24mm Zeiss

S

Stockman

Member
Local time
1:12 PM
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
49
Having recently bought the NEX 5n, and having found out that the kit 18-55 is not that great, I have bought the Sigma 19mm and 30mm lenses which I am very happy with.

Does anyone have extensive experience with the 24mm Zeiss. Given that its ca £900, is it any kind of quantum leap in terms of IQ?
 
You will never get a quantum leap in terms of image quality from just a change in lenses. However, the Zeiss 24mm is very sharp across the frame, has superb out of focus areas, the build quality absolutely matches the price, and it has a different overall look and feel compared to all the other NEX E-mount native lenses.

Is it worth its price? For somebody looking for the absolute best and willing and able to pay for it, of course it is. Will you be able to easily find one? Maybe. :D

One piece of advice ... there were a couple of bad batches back in March-April ... and most used versions of this lens are probably from that batch, so unless you are offered a superb deal used, I'd pony up for the retail price and get it from a reputable dealer with warranty and proper return policy. Sony has really sold every single one of these lenses it produced, so any new ones you buy from large dealers would be from a new production batch.

One other thing, somehow it seems only with either the thinner B+W filters or the actual 49mm Zeiss filters can you fit this Zeiss lens's hood into its bayonet mount.
 
It's strange how people on the web like to repeat how 'bad' the 18-55 is. Actually, considering it's purpose, spec and very low cost it's pretty spectacular!

There is more than one review/comparison on the web that show 18-55 used at f8 (or f5.6) is amazingly comparable to the Zeiss which costs something like 15 to 20x the price!!! Personally, I've had two 20x16 inch prints hung in exhibitions both shot with the 18-55 and although i'm deadly serious about my pix I can't see the sense of such an expensive lens on such a budget camera,...you may as well put the nine hundred quid towards a better camera or even a full frame model.......
 
Bugleone said:
It's strange how people on the web like to repeat how 'bad' the 18-55 is. Actually, considering it's purpose, spec and very low cost it's pretty spectacular!

There is more than one review/comparison on the web that show 18-55 used at f8 (or f5.6) is amazingly comparable to the Zeiss which costs something like 15 to 20x the price!!! Personally, I've had two 20x16 inch prints hung in exhibitions both shot with the 18-55 and although i'm deadly serious about my pix I can't see the sense of such an expensive lens on such a budget camera,...you may as well put the nine hundred quid towards a better camera or even a full frame model.......
Click to expand...

Yep, ok, thanks for that. So your experience of the 24mm Zeiss is..........?
Which I think was my original question.

I already have Canon full frame cameras and L lenses so I don't need to save my money for those. I just want a good lens for my 5N. The 18-55 that I have doesn't cut it.
 
Doesn't "cut" what exactly?

My experience with the 24mm Zeiss is that it's too large, too heavy, too expenisve and too 'average' to be worth the trouble.
 
Bugleone said:
Doesn't "cut" what exactly?

My experience with the 24mm Zeiss is that it's too large, too heavy, too expenisve and too 'average' to be worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

Doesn't cut the IQ challenge!
Soft in all areas!

Apparently the 18-55 can tend to be somewhat variable. I think I had a bad copy.

Your points on the 24mm zeiss are noted and appreciated. I think I'll forget it. I have the Sigma 19mm and 30mm which are very good IQ wise. I could just do with something in between.
 
Going to chime in after a lot of lurking. The 24mm that I had was sharp but the pictures felt flat. I felt that it did not have the Zeiss "pop". I have not felt the need to try other copies to confirm.
 
Bugleone said:
Doesn't "cut" what exactly?

My experience with the 24mm Zeiss is that it's too large, too heavy, too expenisve and too 'average' to be worth the trouble.
Click to expand...

You either have/had a bad copy or your experience is very different than mine. I love the Zeiss 24 on my NEX 5N. More than 90% of my shooting is with this combo and I can see considerable difference between my Zeiss 24 and my kit lens (18-55) at 24mm -- not even to mention the lower light comparison. The kit lens is bad. A poster above tried to say it's not bad for the price and I'd agree, but I don't think I want to judge lenses with price as a factor; that is, I'd rather judge them on image quality alone. If they're great and I can't afford then then they're still great and if they're cheap and pretty good then they're still not great. The 18-55 is decent for a kit lens (maybe even good), but it's not a good lens judged against lenses that are good.

Back to the Zeiss 24 . . . it is a bigger lens than I expected. But I can walk around with the NEX-5N and Zeiss 24 on my camera (with a wrist strap) and not feel the weight of this combo for hours and hours of street shooting. I could never do that with my Nikon D70 and I had to use a neck strap for any extended street shooting, which is crummy in hot weather. It's just heavy and the Zeiss 24 doesn't feel heavy by comparison. I have heard people complain about the price of the Zeiss 24, but Sony had such great demand that they raised the price after I bought it and it still sells out nearly instantly when it's in stock. I tend to believe the market does a good job of determining value so the lens is probably only too expensive for people who can't afford it more so than for people who are looking for a quality return on their investment. But again, my experience sounds very different than yours.

Most of these shots are with my 5N and Zeiss 24. I am a novice photographer who didn't know what aperture and ISO meant a year ago, so keep that in mind. http://www.flickriver.com/photos/jayhawk/sets/72157630578089098/
 
Last edited:
Jabberwockt said:
Going to chime in after a lot of lurking. The 24mm that I had was sharp but the pictures felt flat. I felt that it did not have the Zeiss "pop". I have not felt the need to try other copies to confirm.
Click to expand...

My experience was the same, I was getting CA up til f2.8 in the highlights on an NEX-7, it was SHARP for sure but just not the same Zeiss feeling i've come to love..

Also the size of the lens and cost made me return it.

I would possible wait til the Sony 35 f1.8 or Zeiss 35 f1.8 come out.

If all else fails, try it out, they don't depreciate like rocks—esp with a return policy.
 
I recommend the Sigma 19/2.8 or 28/2.8. They are not Zeiss and they are slightly quirky but for less than £150 in the UK they are fantastic. In fact, I would not even qualify with the price - they are good optics.
 
zuikologist said:
I recommend the Sigma 19/2.8 or 28/2.8. They are not Zeiss and they are slightly quirky but for less than £150 in the UK they are fantastic. In fact, I would not even qualify with the price - they are good optics.
Click to expand...
I assume you mean the Sigma 30/2.8 and not 28/2.8 since the 30/2.8 is the native Emount lens. I owned the 30/2.8 for a little while and ended up returning it. It does not have a smooth focusing ring. The focusing ring sticks and is jerky. I suppose for folks who only rely on AF then it is a nice and cheap sharp lens, but I also was not pleased with the bokeh from the Sigma 30. For a person shooting landscape or cityscapes then it might be great, though . . . if it's not too long.
 
sean said:
I assume you mean the Sigma 30/2.8 and not 28/2.8 since the 30/2.8 is the native Emount lens. I owned the 30/2.8 for a little while and ended up returning it. It does not have a smooth focusing ring. The focusing ring sticks and is jerky. I suppose for folks who only rely on AF then it is a nice and cheap sharp lens, but I also was not pleased with the bokeh from the Sigma 30. For a person shooting landscape or cityscapes then it might be great, though . . . if it's not too long.
Click to expand...

Yes the 30/2.8. Not too long as a normal.

Actually, if size is not too much of consideration, perhaps a Sony lens on adaptor might be an answer. Otherwise, not much alternative to the Zeiss.
 
My Zeiss 24 is outstandingly sharp with an amazing look. I cannot fathom how anyone could think otherwise on a nex 7. It is sharp with a lovely OOF and great detail. This is currently my favorite combo. Bought mine used and never looked back.
 
sean said:
I assume you mean the Sigma 30/2.8 and not 28/2.8 since the 30/2.8 is the native Emount lens. I owned the 30/2.8 for a little while and ended up returning it. It does not have a smooth focusing ring. The focusing ring sticks and is jerky.
Click to expand...

Really? I wonder if this is down to sample variation. The focusing ring on mine is perfectly smooth and feels almost as nice as an actual MF lens. The control sampling rate seems to suffer in very low light, though, making the stepper motor much less responsive to ring movement.
 
Thanks for your replies everyone, very useful.

I have the Sigma 19mm which I am very happy with. I intend to buy the Sigma 30 shortly.

The Zeiss 24mm sounds like it is worth a go after all. Size and weight doesn't matter, compared with a DSLR kit, its always going to be lighter and smaller. The NEX is a good little camera, I just want/need to extract the best from it and if that means paying out for the Zeiss then so be it!

Thanks again.
 
regularchickens said:
Really? I wonder if this is down to sample variation. The focusing ring on mine is perfectly smooth and feels almost as nice as an actual MF lens. The control sampling rate seems to suffer in very low light, though, making the stepper motor much less responsive to ring movement.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I know of a few others who returned their Sigma 30/2.8 for the same reason and there was a discussion on dpreview about the sticky focus. But it's entirely possible that your smooth focusing unit is more representative of most Sigma 30s (or that Sigma has addressed the early problem).
 
sean said:
Perhaps. I know of a few others who returned their Sigma 30/2.8 for the same reason and there was a discussion on dpreview about the sticky focus. But it's entirely possible that your smooth focusing unit is more representative of most Sigma 30s (or that Sigma has addressed the early problem).
Click to expand...

I have both Sigma 19mm and 30mm, they're fine, very good lenses, I'm really happy with them. The IQ is outstanding considering the low price, sub 150 quid in the UK. The Zeiss would fill the gap in between and be more useful for me though. From the posts above it would seem to be worth getting after all. Shame Sigma don't make a 23/24mm!
I would definitely go for that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom