As you know there is a great $350 off on the A6000 with Zeiss 16-70mm lens kit at BHphoto. You get it in Black (Click here) or Silver (Click here). And there is an even greater deal at Cameta (Click here) where you get 8 free extras too!
But how good is the Zeiss lens? SLRgear (Click here) just posted the lens test results and writes:
For Sony shooters using APS-C E-mount cameras, the Sony E 16-70mm ƒ/4 Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* ZA OSS lens is a very versatile, lightweight, well-built lens with good image quality. The images are quite sharp, even wide open, and the autofocus performance is excellent. The Sony 16-70mm Zeiss is an excellent walkaround lens.
0 Responses
24-105mm f/6 equivalent.. Nice, nice. Wish it was a stop faster, though, but then it’d probably carry heftier price tag.
The deals ended yesterday.
will be excellent walk around lens when the price get real: $399 !
Beautiful lens. This lens is basically a reason why I bought Sony A6000 in the first place. It does everything perfectly. Just match it with a fast f1.8 prime for low light indoor photography and you are done.
Agreed. This lens is what kept me from jumping ship to Fuji or Oly
Excellente! It matches in IQ my 24-105 f/4 L which I rarely use now after A6k with 16-70 combo. AF is super fast. My only concern is I wish it was weather sealed, but then it would be bulkier. Well, good job Sony on this one!
At $1000 it had better walk on its own.
It compares well to comparable L lenses like mentioned Canon 24105 f.4 L zoom. Except L lens costs slightly more but still can’t walk on its own. This zoom however, has Zeiss soul that can not only walk but fly on its own. It’s that good.
Zeiss “soul” that can “fly on its own”?
Somewhere, one on Zeiss’ marketing toadies just got an erection, and has no idea why.
LOL, you got a deserved answer for your silly “walk on its own” remark. If price for the lens is too high for you, skip it, don’t buy. Your “erection” reply however, shows that you are an arrogant troll, nothing more really…
Well, the marketing toady needs somebody like you to swallow his… hype.
Ah, come on! Admit it, that was funny.
There are different kinds of humor. This is a bit… Basic.
That’s the same psychopathic troll that has been stalking the SAR corridors under multiple names. kynikos, nwimu, vivek, ….. This place is teeming with psychopaths and narcissists. Just like the real world.
I prefer 18-105 f4. Really nice. And cheaper.
Nah… too bulky. It’s bigger than even 18-200. Besides I don’t like wonky zoom rocker, much prefer dedicated manual smooth zoom ring. 16-70 was much sharper wide open and at corners. To each it’s own.
Do you have to use an adapter for this lens and all other E-mount full-frame lenses on an APS-C (A6000/NEX-6)?
Nope, it’s the same mount for both APS-C and FF. This is an APS-C lens, btw.
The review is a bit contradictory. The numbers show that it is no sharper than the 16-50 kit lens, but the text says its much better than the kit lens.
It sounds like a perfect lens for backpacking, but I don’t know… Is it sharp enough for landscapes at the wide end?
Some folks here seem to like it a lot. Any thoughts? What about the QC issues that get reported in various places? In fact, even this review’s copy was decentered.
Before I jumped from E to FE I used the lens on my NEX7. In overall I was quite happy with this lens besides my 24/1.8 (which was an almost perfect lens for my taste).
Mine was decentered, too. Another quality shock for me was the fact that the serial number that is not engraved but rather printed on a sticker attached to the lens.
IQ was above average however it has some flaws one has to circle around. While a hefty vignetting wide open and quite pronounced CA are no big deal in post processing, sharpness was indeed an issue.
Borders are not all that good at f4, improve already at 5.6 and are really good at f8. The extrem corners improve moderately when stopping down but were relatively soft even at f11.
The 2470FE has similar issues. Hopefully the 1635FE will not.
Primes apparently get more quality inspection at Sony, the 24/1.8 was a very, very good one, and so is the 35FE at my A7R, and I already tested the 55FE.
Don’t know what’s going on at Sony these days at the lens manufactoring.
Sebastian, I was in the same boat. Was trying to decide if this lens worth the price and I was worring about QC issues too. I pulled the trigger and am happy camper since then. I don’t usually look at numbers, I prefer to test lenses myself in real world. I can tell right now that this lens is much better than my previous 2 kit lenses 16-50 (5R) and 18-55 (5N). It is sharper, contrasty and has fast AF mechanism inside (not every lens has eg. SEL50).
In fact, after I used it, my wife instantly noticed (after viewing them on 24” screen) that pictures were sharper and more pleasant looking than all my previous kit zooms. Trust me she doesn’t know what aperture or even Zeiss brand is and has no bias whatsoever. When a totally unbiased person can notice better IQ – that says clearly the lens is worth it. It’s up to you to chose what best serves your style of photography. Any kit zoom will take pictures, it’s just some do it better and it shows really.
Personally, I would recommend getting the 18-105 G lens. It has a better range and get almost the same performance as this Zeiss. Yes its a little more bulkier than this, but not by much.
Definitely more bulkier than the kit 16-50 but far better performance (so no comparison there).
It has the OSS which works well for stills and does wonders with the occasional video you might shoot.
The only complaints received for that lens were by users using the lens on Sony’s E-Mount video cameras which don’t correct the barrel distortion and is considerably noticeable while zooming in and out during a video.
Compact is important to me. And I almost never do video. So I’m skeptical about the 18-105 for my use.
If you really want compact, nothing beats the kit 16-50. LOL. The Zeiss is a little shorter than the Sony G lens, Yes. But even that is no longer truly compact IMO.
Definitely not easy to make a collapsible lens with few optical defects though. The distortion and vignetting on the 16-50 is quite noticeable when you turn off the in-camera lens corrections.
But best you head out to a store and try the lenses on your camera if possible.
Did you by any chance pick up the two zeiss on that “offer of the century” 50% discounts?
well, if I spend about 700 – 900 units to improve on the kit, I want it compact AND optically good. Doesn’t have to be as compact as the kit, but still, smaller and lighter are much appreciated.
nearly impossible to find the 16-70 in a store where I live. It seems like the only method to get to a decent copy is to order at least two and return one. This is really not optimal.
I thought about the 2-Zeiss deal, but I don’t need the 32/1.8, so I hesitated and didn’t pull the trigger fast enough. Maybe a mistake. Wonder how close the Samyang 12/2 comes to the 12/2.8 when stopped down to 2.8. I have a Samyang for my Nikon system and it’s pretty good.
I find that this blue rectangle pricing starts beating parallels with the red dot policy. Who wants a 16-70F4 APSC for 950$ anyway. It performs just as good as the 18-55 OSS kit lens and the 2 mm more do not represent a real advantage. I do not know how the 16-50 performs, so I compare it to the 18-70 that performs in an excellent way and I doubt that there is much more corner sharpness on this one. And, I can get the 18-55 OSS for 195$ on e-bay. If I had to buy a combo, the 35-2.8 would be a better choice, despite not being a zoom, it is FF ready.
“…and the 2 mm more do not represent a real advantage. I do not know how the 16-50 performs, so I compare it to the 18-70 that performs in an excellent way and I doubt that there is much more corner sharpness on this one.”
Man you are all messed all over the place and clearly don’t know what you are talking about. It’s not 18-70 – it’s 18-55. So it’s not just 2mm on wider end, AND 15mm at long end, PLUS constant f4. Zeiss 16-70 is sharp even wide open, not even comparable to 18-55 or 16-50. It has highest score for lens: http://sonyalphalab.com/product-review/sony-e-mount-16-70mm-f4-oss-zeiss-lens-review-sel1670z/
Check that review with test images and real world usage and see it for yourself.
Sometimes it’s better to be silent rather talk nonsense. This lens goes for $750 in a combo with A6000 and that is the lowest price ever. Comparable Canon 24-105 f4 (which this lens was tested against and they were equal in corner sharpness and wide open) costs $1200 and is much more bulkier and heavier. That is amazing what Sony/Zeiss did putting such a beauty lens in so compact form.
I bought this lens and ended up returning it because it wasn’t sharp. Maybe I got a defect, but my old kit 18-55 lens was sharper than this lens. I was extremely disappointed. I do think I got a defective lens though. However, I thought the colors even looked better on the 18-55 lens, so this 16-70 is totally not worth the price. Maybe if it was an f2.8…but it’s an f4 and super pricey for what you are getting.