The 24-240mm FE lens is now shipping in many countires like at at [shoplink 34525 ebay]Fotomundus Germany (Click here)[/shoplink], [shoplink 34524 ebay]eBay UK (Click here)[/shoplink] and Digitalrev. And it will ship within the next 1-2 days in USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, Sony US.
First owners are sharing their tests and samples:
Plenty of image samples by Mark Galer on Flickr.
Image samples and test at Mapcamera (google translation here). They say it has a “images have a nice tridimensional feeling, blur is good and contrast also”. Overall the lens has a surprisingly good optical quality.
Onwers report on Dpreview forum.
Spanish hands-on video on Youtube.
Weird unboxing video on Youtube.
Let me know if you get your 24-240mm and share your findings at Sonyalphaforum.com.
Reminder: BHphoto (Click here) tested the Sony 24-240mm lens and wrote:
In my rudimentary testing I can say that when I focused on something at the telephoto end and zoomed out, the focus did not shift noticeably, which is a big plus. The main drawbacks for video are the stiff zoom barrel, as well as the distortion, which is not as easily corrected for video users. Still, if you have to have a large zoom range and don’t want to splurge for the Sony FE PZ 28-135 lens, then this is certainly a viable option.
It’s not going to be the sharpest or most light-sensitive lens but, in my testing, I think it does well enough to use in place of other FE lenses—in most circumstances.
All new FE lens preorder links:
In USA at:
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, FocusCamera, Sony US.
Sony 90mm f/2.8 FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, FocusCamera, Sony US.
Sony 24-240mm FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, FocusCamera, Sony US.
Sony 28mm f/2.0 FE at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, FocusCamera, Sony US.
Sony Fisheye Conversion Lens for FE 28mm F/2 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony Ultra-Wide Conversion Lens for FE 28mm F/2 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony Fisheye Converter for E 16mm F/2.8 and E 20mm F/2.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony Ultra-Wide Converter for E 16mm F2.8 and E 20mm F2.8 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
In Europe at:
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 FE at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Sony 90mm f/2.8 FE at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Sony 24-240mm FE at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Sony 28mm f/2.0 FE at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Wide Angle converter at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Fisheye converter at Sony Germany, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Wide angle converter for 16 and 20mm lenses at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
Fisheye converter for 16 and 20mm lenses at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, AT, CH, SE, FI, NO, PT.
In Asia/Australia at:
Sony 24-240mm FE lens at Digitalrev, CameraPRO, Sony Australia.
Sony 28mm FE lens at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
Sony 90mm FE lens at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 FE lens at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
Wide angle converter for 16 and 20mm lenses at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
Fisheye converter for 16 and 20mm lenses at Digitalrev, Sony Australia.
73 Responses
Not bad image quality. Better than I excpected.
Not bad in thumbnail but I definitely notice the softness when I zoom into the image.
It’s not softness, it’s character.
Lovely lens for travel …
I don’t see how it’s possible to use a lens for travel. I have travelled by car, train, boat and plane, but never by lens. Please explain.
it’s fun, you should try it some day
Only if you’ve got oss…
Your physician can explain this to you in no time … but in a mean time you just relax and don’t confuse your self with photography …
Just zoom in. You can travel faster than Usain Bolt.
weak joke, very weak
You know those B-movies that are so bad that they are actually good (if that makes sense to you)? Well, that joke is the equivalent of those movies.
Just add the word photography behind travel and it’ll fix all confusion xD
Sony is making too many lenses, we need more bodies!!!
I feel like it needs to be pointed out that you’re joking, in case Sony reads this and gets the wrong idea.
Because you Are joking, right? Yeah, you’re joking.
Yes he’s joking but it wouldn’t surprise me to hear the concern trolls switching up and complain that there should be more bodies now the lens collection if filling out nicely.
thank god you’re joking
Exactly! Sony make plenty of lenses that would be usable for photography, if only we had a body that didn’t produce unusable raw files.
I feel like I can just combine this lens with an A7000 and have the perfect portable camera system and use it for virtually anything.
Except wide angle.
35mm FF equivalent? I don’t think so.
“Portable”? Are you kidding?
This lens weighs as much as a FF DSLR body and is as compact as a bazooka….
Then the A7000 doesn’t even exist and nobody knows how that camera body would look like…
It would be likely an APS-C camera, so I don’t understand why you would choose this 24-240 behemoth instead of a E 18-200mm or a Tamron 18-200.
I would call “perfect portable camera system” a m4/3 gear like the Panasonic GM5 (or
GX7) + 14-140mm combo, or Olympus E-M5II + 14-150. Also the Sony RX10.
780g is still below most high end DSLR.
The idea I had in mind was 1 native Lens I could use on two different systems that covers each others weak points.
The A7s being really good at low light. But it lacks in other areas such as high resolution and autofocus speed.
So a theoretical A7000 would be an ideal 2nd camera to it, higher resoluiton and higher autofocus fps.
Even with the 1,5 x crop factor, 35mm would still be decent wide enough.
How can it be over 1K and it doesn’t have the blue label on the side? Does that cost extra?
Find me another native lens for full frame that goes as wide as 24mm and as long as 240mm that’s weather sealed.
You’ve got something similar and probably better: the canon 28-300L and 35-350L lenses
so how do these compare at 24mm?
“probably”…
Irrelevant. Most people will be using these lenses in the 35-135mm range, covering the essential focal lengths 35mm, 50mm, 85mm and 135mm.
no usage under 35mm and over 135mm? then you wouldnt buy this at all!
face palm
Those are not similar in focal length nor prices though…? Completely different category and consumer.
I’ve got the new Tamron 28-300 VC lens on my Canon 6D. It’s not perfect, but better than the crop-sensor super zooms. Also, it is a good balanced fit on the 6D, so hopefully this FE will be awesome for A7 owners.
There aren’t any interchangeable Zeiss lenses with a 10x zoom factor (well, maybe there are some super exotic cine lenses or something but that’s obviously a different league).
Zeiss? What’s wrong with them? Why are everybody complaining about them? It’s not like their lenses are like Macpro or beats headsets…
You want that blue label? That lens would cost you $1999.
It looks like it has rather distracting bokeh, especially at the long end. Is anyone else seeing this? It’s an almost “donut bokeh” effect in the circles of confusion, much like a mirror lens would produce…
See here: http://news.mapcamera.com/media/contents/kasyapa/20150313_fe24240/04s.jpg
And here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/16634138189/in/set-72157651315578185
Being that this is by far the worst image of the group with the others being very good to excellent I would say your comment is nit picking or borderline trolling considering the focal range and cost of this lens.
Easily fixed.
Re: Easily fixed.
That’s a cute Photoshop job… And I’ll admit that for the most part it looks believable in this particular image. If all of the Flamingo’s legs were in the frame though, and you had to create a gradual amount of faux lens blur along the ground next to their feet, it’d be a much more involved photo-restoration.
And… a working photographer would rather spend a bit more on a lens up front than have to do a major restoration job on every image in post production, just so that the images look “pro” enough to deliver them to their clients.
This is a travel lens. For stopped down scenery shots. I don’t think anyone would use it for professional portraiture where pleasing subject isolation is desired.
Curious then as to why you brought up the quality of the out of focus area in the first place if you don’t think this is the lens to go to for isolation.
I guess I just had high hopes that perhaps with all the modern advances in lens design, that perhaps Sony might have created a good “all-rounder” lens that could really be a jack of all trades.
Of course. It’s just wishful thinking. A purpose built portrait lens will always be the go-to tool for pleasing subject isolation.
At the end of the day, it’s still a superzoom unfortunately, which means they’re definitely not pitching it at the pro market. Given that the a7z is a pro/enthusiast lens (I’m going by the people who buy it, not asking for people to troll be about the lack of features that make it unusable for pros), I wonder who it’s really aimed at…
You’re expecting too much from a super zoom lol. Especially at 240mm f/6.3. But as a travel lens, I think this is a more than fair option for the price. I’m not sold on it just yet but I am very tempted and it’s nice to have options.
So what 24-240mm lens would you recommend as a “professional photographer” that would render a flawless bokeh?
At all focal lengths!
There aren’t any super zoom lenses that would render a flawless bokeh, especially not at F6.3 at 240mm. At least none that I know of. I was just pointing out the rather odd-looking circles of confusion that this lens produces. I haven’t seen that effect before in anything other than a mirror lens.
I was hoping to start a discussion here guys, I’m not trying to be a troll.
You’ll also note that in my comment I mentioned being a working photographer, not a professional one. But, yes, you could say that I’m one of those too. I’ve been a full time photographer for 13 years now.
I’m also a Minolta/Sony shooter, and I have been since I switched from Nikon to Minolta in 2001.
Anyhow. I enjoy the discussions here on SAR and I plan on contributing in the future when I feel I’ve got something useful to say (which is what I thought I was doing by discussing this lens’s bizarre-looking bokeh).
You guys calling me a troll won’t keep me off of this site. It’s my homepage. I read it every day! I’m hooked on SAR. And I’m sorry if you love the look of this lens and didn’t like me pointing out one of the reasons why I, personally, don’t like its rendering.
For what it’s worth, bokeh looks worse than the 18-200 from what I’ve seen. Can’t honestly see why they’d prioritise this over other more needed lenses (24mm or 85mm in particular). For that matter, I’d expect to come somewhere down the list after 70-300 variable aperture Sony branded zoom.
Only thing I don’t really see is mind blowing sharpness. Outside of…”make my eyes bleed”…sharpness I think it looks pretty dang good. Would I pay over 1k for it? Hellll no!!!!!! But that has nothing to do with the lens and everything to do with my cheapness. For those that gotta have it….well, have at it.
Yep. I have this lens. An the long end, the bokeh is pretty nervous and sometimes looks like a mirror lens. I’ve managed to get some decent shots in the middle range though.
B&H has already shipped. My lens left NY last Thursday and will arrive on West Coast on Tuesday. Their definition of “expedited shipping” is actually three business days. The review posted by the Japanese site translated by Google is hilarious, but if my lens produces images as sharp as those, I’ll be very satisfied. It’s not as good as a prime, but I do a lot of traveling, and having a 10X lens is exactly what I needed to replace my Canon 5D with Tamron 28-300, which weigh far too much.
You might be slightly disappointed in the lens for the price but it should be decent enough for travel snap shots.Definitely similar image quality to those old tamron zooms With the feel of the 18~200mm e mount lens.
I’ve had a chance to try this lens and it isn’t great. It reminds me of the tamron 28~200mm af zoom lenses of the 90’s and early 2000’s but with better build quality.
That is disappointing:( Is it equal in image quality to the 18-105G on an A6000? I like the range and was hoping for good things.
More like the 18~200mm e mount mixed with image quality of those old tamrons.Id advise trying it first: ) reding the reviews im surprised some people liked it. Its performance is less than the highly undderated 24~70 f4 for sure.
I thought the 18-200 e-mount (1st version) was surprisingly good, other reviews also confirmed that. If this is as good as the e-mount 18-200, I’d definitely consider getting a copy.
Optically its like the old tamrons, build its like the sony.
that smelly smell of BS…
what advantages do you have using this setup over , say, A6000 + 18-200mm or even LAEA2+ 16-300 ? may be some bokeh?
Most likely nothing.
It’s a big thing only because it’s the first all in one zoom for the FE mount.
Definitely ordering this lend to take for my website. Seems like it will pait nicely with my nex-c3.
Might be off balance on that camera. What type of photos will you be using it for? Try the smaller 18~200mm since your using a cropped sensor.
Haven’t you seen his username?
I don’t think it was a serious comment….
Will this lens be good for wildlife? I mostly shoot bats and plankton.
Batman approves this lens.
be one of the first people to buy it, take some shots and get featured on sar to create silly comments. why not?
This is actually a good portrait lens because bob said you must shoot f8 for portraits.
Totally unnecessary comment with personal attack. Regardless what anyone thinks about Bob, this is trolling.
Excuse me? The personal attack is justified. He called people ‘illiterate’, ‘doesn’t have any idea about photography’, etc. Without any proper idea. I wasn’t being serious at all. This is a good lens if you only want to bring one lens with you. Bullying, yes. Unnecesarry, maybe. Trolling? That’s too ridiculous already.
“Unnecesarry” isn’t a word; you are illiterate. I did not say f8 must be used for portraits (a word that you usually spell “potraits” for some reason), I said that wide apertures (wider than 2.8) are less common. That’s a fact
Unnecessary*, happy? If I am illiterate according to Bob, does it matter?
You said potraits are supposed to be captured at small aperture.
‘lenses usually function better at f8 and you can see the subject more clearly. For outdoors, there’s plenty of nice scenes to be captured and smaller apertures capture it better’
So I am essentially telling you kindly here, literally saying ‘here you go bob, you have what you’re looking for’.
Trolling isn’t Argumentum ad hominem.
So I’m looking for suggestions here. I got asked by my friend to photograph his wedding. Right now I only have the Sony 55 1.8, Old school Minolta 50mm 1.2, Nikon Macro 135mm & I am suing all this on the Sony a7. I been looking to buy a new Sony lens. What do you guys suggest I get? Wedding won’t be until 3 months.
FE 70-200mm F4
135mm 1.8…but I’m crazy so don’t listen to me.