Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Started Mar 26, 2012 | Discussions
Arnesen New Member • Posts: 3
Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Hi!

I'm a recent Nex convert. After trying the Nex 7 for about a week I just had to own it. I have had alot of fun using it with old manual minolta lenses. And I'm without a doubt getting the 50mm 1.8.

I'm torn on the Carl Zeiss on the other hand. Mostly because I already own a Fujifim X100. And I love this camera. But I'd love a perfectly technical comparison. How will a Nex 7 with the Carl Zeiss compare to the X100? My plan is to possibly sell the X100 and use that to fund the Carl Zeiss lens.

As for resolution and speed, those are obvious benefits, but I feel having the posibility to use them both at the same time, outweighs those.

So what other benefits are there to a Nex 7 with the Carl Zeiss lens over a X100?

I'd love some brainstroming

Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony Alpha NEX-7
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Gary H Senior Member • Posts: 2,197
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

I own the X100 and it has been my favorite digital camera. I'm new to the NEX-7 and the Zeiss. First, the X100 is a better camera now than a year ago. The firmware upgrades have been a real plus, but the AF still lags behind the Nex, but the X100 does allow for smaller autofocus area for specifying focus. The NEX-7/Zeiss 24mm provide more image detail than the X100. The NEX-7/Zeiss is a larger package, but well balanced. If you are going to buy the Zeiss, you had better act fast. Supposedly, the price goes up by $100 next month. I will probably sell my X100.. and I prefer an OVF..

 Gary H's gear list:Gary H's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X100S Canon EOS-1D Mark III Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha a7 +20 more
sean lancaster
sean lancaster Veteran Member • Posts: 7,248
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

I bought the Zeiss 24 and regretted spending the $$$. So I sent it back. I then regretted sending it back because I liked the images being produced with that lens. I've now bought it again and I am keeping it. Love it. I've tested it at f/5.6 against the kit lens and have decided that the Zeiss is well worth the money if you want sharper images . . . and this doesn't even get at the huge benefit in lower light photos. A shot I took the other night with a bunch of 6th graders out looking for frogs in the wetlands using my 5N and the Zeiss 24 (with the flash turned all the way down):

EXIF data notes that the flash did not fire. I find that hard to believe since it was dark. Hmmm.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha a7R II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +4 more
OP Arnesen New Member • Posts: 3
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

I'm leaning heavy towards getting the Carl Zeiss now. As I'm probably staying in the Nex universe for quite a while.

Grant Senior Member • Posts: 1,976
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

The CZ 24mm is a popular lens but I just can't get my head around the cost (from a former "L" addict). No stabilization and F1.8. I'd opt for a MF lens. Canon 24 F2.8 FD

 Grant's gear list:Grant's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +13 more
sean lancaster
sean lancaster Veteran Member • Posts: 7,248
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Grant wrote:

The CZ 24mm is a popular lens but I just can't get my head around the cost (from a former "L" addict). No stabilization and F1.8. I'd opt for a MF lens. Canon 24 F2.8 FD

Um, AF.

Seriously, I enjoy MF. I have a few Canon FD lenses that I really enjoy shooting with. I put them on when I am having fun and not shooting anything that I really need (The 50/1.4 is pretty nice for portraits, though). But when I really need shots, particularly when I need many handheld shots, then AF is my choice nearly every single time. I am with you that the cost just seems astronomical, but I have yet to find a substantive review that demonstrates this lens not living up to the price. Yeah, it's still crummy. I was all set to get the Sigma 19 and 30 and not get the Zeiss when I sent it back the first time. But once I had the Zeiss I was put under its spell, I suppose. I just really like the results I get. I feel like have a pretty good lens combo in the Zeiss 24 and the SEL50.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha a7R II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +4 more
Grant Senior Member • Posts: 1,976
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Sean.... I guess that's why so many different lenses are made....:-) My 7 gets here tomorrow and I'm hoping it's a winner.

 Grant's gear list:Grant's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +13 more
lowincash
lowincash Contributing Member • Posts: 717
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

The Zeiss is a great lens, expensive, but great lens. Since there aren't many lenses for the NEX right now, the 24mm is currently the best one. I loved this lens on the 7, sharp and great color. When I first bought it I was going back and forth trying to decide if I should keep it because I couldn't justify spending so much money on a lens but every time I use it I loved it lol
--
I only shoot JPEG =]

foocando
foocando Regular Member • Posts: 219
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Here is my daughter pic took with CZ 24mm last Xmas.

 foocando's gear list:foocando's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7700 Sony RX100 III Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Canon G9 X Sony RX100 V +38 more
Jerry R Forum Pro • Posts: 10,052
Cost is relative. The Nikon 24mm, f/1.4 is $1,800.
-- hide signature --

Canon A2E, Sony R1, Panny TZ5, Nikon D5000, & NEX C3/Zeiss 24mm E Lens

chrisfromalaska Regular Member • Posts: 480
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

I had the X100 and sold it in favor of more stuff for the Nex7. I did the same with my5d2, but that's another story. The Nex with the 24/1.8 produces images that are more contrasty, sharper and more detailed IHMO than the X100 - as you would expect with a good lens and twice the MP count. Add to that a much faster AF and the ability to actually manual focus with Nex, the awesome Nex EVF (Fuji's was crap and I never used the OVF because its always sunny where I live), the fact that I can fire off 10fps in RAW and not have the camera freeze on me while it writes to the card and so on... ditching the X100 was a no-brainer for me. I also shoot RAW, so the super Fuji jpeg engine does not factor into my decision.

I agree with others that a good MF lens will be much cheaper, I have a few Rokkors that combined cost the same as the ZA, but its nice to have the IQ with AF. Sometimes I just want to compose and fire - like at a party and the speed of 24 makes it simple. I thought I'd miss the X100, but I haven't looked back. Its only been a few days, but I'm really enjoying the Nex7. Price-wise the ZA slots between Canon's cheap 24 and the 24L, and IMHO its as good as the 24L, just a stop slower. But the Canon is a bit soft on the edges wide open, and at 1.8 IMHO its no sharper than the ZA, and it costs quite a bit more. So its all relative.

Some say the Nex is not pocketable with the 24 mounted, but the X100 wasn't a pocket camera for me either. I throw the Nex/ZA in my laptop bag during the week or a small sling bag with a few lenses, a flash with some wireless triggers when I'm looking for shots. Either way the ZA is always with me.

 chrisfromalaska's gear list:chrisfromalaska's gear list
Sony Alpha a7S Sony a5100 Sony Alpha a7R II
tesilab
tesilab Senior Member • Posts: 2,741
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

I would boil it down to a very stark choice:

Which do you value most, the IQ of the final image, or a better shot at catching the fleeting moment? I love the look of the images that come out of the X100, especially the high ISO photos in comparison with everything else.

If you are good at capturing the moment with the X100, you might want to stick with it.

 tesilab's gear list:tesilab's gear list
Sony RX1R II Olympus Air Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Leica D Summilux Asph 25mm F1.4 Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 +6 more
Gary H Senior Member • Posts: 2,197
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

tesilab wrote:

I would boil it down to a very stark choice:

Which do you value most, the IQ of the final image, or a better shot at catching the fleeting moment? I love the look of the images that come out of the X100, especially the high ISO photos in comparison with everything else.

If you are good at capturing the moment with the X100, you might want to stick with it.

or if you want both IQ and speed get the NEX-7. Try your NEX-7 at high ISO and then downsize it to the same pixel dimensions as the X100 and see what the difference might be. I love the X100 viewfinder, sealed lens/sensor and the smaller size, but I'm not so sure that your argument regarding IQ will stand up to the comparison. The X100 holds up amazingly well against the NEX-7, but I will disagree with your suggestion that it bests the NEX-7 with regard to final image quality. I should state that I'm a RAW only shooter, so can't speak to JPG comparisons.. and Fuji is great with their JPEGs... at least that is my understanding.

 Gary H's gear list:Gary H's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X100S Canon EOS-1D Mark III Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha a7 +20 more
Grant Senior Member • Posts: 1,976
Re: Cost is relative. The Nikon 24mm, f/1.4 is $1,800.

Cost is relative. The Nikon 24mm, f/1.4 is $1,800.

And it smokes anything Nex has to offer. 1.4 vs 1.8 = plenty of money and light gathering.

 Grant's gear list:Grant's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM +13 more
James63 Forum Member • Posts: 87
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

If you have a NEX-7 you "need" the Zeiss. I really like the combo and it gets a lot more use than our full sized dslr because of the size.

captjoe06 Forum Member • Posts: 52
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

i have the zeiss 24 f1.8 on my nex-5n and my friend has the fuji

same shot from the seat using the two

the zeiss 24mm in the top two photos and the fuji in the bottom one-

http://goodmorninggloucester.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/poll-does-paul-morrison-need-a-duck-intervention/

the duck was the point of focus in all the shots

fwiw

cac1968 Forum Member • Posts: 93
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

Focus peaking is perfectly usable and is a great way to integrate legacy lenses. I enjoyed it when I got the NEX-7, as I only had legacy Nikon & Canon lenses. Then I got the Zeiss and focus peaking turned into a novelty that I don't care to use on a regular basis, so even though I have the Canon FDn 50mm 1.4, I ordered the Sony 50mm 1.8 for the AF and the OSS. I have only had the Zeiss for 10 days, but it hasn't come off the camera since I got it. I was concerned about the price, but do have to echo the comments here, the fit and finish are very nice, it feels like a well made lens, and the photos speak for themselves.

sean lancaster
sean lancaster Veteran Member • Posts: 7,248
Re: Considering the Carl Zeiss 24mm

captjoe06 wrote:

i have the zeiss 24 f1.8 on my nex-5n and my friend has the fuji

same shot from the seat using the two

the zeiss 24mm in the top two photos and the fuji in the bottom one-

http://goodmorninggloucester.wordpress.com/2012/03/26/poll-does-paul-morrison-need-a-duck-intervention/

the duck was the point of focus in all the shots

Too funny. Paul Morrison is a long time buddy of mine. I've been to his lab and had Segway drag races even. Of course there is a rubber duck in the photo. Of course.

But the Zeiss is very good there. Very good. I have similar good fortune with the Zeiss in relatively low light:

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha a7R II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +4 more
straylightrun Senior Member • Posts: 1,440
Re: Cost is relative. The Nikon 24mm, f/1.4 is $1,800.

The Nikon lens is faster and is designed for Full Frame.

The Zeiss is very expensive for an APS-C only lens. I can't think of an APS-C prime from any other manufacturer which is more expensive.

 straylightrun's gear list:straylightrun's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX90V A3000 Sony Alpha a7S Canon EOS M10 Sony 35mm F1.4 G +8 more
sean lancaster
sean lancaster Veteran Member • Posts: 7,248
Re: Cost is relative. The Nikon 24mm, f/1.4 is $1,800.

straylightrun wrote:

The Nikon lens is faster and is designed for Full Frame.

The Zeiss is very expensive for an APS-C only lens. I can't think of an APS-C prime from any other manufacturer which is more expensive.

I have trouble finding APS-C prime lenses at 24mm (or even in the 22 - 26 range). I searched BHPHOTO for APS-C only and then primes for all camera mounts and the results were sparse. I can find the upcoming Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens and it's going to be $850 (for f/2.8) so the Zeiss 24 is $150 more and provides f/1.8.

 sean lancaster's gear list:sean lancaster's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony Alpha a7R II Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 Nokton Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 28mm F2 +4 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads