Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN vs Sony 24-70mm F4.0 Zeiss

MadalinaB said:

I ordered on Amazon the Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN and the Sony 24-70mm F4.0 Zeiss in order to compare them on my a7c. I was convinced that I would prefer the Sigma but I actually ended up keeping the Zeiss because:

• with good light, the image quality is simmilar if not slightly sharper on the Zeiss
• in low light the Sigma performs only marginally better
• it has a wider 24mm end
• it's cheaper
• has better weather sealing

Click to expand...

Very good build quality, this lens is made to last and to stay collimated over time.

MadalinaB said:

I am extremely surprised about this, especially since I've read a lot of negative reviews about the Zeiss.

I'd like to know your th

Click to expand...

Bashing this lens is a popular activity.

MadalinaB said:

oughts about these 2 lenses and if you had the chance to compare them. Am I doing a mistake keeping the Zeiss?

Click to expand...

Had the Zeiss and gave it away. Got me the 4/24-105 G. Then got me the 4/24-70 Zeiss which was and still is my most used lens ever.

MadalinaB said:

PS: I have also tried the Sony 24-105mm F4.0. It's definetly a better option in termes of image quality.

Click to expand...

Not by much. Have tested both lenses and was Amazon by how close the 4/24-70 lenses were to the 4/24-105 G. The Zeiss has a bit more busy extreme corners and that's all. The lens has good resolution and contrast in the center of the field.

MadalinaB said:

Unfortunately i find it too heavy and big for traveling and hiking.

Click to expand...

My 4/24-70 Zeiss is very compact and light weight, has fast and silent auto focus, is built to last (whiners usually forget that mechanical quality matter).

A fine and handy lens to those who knows how to get the most out of it. Not the best lens in the world (but not all want a huge GM monster) but still doing a very good job.

Actually super satisfied with mine. The final images look splendid.

MadalinaB said:

Thanks for any feedback!

Click to expand...

Obviously I am a fan of this lens so the naysayers will most likely say that my opinion does not have value - despite into 40 000+ images with this lens. :-D

Tristimulus said:

Bashing this lens is a popular activity.

Click to expand...

Both the Zeiss and the Sigma are fine lenses. A lot of the preferences are really about whatever the issues each person brings to it (including the preference for constant 2.8 versus f4, which I certainly understand because I share that bias) more than the qualities of the lenses themselves.

Tristimulus said:

Tristimulus said:

oughts about these 2 lenses and if you had the chance to compare them. Am I doing a mistake keeping the Zeiss?

Click to expand...

Had the Zeiss and gave it away. Got me the 4/24-105 G. Then got me the 4/24-70 Zeiss which was and still is my most used lens ever.

Click to expand...

Again, the Zeiss is a perfectly fine lens. Neither the Sigma nor the Zeiss nor the Sony 24-105 are favorites of mine. But again, that's more preference and bias (especially about color output) than anything about the qualities of each lens. They are all fine lenses. Since the OP prefers the Zeiss, she should keep that and be good with it.

Seems like the Zeiss FE 24-70 f4 may suffer from inconsistent manufacturing. I find that odd as Zeiss is typically rather stringent in QC tolerances for anything with their name on it. But that lens seems to have a lot of haters saying they dislike the image quality. I had one copy and it was quite good. No complaints from me. But the sheer number of folks who have complained about "softness" makes me think there may be some genuinely sub par copies out there.

So happy to see your reply Tristimulus! Thanks a lot!

I like the Sony 24-70mm F4.0 Zeiss, it gives excellent image quality for it's size and it's travel friendly. For sure I'm going to use it a lot this summer

jbuzzinco said:

Seems like the Zeiss FE 24-70 f4 may suffer from inconsistent manufacturing. I find that odd as Zeiss is typically rather stringent in QC tolerances for anything with their name on it. But that lens seems to have a lot of haters saying they dislike the image quality. I had one copy and it was quite good. No complaints from me. But the sheer number of folks who have complained about "softness" makes me think there may be some genuinely sub par copies out there.

Click to expand...

Possibly some bad copies; those things do happen. Just as likely, a lot of folks are shooting wide open with the lens - and by rule, a lens is least sharp at its widest and narrowest apertures. There's a reason why the old folks told us to shoot at f8; for many lenses, a few stops from the widest aperture is the sharpest you'll get in the center and corners.

The pursuit of 'creamy' bokeh has led to a lot of shutterbugs complaining about lack of sharpness - when not being sharp is the reality of shooting wide open to start.

The first few FE lenses, particularly the Sony/Zeiss lenses, had serious sample variation issues. The worst was the 35mm f/1.4, but the 24-70 was also problematic.

Looks like you have got a good copy, so be happy!

I am exactly in the same situation now, are you happy with the Zeiss still?

I had two copies of this at the zeiss time with the intention to keep the better one, but eventually sold them both at a slight profit. I bought both used but in mint condition, there was nothing between them and both were equally sharp at all focal lengths.

Out of curiosity, when you did your testing, how far away was the subject you were focused on? i have a suspicion that somehow this lens is optimised for close to medium distances but not as good at infinity.

I did a brief comparison between this and the sigma 45mm at F8 the images from the sigma was brighter but the zeiss images were more contrasty, sharpness was about equal with the zeiss even looking sharper in some instances. I would guess the sigma would be sharper at wider apertures.

I also tested a 24-105mm and I didn't like the images coming out of that. Looking through the flickr pool for this lens, the images coming out of the zeiss look great, whereas, i didn't like most of the images from the 24-105.

Overall its a good lens but definitely not worth the price brand new. I would still get one the F2.8 zooms over this lens any day.

I now have a 28-60mm which seems a bit sharper.

jbuzzinco said:

Seems like the Zeiss FE 24-70 f4 may suffer from inconsistent manufacturing. I find that odd as Zeiss is typically rather stringent in QC tolerances for anything with their name on it. But that lens seems to have a lot of haters saying they dislike the image quality. I had one copy and it was quite good. No complaints from me. But the sheer number of folks who have complained about "softness" makes me think there may be some genuinely sub par copies out there.

Click to expand...

That’s the echo chamber you’re hearing. The Zeiss 24-70 is a fine pro quality lens.

Thank you very much for the review. Though my very first standard zoom for my A7R, I have never had any fantasy about the Zeiss F4.

--I love my 24-70mm……I tend to stay with native lenses because of a bad experience with the sigma’s 16mm.Plus it’s a stabilized lens,the 24-70mm,if I’m not mistaken.
Video made with passion

I have had the 24-70 for a long time and I do like it a lot. I did buy it used. I recently bought the 28-70 Sigma after getting an a7c and reading about it here:

https://sonyalpha.blog/2021/06/11/which-are-the-best-lenses-for-sony-a7c/

It does have better image quality, however it was not as lightweight as I imagined and I felt the 24 on the wide end to me was more valuable than the f2.8 and the added weight. I returned it and got the Tamron 28-200, which I really like as it has f2.8 from 28-56mm. Very pleased with the 28-200 as it's lighter and more versatile for me than my 24-105mm!

KwhyChang said:

I have had the 24-70 for a long time and I do like it a lot. I did buy it used. I recently bought the 28-70 Sigma after getting an a7c and reading about it here:

https://sonyalpha.blog/2021/06/11/which-are-the-best-lenses-for-sony-a7c/

It does have better image quality, however it was not as lightweight as I imagined and I felt the 24 on the wide end to me was more valuable than the f2.8 and the added weight. I returned it and got the Tamron 28-200, which I really like as it has f2.8 from 28-56mm. Very pleased with the 28-200 as it's lighter and more versatile for me than my 24-105mm!

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about trying the sigma 28-70 and I'm also a long time zeiss 24-70 owner. I liked that lens a lot on my original A7r but it doesn't seem to hold up as well on my new A7Iv. It's not awful by any stretch, totally decent lens, it's just not blowing my mind anymore. Mostly i'm looking for the 2.8, but like you, I prefer the wider 24 to the longer 75.

CentralSquared said:

KwhyChang said:

I have had the 24-70 for a long time and I do like it a lot. I did buy it used. I recently bought the 28-70 Sigma after getting an a7c and reading about it here:

https://sonyalpha.blog/2021/06/11/which-are-the-best-lenses-for-sony-a7c/

It does have better image quality, however it was not as lightweight as I imagined and I felt the 24 on the wide end to me was more valuable than the f2.8 and the added weight. I returned it and got the Tamron 28-200, which I really like as it has f2.8 from 28-56mm. Very pleased with the 28-200 as it's lighter and more versatile for me than my 24-105mm!

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about trying the sigma 28-70 and I'm also a long time zeiss 24-70 owner. I liked that lens a lot on my original A7r but it doesn't seem to hold up as well on my new A7Iv. It's not awful by any stretch, totally decent lens, it's just not blowing my mind anymore. Mostly i'm looking for the 2.8, but like you, I prefer the wider 24 to the longer 75.

Click to expand...

I think it's a great lens and there are times when I wish I hadn't returned it...I did mainly because it was a little front heavy on my a7c, but it's fine for my a7iii.

On the other hand, like you, 24mm is really valuable to me and I think the best price/performance/weight option is the Sigma 24-70/2.8 DG DN, which can be found open box or used for a reasonable price, not a whole lot more than the 28-70 new:

https://www.adorama.com/us1590714.html

Here is a test snap I took with the Sigma 28-70/2.8:







Dave

MadalinaB said:

• has better weather sealing.

Click to expand...

The 24-70/4 has zero weather sealing. It doesn't even have a gasket on the mount.

Barugon said:

MadalinaB said:

• has better weather sealing.

Click to expand...

The 24-70/4 has zero weather sealing. It doesn't even have a gasket on the mount.

Click to expand...

Mine have seen its share of rainy days and no damage so far. Lots of droplets on the cameras and lenses. On rainy days the CZ 4/24-70 is my walkaround lens. Have been dripping wet several times.

Do however avoid heavy rain and the shower.

CentralSquared said:

KwhyChang said:

I have had the 24-70 for a long time and I do like it a lot. I did buy it used. I recently bought the 28-70 Sigma after getting an a7c and reading about it here:

https://sonyalpha.blog/2021/06/11/which-are-the-best-lenses-for-sony-a7c/

It does have better image quality, however it was not as lightweight as I imagined and I felt the 24 on the wide end to me was more valuable than the f2.8 and the added weight. I returned it and got the Tamron 28-200, which I really like as it has f2.8 from 28-56mm. Very pleased with the 28-200 as it's lighter and more versatile for me than my 24-105mm!

Click to expand...

I've been thinking about trying the sigma 28-70 and I'm also a long time zeiss 24-70 owner. I liked that lens a lot on my original A7r but it doesn't seem to hold up as well on my new A7Iv. It's not awful by any stretch, totally decent lens, it's just not blowing my mind anymore. Mostly i'm looking for the 2.8, but like you, I prefer the wider 24 to the longer 75.

Click to expand...

I decided to repurchase the Sigma 28-70/2.8. I recently came back from a music festival where I used the Tamron 28-200 a lot. It was great for shooting stage and general... but at times I wanted a smaller f2.8 zoom. Also, in addition to the faster aperture, the Sigma appears to have good magnification for close up shots my Zeiss 24-70/4 doesn't have.

I have the same question. Are you still satisfied with your decision to keep the Sony 24-70 ZA?

jbuzzinco said:

Seems like the Zeiss FE 24-70 f4 may suffer from inconsistent manufacturing. I find that odd as Zeiss is typically rather stringent in QC tolerances for anything with their name on it. But that lens seems to have a lot of haters saying they dislike the image quality. I had one copy and it was quite good. No complaints from me. But the sheer number of folks who have complained about "softness" makes me think there may be some genuinely sub par copies out there.

Click to expand...

Because it’s not Zeiss who make it or design it, they have little to do with that lens just like any other zeiss branded lens for E mount. Zeiss fundamentally just licensed their brand name out. This was a Sony lens one of the first of its kind. Sony had to learn how to make them and also how to get a certain QC and consistency in manufacturing.

It’s the same with Batis - Tamron through and throughout nothing to do with zeiss other then they probably loosely approved it and licensed the name.



yes there oceans of sub par copies out there, it was well known issues with the lenses until about 2016.