.
To me, there are almost no differences between these apertures when checking the focused corner at 100%. The center looks excellent even focusing on the extreme corner giving evidence of lack of field curvature. When stopping down, I see a great improvement at...Show more →
Mar 05, 2014 at 05:18 PM
p.8 #13Sony FE 24-70 lens
serhan_ wrote:
You can check Tim Ashley's comment and samples after his third 24-70mm:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/570715-post270.html
For anyone interested - I have just published my personal findings on my experiences with the lens in a long post here...http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/3/the-sony-zeiss-vario-tessar-t-fe-24-70mm-f4-za-oss-hallelujah
You can check Tim Ashley's comment and samples after his third 24-70mm:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/570715-post270.html
For anyone interested - I have just published my personal findings on my experiences with the lens in a long post here...http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2014/3/the-sony-zeiss-vario-tessar-t-fe-24-70mm-f4-za-oss-hallelujah
Mar 06, 2014 at 03:40 AM
p.8 #14Sony FE 24-70 lens
Hello Tim,
Thank you for the excellent samples! Maybe you could, want to add the RAW files of this test album for download somethere. So far I am still thinking to invest in Sony FE system... depends on this standard zoom.
Best, Walter
Thank you for the excellent samples! Maybe you could, want to add the RAW files of this test album for download somethere. So far I am still thinking to invest in Sony FE system... depends on this standard zoom.
Best, Walter
Mar 06, 2014 at 04:12 AM
p.8 #15Sony FE 24-70 lens
Hi Walter,
I'm afraid uploading all the RAWs is crippling to bandwidth and I get charged extra for hosting them - so long ago I took the decision to use 100% and 50% size JPEGs (always processed from RAW shots) - but the jpegs are saved at 92% quality and in Adobe RGB so they should be good enough to assess IQ....
I'm afraid uploading all the RAWs is crippling to bandwidth and I get charged extra for hosting them - so long ago I took the decision to use 100% and 50% size JPEGs (always processed from RAW shots) - but the jpegs are saved at 92% quality and in Adobe RGB so they should be good enough to assess IQ....
Mar 06, 2014 at 05:01 AM
p.8 #16Sony FE 24-70 lens
Thank's Tim for great effort in testing the 24-70 FE! Here's another assessment comparing it directly to the Nikon 24-70 https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sony-Zeiss%2024-70mm%20Review.pdf I've been shooting today with the lens quite a bit and to be honest haven't been able to get a bad shot from it. I wish all my lenses had this stabilization.
Edited on Mar 06, 2014 at 06:57 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Mar 06, 2014 at 06:57 PM · View previous versions
Mar 06, 2014 at 04:01 PM
p.8 #17Sony FE 24-70 lens
Tim,
Fantastic write-up, great observations and samples. I found the comparison to Nikon particularly helpful.
Fantastic write-up, great observations and samples. I found the comparison to Nikon particularly helpful.
Mar 06, 2014 at 06:25 PM
p.8 #18Sony FE 24-70 lens
dennishh wrote:
Thank,s Tim for great effort in testing the 24-70 FE! Here's another assessment comparing it directly to the Nikon 24-70 https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sony-Zeiss%2024-70mm%20Review.pdf I've been shooting today with the lens quite a bit and to be honest haven't been able to get a bad shot from it. I wish all my lenses had this stabilization.
Phew. He and I agree almost exactly! Thanks for the link!
Thank,s Tim for great effort in testing the 24-70 FE! Here's another assessment comparing it directly to the Nikon 24-70 https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.ejphoto.com/Quack%20PDF/Sony-Zeiss%2024-70mm%20Review.pdf I've been shooting today with the lens quite a bit and to be honest haven't been able to get a bad shot from it. I wish all my lenses had this stabilization.
Phew. He and I agree almost exactly! Thanks for the link!
Mar 06, 2014 at 06:50 PM
p.8 #19Sony FE 24-70 lens
uscmatt99 wrote:
Tim,
Fantastic write-up, great observations and samples. I found the comparison to Nikon particularly helpful.
Thank you. Interestingly, I agree with the findings of others that the T stop is accurate - which means this is, in comparison to the Nikkor, probably only 1/2 a stop slower rather than a full stop. Add the OSS to that and the better performance at the wide end and I know which I'd rather use!
Tim,
Fantastic write-up, great observations and samples. I found the comparison to Nikon particularly helpful.
Thank you. Interestingly, I agree with the findings of others that the T stop is accurate - which means this is, in comparison to the Nikkor, probably only 1/2 a stop slower rather than a full stop. Add the OSS to that and the better performance at the wide end and I know which I'd rather use!
Mar 06, 2014 at 06:52 PM
p.8 #20Sony FE 24-70 lens
If this lens really compares well to the Nikkor, then I have to wonder what all the worries were about. The Nikkor isn't great at 24mm, but otherwise I enjoyed the images from mine for years.
Mar 06, 2014 at 06:53 PM