Jump to content
JimmyD

Zeiss 16-70mm f/4 on the A6000

Recommended Posts

Nice! I'm very tempted to buy the 16-70mm to replace the kit lens (SEL1650PZ) How do you find it weight/size wise with the a6000?

 

I also have the Sony 35mm 1.8 prime and want a decent every day zoom, but with a little more reach than the kit lens. Not too bothered about telephoto.

 

What would be peoples views of this combination? Sony 35mm 1.8 and Zeiss 16-70mm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the A6000 last November along with the 16-50 kit lens. I quickly bought the 35mm and the 10-18mm to complement the kit lens in order to have a light system for city trips.

 

I never really was happy with the kit lens except for its size. That PZ zoom just wasn´t my thing. To be honest, the image quality was quite decent though. But I ended up running around with the 10-18mm lens as walkaround lens...

Just got the 16-70mm this week and it has a very different look and feel. Slightly longer than your 35mm (and the 10-18), but of the same build quality. A great upgrade.

 

Haven´t shot enough photos yet to compare image qualities, still waiting for better weather (and a trip to Bangkok...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 35mm is one of the best E mount lenses available.

 

I'd look at the 10-18mm and the 55-210, both of which are awesome lenses too.

I agree. A cheaper alternative would be the SEL16F28 plus the VCL ECU 1 converter, which is simply attached to the front of the SEL16F28.

 

I am satisfied with SEL35F18, SEL55210, SEL16F28+ VCL ECU 1. The VCL makes the 16 mm lense a 12 mm lense.

 

I shoot 95 % of the fotos with the SEL35F18. I don't miss the GAP between 35 and 55 mm, and also not between 35 and 16 mm.

 

f/4 of the Zeiss would not be enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. A cheaper alternative would be the SEL16F28 plus the VCL ECU 1 converter, which is simply attached to the front of the SEL16F28.

 

I am satisfied with SEL35F18, SEL55210, SEL16F28+ VCL ECU 1. The VCL makes the 16 mm lense a 12 mm lense.

 

I shoot 95 % of the fotos with the SEL35F18. I don't miss the GAP between 35 and 55 mm, and also not between 35 and 16 mm.

 

f/4 of the Zeiss would not be enough for me.

I have discounted the 16F2.8 mainly because it has got some very poor reviews.

I think the f/4 max on the Zeiss is the only thing holding me back, I love shooting shallow depth of field as well as night time, so it may not be fast enough for me.

 

I bought the A6000 last November along with the 16-50 kit lens. I quickly bought the 35mm and the 10-18mm to complement the kit lens in order to have a light system for city trips.

 

I never really was happy with the kit lens except for its size. That PZ zoom just wasn´t my thing. To be honest, the image quality was quite decent though. But I ended up running around with the 10-18mm lens as walkaround lens...

Just got the 16-70mm this week and it has a very different look and feel. Slightly longer than your 35mm (and the 10-18), but of the same build quality. A great upgrade.

 

Haven´t shot enough photos yet to compare image qualities, still waiting for better weather (and a trip to Bangkok...).

I have also been considering the 10-18. But I think 16mm is probably wide enough for me 99% of the time.

 

The 35mm is one of the best E mount lenses available.

 

I'd look at the 10-18mm and the 55-210, both of which are awesome lenses too.

10-18 maybe but I'm not really in the market for a telephoto, never really done much that requires a long reach. Plus I like to travel as light and with as less bulk as possible and the 55-210 is a bit long for my liking.

 

Thanks everyone for the comments.

 

Anyone have experience with the Sigma lenses? I have just started researching the 19mm 2.8 and the other 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I have the Sigma 30mm 2.8.

 

http://kurtmunger.com/sigma_nex_30mm_f_2_8id327.html

 

It is a very small lens, a little bigger than the Sony 16mm.  Matt black and as such, very stealth.  Equivalent to almost 50mm. Results that I have are excellent.  Not as good as the Zeiss 24mm, but for the price it is a great deal.

 

I also have the 16mm with both adapters.   The 16mm lens is ok. I thought it was pretty good, until I saw my 10-18mm results. The 10-18 has better everything in terms of image quality, buy a long long way.  I keep my 16mm for the fisheye applications.

 

The 55-210 is very underated.

 

However if tele is not required, why not get the Zeiss 24mm?  It is brilliant, without peer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I have just ordered the 16-70 Zeiss. The range of 16-50 kit lens was all I really needed really, but wanted something with much better quality.

I like having the zoom as its versatile. This along with my 35mm 1.8 will serve me well I'm sure for the time being.

 

Thanks for all your comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the test from Photozone, here my findings for the lens.

 

I have the lens on the NEX-7, which I bought 3 years ago. It is a good lens for me, only because there is nothing else. I always crop and don't mind the corners. Photozone described it exactly right.

 

I bought the 24mp Sony NEX-7 to replace my 4 year old 12mp Nikon D300, worst € 3000.- decision I ever made, spending on a camera with lenses. The sigma 30mm f/2.8 and this 16-70mm f/4 must do the job. I'am waiting now 3 years for APS-C e-mount quality lenses, don't think Sony spend money in this anymore, pity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to the test from Photozone, here my findings for the lens.

 

I have the lens on the NEX-7, which I bought 3 years ago. It is a good lens for me, only because there is nothing else. I always crop and don't mind the corners. Photozone described it exactly right.

 

I bought the 24mp Sony NEX-7 to replace my 4 year old 12mp Nikon D300, worst € 3000.- decision I ever made, spending on a camera with lenses. The sigma 30mm f/2.8 and this 16-70mm f/4 must do the job. I'am waiting now 3 years for APS-C e-mount quality lenses, don't think Sony spend money in this anymore, pity.

I was not happy with Photozone's claims about the NEX-7 but I have to admit that he was correct and I was very wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are quality e mount APS-C lenses.  The Zeiss 24/1.8 is awesome. The 50/1.8 and 35/1.8 are also excellent.  The 50mm out performs many other 50mm lenses out there, including some full frame equivalents.  The 55-210 is also excellent and produces super results wide open.

 

To say that Sony has not produced any quality E-mount APS-C lenses is untrue.  All of the E-mount lenses that I have from Sony have excellent build quality.  They are small and light and almost all of them have OSS.  Even the 18-55 kit lens is excellent when compared to other 'kit' lenses from Canon and Nikon. Most kit or starter lenses are plastic and a little on the cheap side.  They still work, which is the important thing.  However the e-mount 18-55 is mostly metal, not plastic.

 

Perhaps instead of saying that there is a lack of 'quality', perhaps people should be listing things that they want.  For example the 55-210 is rather slow.  Maybe people want a F/2.8 zoom.

 

People often forget that anyone can use the LA-EA2/4 adapter for the Amount lenses.  Both Minolta and Sony A mounts work great with the adapter.

 

People also forget that to make a fast lens, it becomes a lot larger and heavier.  Continuing with my 55-210 example from above, it is slow, but to make it a constant 2.8 zoom would make it much heavier. The zoom is slow, but very light.  I have travelled many places with several E mount lenses and not had to worry about the weight.

 

I don't consider Sony e-mount lenses to be poor quality.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a recent test on Photozone where the 16-70 does not get a good verdict. Maybe this depends on the one I have and they had, maybe they look at it from the theoretical point of view. I know, that this lens (like any other zoom lens) is not perfect in the corners and over the entire focal range. But I think this is a good zoom lens. I loaded some pics to flickr which I shot with this lens on NEX-7 and A6000 over the last 2 or 3 years: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127457523@N05/sets/72157649339868244

Maybe you find the pics helpful to judge on the quality of the lens. Yes, it could be better at the very long end and around 24 mm, but there is no alternative to this lens with fixed aperture and this focal range.

 

Oh, and yes: The 35/1.8 is a brilliant lens - same is the 10-18!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photozone tested the lens in the lab, nobody takes photo's like that, but it gives us numbers.

 

I did studio fotoshoots with the Zeiss 24mm f/1.8, not really a studio lens, but you can get great photo's out of it, because in the studio I create lab conditions. The problem comes when you shoot in dark and bad light conditions even this lens can't do the job, but that is more to the NEX-7, which gives very bad noise. This is what it is all about for me, outside the studio I make photo's 99% NOT in lab conditions, That is why I always prefer real life tests.

 

I compared the camera (NEX-7, the only one I have from Sony) and the lenses with photo's from my Nikon D300, where the 5 years newer NEX-7 with the 24mp (D300 has 12mp) should be better. Till 800 ISO with the Zeiss 16-70mm f/4 or the Sigma 30mm f/1.8 (I love primes) it is a good combination, but most of the time I need more. So it is my way of shooting, why I need something else, FF of course :)

 

In the daytime with enough light, the NEX-7 with the 16-70mm f/4 is my (too expensive) walk around combo and have a lot of fun with it.

 

When you do landscapes, setup long exposures nightshots, have time to compose your shots and so on, the NEX-7 is great stuff (A6000 even better I think). There are so many things that you can do with those camera's and it is still the photographer who makes the photo.

 

It is not fair to compare it with my D600 or D800 FF camera's and lenses, same as you should compare it with Sony FF camera's of course, so I don't do that.

 

Note, I only shoot in RAW and do PP in Lightroom and Photoshop, nobody mentioned if they shoot RAW or JPG in this thread, but it is also very important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed the Nex-7 'high' ISO noise is a bit of a problem to work around. I still love my Nex-7 though.

 

Photozone seem to be very negative about many lenses.  I agree with Ton, lab tests are not that useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't say lab tests are not that useful.

 

Labtest are useful, because all lenses get the same tests, therefor it is a way to compare.

I prefer tests with the lens on a specific camera as DxO does, then you have some direction.

In both cases there are still no photo's and that is what it's all about.

 

For my - kind - of photography I want real life tests, even better when I can do them myself ;) .

Therefor mostly I rent a lens for a couple of days (different light) to see if I really want it.

I did not with the 16-70mm f/4, but I think I would buy it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice, what confirms the capabilities of the lens. Some questions, you shoot these RAW or JPG, did you do PP, what settings ISO, aparture, shutter speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a recent test on Photozone where the 16-70 does not get a good verdict. Maybe this depends on the one I have and they had, maybe they look at it from the theoretical point of view. I know, that this lens (like any other zoom lens) is not perfect in the corners and over the entire focal range. But I think this is a good zoom lens. I loaded some pics to flickr which I shot with this lens on NEX-7 and A6000 over the last 2 or 3 years: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127457523@N05/sets/72157649339868244

Maybe you find the pics helpful to judge on the quality of the lens. Yes, it could be better at the very long end and around 24 mm, but there is no alternative to this lens with fixed aperture and this focal range.

 

How about the Sony 18-105mm f/4 , that's an alternative

 

Oh, and yes: The 35/1.8 is a brilliant lens - same is the 10-18!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first trip I did with the A6000 kit instead of my A77II (or A850) backpack.

 

Great gear for travelling light, I brought the A6000 along with the SEL1670Z, SEL1018 and SEL35f18.

 

Quite liked the Zeiss 16-70mm, here one photo taken with that lens.

 

17127961110_b506a1b296_c.jpg

 

Sathon South Road Bridge, Sky Train and the busy Chao Phraya River, Bangkok.

 

Sony A6000 & SEL16-70mm CZ at 24mm, f/8, 10s, ISO-100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some beautiful images here, although I know that many of them had some processing help. Still, you have to start with something good to get something really good out of it. I originally bought the 16-70 with my a6000, but I returned it. It seemed a nice lens with decent image quality, but I just did not feel it was worth the $998 I paid for it. I started looking for a used copy, and I am seeing new ones for $700 coming out of Asia. It seems Sony is raking in big profits here in the States due to the currency situation. I am going to make sure that there are service shops here in the States that can repair the lens if need be. If there are I am going to buy one from Asia because I think that price really reflects the value of the lens. After returning the 16-70 I found a used 24mm f1.8 for a very good price, and I can tell you that the 24mm is definitely worth the price. I hope to re-acquire the 16-70 very soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to forum and sony. 

I currently have a full frame canon but want to get an additional smaller travel camera. Thinking about getting A6100 or equivalent and would like to know the lenses better. 

What would be the equivalent to 16-35mm f2.8L?

Best most used lens for the A6000?

 

Thanks for your help!

 

Share this post


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

  • Similar Content

    • By Frestovski
      Decided to present you some footage of our last trip in Spain (San Sebastian - Bilbao - Mallorca - Valencia)
      Filmed with Sony A6000; Zhiyun CraneM; Dji Mavic Air
      Thanks for watching!
    • By GIB39
      Hi 
       
      I have the a6000 and a Nikon dslr. On my Nikon I can programme a button to allow me to toggle between aperture and shutter speed to allow me then to alter either setting with the control wheel. Can this be done with the a6000 instead of using the dial switch on the rear, this is a bit fiddly for me? 
       
      Thanks
    • By sonyatlanta
      Howdy - Question, I have a Sony a5000, 5300 and 6000 (e mount) and I'm looking for an adapter for the Sony e mount so I'm able to use my Nikon 1 Nikkor Lens (Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 and Nikon 1 Nikkor 11 - 27.5mm). I believe the Nikon's are G mount lens and I've read multiple articles with different suggestions. Any and all help would be much appreciated. And I'm looking to keep it a low cost as possible. Appreciate it! 
      Cheers, Btlyle (@sonyatlanta)
    • By zahtar
      Hello


       
      I am shooting with an a6000 and have a question regarding face detection.


       
      I am shooting a group of people and the camera detects 3-4 faces, without face registration. Is there a way to toggle between the detected faces? For example I don’t want to focus on the person at the far left, I want to change focus to the person in the middle.


       
      I am asking for a direct way, not a workaround, just a quick and easy way. So that means no face registration either.


       
      Thanks in advance


       
      PS: I am currently doing workarounds like recompose, lock-on AF etc, looking for something more efficient

    • By JWTPhoto
      Hi all,

      This is my first post here, but why not introduce myself first? Relatively new Sony user. Have an A6000 with the 16-50 and 55-210 kit lenses. I mostly shoot wide landscape, but am venturing into portraiture and I take the occasional wildlife/tighter landscape shot... So, looking for a trio of lenses.
      I'm thinking a prime and two zooms, or just three primes. Not sure. I like the flexibility of the zoom but realize that primes tend to be sharper, which I like for my landscapes. Looking at the Rokinon 12mm F2 for UWA landscapes or the Sigma 16mm (which I've heard great things about). And then a 24-70, and then maybe a 70-200 for the zoomed-in shots. Not too sure.
      Any help and suggestions are greatly appreciated.

      Cheers!
      Jack.
×