The new Zeiss 24-70mm FE lens is now shipping in Korea as you can see on that image posted at SLRclub. The lens will ship on February 2 in USA (Source Amazon) and in late February in Europe (Source Sony Germany).
On top of this post you can see a video review of the Zeiss zoom. A couple of image samples can be seen at Mobile01 (Click on the green text links to open the images).
Zeiss 24-70mm preorders: EUROPE at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT USA at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
0 Responses
Price is reasonable so all that remains to be seen is this zoom’s performance.
Around here, midwest USA, we always refer to T* as “T-Star” lenses.
But this video reviewer literally speaks it aloud as “T-Asterisk”.
What does Zeiss claim the name to be? T-Star or T-Asterisk?
Could I go into a camera store and ask for a “T-Asterisk” lens, and expect them to know what I was talking about?
I’m always amazed at the different pronunciations of photo equipment names.
Zeiss calls it T-Stern
T-Star
The * character’s correct name is asterisk. Colloquial speech says star. So, if Zeiss wants to call their lenses star, they shouldn’t use the * character but a star image.
why would you want to ask fpor “t-star” or “t-asterisk”? its just the coating of the lens. thats like walking in a car dealerhsip and asking for a vehile “with 4 wheels”.
But would they know what I was talking about?
It’s one of those “I have an expensive toy so I want to mention the whole name as loudly as possible” things. Happens a lot with Zeiss and Leica users.
With modern Zeiss lenses, people mention the “Planar”, “Sonnar”, “Distagon”, “Makro-Planar”, etc. even when there are no two lenses with different designs at that same focal length and aperture. And I don’t think there are any lenses that don’t have the plain “T” or no-coatings anymore. Even if there were, it’d be easier to mention when it’s not there.
With Leica, people get even more absurd by saying things like “50 0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH”, etc. although these names are intended for people who don’t understand how F-numbers work. Also people mention the ASPH part even though there isn’t a non-ASPH version available in that model.
Zeiss may be producing good lenses, but they wouldn’t have come so far without good marketing. And these names are part of it.
Concerning the 50mm Leica lenses in production, the 50mm f2.0 is not ASPH (you mentioned that all 50s’ were (or did you mean the Noctilux versions).
Also the f1.0 was not ASPH (only the f1.2 & the f.95 are, according to Hove “8th edition Leica Pocket Book”)
We use the designations because vintage/used lenses are sold at new prices (or higher) and are often more easily available than new copies.
Also, when selling on ebay, the special notations are often typed in the searches, and without them sales fall flat. (example a vintage Canon ASPH lens can sell for 10-20 times the value of the non-ASPH)
Well, george, with me it goes without saying that I meant the sensible interpretation 🙂 Yes… I meant there’s no non-ASPH 50 0.95 by Leica.
Also this has nothing to do with search terms… and I know how search engines work because I code them. I’m talking about how people talk in discussion boards.
Money quote: “Turtle Island is not the light goes out of sight, do not know to put this small series is intended?”
Google Translate cracks me up.
Anyone with native Chinese skills up for giving us a human-generated summary? The translation seemed to indicate there were concerns about edge sharpness and purple fringing, but didn’t parse too much else, other than standard moaning about F4 instead of F2.8.
Isn’t it Korean as per the article?
I’m talking about the mobile01 page… Google identifies it as “Chinese (Traditional Han)” — manually selecting Korean results in nothing but words already in English being translated to English, so I’m just assuming they’re right.
it is traditional chinese 🙂
maybe like taiwanese or hongkong (just my rough guess)
basically it says f4 is pretty usable, and yes there’s some purple fringing but nothing you can’t correct in post
Btw, shipment end of February in Europe is only true if you order just now. I ordered mine on December 7th, and the delivery date stated by the Sony Shop is still January 28th – 29th. Sony was very reiliable with my a7r and FE 35, so i don’t hav reason to doubt the date for the FE 2470.
mine has also delivery date 28th – 29th of january, in Germany.
Also the 28-70 kit lens was already sold and shipped mid of decembre, while in other countries it was not available.
I just got a call from Sony Germany: My 24-70 has been postponed till end of February (store website still say next week). They have my money since end of November – not okay.
Hey Andrea, any news on the new RX cameras? What about the RX1 successor? Are we going to see one?
For giggles I’d like to see this compared to the 16-50mm DT. I bet its not much better if any. You get full frame coverage though in a very sleek package.
Andrea do you have any idea whether Sony might bundle the A7000 with the Zeiss 16-70/4 ??
A7000 is the expected name for the APS-C NEX-7 successor, so I’d be surprised if they bundled it with a full-frame “FE” lens.
Good thing the 16-70/4 isn’t a FF lens then!
LOL… my bad, I assumed the previous comment was on topic, and talking about the 24-70.
I would jump on that kit without hesitation.
Claire,
Just so you know, I am using 16-70 w/ NEX 7 and it’s terrific. The second one, at least; I returned the first one to B&H due to corner probs and color fringing. Instantaneous replacement.
Thank you !! I really want to buy that lens, but it’s quite pricey as standalone, I’d rather wait for the A7000, since it’s supposed to be right around the corner. It’d seem pretty logical for Sony to pair it with the 1§-70 as kit, and I’d jump on that as well !!
The A-Mount folks are starting to creep me out… are you guys ok? This is information on an E-MOUNT LENS, and an hour later there still have been no comments from A-mount owners! Here, let me fill the void: “Ahhhh! Even though we’ve had ~50 A-mount lenses and ~30 A-mount bodies released in the past 8 years, the fact that Sony’s ALSO working on E-mount makes it clear that A-mount is dead! Sell! Sell! Sell!”
All in good fun, guys.
just go out there and take a photo instead insulting A-mount user. with old A-mount camera i can still make a good photograph. A-mount will not died and sony still committed with it. further more we can use adapter to combine 2 system when play sony camera so that no worried at all. when you need fast lens and action/sport/birding/fast and good AF in low light photograph you still need a capable camera like A-mount.
What’s your problem? Get a life and do something useful and stop acting like a 3-year old
I don’t understand how that video reviewer gets a 24-70 to review.
It was the worst, most unprofessonal, least informative review or preview ever made.
It was more just some guy saying hey look at me, I’ve got the lens already.
Worthless.
“yea its sharp but not as sharp as the 35/2.8”
“yea its the first FE lesn with OSS, oh apart from the 28-70 kit lens” it is 2 of 4 lenses with OSS
Keith,
I did some sleuthing. “ItsDanKReviews” is Daniel Kennedy, a Sony Australia product specialist. So he’s not a “pro” reviewer, he’s not even unbiased.
He had this lens as far back as January 6th, as proven by this (Public) photo on his Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153705465945230&set=a.10150779890615230.731064.885085229
He did say its a sample lens and not the production model
Ah ok, that makes sense.
If its just a guy who has access and knocked something up to share, then fair play. The way this was posted was that it was a ‘review’.
Re-read my post and apologise for rudeness 🙂
I have to say based on these samples, this lens is not a promising one. that is sad because i was hoping this lens will be a good performer, but it seems this is not the case. all the samples is like water color and the corner from left right are horrible.
I hope they will fix it before it shipped.
Would have to second that. Noise reduction is not helping but the edges really do not look good on these samples.
Oh just looked at the third photo. Left hand side is poor but the bottom left corner is dreadful for a lens costing this amount of money.
Corners are pretty shocking in the short of the leaves. Definitely wouldn’t be my first choice for FE – would stick with primes based on the current options…
+1
I just ordered the 28-70 kit lens for my 7r. I have the 55/1.8 if I really need an awesome picture. I can spend the difference on a new telescope.
good god, whoever took those sample images DESTROYED them… that goes beyond oversharpening.
Thanks Andrea! Nice to see it almost arrives!
I will stick with my a99 and ZA 24mm f/2 and ZA 50mm f1.4 (and the ZA 85 & 135) until the FF E mount cameras come with stabilization built in and they introduce FE Zeiss lenses to match the A mount Zeiss’, whether they discontinue A mount or not. Nothing I have seen in the reviews so far dictates otherwise. Canon and Nikon haven’t shown me anything to change to either of them, for that matter. With the Sony/Olympus collaboration or whatever they call it, the future should bring an FF E mount camera with 5 axis stabilization and smaller Zeiss FE f/2 primes. That would cement Sony as a major contender against Canikon.
Your….lens….selection….is….AWESOME.
Nice collection you got there. If I had what you have I would just need a good macro a fish eye & the 135mm stf and would probably never buy another lens ever.
just my two pieces looking at jpeg:
I was just looking at the 24mm photos because it seems that zoom lenses tend to do the worst on the widest focal length.
They are only jpegs so hard to really tell..
CA seems to be very well controlled. Not sure since it is JPEG and the user could have easily taken them out in post.
(the 8th one) A bit of distortion in the center and a small bit of wavey action going on as the image moves away from the center. Doesn’t seem too bad.. I think a lens profile can flatten that without much problem.
(9th photo) Sharp in the center and relatively sharp as you move away from the center. Far edges seem to be as sharp as the 28-70 kit lens.
(32mm) For the leaves that are in focus in the edges.. they seem to be pretty sharp. Edges improve alot around 30mm I assume.
Daniel has a Facebook (and Google+) page, why not ask him about these photos/observations directly?
https://www.facebook.com/itsdankreviews
He just replied to a question I posed:
Riot Nrrrd: Daniel, given that you have had the Zeiss 24-70mm FE lens since January 6th, why is it taking so long to get out to customers? I am going on a trip on Feb. 1st and it will not reach the U.S. until after Feb. 2nd
(Yes, I realize you are a Sony Australia employee and have ‘early access’ to stuff … still, 4 weeks is a long time)
Itsdankreviews Youtube: Hi Riot Nrrrd, I was using an engineering sample and borrowed it for testing. I believe that this lens will be in stores in the next 1 to 2 weeks in Australia.
Good news for the Aussies!
thanks for the tip 🙂
I just asked him for maybe a comparison with the kit lens on gplus
Will be interested in his reply … please repost.
(I’ve already ordered the kit lens due to availability, but I really wanted to get this one instead)
didnt say much just that he will do a proper review soon.
G Plus is a disaster, I can’t even find your post.
Shoot me a line on my Facebook https://www.facebook.com/itsdankreviews
I don’t mind doing a comparison of the Zeiss vs kit if I’m allowed to borrow the mass production lens.
Also I don’t work for the Digital Imaging team at Sony at all, I’m just a Sony Staff that decided to take up photography after buying the A7 (hence the comments about the review).
One more thing to add. Judging from the 1st picture, 70mm @f4, the Bokeh looks overly buzzy. Quite dissapointing.
From what I have seen so far, the E Mount cameras (Including FE) are just for folks looking for compactness. If you have any native Zoom mounted on it, IQ will simply not match the A Mount. I really wanted to move to the E Mount, but I guess A mount still rules for IQ. First I was dissapointed with the 16 70 Zeiss, then with the 18 105 G lens & now judging from the pics, I am a bit skeptic. Especially if you consider that the tamron 24 70 2.8 can be purchased for roughly the same amount, its hard to justify the E mount.
In all honesty, I think Sony could do better by just releasing the SLT Adapter tech to Sigma, Tamron & Metabones. Let them come out with SLT adapters for Canon & Nikon mounts. That would really drive E Mount camera sales.
1200 for an F4…dear SAR, April fools is still a few months away. Why anyone would buy this HUGE zoom for their COMPACT camera at middle eastern arabian prince prices is beyond me. I’m all about Zeiss but this shouldn’t cost over 700. F4!
The Canon 24 70 f4 L costs about the same.
Infact, its even more expensive:
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-70mm-4-0L-Standard-Zoom/dp/B00A2BVAN8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1389941074&sr=8-1&keywords=Canon+24+70+f4
Having said that, the Sigma 24 105 f4 costs $900 which again signifies more value in the traditional Canon, Nikon & Sony A Mount systems.
But comparing it to these sample photos it is a better lens and so is the Canon 24-105mm f4 which is cheaper.
Do we know if the Mobile01 test shots are from a pre-production or a production model?
Thanks
I’ve studies all the samples at 100% in photochop.
They are ruined by heavy Sharpening and NR, some of them have camera movement blur.
However I don’t think they are that bad for a modern zoom. They are sharp centre and edge, only corners are blurred.
However don’t forget this is a 36mp sensor which will really show the corners up.. I’d say its no worse corner performance than the Canon 24-70/4 or 24-105/4 Ls – I actually think its probably slightly better.
It will make a great walkaround every day lens. No it wont replace my 35/2.8 and 55/1.8
Nor will it replace my Contax Zeiss C/Y 28/2.8 and 35-70/3.4 for fine art tripod work….
Its far worse than a 24-105. That is useable at 24mm. These samples are not and if it is anything like the 28-70 it will be viewable at small print sizes.
Hopefully the wide angle zoom will be a 16-35 and so the 24-35 can be covered better on that lens.
they’ve noted though that all the pics are jpeg straight out of the camera. So maybe it has more to do with the in camera jpeg engine than the quality of the lens?
That would not explain the drop off on quality at the edges being so bad.
Dont forget the SIGMA is not Parfocal, when you Zoom trough you have to refocus…
look at 00:36, a lot of strong flare