Sony Japan confirms that the Zeiss FE zoom will ship from January 24 while the Sony 28-70mm FE will ship from February 7.
Zeiss 24-70mm preorders:
EUROPE at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT
USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony G 28-70mm lens preorders:
EUROPE at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO.
USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
30 Responses
That’s about $1260 for the Zeiss and $600 for the Sony if my math is correct.
The list prices for the US is $1200 and $500 respectively.
I thought the 28-70 has already been released with the A7 Kit?
yes but only together with the A7 not separate. A7R owners are wanting the Zeiss anyways.
US sources still list February and if you know someone they will tell you not to expect any until March. hope they are wrong.
For the 24-70 f/4 FE I mean.
Yay!
Well I got that kit lens already. Its not that bad actually. Video on it looks pretty impressive in daylight. Really sharp. But I wouldn’t mind selling it to get a sony zeiss 50mm 1.4. 🙂
oh a new troll. Bye bye
Actually an old one who shows up and posts (nonsense) once in a while.
Admin, thanks for the info.
I noticed that you have listed the 28-70 as a G lens, but it isn’t. It’s just a standard kit lens (although a pretty good one according to a number of reports).
Trying to figure out why a Zeiss 24-70 f4 is so horribly overpriced at $1200 when the Canon EF 24-70 f4L is listing for $1500 at b&h. Is the canon horribly over priced too? Is there some distinction that makes the canon worth that much while the zeiss isn’t? Or is this just fanboy/troll warfare? Not taking sides, just don’t see how one is so much worse than the other. (speaking of price only not taking IQ, etc into account.)
The most clueless post ever !
Exactly. It’s not overpriced for a FF standard f4 zoom. It’s not cheap, but this is priced competitively to the same spec of lens on other systems (assuming similar quality that is).
Hopefully the 24-70 is a better performer than the 16-70 Zeiss that just recently was tested by Kurt Munger and – despite its similar price tag of 1000$ – showed a very flaw performance there.
some soft corners at F4, for the rest it gives me very nice pictures every day.
Since no production version of this lens exists in anybody’s hands you can’t know that that is the case with production lenses when they ship. It’s a good assumption of course since virtually all zooms fall down in the corners wide open but you can’t make that statement as a definitive fact.
You may have been talking about the 16-70, I interpreted your comment as you talking about the 24-70.
Yeah, Sony builds some interesting cameras, but most of the glass just sucks -big time-. If only they released some good lenses, they might actually get some users.
Random but…
If i wanted to do HSS flash photography, what would be a good flash for my A7?
Even the Tamron 24 70 2.8 is priced the same. It just pisses me off that they removed VC for the Sony version. It would have been a great combo with the LAEA4 adapter.
I’ve got a pre-order on this lens… hope for the best and fear the worst. The best being a reasonably performing lens with modest distortion and consistent contrast through the zoom range (no mush at 70mm). Stopping down should clean the corners up at 24mm (f/5.6)
The worst would be that it performs essentially like the kit lens at 2-4x the price.
Why again do we need two slow, overlapping zooms at launch?
Because many of us prefer an f/4 zoom… aren’t brainwashed or too self-important to realize that an f/2.8 zoom isn’t often worth the expense in cost, size and image quality:
-f/2.8 on a 24-70mm is pointless for many users
-Many of us prefer optical stabilization to a stop
-Too many IQ compromises required in f/2.8 lenses
-No f/2.8 lenses actually have an f/2.8 transmission. Enjoy your maybe 1/2 stop advantage for a $700-1000 premium
-Lens design will have greater impact on bokeh than one stop through most of the range
f/5.6 in a variable aperture zoom vs. fixed f/2.8 makes sense, but f/4 vs. f/2.8 in practical terms is so limited at this point.
So – yeah. A premium, fixed aperture f/4 lens with OSS makes perfect sense for most people. If you’re brainwashed – buy an f/2.8 zoom and stick it on.
Hi Bart ,I am also interested in the 24-70mm F4 for its more compact design and OSS .Though my interest is dependent on good results at F4 as if you need to stop down to get it to a good level you lose a lot of flexibility. OSS is useful in certain situations but shutter-speed is very often more important.
I share the fear that Sony may be a little “lax” on the optical quality, and hide behind the Zeiss badge for the price premium.
You are right… An f/4 zoom should be very contrasty and modestly sharp in the corners wide open. I’m not holding it to 50mm prime standards, but it’s got to be better than a kit lens!
Agreed here. I’ve been shooting with my 55/1.8 a little bit, and found myself often stopping down to F/4 if I can. Not because of the sharpness, but because the depth of focus at 1.8 is about half a centimeter on such a high resolution sensor, judging from the photos I’ve taken.
I’ve focused on my cat’s eye, and her iris is in perfect focus. At 1 meter, I can make out all the structures in it. But the fur on her eyelashes quickly gets soft and out of focus at F/1.8. A cat’s eyelashes aren’t terribly far from her iris! And no, she wasn’t blinking or something.
F/4 just gets me a lot more useful depth of focus for most pictures, unless they subject is far enough away. I only shoot wide open if the subject is much further away. Large apertures sound good and all, but with all of the tradeoffs, it’s not always better. I’d rather have my main lens be a lighter, sharp lens at F/4, and save the large aperture for specialty lenses. (Like my 560mm F/2.3 telescope!)
I agree. I always stop down my primes (Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 and Zeiss 55mm f/1.8) to at least f/8 to get the best results. Great lenses! Of course that means bumping up the ISO to about 6400 for most family, baby, backyard and cat photos. I can live with that, because I only use my pictures online. Never larger then 800 pixels anyway. Some people say a 36mp A7r is overkill, but I just happen to like that camera. It’s a great camera and I can’t wait to get my hands on the new 24-70mm. I don’t care that it’s only f/4, I’m on,y interested in how it performs at f/8 and smaller.
I know of no F2.8 standard zoom which I would comfortably use wide open. One stop down is usually necessary. If the Zeiss can deliver wide open, I’ll get one.
For low light shooting, I’ll do what I always did – use bright primes.
Did anyone find reviews of this lens? It’s about time thesereviews arrive, doesn’t it?