If you want to see what kind of pictures you can take with the new Zeiss 16-35mm f/4.0 lens jump over at Mark Galer’s Flickr page (Click here). Not that only the pictures on top have been taken with the new Zeiss!
UPDATE: Also Sony Japan (Click here) posted some image samples.
New Sony stuff preorders:
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.
28-135mm powerzoom in Europe at Sony DE, UK, ES, IT, FR, CH, AT, NL, BE, FI, SE, NO, PT.
Sony FS7 4K camcorder at Adorama.
HVL-F32M Flash at Adorama, BHphoto.
HVL-F32M Flash in Europe at Sony DE, IT,
Sony RMT-VP1K Wireless Remote Commander & Receiver Kit at Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony XLR-K2M XLR Adaptor Kit (with microphone) at Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony LCS-PSC7 System Bag (Black) at BHphoto.
Loxia at BHphoto:
Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens for Sony E Mount (Click here).
Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens for Sony E Mount (Click here)
0 Responses
98% of them are with the A7s, not exactly a good test of resolution?
+1 Pretty much anything looks good on the A7s.
I’ve no issues with the FE 4/24-70 on the A7S.
True, but you can still compare corner to center sharpness. Not perfectly, but still helps!
Better than the a-mount 1635F2.8. Hopefully sony will make an emount 1635F2.8 later.
Obviously you suck at taking pictures, then. 🙂
It’s a little too early to tell if it is better. Obviously the photographer is skilled. The FE 16-35 certainly seems to be on par with the FA.
Or at least you’ll see what kind of pictures Mark Galer can take with the new Zeiss.
are these images good? am i supposed to buy this lens? should I eat a tuna sandwich or pizza for lunch? Please! someone tell me what to do!
Haha, made my day 🙂
You really have to ask between a tuna sandwich and pizza?
These are heavily post-processed, low-resolution images, you can’t really judge lens-performance by them.
These are full size images. You just have to click on the “view sizes Icon.” He even states on some files that they are not post processed.
EX: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15244456212/sizes/o/
Not all of them are full size and clearly he is cooking his files:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15019663770/
come on!
Yeah, that file is cooked…I can see the paprika.
LOL 😀
I’d like to see if this lens is comparable to leica wate 16-18-21.
That sounds like a good example of unrealistic expectations. Of course it will not be comparable to the WATE. Prepare to be disappointed. Omg.
Many leica lenses don’t work at their best on the a7 system. It’s not so strange that a sony lens on a a7 camera could work better.
you will get a comparison, as soon, as we get the Sony lens 🙂
Looks very promising at first glance….but.
We need to ask him (and I hope this doesn’t mean the images will be taken down)…in his flickr gallery, you see some shots EXIF data that clearly state: Sony ILCE A7s and then…the other photos, especially those market 16-35mm…say “Sony – MODEL NAME”
So…what else did he get when he borrowed that lens?
A good example:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15243267346/
Shows color shift (reminiscent of the 10-18 f/4 on NEX-7)? Most likely the A7R.
This one doesnt show any shift.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15058281258/
I think he is cooking his files a bit too much sometimes.
Granted, I could say that this one does show shift:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15079706467/
magenta bottom left, and a bit cyan on upper right…but it isnt as the shift I have seen on my former NEX 7 when using the CV 15mm where color shift (not including vignetting) was one color on all corners.
This photo for example shows me there isnt any:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15079705997/
Great. I bought a wide angle paperweight with the A7r. They can’t even design a wide angle lens that works on their own cameras without color shift.
That looks more like the effect you get from a CPL.
I have seen MODEL NAME on early cameras Sony shows around at demos when they do product launches. I have few NEX-7 photos that say MODEL NAME. I gues A7r and A7 too have these.
I see. Well, mystery solved, then?
Guess It’s the a7R – look at the description on this picture: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15244456212/in/photostream/
It’s also marked as “Sony – MODEL NAME” 🙂
Admin, Your Sony link is dead.
Not exactly.
http://www.sony.jp/ichigan/products/SEL1635Z/feature_1.html is the right one.
But it’s not the first time when we got http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/zeiss-16-35mm-images-samples-by-mark-galer as prefix.
Looks better than I was expecting. Certainly better than Canon’s 17-40 to my eyes. Vignetting looks pretty bad but the distortion looks really well controlled which is the most important thing for me on a lens like this.
I should say that I don’t use wide angles much, and I’ve never had a wide zoom. But, do you guys really think it’s good? To me it seems soft in the corners and vignetted.Or are other wide zooms worse?
Look at this one: https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15079707047/in/photostream/ The dots along the top edge are sharp in the middle of the frame and blurry in the corners. I don’t think it’s a focus issue.
Or look at the left side corners on https://www.flickr.com/photos/markgaler/15079707307/in/photostream/ they vignette by at least a couple of stops.
On the plus side, since this since this is a stabilized lens you don’t have to shoot it at f/4 so much, you can stop down some.
Again, this is not my kind of lens, I wonder how the competition compares.
He is processing his photos and some of them are very cooked.
Perhaps the vignetting is added.
According to the photographer, this image isn’t processed. Here’s a link for downloading the original size:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/569dyzt6ier8bkg/15058281258_d07ea89dff_o.jpg?dl=0
It looks comparable to my 16-35mm f2.8L II. But the new Canon 16-35mm f4 blows it away. As well as the Nikon 14-24.
how can you say that from these downsized images?
I had the Nikkor 14-24 for many years (before i got the A7R) and found the corners soft too.
You can click the images and view full size.
But the MTF charts on this lens aren’t as good. But, I’ve yet to really get my hands on them and compare side by side. We’ll have to see what DXOMark does when they test them.
I’ll probably get this lens though just because I’m sick of using Metabones.
thanks, Alik
but you only get 3147 x 2160 on one example and 3840 x 2651 on the A7S as the uploaded “original” size, this is not the full image size. The sizes are all different.
Yeah you’re right. Didn’t notice that. It will be cool when more people can get there hands on it and do some proper side by side tests with other lenses. It’s pretty exciting sony is releasing all these lenses now.
Goaded by this, I went looking at wide angle zooms in general. I found this interesting: http://www.leica-boss.com/2013/12/your-a7r-wants-a-wide-angle-lens-what-do-you-do/
I don’t know what lens this pictures are from, but they look pretty sharp to me. Even in the corners, but I’m at work wasting time and viewing on a crappy monitor. Still, looks good.
if the 24-70 would have so little distortions, it would be great.
But I assume, that the images are corrected in camera or even on PP!
Mark does not answer questions jet:-(
If you are familiar with ultra wide lenses, you would know that this lens compares pretty favorably. Preliminarily, I would say that this lens is superior to the canon 16-35 2.8 and probably on par with the Sony Zeiss 16-35 2.8. My canon 14mm generally leaves subjects in the corners unsharp ( and it is a pricey prime). I have heard that Nikon’s 14-24 is the best ultra wide zoom with the best corner performance.
I also think it looks good, but I would like to see a more thourough test than just sample photos if I’m going to place a pre-order. It also feels more sensitive to buy a WA-zoom than a normal zoom, if this lens is poorly corrected it could be truly horrible. But I’m hoping, wide-angles are expensive, even older ones cost a lot. So if it performs well, it might be worth the price.
I must admit, that these forums are heavily saturated by morons.
Zeiss optics and SONY A7 line of cameras are fantastic products. Those notorious complainers should learn photography before pointing fingers. PLEASE.
P.s. … maybe look in to camps of NIKON / Canon ? …. just a thought …
First off, I don’t have any fingers so I’m offended. But if I did they wouldn’t be wrapped around an A7. For one, that camera is designed for E.T. hands. Second, Zeiss optics are available for practically any camera body.
I need a camera for my nubby hands. In that case I choose an SLT. The buttons are so big I could operate it with my knees if I have to- which I often do.
Did you reply to the intended comment?
Agreed – I’ve shot many systems over the years and the A7 series of cameras are by far the most adaptable to both still & motion photography. The lenses are as good (I think better) than anything I’ve used from other manufactures. I may be biased though being a photographer and not a reviewer/critic/key-board expert.
What A7 are you using at this time. If the 7r, what is your opinion of the shutter and your experience with the blur from shutter vibration. Would it be near perfect if it had the newer video codec, since you seem to do both stills and video.
A7R for stills & A7S hybrid. On the A7R (5D3 too) I avoid 1/60th, that’s it. The A7R is missing a minimum shutter speed setting for Auto ISO. On the 5D3 I set it to 1/125th. If you’re used to shooting MF cameras, then the A7R hasn’t got an issue, if you’re coming from a modern sub-FF camera I suppose there could be one. It’s all about experience, knowing the work-arounds (everything in photography is a workaround before someone chimes in:). The biggest victims of the shutter are, for the most part, lesser experienced people coming from a sub-FF digital workflow.
The 7r has my interest and was close to getting it. However, I do not like the fact it does not have an EFC. I would prefer a quiter shutter which it sounds like the 7r is quite the opposite. The autofocus has been remarked to be sluggish. I am not sure if that is exaggerated but I had a 5n and the autofus was slow and inaccurate at times. I heard the new video codec is significantly better. I don’t know if they plan on releasing another ff e mount that addresses some of these problems or if firmware can add the codec but if it could I would have imagined it would have been done by now. I would like a smaller footprint than my 99 and I think Sony is not in any rush to release a camera that addresses all the shortcomings of the 99.
It’s not the codec that lets the A7R down its that large pixel count. I can shoot AVCHD or XAVC -S on the A7S and its the lack of moire and aliasing I always notice over the A7R not the better XAVC-S codec, horses for courses. All these shutters have issues and require workarounds, these EFC shutters aren’t the best choice if you are bouncing around north of 1/1000th as there are serious limitations as to how fast that sensor data can be read off that EFC – there are many articles written on this topic.
Have you looked at the A7? Faster AF & EFC. On a side note, the AF on the A7S is superb, it will focus in situations that I cannot see to focus and do it accurately!!!!
I will bother you with one more question. I feel like I wanted to go with a higher resolution camera. A bit of a life saver when cropping needed. However, I am a bit smitten with the A7S. I heard it does wonderful video. How is the still quality? I print usually 8×10 but will go as large as 16×20 or poster size. Thanks for your insight and experience. I love your work.
Cheers
Thanks!
Tough question really, I have both cameras and cannot decide which I prefer. The A7S feels more finished, both mechanically and firmware-wise, mine has a lovely snug lens-mount. But, those stills off the A7R are quite outstanding, especially from the FE 2.8/35 & FE 1.8/55, zero complains with the A7R & either lens, I shoot wide-open too.
I think the A7S is more forgiving of different glass, not just because of the lower pixel-count, but maybe the different sensor design. For example, the FE 4/24-70 looks superb on the A7S, for the A7R I always reach for the primes as its brutal on the zoom.
I’m more about learning video/motion today, so for me, given the choice, I think I’d choose the A7S, its a very flexible camera. The biggest thing about both cameras IMO is the EVF and that MI shoe, both are superb for the video user.
Here’s a video I snagged outside a coffee shop last week on the A7R, there was moire and aliasing everywhere but its hidden in the grade. With the A7S these aren’t issues though, but those A7R still files are lovely………….. its no easy choice!
http://youtu.be/-zx5S-GFe-Y
I print on an Epson 4900 17″x22″ and crop the portraits heavily from 16:9 camera files, no uprights, everything I shoot I shoot for a 16:9 screen. On the A7S I’m not too sure (yet) how it’d compare when treated this way (from a cropping perspective) depends on what you shoot I suppose? I do tend to rely on my printer though and let it do the heavy-lifting rather than me second guess in PS.
Well I may have to wait until the next gen of A7’s arrive. I lean towards the 7r because I primarily do stills. But I want Sony to improve the shutter sound of the 7r which by most accounts is very loud. I also read the autofocus is less than stellar. I am not sure if this is accurate or not. But these are two things that can be easily improved. I want to incorporate video more into my work. The 7s sounds tempting but am concerned about printing larger photos from cropped images with the Mpix count of the 7s. I use the 3800 to print. The shutter seems better on the 7s than 7r. I also heard the 7s hunts a bit on focus especially compared to the 7 or 6000. I feel like Tuco in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly when he walked into the gunshop and took parts from various guns to make his gun. I guess I will keep lugging my 99 and my 1Dx around until I can make a decision.
Best “still camera” I ever owned or used is probably the Canon 5D3, lovely ergonomics, just bullet-proof for stills. The A7’s are cutting edge, you really need a very specific reason for owning/shooting one IMO. EVF’s are ***very*** cool, but can be a PITA if you wish to shoot fast & unrestricted though, everything’s a compromise. Personally I think it makes little sense waiting for the A7 to become something it may not. For example, we won’t get a high pixel count and stellar video anytime soon, it’s an either or proposition. Same with fast & accurate AF, Canon are still working hard on that one…………
I think the new Nikon D810 is the perfect compromise for what you’ve described. Great resolution, EFC shutter option, slendid AF and a very competent video feature-set.
Hey, feel free to ask away, we’re here to chat & share our photography experiences! ~Chris
Could you explain what is the problem with 1/60th on A7r, please?
Which speed is “safe” for 35mm in your opinion?
Have you ever experienced any problems with OSS with A7r?
My long lens is usually the FE 1.8/55 and at 100% on a good monitor you can see the slightest camera movement at 1/60th. The A7R needs a minimum of 2X the lens focal length unless you’re very practiced in your technique. There’s no problem with the camera, it’s simply physics, small camera + less mass = amplified user error.
To use a gun analogy, the A7R is akin to a small frame Glock with a hot 10mm cartridge, it requires much more proficient and practiced handling. It’s not a beginners tool and takes time to learn. I follow the same rule with the FE 2.8/35 and avoid 1/60th just so I don’t confuse myself. (:-)
I don’t use the zooms on the A7R sorry, but they’re fantastic on the A7S for video, super-smooth for handholding, love them!
“P.s. … maybe look in to camps of NIKON / Canon ? …. just a thought …”
Better be careful with a company that thinks that way. I don’t “think” sending customers to CaNikon is part of Sony plan. Now even their own customers are recommending it. Good plan. Great for the brand. That will really help stabilize the company and secure your purchase.
Agreed. See people complaining that samples were cooked made me laugh..when someone buy lens obviously he’ll cook whatever images taken from that lens. You can cook but others can’t 🙂 ..and to people just complaining samples were cooked instead of criticizing show us your “beautiful uncooked photos’ 🙂
Sony/Zeiss have responded fully to our request for more lenses. Now, we must wait for the reviews and for some of us, we must see what the next round of E-Mount bodies bring. I’m wanting to like the 35mm f/1.4, but the smaller ‘ZM’ version also looks good. What I don’t like about using an ‘M’ lens is the need to focus wide open and then to set the aperture. Larger bodies will make me more willing to buy one of these largish lenses.
Why do you need to focus with the aperture wide open? The Sony lenses don’t open the aperture when the autofocus (or manual focus) is activated and I don’t seem to have any issues. Curious..
sony cameras do open the aperture all the way for focusing and the aperture steps down to the set aperture upon the shutter release.
No, only A-mount cameras do that, but E-mount cameras stop down the aperture real time. Especially with manual focus lenses, there’s no need to worry about your aperture setting since you can manually focus at any aperture.
ah thanks for the correction. i stupidly assumed it was the same for both mounts.
Alpha’s do it both ways. Can get live aperture by pressing DOF button. Especially accurate when setting that button to “shot preview”. Elpha’s only work in stop down mode.
There are benefits and drawbacks to both methods. Always working in stop down live aperture will provide live DOF. But manual focusing doesn’t work nearly as well because subject doesn’t stand off background as clearly as when wide open aperture is used for focusing.
Better to have both options available, and to be capable of using them for each advantage when desired. Can’t get that with an Elpha.
Maximum aperture provides the most accurate focus. I also turn off live view with my A7.
the link to Sony Japan images is still on 404 🙁
too bad, that Mark Galer does not answer any comments and questions 🙁
Correct link is http://www.sony.jp/ichigan/products/SEL1635Z/feature_1.html
He is in Australia and it’s only just the morning here. He did all the A7 presentations for Sony last year at the launch events and at the end he answered all questions of people walking up to him. I assume he will answer the questions on Flickr as well.
Link to the sony japan site http://www.sony.jp/ichigan/products/SEL1635Z/feature_1.html
Is there a single image of anything Alpha at the Sony booth whatsoever? The Elpha’s are everywhere… But I don’t see even an a77II or a99 sitting on a background table.
Imagine if Nikon showed up with only the V system, acting like F mount didn’t exist. And when asked about it, they just smile and wave like Twilight Zone characters from a different dimension.
Can somebody share a link to any photo that has any kind of native mount Alpha anything at the Sony booth? Please do.
most of the lenses on show were Alpha lenses. there was a slide in the presentation clearly showing two lines of cameras – A and E mount…..
Awesome! Thanks, I really needed to see that.
Keep Calm and Take Some Pictures
I clearly see A99 and another A mount body beside it…..
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/t31.0-8/10631258_10152754911064365_8933089242541432446_o.jpg
Reps tend to heavily focus on the newest stuff and show goers typically are most interested to get hands on time with the newest stuff – particularly those items not in stores. So naturally the just announced lenses & accessories are going to be at the forefront.
I shoot real estate photography and the Nikon 16-35 f4 is my go to lens, so very use to looking at that UWA. While sharpness to corners is what people focus on, it is really minor with this class of lens as DOF is phenomenal with the lens typically stopped down to F8 or smaller. My typical interior is ISO 640, f14, 1/250 which gives great exterior exposure with crystal clear windows/views then multi off camera flash to bring the ambient up to correctly expose the interior. The two biggest issues with UWA lens are 1) compositional skill controlling distortion, and 2) the natural distortion of the lens. I personal find the UWA lens one of the more difficult to use and it takes practice.
Reviewing the photos examples in the flikr group and was in awe with no post processing. Several, I viewed the extended EFIX data link. As he states, these were originally shot in RAW, no processing and Lightroom export to jpeg. Amazing. If was shot in jpeg, then the camera would have provided correction algorithms, but at least in Nikon’s case – RAW remains uncorrected, with lens correction the first thing I do in Lightroom to remove barrel distortion and other lens defects as Adobe does a nice job of removing them. However, Adobe hasn’r created a lens profile and updated Lightroom for this just announced lens, so he couldn’t correct them if he wanted too, other than manually. These lines were dead on with no apparent barrel distortion or other lens distortion. That was jaw dropping. Compositional distortion is another issue, like verticals no vertical with the door leaning back, but that is a photographer issue, not a lens issue.
Hopefully you’re right regarding no in-camera fix. Cause that would pretty much seal the deal for me (very good resolution with low distortion).
As obvious from the original post, currently a Nikon user…but seriously considering selling everything and downsizing. The performance of the 16-35 is a key as I primarily use the short end of the focal range with limited telephoto. Businesswise, I don’t need the tax deduction this year so it gives me some time. With my daughter’s wedding next month in Europe, obviously I won’t be shooting it as have other responsibilities, but seriously considering leaving most of my Nikon gear at home, sans some primes and metabones adapter. As a “Premier” customer at Best Buy I get a 45 day return policy, and it is so tempting to pick up an A7 to try during the trip. As backup, my wife owns an a6000.
Quote from the photographer
“Images 4 to 13 have been captured with the aperture wide open (most at 16 mm) with manual lens corrections applied in Lightroom.”
So the jury is still out on the native distortion properties of the lens but even with manual corrections, it is looking optimistic.
Nonetheless, he said this:
“There are no lens profiles available for this lens so I have had to take a small amount of barrel distortion out for the images captured at 16mm in Lightroom (approximately +5). Things settle down by 20mm. There is virtually no Chromatic Aberration with this lens and corner shading is minimal.”
+5 is extremely light; personally, I wouldn’t even care. No CA and shading is minimal…. Sound like a winner to me
Yup, as I said,a looking optimistic.
Played with the 3 RAW files and distortion was not a problem, nor was CA. Corners were a bit soft but nothing ugly.
Based on these, I went ahead and got on the list down at Precision Camera.