.
The image on top shows you the great Zeiss 16-80mm A-mount zoom. And quite many NEX owners would be happy to see an E-mount version of it. And you know what? A source told us that we may see a new 16-70mm Zeiss E-mount lens coming within the the year! Finally we will have a high quality zoom. I only hope it’s not too big….
—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
90 Responses
Yes please!
Yes this would be awesome! I shoot video on a FS100 so I could care less if it’s big though. Everytime they try and cram good optics into a small package there is a payoff for the small size. The bigger the better, Image stabilization is not needed either.
Oh yes please, but with Zeiss it costs a shipload……come on Sigma !
If it’s Sony-Zeiss it’d be a Sony designed and manufactured lens signed by a Zeiss employee. The sign costs about several hundred $ extra and build quality will be nothing close to genuine Zeiss as many owners from the A mount zoom will tell you. Which doesn’t mean that it has to be bad optically.
I guess those of us who need a normally priced standard quality zoom will still have to wait for several years. Or more likely, we’ll never get to see one. I hope one of the third party companies would offer an alternative but I don’t see them making one, given that all other relevant system already got their quality zooms (Fuji, mft).
Sony Zeiss lenses are designed by Zeiss and assembled by Sony. The optical train is produced by Zeiss and shipped to the far East to be mated with the case and electronics. That’s why the lenses have two serial numbers.
Sorry to disappoint you, it’s not the re-branding exercise you image.
Furthermore I have had the 16-80 since 2007 and have had zero issues with it. It remains the best walk-around zoom ever produced in terms of quality and reach – outperforming Nikon and Canon equivalents by a margin. It was built to be an affordable high class zoom and it is.
I’ve had two of the Sony/Zeiss 16-80’s, one of which went through Sony repair several times and only got partially repaired, a lot of money spent on that lens. And the two lenses were widely different in production date, so it was not just one batch. The inner optical tube loosened up to where the lens could not hold focus while taking a photo. The second one is doing the same thing. I like the optics of the lens, but the entirely plastic internal mechanical pieces are poorly designed.
I do also have the 24-70 and 16-35 Zeiss and so far those are holding together ok, but they are not the same as the 16-80
Zeiss has their name on the lenses, so I WILL blame them.
“…and build quality will be nothing close to genuine Zeiss as many owners from the A mount zoom will tell you…”
What the hell are you talking about?
I have the 24/70 f2.8 (which I dropped by mistake and NOT a single scratch or issue since then) and the 16/35 f2.8 and they’re build like a tank, they’re high quality lenses able to easily outperform equivalent Canon or Nikon.
On top of that Zeiss/Sony are the only Zeiss with autofocus: that’s where some extra goes as well.
Sounds like you don’t know what you’re talking about, sorry.
Too bold, sorry. This CZ (24-70) is just as good as Nikon equivalent and has no chance against Canon 24-70L II.
LOL. Canon don’t make any lenses that outperform ZA. In the film era Canon lenses were always behind Nikon, Zuiko, Minolta optically. Computer-aided-design has levelled the field somewhat in the digital era, but Zeiss always seem to find a bit more. The neutrality and micro-contrast of the ZA lenses is breath-taking.
Sorry, Canon can’t even hold a candle to the 24/70 Zeiss/Sony. Maybe Nikon is the closest. Test them out and be surprised: contrast, colors and clarity of image are simply awesome (from 24/70 Zeiss/Sony)
While the current 16-80 Zeiss is very nice optically, it’s a noisy lens when focusing and hunts quite a bit.
Is it nicer than the Canon 24-105mm? Tough call. The Canon’s constant aperture helps a lot, but I do like the colors coming out of the Zeiss. The 24-105mm is MUCH better put together though.
Just to chime in on the debate. The newer 16-50 f/2.8 is built quite well and performs superbly, probably closest to my Canon 24-105. Nonetheless, this is welcome news for Sony. I’ll take the good news days with the bad.
still waiting for a constant f2.8 zoom.
I’m waiting too … the shabby Sony E 16-50mm is nothing for me…
Me too!
Me three 🙂
No kidding. At least Fuji gets a 2.8-4 zoom, and even their telephoto is 1/2 stop faster than the norm. It’s like Sony compares the apertures on mirrorless to faster lenses available for SLT and considers them equal. No 2.8 zooms, no 1.4 primes. What gives, Sony?
One caveat – Zeiss have an aversion to stabilisation in their lenses. Still, high quality zoom lenses for the NEX system are a welcome addition so I look forward to seeing the specs / results.
That is a very big one. If there is no stabilisation, shooting handheld at 70mm will be almost impossible for me. But if they do add it, the lens will be much more expensive than the A-mount is right now. Still, 16-70mm would be pretty much the ideal range for me.
Do you suffer from uncontrollable Parkinsons? Applying the 1/FL rule and adjusting for crop, gives a minimum shutter speed of 1/100 to produce sharp images with a 70mm. What is it that you shoot, that you can’t get a shot without stabilization?.
I don’t mind the lack of stabilization. It’s a daylight travel lens of hopefully superb sharpness and contrast. If it’s strong at the wide end then with a tripod it can do double duty as an anytime landscape/WA option.
This + 35 1.8 would make a great travel kit.
Ive seen a lot of middle aged and older people that aren’t steady and it isn’t because of Parkinsons… In fact a hypoglycemic would often get unsteady hands because of glucose levels.
Try shooting in shutte priority (TV) mode with a shutter of 200 your photos should be sharp up to 100mm.
Try shooting underwater with a current thats when you need stabilisation. Desperately need good macro 70 or 100mm for small critters
Indeed. It does make a great deal of difference. I won’t be buyin this unless it has IS. We should also keep in mind that built in IS isn’t possible with the NEX bodies.
It’s no coincidence that some of the best optic makers, Zeiss, Leica, Olympus all avoid in-lens stabilization
I am wrong or the OSS only works for video or when shooting above the 1/FL rule? At least in NEX6 looks like that.
hope there is IS built-in in the lens, so i can use for my fs700 next time.
will there be a OSS along with the lens? (should be so, right?)
Nope. It’s one of the nice things about Zeiss, is that they don’t compromise IQ.
Yep, no IS. It’s one of the bad things about Zeiss.
Still no constant aperture during zoom? It Sucks!!!
Nobody would buy a parfocal for NEX. Either to big or too slow.
you are confusing a constant aperture lens with a parfocal lens, a parfocal lens keeps the focus constant when you zoom, not the aperture
That is a good news !!!
I find it in a cool blog
http://specialphotonex.blogspot.fr/2013/04/objectifs-sony-2013-pour-le-sony-nex-7.html
Hmmm… Does Zeiss be favorable for OSS in their Zoom?
But that is really an excellent New…
Is it a dream to expect a price similar to SAL1680Z if stabilization not included ?
PS:
Besides that…. Personally… I have a psychological blockage against 70mm lenses after my experience with the Sony 18-70 🙂 🙂 🙂
@Andrea:
As SR4 rumor… Could we have more info?
– OSS ?
– Aperture?
– Approx. price?
Uhh yeah. Now we need to see a 3,5mm audio adaptor for the interface shoe and the NEX6 is mine.
I know that it is pobably unrealistic but what about a 14-40mm zoom? It would bridge the range around 18mm that is not so perfect in all current e-mount zooms.
So… what happen to the G lens standard zoom that rumored for ages?
Some guys just forever not satisfied. Ask for this n that. Maker say no i cant do it. And when the maker do it. They rant its too expensive and etc. . Really..
I want a Sony or Sigma 16-50 2.8 OSS and AF in E-Mount. I want it to be good, and i don’t care how big it is. I’ll use it on both the NEX 5R and the FS700.
Agreed. The A-mount 16-50mm is my favorite walk-about lens and I would love to have the equivalent available on the E side.
Is there any information on the Sony (not Zeiss!!!) “mid magnification zoom” scheduled for 2013 from the old roadmap? Or was it dropped in favour of the Zeiss 16-70?
not dropped.
Are we sure this isn’t the mid-mag? The 24 Sony-Zeiss was on the road map, too.
Great news! Curious if this will be a Sony/Zeiss branded lens (like the 24 1.8) or a pure Zeiss lens (like the upcoming three primes)?
Will it be compatible with the rumored FF Nex and what Aperture will it be?
Fantastic news !!! I am waiting so long and I able to pay any price for this ,if just optic and performance will be high . I tried la-ea2 with sony 16-50 ,24-70 , sigma 17-50 . All of them good just for photo , but for video awful . Zoom ring ,focus ring awful . I do not use auto-focus too much , any way is not good , because is jumping ,it does not behave like native e mount lens .Sony la-ea2 is just good for photo or for video tracking , nothing more . All A-mount lens design for photo and I understand it . But what is more interesting for all of us, Sony give us E -mount which is perfect for photo and video us well . All lens have Smooth zoom ring ,smooth focus ring ,wonderful . We need at now , very high quality fast zoom like 17-50 f2.8 or 17-70 f3.5 . Zeiss WOW !!! ,I am taking straight away . I have 24 1.8 , some zf as well they are all amazing quality .
Dear Andrea,
I once owned the A-mount Zeiss Zoom 16-80mm and used it on my A700. I have rather mixed feelings regarding that lens, then unless you stop it down to 8.0 you get lots of CAs ! That said, stopped down to 8.0 you get stunning contrast and sharpness.
For me the lens for Sony to beat is the Fuji 18-55 for their x series. In my ideal world I could put that lens on an NEX-7. Zeiss can do it, but can they do it for anything close to the price Fuji does it ($700)?
interesting for sure and would be about the only way i would go to a nex
i think tho that since i have the 1680z i would rather pay for a NAX about the size of my old DSC V1 that was Amount mirrorless and IBIS. after all i cant see how a NEX 16-70z woudl be much smaller the the 16-80z
if that support FF???
I would much prefer an 18-70 zoom, but smaller and/or faster. And with a much better build quality than the A-mount version. I understand it would be expensive but I’m willing to pay more for the quality…
Zeiss = no OSS…. Put a “G” label on it & OSS, problem solved
A 18-55 2.8-4 like Fuji would be better I think, but hope this Zeiss be smaller and lighter.
Anyway, hope to see some G telephoto for e-mount someday.
I’d take image stablisation over the last margin of sharpness any day. My canon 17-55 F2.8 has it and it makes a difference. My Fuji 18-55 has it and its noticable over the 35mm when shooting at the equivalent focal length and no I don’t have parkinsons.
Daylight travel lens? Daylight?Shooting indoors in many places will see you pushing the ISO and dropping the shutter speed as low as you can. What is wrong with IS then?
People are entitled to their opinions but saying things like the 1/F rule is enough to mean you don’t need IS…Not relevant to real world photography.
I won’t be buying the lens. Canon 17-55 and Fuji 18-55 give me adequate sharpness on my NEX-7 and X-Pro1. I don’t need an overpriced Zeiss but I am sure many will.
Agreed.
Any word about this having full-frame compatibility or is this just another APS-C lens like Sony/Zeiss DT 16-80mm F/3.5-4.5 but in a E-Mount?
Considering the wide end of 16 and the long end of 70 I am certain it’s APSC only. Have a look at the size of the CZ wide angle zoom for FF.
Very good year for NEX users, 3 prime lenses from Zeiss plus this Zeiss zoom from Sony. Looking at the zoom range most likely it is not a big aperture zoom, but maybe it is not practical to build large-size big aperture zoom lenses for this compact system to begin with.
Hope it’ll be better built than the 1680ZA. My 1680 creeps and looses focus ring after just a few years of usage.
I sold all my Nex except for the 5n/18-55 combo for Fuji because of native f/1.4 lens (the 35mm is magic and the upcoming 23/56 should be as good) and faster zooms. The 18-55 is a stunner at 2.8, has IS and is only a tiny bit larger than the Nex 18-55 despite being about a stop faster throughout the entire range. In addition to the upcoming f/1.4 lenses there is a 10-24/4 and a 55-200 that are set to be released this year. I’m just tired of waiting for fast Nex lenses that will never materialize.
does anybody know if a constant 2.8 with a shorter zoom range could possibly be made smaller and lighter than the monsters that we’re used to with the dslr:s?
The Alpha 16-50mm f/2.8 is already made for an APS-C sensor so no help there. There may be some help from the shorter flange distance as the lens could be less retro-focus then a SLR 16mm. Do not know enough on optics to say for sure.
Assuming identical build quality, yes, a shorter zoom range would result in a smaller lens and/or* improved IQ. That is, a 28-50/2.8 would be smaller and/or* better than a 24-75/2.8
*One, the other, or some of both.
sounds nice, though i wonder how it would turn out in the end – compact 28-50 f2.8 aps-c only. made as small as possible (no oss?).
Big lens on a tiny camera. It kind of reminds me of a fat guy in a little suit, but I guess it’s more similar to a small guy in a big suit.
Welcome to the world of professional photography. Even a full-frame DSLR will look tiny with some of those telephotos.
I was pretty happy with the A55/Tamron 17-50 combo. The A99/24-70ZA is decidedly front heavy, but the IQ makes it worth it. All of the Zeiss lenses are relatively big for that matter.
At the likely price point of nex/Zeiss combo, I’d rather get an RX1, and zoom with my feet, or just crop.
I would like to see a smaller range if it meant an increase in IQ and smaller size.
For me, 16-40 would even make sense if it had great IQ and a fixed 2.8. That would cover most of what I need when I travel with one lens. I could then use my 50 1.8 when needed or expand the range with a second zoom.
I realize no one makes a lens like that however.
I just can’t see any way a zoom for something Nex sized can deliver what people want. A fast zoom with OSS doesn’t make for a compact package… Fuji’s option is about as good as you can expect (not that I can see many occasions when you’ll be shooting wide open at 18mm…), so hopefully there’ll be a Sigma clone at some point.
IMHO, primes are always going to be your best bet if you want good IQ in a small package.
If it’s f/2.8 constant, light, compact, has IS and is optically suberb not just in sharpness but in aesthetic, I’m sure it’ll be worth every penny of the doubtless high asking price.
I have no problem with a big lens, if they could make a NEX body in traditional form, like the Panny G5. Kind of nice in m4/3 world since they get a choice of styles.
My hope was for a 16-50mm f2.8 for the Nex line, i think Nex will never see a good fast and constant aperture zoom, and before someone bash me with “lens too big for Nex”, “Big lens on small body” comments. I want to remember that Nex have video cameras too.
Guess i must still waiting.
Bring it on! I would love that lens if it stays within reach budget wise. No IS / OSS is no killer issue for me if the optical quality is wonderful. Please don’t make it FF, that will definately be too heavy and too expensive. If compromise on cost weight 16-50 will do for me. 2.8 is nice but 2.8 to 4 is fine for me (but then please no complete reliance on correction software for any decent results)
I will by considering buying it if:
1. it’s not more expensive than A-mount version
2. it’s significantly smaller than A-mount version
3. it has constant aperture 2.8
4. it has proper built quality
5. it has mechanical focusing ring
6. it has proper optical quality
You porbably won’t get 1, 2, and 3. Mutually exclusive. To make it 2.8, it’s going to be massive. I think if they could swing a high quality constant f4 and keep the size down, that would work very well with the high ISO of NEX cams.
Yea. Case in point: the 16-50 2.8 is 20% heavier than the 16-80 3.5-4.5.
Another topic – Sony is discounting the A57 by $300, Amazon had the body for $399.
Pretty awesome camera IMO. Bought mine at full price, but no regrets as I used it with the 16-105mm on 2 trips already and smokes my 60D.
JaJa! i was considering to buy the LA-EA2($300) for my Nex 5n and with the A57 at this price is a steal.
Yes, excellent deal, buy it !
“A” does not translate to “E”. That is the problem with Sony’s decision to put image stabilization in the lens for “E” and in the body for the others. The 16-80 would require a fairly extensive redesign to add stabilization for the NEX.
So Sony has a choice for the NEX. 1) Do nothing except recommend an adaptor. Big, moosey, and antiquated without image stabilization. Zero cost except loss of future sales of NEX. 2) Redesign the lens for the NEX to just accommodate the mount and image stabilization. Big, moosey. 3) Design a new lens suited to the NEX sensor maybe even with some collapsibility. Smaller with image stabilization.
I know the last one is what I want. Would not be surprised if we get number one.
> 1) Do nothing except recommend an adaptor. Big, moosey, and antiquated without image stabilization.
Oh, I got it! An adaptor that provides IS by moving the entire NEX body! Gufaww!
Did Sony ever explain their logic in this decision. The OSS in telephotos such as the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L II are very good at 3-4 stops. Perhaps they thought just having IBIS would never get that type of benefit, but that means they would build E-mount equivalents pf the A-mounts. They need to decide and sort this out.
NEX size may mean compromise.
If you look at the original e-Mount SEL18200 vs the more compact 18200LE that Sony and Tamron released, it appears that the original lens, which is larger, has better image quality, at least from the many reviews and user feedback I’ve read. No hands on here, but maybe users can chime in?
I doubt you can have it both ways. IE smaller than A-mount, f2.8 constant, and yet maintain an exceptional image quality, at least without a hefty price.
Then of course you will have the whiners saying it’s way overpriced etc…
So yes, maybe we will see Sigma or Tamron break ground in the compact e-mount high quality area without breaking the bank of the average enthusiast ?? Sigma already have the 30mm and 19mm.
Sigma “already” has… ?
It’s been ages since we are waiting for Sony branded or third parties’ lenses dedicated to E mount.
The lens selection is still meager at best. And if you sort out the large lenses (not suited for a portable, if not pocketable, system), you are currently reduced to very few primes…
It seems we need to gather up the specifics and when the tests of both the Nex 7n and the FF prototypes, which are out there some place,get into SAR & DP’s hands,we can mount a more cogent discussion of what the FF NEX will actually mean as far as price, weight and size of glass, what the glass will actually consist of, and, most critically, for many of us serious, quality shooters if the FF NEX’s pictures will actually be worth the wait and the price. At some point, a redesigned APS-C sensored camera at less than half the price with smaller lenses just might deter my intentions to wait and get a FF NEX. I realize we don’t have sufficient data to make this decision, but I’m getting frustrated with so many posts in each camp, but not tying the laces together. Do any of you actual experts out there have views on this?
BTW do we have any news on NEX new lenses?
cheers!
asn
Zeiss announced well over a year hat they would make the Touit series lens for NEX. 2 are out and the 3rd, a 50mm macro, is coming soon, perhaps in October or by years end. If they were going to make this an e-mount lens, why wouldn’t they announce it? Should they make it, I hope they keep it’s physical width under 64mm so it’ll fit in a Nauticam port for my NEX 7 underwater rig. This rumor actually had it’s start a couple years ago and nothing so far, not even a peep. I doubt it’s an SR4 possibility. I’d buy one in a heart beat if they made it smaller than the above A-mount version which s already too wide for my housing. If Sony spent as much time making lens as they do cameras, we’d be doing okay with the NEX series. Alas, that’s not the case, so we wait and wait and wait and…….PLEASE Zeiss make it so.