[shoplink 11326 ebay]
[/shoplink]
One of the lenses I am considering to buy right now is the [shoplink 11326 ebay]Zeiss ZM 18mm f/4.0 lens (here on eBay)[/shoplink]. Our reader Pascal tested the lens and posted his findings at DearSusans (Click here): “Contrary to my (FABULOUS) Zeiss ZM Biogon 25mm/2.8, this is not a symmetrical lens and should work much better on the NEX-7. The NEX-7′s smaller pixels make it much more adverse to symmetrical designs such as the Biogons and some early Leicas. But no such problem with this lens“. He tested the lens on the NEX-5n and these are his findings:
– warm colors
– It has the classic Zeiss 3D look
– damn sharp!
– not the best bokeh but as the tester said, bokeh doesn’t matter with that lens.
– focus ring not tight enough
– it’s a bit too big for such a slow lens.
Read the full test and watch the images samples at DearSusans (Click here)! To see some image samples of the lens on the NEX-7 check out Rob Skeoch (Click here) website. Reviews on M-mount cameras have been made by Ken Rockwell and SLRlensreview.
There are a few good reasons why I would buy the lens:
1) Versatility: I will be able to use this lens on a future fullframe Sony mirrorless system or any other mirrorless system. It’s an investment for the future.
2) Build quality and manual focusing and aperture ring.
3) You can have it in Silver or Black (perfect for my NEX-7!).
4) Image quality is top
I am looking forward to find a good deal on used lenses on eBay 🙂
The Silver Zeiss 18mm ZM lens is in Stock at Adorama (Click here), [shoplink 11326 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink].
The Black Zeiss 18mm ZM lens is in Stock at Amazon UK (Click here), [shoplink 11326 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink].
53 Responses
zzzzzz
meh.. my minolta lens does the job even in terms of sharpness
Just found this, looks interesting: http://scottrobertla.com/2012/01/30/sony-a77-review-revolutionary/
Reaaly nice work, yes. Very sharp and great light.
What am I missing? I’m not seeing any lens review from any of the dearsusan links. Is there a link I’m missing?
O_o Click on “Home” !
i prefer to use tokina ATX 17mm f3.5 on nex camera 😀 small, cheap, sharp and build well 😀 but it’s really rare >.<
I’m liking it and the f/4 doesn’t bother me on wide angles so much 😉
Did you write about it – or did you see anyone else doing it? I’ve been thinking a lot about this lens for Nex … but did not find anyone’s experience before this 🙂
Andrea, could you please let us know what is the status of new CZ A-mount lenses? Are they comming soon?
Much thanks 🙂
Really cool looking, and I bet that is precision instrument too, but I just can’t get excited about slower lenses, and I really wish that I could as often they are cheaper and smaller and lighter than the faster ones.
But when you need an f/2.8 to get the shot then an f/4.0 won’t do, and it just doesn’t make sense to carry two lenses at a similar focal length around in your bag.
Admin,
Is it really better that the native Sony-Zeiss 24mm f/1.8 ?
– Its almost 50% more expensive.
– Its almost 50% heavier.
– Its several stops slower.
– No AF.
The Sony-Zeiss 24mm f/1.8:
– bokeh is magnificent
– focus ring is perfect
– Colors are accurate
I am curious to find out why you still like Zeiss ZM 18mm f/4.0 lens ?
(is it because 18 vs. 24mm)
Jack
Different focal lengths. How is it they compare at all?
I have a Pen 20mm and 25mm. There is a big difference between them.
Yes, that is the only thing I could come up with.
(as I wrote in my last parentheses)
Jack
On a 2x crop thie difference between focal lengths is more noticeable however.
Yea sure, that is not in dispute, but It was not clear if Andrea was looking for a 18mm and this was the “best” available or – this is a very good lens which happened to be 18mm.
If it is the former, Ok, otherwise most commentaries in the this forum believe that (for the money) it may not be best choice. Granted, the beauty of photography is to pick gear that fits you.
Unless, we missed something about this lens….
Well, the kit zoom is 18/3.5 at the wide end. I know, can’t compare the (optical or build) quality of that to this but I have a hard time justifying this, especially on APS-C. This ZM is neither bright nor small nor cheap.
Too bad there isn’t something like the Pany 14/2.5 for the NEX – a pancake that is not too wide (28mm equiv.) with decent IQ and price (only 200 new on eBay). The AF is fast too.
Zeiss suks better leica
Although the Super Elmar 18 is spectacular lens (I have one), but they usually say this distagon isn’t worse.
I am not seeing what makes this manual, slower lens any more attractive than mt Sony 16/2.8? Is it purely a fashion thing?
Jason,
I also do have the 16/f2.8 lens and not to happy with. Maybe your experience is better than mine.
It is small and reasonable fast, but shooting at 2.8 it was soft around the edges and not that sharp. Shooting at f/4 to 5.6, the picture became significantly sharper, but of course you then loose enough stops for low-light shooting.
If you have the opportunity, try the 24mm f/1.8 Zeiss and you be amazed.
It is more expensive and bigger, but I thought it was worth the money.
Jack
I haven’t tried the Zeiss 24 yet and at $1000, maybe never will. I do however have several fast Pentax and Olympus OM prime lenses I use with adapters when wanting something manual and sharper than the 16/2.8. Honestly, he kit lens is plenty sharp too.
I am eagerly awaiting more NEX and E mount lenses in general to hit the market. Hopefully something like a smaller 28mm and a reasonably sized fast 85 as well.
Jason
The Zeiss probably has better performance than the 16mm Sony (which is handy, but far from being a marvel). However, I tend to agree, the weight, price and lack of AF of the ZM lens might be a lot to accept to use this lens on NEX.
I totally agree with you Jason. I haven’t seen anything impressive from the Zeiss at infinity, which is where most people complain about the Sony 16mm too. But now with correction, I’d bet the 16 Sony may actually be better. Those with both should post.
At regular shooting street photo distances, I’ve been very impressed with the Sony 16mm.
I have a hard time justifying the cost of the Zeiss 18/4.0. Personally I find 18mm not quite wide enough and too close to the superb Sony Zeiss 24/1.8. Never mind that the 24mm lens is lighter (350+60g adapter = 410g vs 225g) and an incredibly useful 2.33 stops brighter.
Whether you like how a lens draws is of course subjective. I can only say that I consider both the Sony Zeiss 24/1.8 and the Zeiss Biogon 35/1.8 excellent in that regard, so much so that I almost never use the 16/2.8 or the 18-55 kit lens anymore.
If I shot a large percentage of my shots at 27mm FF equivalent, I’d take a serious look the Zeiss 18/4.0 based on my experience with the 2 Zeiss branded lenses I own. But if I only shot the occasional frame at that focal length, I’d wait to see what the performance of the 1 stop faster, much cheaper and lighter Sigma 19/2.8 ends up being like.
The 27-28mm equivalent is my ideal FL for wide angle, because everything that is wider only good to show massive perspective distortions (I don’t need them much) and everything that is narrower (≥20mm looks more like a normal lens than WA). Although I have chosen Leica Super Elmar 18 over this CZ due to lesser weight and better handling (yes, sometimes I do stupid things :D), optically the CZ isn’t any worse, although I prefer leica colors.
I don’t care much about lack of speed: wide angle purposes rarely need wide aperture but rather closed one.
And I forgot: both these lenses (Distagon 18 ZM and Super Elmar 18) are quite big due to the fact they are just as sharp wide open as, for example, at f8. Even at FF.
When “wide open” is F4.0, you would expect it to be sharp starting at its maximum aperture. If the 18mm Zeiss offered a faster maximum aperture, I’d be willing to make some allowances for its weight (which is greater with he adapter than the NEX-7 body itself). But it doesn’t. While I agree that you don’t always need a fast, wide lens, having one increases the range of conditions you can shoot under.
As to the focal length, I agree that 27mm is about as wide as you can go before perspective distortions become an issue. Some photographers like shooting street photographs at 28mm FF, but I prefer a focal length around 35mm FF. The speed of the lens is an issue for street photography; you need larger apertures to achieve sufficiently fast shutter speeds in poor light or indoors. F4 just isn’t fast enough for that, even if you crank up the sensitivity.
I’m not saying that the Zeiss 18/4.0 isn’t a good or even excellent lens, it’s just that for that much money I would want it to be a more versatile all-rounder.
Ouch, I didn’t even mean sharpness only, but the fact it’s has the same optical performance at any aperture until diffraction comes into play. That means it has (Super Elmar, I didn’t try the Distagon) no visible CA across the frame at any conditions, even branches with sky behind have no purple fringing. To say, it, being twice lighter and much smaller, outclassed the Distagon T* 21 ZK I had (Pentax version), which is supposed to be the best WA SLR lens.
And, still, they are 18mm lenses for FF with their specific purposes, not true 28mm equivalent, although their speed are enough for me: it’s more than enough for landscapes and cityscapes.
@Björn: What Biogon 35/1.8 might that be? Just curious … thanks 🙂
You know every time I read Biogon i just “read” Bygone…
Buy the 16/2.8
Stop it down to f4
Problem solved!
Nice! 🙂
I find that the 16mm is actually better than most people say, I wonder if there are just a few bad batches out there.
For the extra size I’m quite fond of the Minolta 20mm 2.8 with LA-EA1. Aperture control in body with EXIF data. I think that short registration lenses cause too many issues and while the Minolta isnt a great classic lens it still takes great photos and a stop faster. Then save the difference and buy the Zeiss 24mm E.
Also is FF, will work on Alpha’s and LA-EA2 with PDAF and can easily be adapted for other mirrorless systems.
I agree. I love my 20mm F2.8, surprisingly sharp. Probably one of my favourite purchases, but I don’t use it as often as I should… I have the NEX5 and the LA EA1 and EA2, works great across them all. Manual Focusing on the 20mm is smooth too.
If a little fiddly with the small focus ring. I don’t use mine that much either unless I want a wide (that is about as wide as I ever want and never use the 16mm as I find it too wide) I tend to use my Minolta 24mm 2.8 much much more (so much so I bought a X100 so I can have a small body with a nice 24mm constantly attached).
Another option (though relatively huge) that is 2.33 stops faster than the Zeiss above and 1.33 stops faster than the Minolta is the Sigma 20mm 1.8.
Is there any magenta color shift in the corners on ZM 18mm like the attached link?
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/10/28/sony-nex-7-with-wide-angle-leica-lenses-a-quick-test-and-gxr-comparison/
This is by far my sharpest lens on my nex5N (considerably sharper than the 24mm zeiss). I use it for daytime wide angle urban/rural shots at infinity. Other than the weight I think you will be quite pleased.
WOW
wow what?
Funny for some weird reason admin called Sigma 19mm F2.8 a “boring” lens. What’s “boring” about that compared to this?
+1
emotions rule us.
I am very interested in seeing the mtf for the 19/30mm sigmas.
a 8 fish/19mm/50mm kit might work for me. (originally I wanted 16/30/70)
Calling a small very compact Sigma 19mm F2.8 “boring” (when we desperately need native Nex lenses) was one of the most stupid title ever on SAR.
Good point! Though isn’t it obvious.
This lens looks cool. It has the Zeiss nametag. It’s all manual with an aperture ring and everything.
Did I mention that it looks cool?
That’s why.
Even though I’d rather have a smaller, faster aperture lens with autofocus which has modern coatings, comes with a warranty and was actually designed for the NEX, rather than some old, slow, second hand glass bungled together with an adapter.
I’d suggest we don’t judge the new Sigma lenses until we’ve seen what they’re capable of. If the 19/2.8 offers decent performance wide open, then it may be worth considering.
On a hypothetical full frame Sony mirrorless body, the Zeiss 18/4.0 becomes a much more interesting proposition in my opinion. It’s now a very wide lens making the modest maximum aperture less of an issue – you’re much less likely to use it for things like street photography. The full frame sensor will also give you more room to choose higher sensitivities if necessary.
Of course it remains to be seen what the Zeiss 18/4.0’s corners look like on an even more densely packed full frame sensor when there are reportedly already some issues with vignetting and cyan drift on the M9 (uncorrected).
Still, the Zeiss 18/4.0 will likely perform better on a full frame sensor than either my Zeiss Biogon 35/2.0 or Sony Zeiss Sonnar 24/1.8 (which covers APS-C only). So in that sense it’s probably a better long term investment.
Sonnar reported to cover FF by LL
Ahh … 35/2.0 … that one I know 🙂
That would be extremely interesting, Denis. Could you point me to the location of that comment?
I’m sorry Björn, I misread the text. This lens is indeed APS-C only, my apologize.
Denis, that would have been great, eh? Thanks for checking it out.
LOL. Everyone says that Zeiss 18mm is better than Leica 18mm. And price is 1/3.