Reading mode: Light Dark

Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 pricing

Go to last post
C

CM PHoto

Senior Member
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Chicago, IL, US
how much competitors charge for their lenses, however, once I posted on a Canon forum and I received multiple replies stating that sony's unstabilized lenses cost more than competitors' stabilized ones of the same range, I doubt Sony will charge less than that of Canikon in that case.
 
High priced lenses seem to be a trademark for Sony, and may wind up costing them market share.

--

'A man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of the time he will pick himself up and continue on.'
Winston Churchill
 
Cope said:
High priced lenses seem to be a trademark for Sony, and may wind up
costing them market share.
Click to expand...
It already HAS hurt their market share considerably, I would think.
I believe that there are many people out there who might have
been really seriously looking at the Sony A100 who, when they looked
at the prices of the high end, simply bought a Sigma or Tamron, or
just turned their back on Sony. Or, they bought a totally different
system.

--
Gil
Sardis, BC
Canada
 
CM PHoto said:
I know that some feel this lens should be announced at $1200, because
that is what the currently available mature competitors are at.

Just by way of comparison, the new Zoom Nikkor 24-70mm f2.8G
(available in November) is supposed to list at $1700-$1800.

What will Sony's initial price be for the similarly spec'd lens?
Click to expand...
I almost choked on my coffee when I saw the sticker on the Nikon 24-70/2.8.

It does have AF-S (SSM) though and the older 28-70/2.8 was about $1200.

Looking at the MTF data, this new one is also much sharper and those 4mm increase the difficulty of production. Still an incredible amount of dosh to shell out for a lens in that range though.

My lens Cost Perception Index

up to $250 > > Cheap as Chips
$250 to $500 > > OK
$500 to $1,000 > > Expensive
$1,000 to $1,500 > > Ultra Expensive
$1,500 to $2,000 > > in the stratosphere

--
http://dakanji.com
 
I think the substandard (slow AF, mediocre min. focus distance) old Minolta G 28-70 f/2.8 cost an arm and a leg, the new large aperture standard zoom will be even more expensive I'm sure.

The Tamron based 28-70 f/2.8 makes the things a bit better in Minolta days but not great.
 
I did a random test on A100 photographs on pbase that specify the lens used. I just picked the first ten which is not a very big sample and the numbers were

Tamron 4
Sony 3
Minolta/KM 2
Sigma 1

A lot of the unspecified lenses were probably the two kit lenses as well but it is surprising that quite a few A100 users have the more expensive Sony lenses.

--
dhaslam
http://www.pbase.com/dhaslam/galleries
 
In my opinion a 24-70 lens is useless. On FF 70mm is too short. On aps-c 24mm is not wide enough.

OK its F2.8 but I do not consider that a fast lens in this day and age.

Build something more innovative Sony (or Zeiss), please.

Dave
 
It is going to cost a lot of $ that's for sure. The new Nikon is probably going to be on par with the CZ so I would expect similar pricing. If the Sony doesn't have SSM it had better be cheaper than the Nikon IMO.

--
fjbyrne
 
The only faster zooms are the Olympus F2.0 ones - but - those are focusing their light onto about half the area of an APS-C sensor.

That's the only reason that Olympus was able to make them "so bright".

In addition, because the 4/3rds sensor is so small, F2.0 gives you about the same depth-of-field as F2.8 does for APS-C. Whatever Olympus fans say, their cameras also produce a tad more high ISO noise too.

Is that really worth it to you?
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://www.flickr.com/photos/two_truths/
http://two-truths.deviantart.com/gallery/
 
Two Truths said:
The only faster zooms are the Olympus F2.0 ones - but - those are
focusing their light onto about half the area of an APS-C sensor.

That's the only reason that Olympus was able to make them "so bright".

In addition, because the 4/3rds sensor is so small, F2.0 gives you
about the same depth-of-field as F2.8 does for APS-C. Whatever
Olympus fans say, their cameras also produce a tad more high ISO
noise too.

Is that really worth it to you?
--
Click to expand...
Where did I say I wanted an F2 zoom lens?

I just said F2.8 is not that fast. If you want to imply anything from that statement it should be why bother with F2.8 if you have to offer a restricted zoom range.

It is the 24-70mm I find useless but I am assuming it is this range because it is an F2.8 lens.

Dave
 
Well it's going to a long while yet before anyone develops anything much better... I suspect that in a year or two we might begin to see 20-70mm or even 20-75mm lenses.

I presume that it is either infeasible or impractical to produce the fine optical quality expected of a pro lens, over a greater focal range, e.g. the lens would become impossibly bulky.

Since the 24-70mm F2.8 is most likely going to be the lens described by Sony as the "Large aperture standard zoom", the "Large aperture wide angle zoom" should be interesting too. Maybe something like Nikon's 12-24mm F2.8?

--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://www.flickr.com/photos/two_truths/
http://two-truths.deviantart.com/gallery/
 
It being a ZA is not known. Early rumors said yes. But from PMA it looked more to be a G, which would make far more sense. It has the "new black" as it was being put forth by one sony rep of the new non-white Gs, and was different color from the clearly ZA primes.

Also KM canned their 28-70 G SSM a few years back before it hit stores. They probably went back to make it a 24mm on the wide end after hearing folks react to it.

It and the wide angle zoom are probably both G lenses, to replace the Old Gs, and continued the G line of lenses which KM was working on re-doing. The 17-35 and 28-70 had been discontinued long before Sony, and some folks had word of a new 400, and 600 being worked on, plus the 35G which never made it out under KM, just announced. So things point to it being a G.

Anyways. I'd expect it to be priced similar to the Nikon. Now people will actually see what a Sony lens price looks like compared to an equally new Nikon/Canon lens. We will get the similar test when sony gets that 2.8/400 G out, since Nikon launched a new one of those. Granted the VR vs SSS deal will come up.

People keep looking at new sony to old canon, nikon. Now things will change. It doesn't matter if Minolta made the lens too, it's still new, since it's new for sony, under the sony brand. Plus there may be some behind the scenes deal with the white lenses that cause the prices to be higher, like KM still owning the plant and making them for Sony, thus they get a cut too.

I personally hope to see it come in the same price or even less than the nikon. So then maybe this endless complaining about sony lens prices can end. The more that happens to get people done with complaining and moving on to actual discussion the better.
 
Did Zeiss ever make any ssm/usm zoom? Any lens sony makes with a blue zeiss sticker is going to give us $ticker $hock.

as far as the km 28-70g - it had its drawbacks - weight, slow af (but very accurate), a min focus distance of 850mm - but boy that lens was a beauty in form and function! i just sold mine for just over $900 - when i originally bought it in 2005 it was for $640 brand new at ritz. sold it before sony puts out a replacement and looses its value and bought the cz 16-80.

the 16-80 renders very high quality sharp results and is far more practical range than a 24-70 especially considering that we don't know how far is the ff from arriving for a fact and definitely is bound to have a prohibitive prize.
--
dancph
 
The Contax N lenses made by Zeiss were SSM/USM type lenses. Those are the only other AF SLR lenses they have made.

They are crazy expensive. They only ever made about 8 models too. Canon users buy them, and now an individual has actually reverse engineered the EOS and N protocols and created a modification to have them work on EOS bodies.

A very very expensive option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top