Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss

Started 7 months ago | Questions
jasby
Regular MemberPosts: 197Gear list
Like?
Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
7 months ago

I have just invested AU$1000 in a Sony 16-70mm f4 Zeiss, because I wanted the wider end and the longer end for a general travel camera that would also give me better IQ (Europe for 5 weeks in early June), leaving the 55-210mm at home. Thought I might sell the kit lens if I was happy with the Zeiss. Just did the brick wall test with both, and I would like your comments please.

I used a tripod and remote shutter release, used 24mm and 35mm focal lengths. therefore two from each lens. Tried to upload full size but was told the file was too big. Strange, because each file was only 11mb and longest side 6000 pix, but I have not done much uploading before so am confused.

First two from the Zeiss 23mm then 34mm

Second two from the Kit 24mm then 35mm

All at f8 and ISO 100

I am either very impressed with the black kit lens OR not very impressed with the Zeiss.

I would appreciate comments from those who know these two lenses, but do not want to hear from those who just want to trash the Zeiss.

Thanks,  John

ZEISS......8514...23mm  at f8  ISO100

ZEISS.....8516....34mm  at f8     ISO 100

18-55 KIT.....8521......24mm  at f8   ISO100

18-55 KIT....8523.....35mm  atf8   ISO 100

 jasby's gear list:jasby's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
ANSWER:
Dawson53
Regular MemberPosts: 143
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

I've been thinking Zeiss 17-70/4 must be much better than Kit lens for APS-C... I am very impressed with the kit lens too. Nice comparison. Have a nice trip in Europe.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jasby
Regular MemberPosts: 197Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

Sorry ........heading should say 16-70 Zeiss NOT 17-70 Zeiss.....thought I should say it before someone pointed it out before me !!!

 jasby's gear list:jasby's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Donny out of Element here
Contributing MemberPosts: 732Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

As far as I can see in this test your 18-55mm is sharper across the image, BUT especially so in corners. Please, notice your right edge and corners of 16-70 in both shots are noticeably softer than left edge/corners and MUCH softer when you compare them side by side with 18-55. I think your copy of 16-70 is decentered a bit? What was the distance from camera setup to wall? Not that it matters, since if one lens performed good, than other one should at least do as well.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Biu
Biu
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,229
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

Those samples showed better contrast, typical of Zeiss.  I believe that the difference in clarity would be even greater when used on people.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Donny out of Element here
Contributing MemberPosts: 732Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to Biu, 7 months ago

Biu wrote:

Those samples showed better contrast, typical of Zeiss. I believe that the difference in clarity would be even greater when used on people.

I tend to disagree here. Zeiss shows warmer colors due to its T* coating and premium (hopefully) glass used in lens, BUT in this case 18-55 shows better contrast. It's easy to get carried away and mix warmer colors with better contrast. If you look at 100% magnification 18-55 resolved details more and some scratches (in shadow groves) are visible only on 18-55 pics - better contrast. I think either this copy of 16-70 is a little off or his 18-55 is too good.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jasby
Regular MemberPosts: 197Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to Donny out of Element here, 7 months ago

Donny out of Element here wrote:

As far as I can see in this test your 18-55mm is sharper across the image, BUT especially so in corners. Please, notice your right edge and corners of 16-70 in both shots are noticeably softer than left edge/corners and MUCH softer when you compare them side by side with 18-55. I think your copy of 16-70 is decentered a bit? What was the distance from camera setup to wall? Not that it matters, since if one lens performed good, than other one should at least do as well.

I also felt that the right side was noticeably softer in the Zeiss shots, meaning that it is slightly decentered. I am not able to return the lens for another....must send to Sony under warranty, even though I have only had it for two weeks. camera stores in Australia don't take returns in my experience.

John

 jasby's gear list:jasby's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ray Maines
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,306Gear list
Like?
I'm Just Guessing, But...
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

jasby wrote:

I have just invested AU$1000 in a Sony 16-70mm f4 Zeiss, because I wanted the wider end and the longer end for a general travel camera that would also give me better IQ (Europe for 5 weeks in early June), .... Just did the brick wall test with both, and I would like your comments please.

I'll bet all of the photo's are JPG's. If so, they all benifit from in-camera software correction.

My experience is that the PZ 16-50 really isn't that bad of a lens. From 16 to about 30, maybe 35 mm it's pretty hard to see the difference between the two lenses. From 35 up to 50 the Ziess starts to shine.

No doubt in my mind the Zeiss is the better lens, but the small, lightweight PZ lens is pretty attractive as a vacation tool.

EDIT: Ooops. I didn't catch you were talking about the 18-55 mm lens, not the 16-50 PZ. Never mind.

-- hide signature --

Buy books, not gear.
Tacoma, Washington, USA

 Ray Maines's gear list:Ray Maines's gear list
Sony SLT-A77 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Sony DT 16-80mm F3.5-4.5 ZA Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MaxNex
Forum MemberPosts: 61Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

The Kit lens looks sharper and overall more consistent to me, especially in the corners. The Zeiss is softer on the right side, just like the one I returned. After seeing this, and confirming once again the QC problems and the overall feeling of "not much better than kit" of the 16-70, I will not reorder one, but stick with the 16-50 for now.

Thanks for posting this.

 MaxNex's gear list:MaxNex's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Spike6
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to MaxNex, 7 months ago

It looks to me that the centre point varies from shot to shot which means that either you moved the tripod slightly between shots or accidently changed the camera angle.  I doubt that the camera is truly parallel to the wall in any of the shots which means that focus distance will vary across the frame.  I don't think that this is a test that can really be done at home.  It requires you to maintain extremely small tolerances in the camera position across all shots.  Any apparent variability between one side to the other is likely to be due to the camera not being fully parallel to the wall.    Also focus is critical here, to be objective you would need to repeat this test many times, focusing precisely on the exactly same point each time with identical lighting conditions and then select the best shots to ensure that you hadn't inadvertently missed the focus.

In any case both of these lenses would be expected to produce similar results at f8.  Check out test results for any reasonable quality zoom lens from any of the major manufacturers and you will see that they will largely produce similar sharpness at f8.  You mostly see significant differences wide open.  To me this test, like pretty well all the "tests" that have been posted by others, are somewhat pointless as you are comparing the situations where the two lenses are closest in performance.  I would be astounded if you saw significant differences at this aperture.

Try comparing them at 55mm + f4 then you will see the real differences i.e. the kit can't do it.  This is why you would buy the 1670Z - because it can do things that the kit can't not because the kit is a bad lens - it isn't.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 7,519Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

jasby wrote:

I have just invested AU$1000 in a Sony 16-70mm f4 Zeiss, because I wanted the wider end and the longer end for a general travel camera that would also give me better IQ (Europe for 5 weeks in early June), leaving the 55-210mm at home. Thought I might sell the kit lens if I was happy with the Zeiss. Just did the brick wall test with both, and I would like your comments please.

I used a tripod and remote shutter release, used 24mm and 35mm focal lengths. therefore two from each lens. Tried to upload full size but was told the file was too big. Strange, because each file was only 11mb and longest side 6000 pix, but I have not done much uploading before so am confused.

First two from the Zeiss 23mm then 34mm

Second two from the Kit 24mm then 35mm

All at f8 and ISO 100

I am either very impressed with the black kit lens OR not very impressed with the Zeiss.

I would appreciate comments from those who know these two lenses, but do not want to hear from those who just want to trash the Zeiss.

Thanks, John

ZEISS......8514...23mm at f8 ISO100

ZEISS.....8516....34mm at f8 ISO 100

18-55 KIT.....8521......24mm at f8 ISO100

18-55 KIT....8523.....35mm atf8 ISO 100

Hi John,

brick wall tests are sometimes misleading because they tend to shorten the distance to the subject (the wall) versus what you would usually photograph in your field of view. In doing so, you are more subject to plane mis-alignment and DOF effects.

If you do a test like this, mount the camera on a tripod, and take a first shot. Then, flip the camera upside down and take another shot from the same position. It is important that the two shots use the same camera (sensor) plane. Remember to turn OSS off when using a tripod.

If the edge softness moves from left to right, it is a lens property. But if it stays at the same side, regardless of camera orientation, it is merely an effect of FOV, alignment and DOF. Nothing to worry about in the latter case.

Also take multiple shots - especially if handheld. In 'precision' experiments, simple breathing can affect the results, and thereby the interpretation thereof.

As to the kit versus Z zoom lens comparo, you are comparing at f/8. At this aperture, I would expect that any differences between the lenses become minute, and whatever differences remain can be erased in post-edit. If you shoot JPG, this kind of does some of the post-edits steps in camera. So, remember that you are comparing lenses + software applied, and not just the lens.

That is, the Z lens may be a better optical lens, and require less software corrections that the kit lens, but after corrections, the results are very close. Only in textures with extreme fine detail you may be able to see the effect of software compensation - most of the time this is very hard to find.

The Z lens does have a constant f/4, it does have slightly different coating (warmer), it does have slightly improved micro-contrast, and it goes wider and longer. Plus it is made with more expensive materials. All this, aside from its internals (more expensive glass, larger glass, etc), amounts to a more expensive product.

You get what you pay for.

The test shots as taken may be misleading. But they are telling that the distance between the kit and Z zoom lenses is fairly narrow when stopped down. Wide open, the Z will perform a tad better, but wide open I'd always argue that you should consider a prime lens.

Another way to get a 'feel' for a lens is to just take it out an afternoon and shoot solely with this lens. Then come home and inspect the results. How do these compare with another lens? Do you see the same sharpness, color, micro-contrast, and so on. Some lenses will fit your style better than others, and when you find a lens that aligns itself with you, you'll immediately will notice this in the results.

I am shooting the A7 with the kit zoom lens and am satisfied with the images. I posted a while ago the kit zoom against some high IQ prime lenses in this thread, and, if you visit the thread, you can see that the distance between the prime lens and zoom lens is noticeable.

But it doesn't bother me - the kit zoom lens images are rather pleasing, and the zoom is convenient at times.

As to choosing between 1855 or 1670, I already listed above what the 1670 adds over and above the 1855. If the lens works for you, it also adds confidence and surefooted-ness which will show in your final result.

Some feel that f/4 is usable with these new cameras at ISO 3200 or higher, when going indoors.

I find that using a prime at f/2 at ISO 800 yields a much more pleasing image. To me, this is the biggest difference between the zoom and prime.

But, if you compare the 1670 at f/4 versus the 1855 at f/5.6, the 1855 would have to be at ISO 6400 to keep up, and that is really pushing it.

This implies that the 1670 is more useable, and for some that may be good enough. Personally, I would carry a prime or a flash.

And in the latter case, the 1855 would satisfy me plenty. I would never have to use it wide open, I figure, and thereby nullify some of the benefits of the 1670.

Hope it helps - in the end it is a personal decision, and only you know what works best for you.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +34 more
selected answer This post was selected as the answer by the original poster.
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cxsparc
Senior MemberPosts: 1,503
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to blue_skies, 7 months ago

I agree with Henry that brick walls may be popular but actually less useful for lens tests.
I also find it hard to find meaningful detail as well as representative colors in bricks 😉.

Therefore I shoot a very long building with lots of minute details from a distance of approximately 25 m. This is also more realistic of landscape shots. My experience with 1670 versus 1855 is different, but then I checked my lenses according to Cicalas recommendation with the Siemens star against misalignment and all seem to be fine.

You might take a look at my crops and observations re these lenses whether they match, as on my blog. At f8 all zooms are good, the difference is below that. I am seriously thinking about keeping the 1650pz as lightweight lens for bike rides in good light, in addition to the 1670.

I'd recommend you to do the Cicala test first, and if that doesn't indicate problems, to redo your lens test with more distance on a building.
--
Nex-Blog: http://luxorphotoart.blogspot.de/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
forpetessake
Senior MemberPosts: 3,894
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

Nothing surprising, really. Every test so far showed that both lenses are in the same ballpark when it comes to the image quality, and that Sony lenses are frequently decentered. That said, those people who buy 16-70 for the extra range and extra stop at the long end won't be disappointed. I think the discrepancy in pricing is setting people up for unwarranted expectations and a resulting disappointment.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
captura
Forum ProPosts: 15,728Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

Until we get some definitive tests from DxOMark, or whoever, the 16-70 remains somewhat of an unknown quantity. I recommend the FE 28-70 as being superior to the kit 18-55. I own both.

 captura's gear list:captura's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Samsung NX1000 NEX5R Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jasby
Regular MemberPosts: 197Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to Spike6, 7 months ago

Spike6 wrote:

It looks to me that the centre point varies from shot to shot which means that either you moved the tripod slightly between shots or accidently changed the camera angle. I doubt that the camera is truly parallel to the wall in any of the shots which means that focus distance will vary across the frame. I don't think that this is a test that can really be done at home. It requires you to maintain extremely small tolerances in the camera position across all shots. Any apparent variability between one side to the other is likely to be due to the camera not being fully parallel to the wall. Also focus is critical here, to be objective you would need to repeat this test many times, focusing precisely on the exactly same point each time with identical lighting conditions and then select the best shots to ensure that you hadn't inadvertently missed the focus.

In any case both of these lenses would be expected to produce similar results at f8. Check out test results for any reasonable quality zoom lens from any of the major manufacturers and you will see that they will largely produce similar sharpness at f8. You mostly see significant differences wide open. To me this test, like pretty well all the "tests" that have been posted by others, are somewhat pointless as you are comparing the situations where the two lenses are closest in performance. I would be astounded if you saw significant differences at this aperture.

Try comparing them at 55mm + f4 then you will see the real differences i.e. the kit can't do it. This is why you would buy the 1670Z - because it can do things that the kit can't not because the kit is a bad lens - it isn't.

Thanks Spike6, that was very helpful and very true. I will just take pictures with the 16-70 and enjoy it.

Regards, John

 jasby's gear list:jasby's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jasby
Regular MemberPosts: 197Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to blue_skies, 7 months ago

blue_skies wrote:

jasby wrote:

I have just invested AU$1000 in a Sony 16-70mm f4 Zeiss, because I wanted the wider end and the longer end for a general travel camera that would also give me better IQ (Europe for 5 weeks in early June), leaving the 55-210mm at home. Thought I might sell the kit lens if I was happy with the Zeiss. Just did the brick wall test with both, and I would like your comments please.

I used a tripod and remote shutter release, used 24mm and 35mm focal lengths. therefore two from each lens. Tried to upload full size but was told the file was too big. Strange, because each file was only 11mb and longest side 6000 pix, but I have not done much uploading before so am confused.

First two from the Zeiss 23mm then 34mm

Second two from the Kit 24mm then 35mm

All at f8 and ISO 100

I am either very impressed with the black kit lens OR not very impressed with the Zeiss.

I would appreciate comments from those who know these two lenses, but do not want to hear from those who just want to trash the Zeiss.

Thanks, John

ZEISS......8514...23mm at f8 ISO100

ZEISS.....8516....34mm at f8 ISO 100

18-55 KIT.....8521......24mm at f8 ISO100

18-55 KIT....8523.....35mm atf8 ISO 100

Hi John,

brick wall tests are sometimes misleading because they tend to shorten the distance to the subject (the wall) versus what you would usually photograph in your field of view. In doing so, you are more subject to plane mis-alignment and DOF effects.

If you do a test like this, mount the camera on a tripod, and take a first shot. Then, flip the camera upside down and take another shot from the same position. It is important that the two shots use the same camera (sensor) plane. Remember to turn OSS off when using a tripod.

If the edge softness moves from left to right, it is a lens property. But if it stays at the same side, regardless of camera orientation, it is merely an effect of FOV, alignment and DOF. Nothing to worry about in the latter case.

Also take multiple shots - especially if handheld. In 'precision' experiments, simple breathing can affect the results, and thereby the interpretation thereof.

As to the kit versus Z zoom lens comparo, you are comparing at f/8. At this aperture, I would expect that any differences between the lenses become minute, and whatever differences remain can be erased in post-edit. If you shoot JPG, this kind of does some of the post-edits steps in camera. So, remember that you are comparing lenses + software applied, and not just the lens.

That is, the Z lens may be a better optical lens, and require less software corrections that the kit lens, but after corrections, the results are very close. Only in textures with extreme fine detail you may be able to see the effect of software compensation - most of the time this is very hard to find.

The Z lens does have a constant f/4, it does have slightly different coating (warmer), it does have slightly improved micro-contrast, and it goes wider and longer. Plus it is made with more expensive materials. All this, aside from its internals (more expensive glass, larger glass, etc), amounts to a more expensive product.

You get what you pay for.

The test shots as taken may be misleading. But they are telling that the distance between the kit and Z zoom lenses is fairly narrow when stopped down. Wide open, the Z will perform a tad better, but wide open I'd always argue that you should consider a prime lens.

Another way to get a 'feel' for a lens is to just take it out an afternoon and shoot solely with this lens. Then come home and inspect the results. How do these compare with another lens? Do you see the same sharpness, color, micro-contrast, and so on. Some lenses will fit your style better than others, and when you find a lens that aligns itself with you, you'll immediately will notice this in the results.

I am shooting the A7 with the kit zoom lens and am satisfied with the images. I posted a while ago the kit zoom against some high IQ prime lenses in this thread, and, if you visit the thread, you can see that the distance between the prime lens and zoom lens is noticeable.

But it doesn't bother me - the kit zoom lens images are rather pleasing, and the zoom is convenient at times.

As to choosing between 1855 or 1670, I already listed above what the 1670 adds over and above the 1855. If the lens works for you, it also adds confidence and surefooted-ness which will show in your final result.

Some feel that f/4 is usable with these new cameras at ISO 3200 or higher, when going indoors.

I find that using a prime at f/2 at ISO 800 yields a much more pleasing image. To me, this is the biggest difference between the zoom and prime.

But, if you compare the 1670 at f/4 versus the 1855 at f/5.6, the 1855 would have to be at ISO 6400 to keep up, and that is really pushing it.

This implies that the 1670 is more useable, and for some that may be good enough. Personally, I would carry a prime or a flash.

And in the latter case, the 1855 would satisfy me plenty. I would never have to use it wide open, I figure, and thereby nullify some of the benefits of the 1670.

Hope it helps - in the end it is a personal decision, and only you know what works best for you.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

Thank you Henry for that very detailed response. I fully understand your comments and will forget about any other tests and just enjoy taking pictures with this wonderful lens. Thanks again, John

 jasby's gear list:jasby's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
gkstar
Regular MemberPosts: 287Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to captura, 7 months ago

captura wrote:

Until we get some definitive tests from DxOMark, or whoever, the 16-70 remains somewhat of an unknown quantity. I recommend the FE 28-70 as being superior to the kit 18-55. I own both.

Different ranges though - not really compearable. The 28mm FE would be narrow when on APS-C camera (well over 20mm+ APS-C equivalent vs 18mm), right?

 gkstar's gear list:gkstar's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony a6000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS LE Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PVCdroid
Senior MemberPosts: 2,173Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago

jasby wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

jasby wrote:

I have just invested AU$1000 in a Sony 16-70mm f4 Zeiss, because I wanted the wider end and the longer end for a general travel camera that would also give me better IQ (Europe for 5 weeks in early June), leaving the 55-210mm at home. Thought I might sell the kit lens if I was happy with the Zeiss. Just did the brick wall test with both, and I would like your comments please.

I used a tripod and remote shutter release, used 24mm and 35mm focal lengths. therefore two from each lens. Tried to upload full size but was told the file was too big. Strange, because each file was only 11mb and longest side 6000 pix, but I have not done much uploading before so am confused.

First two from the Zeiss 23mm then 34mm

Second two from the Kit 24mm then 35mm

All at f8 and ISO 100

I am either very impressed with the black kit lens OR not very impressed with the Zeiss.

I would appreciate comments from those who know these two lenses, but do not want to hear from those who just want to trash the Zeiss.

Thanks, John

ZEISS......8514...23mm at f8 ISO100

ZEISS.....8516....34mm at f8 ISO 100

18-55 KIT.....8521......24mm at f8 ISO100

18-55 KIT....8523.....35mm atf8 ISO 100

Hi John,

brick wall tests are sometimes misleading because they tend to shorten the distance to the subject (the wall) versus what you would usually photograph in your field of view. In doing so, you are more subject to plane mis-alignment and DOF effects.

If you do a test like this, mount the camera on a tripod, and take a first shot. Then, flip the camera upside down and take another shot from the same position. It is important that the two shots use the same camera (sensor) plane. Remember to turn OSS off when using a tripod.

If the edge softness moves from left to right, it is a lens property. But if it stays at the same side, regardless of camera orientation, it is merely an effect of FOV, alignment and DOF. Nothing to worry about in the latter case.

Also take multiple shots - especially if handheld. In 'precision' experiments, simple breathing can affect the results, and thereby the interpretation thereof.

As to the kit versus Z zoom lens comparo, you are comparing at f/8. At this aperture, I would expect that any differences between the lenses become minute, and whatever differences remain can be erased in post-edit. If you shoot JPG, this kind of does some of the post-edits steps in camera. So, remember that you are comparing lenses + software applied, and not just the lens.

That is, the Z lens may be a better optical lens, and require less software corrections that the kit lens, but after corrections, the results are very close. Only in textures with extreme fine detail you may be able to see the effect of software compensation - most of the time this is very hard to find.

The Z lens does have a constant f/4, it does have slightly different coating (warmer), it does have slightly improved micro-contrast, and it goes wider and longer. Plus it is made with more expensive materials. All this, aside from its internals (more expensive glass, larger glass, etc), amounts to a more expensive product.

You get what you pay for.

The test shots as taken may be misleading. But they are telling that the distance between the kit and Z zoom lenses is fairly narrow when stopped down. Wide open, the Z will perform a tad better, but wide open I'd always argue that you should consider a prime lens.

Another way to get a 'feel' for a lens is to just take it out an afternoon and shoot solely with this lens. Then come home and inspect the results. How do these compare with another lens? Do you see the same sharpness, color, micro-contrast, and so on. Some lenses will fit your style better than others, and when you find a lens that aligns itself with you, you'll immediately will notice this in the results.

I am shooting the A7 with the kit zoom lens and am satisfied with the images. I posted a while ago the kit zoom against some high IQ prime lenses in this thread, and, if you visit the thread, you can see that the distance between the prime lens and zoom lens is noticeable.

But it doesn't bother me - the kit zoom lens images are rather pleasing, and the zoom is convenient at times.

As to choosing between 1855 or 1670, I already listed above what the 1670 adds over and above the 1855. If the lens works for you, it also adds confidence and surefooted-ness which will show in your final result.

Some feel that f/4 is usable with these new cameras at ISO 3200 or higher, when going indoors.

I find that using a prime at f/2 at ISO 800 yields a much more pleasing image. To me, this is the biggest difference between the zoom and prime.

But, if you compare the 1670 at f/4 versus the 1855 at f/5.6, the 1855 would have to be at ISO 6400 to keep up, and that is really pushing it.

This implies that the 1670 is more useable, and for some that may be good enough. Personally, I would carry a prime or a flash.

And in the latter case, the 1855 would satisfy me plenty. I would never have to use it wide open, I figure, and thereby nullify some of the benefits of the 1670.

Hope it helps - in the end it is a personal decision, and only you know what works best for you.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

Thank you Henry for that very detailed response. I fully understand your comments and will forget about any other tests and just enjoy taking pictures with this wonderful lens. Thanks again, John

Yes, Henry's observations are excellent. You really have to get out and shoot as you normally would and see if it is making a difference for you. If not, stick with what you believe in. The brick wall tests are generally going to disappoint a new lens owner, especially with a zoom. I personally have two 18-55 lenses but will only use them for video. I saw a dramatic improvement in my photography with the 16-70 compared to the 18-55. I've done the brick wall tests and didn't see a big difference but after a couple days of outdoor/indoor shooting, I could really see an improvement. I'll occasionally put the 18-55 back on and see if I'm missing something. I'm not.

 PVCdroid's gear list:PVCdroid's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Donny out of Element here
Contributing MemberPosts: 732Gear list
Like?
Re: Comparison Sony 18-55 Kit lens and Sony 17-70/4 Zeiss
In reply to gkstar, 7 months ago

gkstar wrote:

captura wrote:

Until we get some definitive tests from DxOMark, or whoever, the 16-70 remains somewhat of an unknown quantity. I recommend the FE 28-70 as being superior to the kit 18-55. I own both.

Different ranges though - not really compearable. The 28mm FE would be narrow when on APS-C camera (well over 20mm+ APS-C equivalent vs 18mm), right?

Yes, FE28-70 will be exactly that on APS-C eg. 28-70. It is a good zoom though. If I had A7 my first choice would be FE28-70 over FE24-70.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jerry R
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,170
Like?
For brick walls stay with the kit lens.
In reply to jasby, 7 months ago
-- hide signature --

Canon A2E, Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R + Zeiss 24mm & 16-70 E Lenses, Nikon D5100 + 35mm, 85mm & Sigma 150mm lenses, Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads