Worries about the new 16-35f4 Zeiss

Started May 2, 2014 | Discussions thread
Flat view
dbm305 Senior Member • Posts: 1,741
Worries about the new 16-35f4 Zeiss

So after the announcement I had a look at the most comparable lens: the Nikon 16-35 f4.

Comparable because it's relatively recent, same specs, and includes IS.

I don't think being for mirrrorless can bring much reduction in bulk, because if you bring the rear elements too close to the sensor you run the risk of ray angle issues.

So: the Nikon is almost 700g.

It's also not that wonderful: never impressive at the long end, dubious corners at the short end.

Remind you of anything? FE 24-70?

Now I doubt that Sony will let this lens be 700g; they targeted a much lower weight for the 24-70.

Now i doubt that the Nikon is any worse than you could get given the cost parameters, and the size parameters.

So if Sony go for a smaller size/weight, then unless they break the laws of physics or Zeiss fairy dust has magical properties, it's likely even less optically good than the Nikon.

That doesn't mean it won't be useful for many people. But if I'm right I think that I for one will pass on it and wait for a zeiss prime in the 18-21 range. I'm very happy to accept some compromises for a standard zoom for the immense convenience; but zoom is less critical (for me) in a wide-angle, so only if it's optically terrific would I get one over a prime  (especially as given the range I'm likely taking my 14mm samyang with me anyway..._

 dbm305's gear list:dbm305's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Alpha a7R II Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Canon MP-E 65mm f/2.5 1-5x Macro +17 more
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow