Image courtesy: Mobile01
Note: UPDATED Zeiss FE 16-35mm preorder links list:
Zeiss 16-35mm FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony Store US.
Zeiss 16-35mm FE in Europe at Sony DE, UK, ES, IT, FR, CH, AT, NL, BE, FI, SE, NO, PT.
Zeiss 16-35mm FE in Australia and Asia at Sony AUS and Digitalrev.
—
The very first full Zeiss 16-35mm FE lens review has been posted by the Chinese site Mobile01 (bad google translation here). Note that google translation tool misses to load all images therefore click on the original korean link to see them all. You can download all images (RAW and JPG) here. Because the google translation tool sucks on showing the images I directly link you to the test images:
Sharpness test at 16mm (center left and corner right): image here
Sharpness test at 35mm (center left and corner right): image here
Distortion at 16mm: image here
Distortion at 35mm: image here
Vignetting test: image here
Cool “astral” test: image here
Flare test: image here
aperture dispersion suppression test: image here
These are some of the reviewer thoughts on the lens:
– Very high optical quality (good resolving power even on the edge). It only gets soft from f/16 towards at 35mm
– Slight flare issues in some conditions
– autofocus is slow on the A7s but quite reliable.
– Some purple fringing wide open (easily to correct in PS)- not really fast autofocus on the A7s
– no barrel distortion, results are perfect (and that’s one of the key reasons you buy a wide angle lens!).
Zeiss FE 16-35mm preorder links:
Zeiss 16-35mm FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony Store US.
Zeiss 16-35mm FE in Europe at Sony DE, UK, ES, IT, FR, CH, AT, NL, BE, FI, SE, NO, PT.
Zeiss 16-35mm FE in Australia and Asia at Sony AUS and Digitalrev.
[poll id=”197″]
And this is just one of the great images posted at Mobile01:
Image courtesy: Mobile01
0 Responses
That is Mandarin not Korean
Thanks! Fixed 🙂
One probable reason the translation was bad: Mobile01 is a (Traditional) Chinese site. Not Korean.
It is Chinese, not Korean.
It seems that my concern regarding borders and edges (analogue the 2470FE) was unneeded.
If it would have been similar to the 2470FE I wouldn’t consider buying because I own the 1635ZA and the LA-EA4.
But if it gives better IQ, than it would be combined with the weight topic (500g vs. 1100g) an argument to go for it. 🙂
as for testing, FE1635 is definitely better than 1635ZA except f2.8
Resolution Test on a A7S!?? ….. not meaningful.
Why not on A7R?
This is not a extreme testing because he tested on A7S, with the least problem in corner.
some comment need to be edited,
1. It only gets soft from f/16 towards at 35mm.
2. flare reduction isn’t as good as expected especially in small aperature.
3. autofocus of A7S isn’t fast enough to amaze him combined with FE1635 (but not emphasize the speed of motor of A7S), but stability of autofocus is quite reliable.
Totally off-topic – How I wish Sony would release the much anticipated 85mm FE f/1.8 OSS G lens already…..!!!!!!
I was hoping for that announcement for Photokina. I guess Sony saw it more urgent to announce a fast 35mm first for the prime lens front. The nice thing about releasing an 85mm lens though is that this is a prime also sorely lacking from the APSC lineup as well. I’ve been hoping for a high quality telephoto prime for a long time now.
it will be a zeiss 85mm f1.8 with no OSS, if you want OSS, you will have to use the 90mm macro G oss lens
What happened to the RX20 news?
i see no reasen to use such kinde of interchangable lens, becuas allredy egseast 16-70 with same optical charecteristics and more universal
16-70 is an APS-C lens, not the same thing at all. This is for full frame
i see no reasen to use such kinde of interchangable lens, becuas allready igseast 16-70 with same optical charecteristis and more universal
Maybe because it’s an FE lens designed for full frame bodies like the A7R and not APS-C bodies.
Nice to see 7s+16-35 f4 in action , but I wish to see original video file . All video from 7s on you tube looks terrible . Is anyone know where I can get them ?
Looks like a very nice lens, would like to see a few landscape shots using the A7r instead of the A7s.
Sony lenses coming in 2015 second half –> E-mount 24-70 F2.8 G, E-mount 16-35 F2.8 G, E-mount Zeiss 85mm F1.8, E-mount Zeiss 50mm F1.2, E-mount Zeiss 135mm F2.0, E-mount 300mm F2.8 G, E-mount 70-400 F4.5-6.3 G, E-mount 500mm F8 (reflex lens), E-mount 28-105mm F4 G, E-mount 24mm F1.8 G…
is it true?
No.
I said it before and I’ll keep saying it…..
They’d need to develop some breakthrough AF tech first.
This review has a serious flaw…it forgot to answer the question, “Can this lens makes me breakfast?” I’m sitting on the edge of my chair. Must know.
Samples look pretty soft at 1:1. What’s the point in gaining a great sensor if the glass can’t deliver.
But it has a metal body and a blue label on the side.
taking this with a pinch of salt. 12mp isn’t exactly something you’d use to test resolving capabilities. the real test should be on the a7r instead
I wish he shot raw dog for this review. It’s hard to see the actual performance with these mushy jpegs.
I wish you would STFU.
Talking to yourself again Ben?
Seriously friend, a couple trips to the therapist can clear up your mind funk real fast. Then you can live and contribute, rather than whither and complain.
still waiting for a useful review with text that i can read…
How anyone would conclude from the samples that the lens looks ‘promising’ is beyond me. The difference between center and edge performance is very visible. That in itself is not a problem as it will be vthis way on any lens to some degree BUT these samples are taken @12mp and the difference is still there even at f11.
Not saying this will be another 24-70 blue-sticker lens but so far it doesn’t look too good. The recently posted comparison shots vs the Canon 16-35 on the a7r also look awfully soft for the DxO conversions (jpegs looked fine but jpegs are jpegs with lots of bionz magic).
Frank, do you mind sharing the comparison link? I was thinking about getting the Canon, but the AF will be awfully slow (I would say unusable) via the Metabones adapter… So there are not many choices for the E-mount folks unfortunately.
No problem, here you go. Imo at 16mm, the Sony looks better, at least in jpeg. If you look at the DxO though, it looks like a completely different lens. (much worse). At 35mm no contest, Canon is much bettter even in jpeg.
http://digiphoto.techbang.com/posts/7022-sony-fe16-35mm-f4-za-oss-use-ideas?page=2
Flickr full res:
16mm
OOC Sony: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3898/15130319979_8771f07fda_o.jpg
OOC Canon: ttps://farm4.staticflickr.com/3925/15313902891_25a0d29542_o.jpg
DxO Sony: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5561/15294020376_7cf2e1c9eb_o.jpg
35mm
OOC Canon: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3912/15294098466_db652313e9_o.jpg
OOC Sony: https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3893/15317182815_5e8e4e0345_o.jpg
DxO: Sony: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5581/15130428990_0f1853485f_o.jpg
Thank you!
If you’re interested : samples from 24 to 36 mpx of the 16-35 FE :
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15244456212/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15058281258/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15058237158/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15144080507/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15144087097/
These look pretty dang good.
I don’t know. Maybe such a couple lense + 36 mpx deserves more complicated samples (fine textures, vegetation, etc) to know if it’s good or not…
Another funny review: lens distortion test with in-camera correction enabled. What’s the point?
the absurd pricetag of this piece of shit. I’ll never switch to FE with this stupid prices for a subpair lens performance and so few lens available.
it isn’t even small for the sake of portability. it negates all the A7 advantage.
And specially when it costs about the same of the suberb nikon 14-24mm f2.8 and when the
Tamron 15-30mm 2.8 VC is coming out with an even lower price it’s trully a turn off.
Nikon! Lol, lol
say what?