FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Here Today .. Gone Today! Locked

Started Mar 4, 2014 | Discussions
This thread is locked.
Keit ll Veteran Member • Posts: 4,313
Re: FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Here Today .. Gone Today!

Folk need to remember that copies can vary in quality but that fact is also disturbing on a relatively expensive lens. Most Sony buyers are price sensitive & the cost of this lens leads to high expectations , many feel that they have already compromised in accepting F 4.0 & then to find edges smeared it is a double whammy...

OK you need to pixel peep to see the differences in most images but that is how new buyers judge lens quality & when they find the differences between this lens & much cheaper lenses are not that great then is it little wonder that they have reservations ? The excuse that it is just a zoom are not totally convincing to me. Judgements about value for money would ,of course, be a lot different if the asking price was lower.

LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

Clayton1985 wrote:

NomadMark wrote:

David Lozoya wrote:

The ONLY zoom lens that I have used/owned that was sharp to the corners at all apertures with minimal distortion was the fantastic Olympus 12-40 f2.8. You have to see it to believe it. No other zoom comes close.

And with corrections turned off in camera, it appears distortion may be worse with that lens.

Correct

Incorrect, way better than any Sony E Mount Zoom, and almost as good as the 50mm f/1.8 prime...

http://www.photozone.de/m43/862_oly1240?start=1

At 12mm, there is only a slight degree of barrel distortion (~0.5%) and it's negligible beyond.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/829-sony1018f4oss?start=1

The 10-18mm OSS exhibits a moderate degree (2.2%) of barrel distortion at 10mm - while this is visible, it is actually a very good figure at such a focal length. At the other end of the range, thus at 18mm, it shows a pincushion distortion of 1.8% which is slightly higher than average. Unsurprisingly, the two opposing distortion types even out around 14mm.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/729-sony55210f4563nex?start=1

The 55-210mm OSS exhibits a slight to moderate degree (0.9-1.8%) of pincushion distortion throughout the range. This is fairly unusual - most lenses show switch between barrel (at the wide end) and pincushion distortion (at the mid to long tele end).

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/720-sony50f18nex?start=1

The Sony lens produces a marginal amount of pincushion distortion (~0.3%) which is not objectionable in field conditions.

Truth is if they tested the Sony E Mounts uncorrected, which they don't the numbers would be over the top...

Really there is a God...and He loves you.

FlickR Photostream:

www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

NomadMark
NomadMark Contributing Member • Posts: 603
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

Clayton1985 wrote:

NomadMark wrote:

David Lozoya wrote:

The ONLY zoom lens that I have used/owned that was sharp to the corners at all apertures with minimal distortion was the fantastic Olympus 12-40 f2.8. You have to see it to believe it. No other zoom comes close.

And with corrections turned off in camera, it appears distortion may be worse with that lens.

Correct

Incorrect, way better than any Sony E Mount Zoom, and almost as good as the 50mm f/1.8 prime...

http://www.photozone.de/m43/862_oly1240?start=1

At 12mm, there is only a slight degree of barrel distortion (~0.5%) and it's negligible beyond.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/829-sony1018f4oss?start=1

The 10-18mm OSS exhibits a moderate degree (2.2%) of barrel distortion at 10mm - while this is visible, it is actually a very good figure at such a focal length. At the other end of the range, thus at 18mm, it shows a pincushion distortion of 1.8% which is slightly higher than average. Unsurprisingly, the two opposing distortion types even out around 14mm.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/729-sony55210f4563nex?start=1

The 55-210mm OSS exhibits a slight to moderate degree (0.9-1.8%) of pincushion distortion throughout the range. This is fairly unusual - most lenses show switch between barrel (at the wide end) and pincushion distortion (at the mid to long tele end).

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/720-sony50f18nex?start=1

The Sony lens produces a marginal amount of pincushion distortion (~0.3%) which is not objectionable in field conditions.

Truth is if they tested the Sony E Mounts uncorrected, which they don't the numbers would be over the top...

Really there is a God...and He loves you.

FlickR Photostream:

www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Scroll down to the uncorrected grid. I.e. What you'll get if you shoot raw. Distortion at 12mm is terrible!!! Yikes!

You are looking at the grid for corrected jpegs.

 NomadMark's gear list:NomadMark's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Sony Alpha a7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM +12 more
LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

NomadMark wrote:

Clayton1985 wrote:

NomadMark wrote:

David Lozoya wrote:

The ONLY zoom lens that I have used/owned that was sharp to the corners at all apertures with minimal distortion was the fantastic Olympus 12-40 f2.8. You have to see it to believe it. No other zoom comes close.

And with corrections turned off in camera, it appears distortion may be worse with that lens.

Correct

Incorrect, way better than any Sony E Mount Zoom, and almost as good as the 50mm f/1.8 prime...

http://www.photozone.de/m43/862_oly1240?start=1

At 12mm, there is only a slight degree of barrel distortion (~0.5%) and it's negligible beyond.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/829-sony1018f4oss?start=1

The 10-18mm OSS exhibits a moderate degree (2.2%) of barrel distortion at 10mm - while this is visible, it is actually a very good figure at such a focal length. At the other end of the range, thus at 18mm, it shows a pincushion distortion of 1.8% which is slightly higher than average. Unsurprisingly, the two opposing distortion types even out around 14mm.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/729-sony55210f4563nex?start=1

The 55-210mm OSS exhibits a slight to moderate degree (0.9-1.8%) of pincushion distortion throughout the range. This is fairly unusual - most lenses show switch between barrel (at the wide end) and pincushion distortion (at the mid to long tele end).

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/720-sony50f18nex?start=1

The Sony lens produces a marginal amount of pincushion distortion (~0.3%) which is not objectionable in field conditions.

Truth is if they tested the Sony E Mounts uncorrected, which they don't the numbers would be over the top...

Really there is a God...and He loves you.

FlickR Photostream:

www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Scroll down to the uncorrected grid. I.e. What you'll get if you shoot raw. Distortion at 12mm is terrible!!! Yikes!

You are looking at the grid for corrected jpegs.

Like I said where are the grids for uncorrected E mounts? There are none for a good reason?

Check out the MTF in the corners compared to the 12-40 it is a s good and better than ALL of the E Mounts across the frame...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

craigshipp
craigshipp New Member • Posts: 4
Re: FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Here Today .. Gone Today!

I love mine! Samples: http://www.flickr.com/photos/areaguides/sets/72157641652673995/

-- hide signature --

Nikon D700; Sony A7r; Sony NEX-7
http://CraigShipp.com

LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

NomadMark wrote:

Clayton1985 wrote:

NomadMark wrote:

David Lozoya wrote:

The ONLY zoom lens that I have used/owned that was sharp to the corners at all apertures with minimal distortion was the fantastic Olympus 12-40 f2.8. You have to see it to believe it. No other zoom comes close.

And with corrections turned off in camera, it appears distortion may be worse with that lens.

Correct

Incorrect, way better than any Sony E Mount Zoom, and almost as good as the 50mm f/1.8 prime...

http://www.photozone.de/m43/862_oly1240?start=1

At 12mm, there is only a slight degree of barrel distortion (~0.5%) and it's negligible beyond.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/829-sony1018f4oss?start=1

The 10-18mm OSS exhibits a moderate degree (2.2%) of barrel distortion at 10mm - while this is visible, it is actually a very good figure at such a focal length. At the other end of the range, thus at 18mm, it shows a pincushion distortion of 1.8% which is slightly higher than average. Unsurprisingly, the two opposing distortion types even out around 14mm.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/729-sony55210f4563nex?start=1

The 55-210mm OSS exhibits a slight to moderate degree (0.9-1.8%) of pincushion distortion throughout the range. This is fairly unusual - most lenses show switch between barrel (at the wide end) and pincushion distortion (at the mid to long tele end).

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/720-sony50f18nex?start=1

The Sony lens produces a marginal amount of pincushion distortion (~0.3%) which is not objectionable in field conditions.

Truth is if they tested the Sony E Mounts uncorrected, which they don't the numbers would be over the top...

Really there is a God...and He loves you.

FlickR Photostream:

www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

Scroll down to the uncorrected grid. I.e. What you'll get if you shoot raw. Distortion at 12mm is terrible!!! Yikes!

You are looking at the grid for corrected jpegs.

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

stevo23 Forum Pro • Posts: 19,010
Some perspective:

ZzzooM3 wrote:

I think this sets a record for me on camera gear. I ordered the FE 24-70mm F4 OSS and it finally arrived today at 1:15PM. I dropped it back to FedEx at 3:15PM!!

I knew it was a bad idea to pre-order just on expectation. I really got caught up in the positive reviews for the FE35 and FE55 and placed the order site and review unseen. I won't be making that mistake again.

At $1200, this lens should be spot on for the entire focal range, not just from 28-60 and it's not fast enough. Shame because Sony had such a good start with the other 2 Zeiss branded FE lens

I realize a few people won't be liking this lens. But to put it in perspective, I compare this to the similarly priced Canon 24-70 f/4 and I feel that the images I'm seeing from some guys are actually nicer looking than those coming from the Canon.

I'm not sure what tests would show here, but I still think the results are pretty good. They are certainly in line with the cost. Keep in mind that a faster lens or better corner performing lens would likely double the cost to the likes of the Canon 24-70 2.8 and even that lens has issues.

Maybe some of us were expecting better performance because of the Zeiss name? But is it really priced like a top Zeiss would be? It's priced like a Canon mid-range zoom and seems to equal or better that. And forget Nikon, nothing in this price range touches it in my view.

For the record, I'm not going to buy it. I've generally been a prime guy and this lens hasn't changed my approach. I can't afford a WATE, so I'm sticking with primes.

Just some thoughts...

 stevo23's gear list:stevo23's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro2 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 Fujifilm XF 23mm F1.4 R +3 more
blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 11,532
Re: Henry says that F4 on FF is F2.8 on APS-C and F2.0 on m43

Miki Nemeth wrote:

blue_skies wrote:

Remember that F4 on FF is F2.8 on APS-C and F2.0 on m43?

Hi Henry,

I have learned so much from You, here on the pages of this excellent forum. This point I do not understand completely. I had the impression that F-number is the same on any camera systems, just like focal-length. Do you mean that the DoF of F4 on a FF camera is the same as the DoF of F2 on a m43? Does this mean that a FF camera with F4 can auto-focus at the same speed as a m4/3 camera with F2?

Another related question: If I change the A7 to APS-C mode the effects/usability of F4 changes down to F5.6?

Thank You for the help, Miki

Hi Miki,

thanks for your comment.

If you expose cameras side by side, they will all measure the same light, regardless of the sensor size.

So if you shoot at ISO 100, then all formats will e.g. choose 1/200th and f/4. This is same normal exposure.

With this exposure, the larger sensor will produce shallower DOF, because, in FF equivalent terms, it uses the widest aperture. If the ISO is not at base 100, but e.g. at ISO 1,000, then the larger the format, then the lower the noise levels.

But for equivalent exposure, the sensor size must be taken into account. E.g if you compare this ISO 100, 1/200th and f/4, then equivalent exposures are:

  1. ISO 100, 1/200th, f/4
  2. ISO 200, 1/200th, f/5.6 (+1 stop)
  3. ISO 400, 1/200th, f/8 (+2 stops)

Or, roughly, the table shows m43 versus aps-c versus FF. The larger sensors can handle a higher ISO level noise free, but require a higher f-number to keep the equivalent level of DOF.

So, the lens speed is a factor, but without knowing the sensor size, it is all relative. Saying that an f/4 lens on m43 is faster than an f/8 lens on FF is incorrect. Technically the lens at f/4 is faster than a lens at f/8, but as you see from the table above, in equivalent terms, they will perform just the same.

Focusing speed may be sensitive to the normal exposure, and not the equivalent exposure, as it needs to see the contrast points. Both PDAF and CDAF need a minimum level of contrast. I find that under normal illumination, both PPDAF and CDAF work fine. If it gets too dark, then the contrast may not be picked up, or not be where you want it (faces are not very contrasty at night, lamps are).

If you stop down too far, your AF point does not matter a whole lot, since you increase your DOF. But if you go wide open, focus becomes more critical, so you need to properly focus. AF works fine with fast (f/1.8) lenses under low light, but you have to give the (contrast detect) system time to find the AF point (it does) - at f/1.8 there are many more steps for the lens to be considered. The A6000 seems to not require the contrast detect fine tune step any longer, so I am curious to find out how it handles faster (than the kit) lenses.

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R II +36 more
juvx
juvx Senior Member • Posts: 1,536
Re: FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Here Today .. Gone Today!

its just too expensive for its performance imo. Priced at 700-800$ and it would be acceptable for what it is.

 juvx's gear list:juvx's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Sony a6500 Sony a9 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony FE 35mm F1.4 +4 more
Clayton1985 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,629
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

The post in question said minimal distortion and that no other zoom comes close.    There is distortion and there are other zooms that come close and then some.

LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

Clayton1985 wrote:

The post in question said minimal distortion and that no other zoom comes close. There is distortion and there are other zooms that come close and then some.

Wished that was true in reality...I just sold the 16-70 and going to send the 24-70 back the sides and corners are not even close to the 12-40 Oly...center they excel above the 12-40 easily I might add, but when you have to crop 1/3 off each side the center doesn't matter much on a landscape shot...

Distortion truth, the Oly 12-40 is actually better than most E Mount Primes, hence "PRO" grade, with the Oly PRO 7-14 f/2.8 and 300mm f/4 2015 I am going to go that route...going to keep the A7r, 55mm, 24mm f/2 + LA-EA4 Adapter until a wide prime materializes for the FE Mount...hopefully sooner than later...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

sgoldswo
sgoldswo Veteran Member • Posts: 5,717
Overreaction?

ZzzooM3 wrote:

I think this sets a record for me on camera gear. I ordered the FE 24-70mm F4 OSS and it finally arrived today at 1:15PM. I dropped it back to FedEx at 3:15PM!!

I knew it was a bad idea to pre-order just on expectation. I really got caught up in the positive reviews for the FE35 and FE55 and placed the order site and review unseen. I won't be making that mistake again.

At $1200, this lens should be spot on for the entire focal range, not just from 28-60 and it's not fast enough. Shame because Sony had such a good start with the other 2 Zeiss branded FE lens

I've got to say I see this as a bit of an overreaction. You need to get used to a lens, and every zoom is going to be a compromise. Every FF 24-70 has some softness in the corners.It isn't the end of the world in my Nikon 24-70, nor is it here.

I find the lens to be great within its limitations, contrasty, saturated and sharp across the frame for the majority of focal lengths. Here's an example with soft edges - I can't say I was disappointed though:

It's undoubtedly softer in the corners, but I still like this image. Here's another:

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica Q Leica M Typ 240 Nikon Df Nikon D810 Nikon D750 +1 more
red fuji Regular Member • Posts: 213
Re: Overreaction?

I dont have the same reaction as the OP that the corners are soft.i dont have the lens yet but been reading about it plenty. in most of my pictures, i really dont care that much about the corners. i dont 100% crop or print 90% of my pictures and if i was going to then i will probably pre-plan shots. It is funny how we intentionaly add soft edges to some of our pictures durning editing. If i was a heavy cropper then i guess i would have a different take. Maybe the OP is a Pro who does lots of 100% cropping and printing but why would he want a zoom if that was the case.

 red fuji's gear list:red fuji's gear list
Nikon D5100 Sony Alpha a7 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II
cxsparc
cxsparc Veteran Member • Posts: 3,430
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

@LTZ: You DO know that m43 cameras are famous for correcting even RAW files?

-- hide signature --
 cxsparc's gear list:cxsparc's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony a6000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS +3 more
Photoworks Contributing Member • Posts: 604
Re: Well...

David Lozoya wrote:

The ONLY zoom lens that I have used/owned that was sharp to the corners at all apertures with minimal distortion was the fantastic Olympus 12-40 f2.8. You have to see it to believe it. No other zoom comes close.

Sure, but you're only assessing this lens with 16mp of resolution.  36mp is a whole different ball game.

cosmonaut
cosmonaut Senior Member • Posts: 2,223
Re: FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Here Today .. Gone Today!

I got mine today !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-- hide signature --

www.gregmccary.com

LTZ470
LTZ470 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,926
Re: Well...distortion is a funny thing

cxsparc wrote:

@LTZ: You DO know that m43 cameras are famous for correcting even RAW files?

Thats great, but the distortion of the Sony E-Mounts are over the top and thats what is killing the side and corner resolution...corrected or uncorrected if there is no resolution, it's a futile effort...

-- hide signature --

--Really there is a God...and He loves you..
FlickR Photostream:
www.flickr.com/photos/46756347@N08/
Mr Ichiro Kitao, I support the call to upgrade the FZ50.
I will not only buy one but two no questions asked...

PaulR Contributing Member • Posts: 651
Re: EXPECTED AT LEAST A SHORT REVIEW

Dennishh wrote:

Here's something to help soothe your tortured soul! Sometimes it doesn't pay to jump to conclusions.

Shot with the Zeiss 24-70 F4 ZA A7r

How does posting a shot taken at F11 contribute anything to the debate over how good the lens is?  A) if you have to stop down to F11 to get good quality the lens is no good.  B) Diffraction effects clearly start showing up at F11 on an A7R so just how bad does the lens have to be for an F11 shot to be sharper than an F8 or F5.6 shot?

 PaulR's gear list:PaulR's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Nikon D600 Sony Alpha a7R Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +4 more
Stu 5 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,277
Re: Overreaction?

Why on earth were you shooting at those ISO's when you did not need to? The quality loss due to that is noticeable.

As for the sharpness you do not need to view at 100% to see the issue. It is noticeable and means for some types of photography where the corners are important the lens is unusable as a lot of clients would reject the work or just not bother to use you in the future. If this lens had Sony written on the front and cheaper then it would be acceptable but not at this price or with Zeiss as a brand name on it.

Dandrewk Senior Member • Posts: 1,094
Re: EXPECTED AT LEAST A SHORT REVIEW

PaulR wrote:

Dennishh wrote:

Here's something to help soothe your tortured soul! Sometimes it doesn't pay to jump to conclusions.

Shot with the Zeiss 24-70 F4 ZA A7r

How does posting a shot taken at F11 contribute anything to the debate over how good the lens is? A) if you have to stop down to F11 to get good quality the lens is no good. B) Diffraction effects clearly start showing up at F11 on an A7R so just how bad does the lens have to be for an F11 shot to be sharper than an F8 or F5.6 shot?

The purpose of his post was in response to someone who seemed a bit agitated.  The content of the photo is the thing, NOT the exif data.

Perhaps you should join the intended recipient  for a nice stiff drink.  It may relieve you from your obvious agenda of slamming this lens for no good reason.

 Dandrewk's gear list:Dandrewk's gear list
Sony RX1R II Sony Alpha a7R II Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads