Anyone bought a 24-70 ZA lately?

[Cheyne]

I've never been so up in the air about a lens as I am with this one before. 

 

The initial testers all panned the lens, claiming it was not worth the money and just barely better than the kit lens.

 

I have since then heard that people who have bought this lens within 2015 are very happy with their copy and claim it to be much sharper than the initial batches. 

 

I'm not really sure who to believe, but I know I could really use a good 24-70, and would get a lot of use from it.  I have the kit lens, and it gets me by occasionally when primes wont do, but i've never really loved it.  

 

I would love to hear from anyone who has bought this lens in the past few months and what their experiences have been.  The theory is that Sony/Zeiss may have improved on the initial lens and just silently rolled them out, rather than pushing an MKII version, which would of surely made earlier adopters angry. 

[gadelrosario]

I bought my 24-70 together with my A7II a couple of months ago.  I give it a thumbs up.  I don't have pictures that I can share at this point but will have them after coming back from Grand Canyon in a couple of weeks.

[Cheyne]

Did you happen to ever try the kit 28-70?   Some people say it's not worth the upgrade, others say it's totally worth the upgrade.  

 

At least when I bought the 55mm f/1.8, the decision was clear as day.  Its an awesome lens, and nobody says otherwise.   

[lo9rd]

I think the problem is that many who moved to the A7 series bought the 55mm 1.8 or the 35mm 2.8 and then going back to a zoom which may have corner issues the difference became massively apparent.

[JLBiggs]

I bought one in March of this year and just love it. I have no complaints!

[gadelrosario]

Did you happen to ever try the kit 28-70?   Some people say it's not worth the upgrade, others say it's totally worth the upgrade.  

 

At least when I bought the 55mm f/1.8, the decision was clear as day.  Its an awesome lens, and nobody says otherwise.   

No, I didn't get the 28-70 because I bought my camera body-only.  Edges are a little soft but nothing I can't deal with in post.  The 35mm F2.8 is a phenomenal lens - I agree with the prior post.  What is a disappointment is the 28-240.  Horrendous distortion and corners.  I had hoped it would be a good traveling lens but I'd rather carry the 24-70 and 70-200 at this point.

[Cheyne]

I think I might just have to buy one and see. 

 

I own both the 35mm 2.8 and the 55mm 1.8.  I bought the 35 first, and really didn't need the 55, but I had to see what everyone was talking about (I totally see now, and i'll be keeping it)

 

I don't completely buy the argument that people are expecting prime performance from zooms, while yes, its a bit jarring moving from the amazing performance of the 55 to a zoom,  I have used zooms all my life and I expect a certain quality from them.   Ie,  I also own the Olympus 12-40 f/2.8 Pro, which is a near perfect zoom lens.  Sharp from corner to corner with beautiful contrast.     I also own a Canon 24-105 and a Canon 24-70 f/2.8, which is also a great lens.    The kit 28-70 isn't even in the same league as these lenses judging from the pictures i've been getting from it.  Its an ok holiday lens but thats about where it stops.  

 

So when people keep saying that the 24-70 is only slightly better than the kit 28-70, it worries me.   In fact, Sony them selves have also stated this,  see comments from Sony support here: http://www.amazon.com/forum/-/Tx2XGSH9V0Y5YZM/ref=ask_dp_dpmw_al_hza?asin=B00FSB79FU

 

 

Eh .. now I sound like one of "those" people online who over analyses new gear.   It's just a lot to spend on something that i'm really not 100% is going to be worth it. 

[holmes4]

I also bought the 24-70 along with the A7ii and I have no complaints. I now also have the FE 55, which is fabulous, but the 24-70 is very good. No, I didn't compare to the 28-70.

[Cheyne]

Thanks for the feedback.  I'd be happy if it were a little sharper in the edges and offered a little more contrast than the kit lens  (which I believe, from what people are now saying, it does)

 

Yes, the 55 is amazing. It took me 6 months to decide to actually buy one. The 55mm focal length wasn't that appealing to me, and I already had the 35mm, but I picked one up for $730 two weeks ago and i've been very happy with it. 

 

A few sample shots from my first outing with the 55

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cheynewallace/17593773888/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/cheynewallace/17593759858/

[AndyWear]

I have the 28-70 and also  tried the 24-70.  Its not worth the upgrade.  The 28-70 is a really good lens, especially for the price.  The AF  is faster I think. The 24-70 didn't impress me so I returned it.

[Cheyne]

Thanks Andy,  that's kind of what I was worried about.

 

I went out for a hike on the weekend and was wishing I had a single quality zoom lens with me, instead I carried 3 primes, which kind of detracts from the convenience of using a smaller camera.   I ended up using the 35mm 2.8 for about 70% of the time.  Such a great lens.  

 

One of the resulting photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cheynewallace/18036473196/in/dateposted-public/

[Reality Studio]

You didn't mention if it was for photography or video, but in my case I've used the 28-70 kit lens a bunch for video and very much like it, and briefly tried the 24-70 as well. In my case for video I couldn't tell any quality difference and it was somewhat heavier than the kit lens which was an issue for me as my use for it was handheld video. Plus when zooming the kit lens stays small, whereas the 24-70 becomes somewhat longer which adds more twisting weight on your hands when filming handheld (changes the center of gravity). So I returned the 24-70 and have stuck with the kit lens. That's only for video though, I've never used either for photography.

[Cheyne]

Sorry, i'll be using it for pretty much 100% photography.  I think i've shot less than a minute of video on my A7II. 

 

Mostly street and urban, but some landscape photography.  I would also shoot a lot of pictures at 24mm, but probably stopped down.

 

When you say it was somewhat heavier than the kit,  how much would you say? what what about physical size, did it look / feel bigger on the camera?  I've read the specs, but its hard to visualize.  

[Reality Studio]

I think it was about 150g heavier which doesn't sound like much, but when you are holding it for many minutes straight for video use it definitely starts to add up. For photography use though I don't think it's weight will matter really. Likewise as far as general feel on the camera for photography it would feel just fine to me. It's larger when zoomed but not really a big deal for taking pictures because you aren't holding it for long, just frame, shoot and back into your bag it goes until the next picture. Personally though if you want it for street, urban and landscaping photography I'd go with the 24-240 instead, it sounds like it's range would be more useful for what you do. For example you could take street pictures from across the street with it no problem thanks to the long end and it's OIS. I've used the 24-240 a bunch for photography and I'm a fan of it. I know people and reviews pick on it for distortions and such but the camera corrects those quite nicely, and at the end of the day it lets me get pictures that other lenses wouldn't. It's bigger than the 24-70 to be sure, but to me that doesn't matter for taking pictures. I'd suggest renting one or buying one from a place that allowed hassle free returns and see for yourself if it would work for you rather than just go by internet reviews which personally I feel harp on the minutia way too much sometimes. A lens that reviews amazingly well is of less use to me than a lens that reviews not as favorably but ultimately let's me get the picture I want. But that's just my 2 cents

[Cheyne]

150 grams is descent.    I think the 24-240 might be a bit too big though. 

 

Eh, i'm torn.  I might just hang out for a bit, force my self to use my primes more, maybe see how much more performance I can squeeze out of this kit lens.   I have seen some descent prices on the 24-70 lately,  I can pick one up for $840, which isn't too bad.   If it drops below $800 I might grab one. 

 

It's wishful thinking but i'm hoping there are more  quality short range zooms released in the near future.   The 24-70 also has OSS, which isn't really useful now with IBIS.  I'm sure removing OSS could shave a few grams off the weight and possibly free up space for better optics. 

[Neroon]

So look at these with the following notes. These were all shot on a tripod, using Aperture priority and ISO 100


Sony 24-70 @24 f5.6 by Michael Jardeen, on Flickr
 
35mm @ f5.6

Sony 24-70 @ 35mm f5.6 by Michael Jardeen, on Flickr


Sony 24-70 @50 5.6 by Michael Jardeen, on Flickr

Sony 24-70mm @70 f5.6 by Michael Jardeen, on Flickr

 

Ignore lighting variations as that was my fault. Shot on tripod using aperture priority w/ ISO 100. Show as RAW, Adobe RAW lens correction applied and Auto Tone were only processing used. The 70mm needs to be reshot as I did not have a spot with the correct distance to include the entire chart.

[Cheyne]

Thats actually not bad at all.  Thanks for posting those Neroon. The corners at 50mm are quite good.  Can I ask, when did you purchase your 24-70?    I'm trying to figure out if there were variations between the first batches vs more recent batches.  Also, you dont happen to have a kit lens available do you?

 

I've been looking around, comparing shots from the 28-70 vs the 24-70 and the 24-70 definitely seems to have a little more punch, where as the 28-70 shots always seem to lack a little contrast to me.  Probably nothing that can't be fixed in post though.

[Neroon]

Thats actually not bad at all.  Thanks for posting those Neroon. The corners at 50mm are quite good.  Can I ask, when did you purchase your 24-70?    I'm trying to figure out if there were variations between the first batches vs more recent batches.  Also, you dont happen to have a kit lens available do you?

 

I've been looking around, comparing shots from the 28-70 vs the 24-70 and the 24-70 definitely seems to have a little more punch, where as the 28-70 shots always seem to lack a little contrast to me.  Probably nothing that can't be fixed in post though.

I do not have the kit lens. I bought mine in late February '15. I think it's just fine. I always shoot in RAW and have no fear of post processing

[AndyWear]

Thanks Andy,  that's kind of what I was worried about.

 

I went out for a hike on the weekend and was wishing I had a single quality zoom lens with me, instead I carried 3 primes, which kind of detracts from the convenience of using a smaller camera.   I ended up using the 35mm 2.8 for about 70% of the time.  Such a great lens.  

 

One of the resulting photos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/cheynewallace/18036473196/in/dateposted-public/

ha, nice pictures! I guess you live in SF or nearby. Me too because I've seen all those areas you shot in SF lol

[AndyWear]

Have you tried the 16-35 yet Cheyne? I love that lens, its great for the shots you're taking.  I had a 16-35 2.8 but sold it  recently. It was way way too heavy carrying around all the time(felt really nice though). I just ordered the 16-35 F4, can't wait to get it.

 

Most my life I shot with all kinds of  50's though, but since I bought the 28-70 kit lens, I've been s hooting at 28 a lot and I just love the way it looked and decided to go even wider. 16-35 just makes everything alot funner.  I bought it mainly for Real Estate and tried it shooting family portraits.  I stayed away from it for awhile because I felt it made people fat looking, but after using it for awhile, I didn't  feel like it made them "fatter".  Just more dynamic and gives my image more movements.

 

I don't consider myself a good photographer by any means and sharpness and corner issues arent a big deal to me, so I might not see all the minute details that most other professional photographers are seeing.  I'll post something with the Kit lens.  Its pretty sharp to me, light, and cheap so I don't care what happens to it.  I use it mostly just for candid shots and family outtings.  Its been post processed to hell though just keep that in mind. :-p

 

[Cheyne]

Hey Andy

 

Yep, i'm in San Francisco  I live right next to the bay bridge, hence why I seem to photograph it constantly. 

 

I havnt tried the 16-35 yet, but my favorite lens on my Canon 5DMKII is my 16-35MKII f/2.8, so im very familiar with the focal range.  I have been trying to sell the Canon and do a swap for a Sony 16-35.  I think you're right,  it suits my photography a lot.    I only shifted to the Sony system a few months ago and i've been spending loads of cash on new gear so I should probably wait a little bit before splashing out on more  (only bought the 55mm 2 weeks ago)  

 

I'd be interested to see what you think of the 16-35 though.  Post some pictures when you get it   (p.s the images you attached arent loading for me)

[AndyWear]

These were the 16-35 2.8 

 

Here's one of Bay Bridge at Clipper Cove

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jvky6gtkppirgjb/2015-Bay%20Bridge%2C%20Treasure%20Island%20Clipper%20Cove.jpg?dl=0

 

Dinosaur Point

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cf9u48du8p3ceku/2015-DinosaurPark-AstroMilkyWay.jpg?dl=0

 

Near Pinnacles

https://www.dropbox.com/s/p2tc2v6xyrlvkb8/2015-Pinnacles%20National%20%20Monument-Road-Chris.jpg?dl=0

 

Pinnacles

https://www.dropbox.com/s/obtcy3fir7l3364/DSC00196%20as%20Smart%20Object-1.jpg?dl=0

 

Burney Falls

https://www.dropbox.com/s/obtcy3fir7l3364/DSC00196%20as%20Smart%20Object-1.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/87fxverxhupx34t/DSC00065%20as%20Smart%20Object-5.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hbtp5aocm5iuaqo/Untitled_Panorama3.jpg?dl=0

 

 

 

------

28-70

https://www.dropbox.com/s/1tgkds5xkuc55tl/DSC04137.1.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/iis369rz588w8d3/DSC04209.1.jpg?dl=0

 

 

 

I'm just an amateur so don't judge hard.  There are some mean people here lol.

[Jamooche]

Hey Cheyne. I know it's an old topic, but I'm interested I. Getting the FE 24-70 f/4 lens for my A7RII.

 

Did you buy it and do you recommend it? I too want a take only one lens zoom for this camera rather than using primes. I know we have the G master one now, but it's way too big and heavy for me.

 

Thanks for any info!

[Hydrology]

Bought this last week as my first lens with the A7RII. Coming from a Canon 5DMKII where the only two lenses I used were the 24-105 f4 and 40 f2.8 pancake.

Initial testing with this lens is favourable, but my goto lens on the Canon was the little pancake - super sharp!

 

Plan will be to add the 35mm 2.8 to the setup in the next few months.

[Portrait Painter X]

Just wanted to add that I have a 4/24-70 from July 2015 that I love. Really sharp and great contrast. I use it for everything, studio, landscape, walkaround... Definitely a keeper!