Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I take it A mounts can be discussed here.

I've ben using - and love - a 1993 Minolta 24-70 G series lens extensively on my A99 for two years (and previously on the A900) and it is now starting to falter... The aperture is getting "sticky" and it isn't consistent anymore. So I am contemplating the purchase of a new replacement Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 SSM. This lens has been out since 2008 and of course, I am eager to get it as soon as possible - BUT, with winter light and winter daylight saving time back in effect, I can wait until late winter as I usually hibernate at this time of year and don't really shoot until mid February in southern France (I love the photogenic Nice carnaval)...

So, MY QUESTIONS: does anyone know of a better A mount 24-70 zoom lens AND are there any rumours regarding the replacement of this aging lens ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I like how you used the word ageing, made me smile.  I have owned this lens for over two years now and it has never let me down.  The quality of the images is just breathtaking and it easily out performed my Sony 50mm F1.4 which I sold as a result.  The lens is heavy but will be well balanced on your A99 which I use mine on, it use to be an A850.  If I was looking for a 24-70mm F2.8 lens now I would give Sigma's DG HSM a serious look  or Tamron's offering as they are cheaper and Sigma have really been pushing the boat out of late in terms of image quality if the reviews are anything to go by.  However, I am a huge fan of Zeiss glass having purchased Sony's 16-35mm F2.8 ZA before the 24-70mm, and although they are more expensive I think they are worth it.  The other thing to consider is that the Sony's are not weather sealed at present but I believe it is coming but again I have used both of my ZA lenses in bad weather and in dusty conditions without any issues.

 

It is not up to date but here is my Flickr album for Sony's 24-70mm F2.8 ZA.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Kind regards

 

Si

Link to post
Share on other sites

the ZA 24-70 is a great lens. Razor sharp even wide open, great contrast and colours. A good all-rounder lens. The only thing that bothers me is the bokeh sometimes, as it gets a bit harsh in certain situations. As it was my first lens with the A mount initially I didnt find it bad..but after getting the cz 85/1.4, man, thats whole other bokeh universe :) Basically most of the primes will do much better in this regard...pitty, could have been the perfect lens. Anyway I dont think theres a 24-70 zoom alternative in the a mount which would perform better in this regard.

As for the rumors: nope, I didnt notice any rumors about its replacement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I take it A mounts can be discussed here.

I've ben using - and love - a 1993 Minolta 24-70 G series lens extensively on my A99 for two years (and previously on the A900) and it is now starting to falter... The aperture is getting "sticky" and it isn't consistent anymore. So I am contemplating the purchase of a new replacement Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 SSM. This lens has been out since 2008 and of course, I am eager to get it as soon as possible - BUT, with winter light and winter daylight saving time back in effect, I can wait until late winter as I usually hibernate at this time of year and don't really shoot until mid February in southern France (I love the photogenic Nice carnaval)...

So, MY QUESTIONS: does anyone know of a better A mount 24-70 zoom lens AND are there any rumours regarding the replacement of this aging lens ?

My experiences with the Zeiss 24-70 together with my a900 is mixed so I sold mine again.

 

It started when I recieved the lens. The thing wouldn't focus so it went directly back to repair to have an exchange of the SSM motor.

 

But thats not the only thing. From 50-70 mm it simply is not sharp enough in the corners even at f/8. That makes it a no go for landscape. At wider apertures and at 24mm it's really sharp even across the frame at f/2.8.

 

I compared it with my old trusted Minolta 24-105 f/3.5-4.5 and from f/8 and up the Minolta easily beats the ZA 24-70 f/2.8 at focal lengths beyond 50 mm. And since a landscape shot often is shot with an aperture from f/8 and up to f/13 or f/16 in my opinion it was easy for me to sell the Zeiss.

 

So for me it was a mixed bag of both good and not so good things and learned me that if I wanted the best I had to go into prime land. So if I were you I would buy a Sigma 50 mm and Samyang 24 f/1.4 / 35 f/1.4 mm.

 

See here: http://kurtmunger.com/tamron_sony_28_75mmid141.html

 

I have never regret that I sold the Zeiss.

 

Greetings from David

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experiences with the Zeiss 24-70 together with my a900 is mixed so I sold mine again.

 

It started when I recieved the lens. The thing wouldn't focus so it went directly back to repair to have an exchange of the SSM motor.

 

But thats not the only thing. From 50-70 mm it simply is not sharp enough in the corners even at f/8. That makes it a no go for landscape. At wider apertures and at 24mm it's really sharp even across the frame at f/2.8.

 

I compared it with my old trusted Minolta 24-105 f/3.5-4.5 and from f/8 and up the Minolta easily beats the ZA 24-70 f/2.8 at focal lengths beyond 50 mm. And since a landscape shot often is shot with an aperture from f/8 and up to f/13 or f/16 in my opinion it was easy for me to sell the Zeiss.

 

So for me it was a mixed bag of both good and not so good things and learned me that if I wanted the best I had to go into prime land. So if I were you I would buy a Sigma 50 mm and Samyang 24 f/1.4 / 35 f/1.4 mm.

 

See here: http://kurtmunger.com/tamron_sony_28_75mmid141.html

 

I have never regret that I sold the Zeiss.

 

Greetings from David

Nice to see the reference to Kurt a big Sony fan NOT.  I guess someone bought your 24-70mm ZA and ended up a very happy bunny!  I am surprised you can own a Sony camera given the quality of the lenses available?

 

Si

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nice to see the reference to Kurt a big Sony fan NOT. I guess someone bought your 24-70mm ZA and ended up a very happy bunny! I am surprised you can own a Sony camera given the quality of the lenses available?

 

Si

Why are you surprised that I can own Sony given the quality of the lenses? There are many fine a-mount lenses and some less fine too. And why are you mentioning that Kurt is not a fan of Sony? Actually I think his tests is ok. Stefan at www.artaphot.ch also tested the Zeiss against the Minolta 24-105 and found the same as I did. But what does it all have to do with my experience with the Zeiss ZA 24-70 f/2.8.

 

Maybe you are right that the guy who bought my 24-70 ended as a happy bunny. At least I did since I only lost a small amount on the sale. Actually I am sitting on my bunny tail right now ;-)

 

Seriously. Based on what I shoot and how the lens performed I can not recommend the 24-70.

 

Btw. I own a couple of Sony lenses that perform just fine and has shot with the a-mount system since 1992 ;-)

 

 

Greetings from David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you surprised that I can own Sony given the quality of the lenses? There are many fine a-mount lenses and some less fine too. And why are you mentioning that Kurt is not a fan of Sony? Actually I think his tests is ok. Stefan at www.artaphot.ch also tested the Zeiss against the Minolta 24-105 and found the same as I did. But what does it all have to do with my experience with the Zeiss ZA 24-70 f/2.8.

 

Maybe you are right that the guy who bought my 24-70 ended as a happy bunny. At least I did since I only lost a small amount on the sale. Actually I am sitting on my bunny tail right now ;-)

 

Seriously. Based on what I shoot and how the lens performed I can not recommend the 24-70.

 

Btw. I own a couple of Sony lenses that perform just fine and has shot with the a-mount system since 1992 ;-)

 

 

Greetings from David

Hi,

 

Kurt has only changed his tune towards Sony recently before he did not rate them at all.  i would like to know how your photography did not fit the 24-70mm F2.8.

 

Si

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Kurt has only changed his tune towards Sony recently before he did not rate them at all. i would like to know how your photography did not fit the 24-70mm F2.8.

 

Si

Hi.

 

I think you misunderstand something. Kurt Munger has reviewed Sony cameras and lenses since 2006. As far as I know he didn't rate them but he has always showed fine image examples and explained his findings very well.

 

Regarding why the Zeiss 24-70 didn't fit my needs I explained earlier that it was not sharp across the frame from 50mm and up to 70mm even at f/8 or f/13. IMHO it's not suited for landscape shooting.

 

My old Minolta 24-105 did and still does a better job at 50-70 and at f/8.

 

Greetings from David

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I have been a Pro Photographer for 20 years and have used about every camera and lens combo. The studios provide the cameras and etc.on many shoots. I have never seen sharpness and color and all around image production, using a zoom lens, better than the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar f2.8, 24-70 ZA T on a Sony A99. Excluding Medium Format. That is why I bought the A99 with Zeiss 24-70 2.8 lens for my own equipment. For Christmas, Santa brought me a Sony A7II and a LE-A4 adapter. I have just started using this Zeiss lens with the new camera. Unbelievable results. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • Wow, we have two distinctly different trains of thought. I'm not sure how valuable my advice will be, just consider this something to toss around in the back of your mind. First off, I hate rangefinder style bodies, never could get on with them. The decision of whether to go with a full-size body wasn't even in play. The difference when looking at size comparison photos is considerable, the difference in practical use is minor. About the only time I can think of that it may be beneficial is street if you want to conceal yourself a bit.  Lenses: Size and weight don't bother me near as much as inconvenience. Who in the heck wants to be changing lenses all the time? I take a short zoom, a long zoom, and a medium-wide fast prime for indoors. That's it. I am hoping Sigma's 20-200 set to be released tomorrow isn't a turd, if it's decent it will replace my 24-105.  If I were to go on a trip today, my setup would be: A1 70-200/2.8 GM II 24-105 Samyang 24/1.8.  If I was feeling it, I might add the 2X TC for the GM II, but I doubt it'd even get used.  An alternative to the 70-200 + TC would be the Tamron 50-400.  BOTH of these setups fit nicely in my Tenba Solstice 10L Sling.  So, I would say yes. Trade up to the A7R V. Definitely get the 24-70, or maybe the 24-105 for more range. You don't need 2.8 for your described subject matter.  As an aside, I never, ever, ever shoot in crop mode. Why? Well, I can do the exact same thing in post on my computer. They're both just electronic crops. I end up with a lot more information that way, and who knows, if I'm going to crop anyway, maybe there's a better composition hidden in the full frame image that I didn't see when I made the shot? Much easier to remove content than to add it.  
    • Hi all, For about the last 1.5 years I've been using the Sony a7CR combined with the 24-50mm f2.8 G lens as one of the lenses that basically lives on my camera. Besides this I have the following lenses as well: Sony 16-25mm f2.8 G Sony 14mm f1.8 GM Sony 40mm f2.5 G Sigma 85mm f1.4 On my last travel I took the above mentioned lenses with me + the 24-50 G. Would have most likely taken the Sony 14mm f1.8 GM but I didn't own this yet at the time. For my next travel I do want to take this as well so then my setup would look like: Sony 24-50mm f2.8 G Sony 16-25mm f2.8 G Sony 40mm f2.5 G Sigma 85mm f1.4 Sony 14mm f1.8 GM At this point I feel like I'm kinda reaching a bit of a limit in terms of lenses I want to take with me during travel, especially the 85mm. I wish to use it more but noticed I often left it at the hotel/apartment room I was staying at. Initially I bought the a7CR for weight savings but as time has passed I do feel certain limits with the setup especially during travel/landscape (as this is my main form of photography). And that's mainly coming from the amount of lenses I'm taking. I have been considering to trade in the 24-50 G lens to the 24-70 GMII to use on my a7CR but after using my Sigma 85mm f1.4 for an extended time on my a7CR it does feel uncomfortable to use due to the front heavy nature of the setup. The 24-70 GMII would be about the same weight as the Sigma. One option would be to use the extended grip on my a7CR, this certainly makes handling a lot better of bigger lenses but I usually have my setup hanging from the Peak Design Capture Clip on my backpack and I'm not sure if the extended grip really designed to take this much weight to be fair. Maybe anyone here has experience with this? So what this leads me to was the consideration to upgrade to the a7RV + Sony 24-70 GMII as there are some good trade in deals going on right now where I'm at. I'm not sure is this setup an absolute overkill for a hobbyist photographer... :) The benefits of this upgrade would be to have less need for changing lenses during travel and reduce the amount of separate lenses I have to take with me. The overall weight would however be approx. the same that goes in my backpack. Usually when I'm out for hikes I will currently only take the 16-25 & 24-50 with me. With this setup the reach feels limiting even with cropping the 50mm to 75mm (still approx. 26MP on the a7CR after crop). What I usually use my setup for: Landscape photography Travel Portrait Astrophotography I was wondering is there anyone here who went from a lighter a7CR (or similar) setup to a slightly heavier setup to carry around during hikes etc. Did you regret it or was the tradeoff worth it? As mentioned I do feel like my current setup is somewhat limiting and realized that switching lenses during travel is an absolute pain in the ass. But I'm not sure if the extra 450gr (about 1 lb) is worth the tradeoff. I know the decision is ultimately up to me but just like to hear your thoughts on this upgrade, and if the additional features & image quality in trade for weight would be worth it as well. TL;DR: Looking to upgrade my a7CR 24-50G f2.8 setup to a7RV with 24-70GMII f2.8 lens, not sure if it's worth it with the additional weight in trade for more versatility and better IQ. Thanks in advance for your replies!
    • I got one tuned up pretty well last year. I don’t remember exactly after doing a 77ii not too far apart that was different. The a68 was faster and more accurate but color profile was more work to tune btw. profile/style set to clear and highest sharpness allowed + micro focus adjustments per lens if I remember right. And any of these fall apart fast in low light or slow lenses. 
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...