Sony Zeiss 24mm f/2.0 review at Kurtmunger
Our friend Kurt Munger just posted the new Sony Zeiss 24mm f/2.0 review (Click here to read the full review): “The Sony Carl Zeiss 24mm F/2 lens is expensive, but is it worth the price? As I explained above, it has some really good qualities, and a few flaws for a very expensive lens, it all depends on what’s important to you. Based on some preliminary tests, I’d say if you own the CZ 16-35mm and/or CZ 24-70mm, and won’t need F/2, then you probably won’t benefit from the CZ 24mm[/shoplink]. However, F/2 is a whole stop faster than F/2.8, that’s a big part of the additional expense, and very important when doing hand-held shooting in low light.”
Check the current Zeiss 24mm price at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay (Click shopnames to visit the direct product page).
Via kurtmunger.com
danny
3 years ago |FIRST!!
SonyA77
3 years ago |What?
dyna
3 years ago |I’m not 100% certain I’m sold on his reviews yet. I’ve not seen much that impresses upon me anything more than just another photo blogger with an opinion.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Edgars
3 years ago |I like Kurt tests a lot. He has his own style and usually in review is something, that you never will find in other tests.
Anyway in DPR 24mm f2 lens test is published in October last year and resolution tests showing really pronounced field curvature. For the price I expected at least flawless IQ.
dyna
3 years ago |I agree with the style, and I’m definitely okay with a unique perspective… I just smell a bias or an agenda somewhere. Don’t know why… maybe it’s just his phraseology. Or maybe I’ve not had my coffee yet
Anywho, agreed overall with the curvature bit though DPR did state that the 24Z is certainly sharper than its 1.4 counterparts and for less. Can’t help but be happy with that. I don’t need 1.4, especially on a 24. And curvature is to be expected, though if you’ve shot one you’ll notice it’s slight and nothing to be concerned with.
Per Kurt, I’ll give him a few more reviews… see where he goes with all this
Not that my opinion matters on whit, lol, just been doing this sort of thing for too long.
REVENGE
3 years ago |Review seems fairly objective, but like he admits, there may be some unforeseen issues with sample quality variation that’s affecting these lenses. Hopefully he’ll be able to get his hands on a copy from another batch.
Q
3 years ago |Kurt is good with his reviews and is a straight shooter from what I’ve read in his opinions, considering he is also a Sony shooter he is giving a fair judgement on his own findings.
Also, he isn’t going off the tangent like a madman such as Kenny Crockwell and his anti Sony/pro Nikon slander.
alex
3 years ago |ken rockwell is laughing his #ss of from people who were truly hurt by his review.. 1-0 for ken rockwell..LMAO!i really don´t understand that some people are so much offended by his review.. just buy the damn a55, shoot with it, be happy with it…what do you care more about? doing your own thing, or being upset by every negative review about some camera by KR or what? don´t be offended and talk like a looser, because now you really sound like one..
Q
3 years ago |Oh it’s you again Alex, I see you are still the same and have not grown up. Give it a few years and puberty will shine upon your whiney little voice my son, in the mean time keep on trolling because the key board won’t bite back
alex
3 years ago |this has nothing to do with trolling.. somebody who is being offended by a reviewer because who doesn´t like his camera-brand definetely needs to grow up..i don´t worry about reviewers, i buy what i need and i use it, despite what reviewers say about it.i bet you´re still looking for the ultimatecamera, that is why you keep on posting here every dday, and having comments on all kinds of stuff you probably don´t even own.. i use sony btw, together with nikon, canon and leica, so i guess i know what i am talking about, and you are not.. keep on posting my friend..
RB
3 years ago |I would love to see a direct comparison between the 2.0/24 and the 2.8/24-70, which (hopefully) would help to make up my mind… In particular, how much does the extra f-stop influence image composition…
Steve
3 years ago |Alex
I have for the most part stopped my participation in this group for the reasons you have been pointed out, and I’m sure that I’m not missed.
After my last posting, a few posters in this group explained to me the obvious; that this is a rumor website, not a photography website and has several people(with too much time on their hands)complaining about equipment that they will never own, looking for an elusive perfect camera body if made and sold at a completive (Canon, Nikon) price they would never purchase because it would be beyond their pocket book to afford.
And they have the right to do so, its a basic freedom of the Internet.
Notice that the same dozen posters all-day everyday chime in with the same old rants, complaining that no A700 replacement has yet to be shipped, no matter what the rumor posting is about.
For photographers, both professional and not that use a camera body as a creation tool, the postings on this website can be confusing, so think of it as a entertainment site, or more like a group of teenage girls chatting about rumors on the phone and not about business and art of photography.
Believe me, after Sony releases its A700 replacement (A77 and/or A750) the same group will continue whining about something else, likely the FF replacement of the A850/A900 class of products……………………and never a camera purchased by any of them.
ChenAlan
3 years ago |I think based on Kurt’s work, you can tell that the 24mm F/2.0 pawns both the 24-70 and 16-35 at 24mm F/2.0.
Daniel
3 years ago |True, Steve…but I must say that there’s a growing concernt about missing higher-end cameras from Sony, both APSC and FF. Judging on how many used a700s I’ve seen lately being sold on ebay by people who have chosen to buy gear from another more committed camera manufacturer, we can say that there has been a demand for quite a while now and most people lost their patience. But there’s also a growing request from former newbies, people that are taking a step up…
There’s another story with FF, a much more mature category of users, but even there we notice requests for better noise& autofocus performance mostly(EVF& translucent is not that welcomed here, not at all if you ask me).
There’s no such thing as the perfect camera…just that every now and then it would be nice to see some upgrades to certain lines of products that take place in a reasonable amount of time.
Maybe this site, among others, can help Sony get at least some feedback regarding their announcements and make better decisions according to this in the future….that is if they care to do so!!
dyna
3 years ago |In reference to the above comments about a.) Ken Rockwell and b.) Sony not being a “committed” D-SLR company…
1.) Ken Rockwell is a Nikon fanboy. Unabashedly so. Trying to pull anything else out of his reviews or his website would be asinine. If you’re going to his website in order to hear unbiased opinion, one would expect you to know better. Even the Nikonians consider him a crackpot half the time… but it’s his right, as Steve pointed out, to post as he pleases. Free speech and all that… it doesn’t have to be informed XD but it’s most certainly free. At least he allows commentary. Look at Hogan’s fantasyland: he won’t allow anyone to speak of his comments on his actual page, in favor or against. That would be too committed.
2.) Speaking of committed. Yeah, full stop. Sony’s had to shed the Minolta artifacts that make zero sense in the modern DSLR era and “sony-fy” the technology they want and they’ve done things no one else has yet to pull off, creating a technological coup in the making while only playing in the full body creation process since 2004. That is to say: they’ve done in under 8 years what it took everyone else 15. That has to be taken into consideration. And while everyone who can’t stand the idea of traditional change still whines about the “overheating issues” or the extra CA in the translucent mirror images (which, I might add, is most certainly not present in all the images and can often be dealt with when using a good circular polarizer)… people tend to forget that the A55 and A33 are both first generation products. And taking THAT into consideration, adding the fact that every new lens announced over the past 6 months or more has solely been for full frame product, one could posit that Sony is highly committed. So they had to start from the ground up. All they got was a lens mount and a flash hot shoe and a metering system. Look what they’ve done since.
No one’s perfect, certainly not Sony. But calling them non-committal is ridiculous.
Daniel
3 years ago |Look , Dyna, you have a world of your own!!
) Nobody called anyone non-committed…the term in my post was “more committed” in reference to other manufacturers(regarding the FF line and high-end APSC cameras and lenses).
Where on this earth did you come with the idea that they sony-fied anything!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! They shed what!?!
They bought a good company. It was an affordable cost for the technology and legacy that came along with it, everyone knows that.
Please take a peak on ebay…see the minolta primes prices..they had very decent optics and just had developed their ultrasonic focusing motor by the time Sony stepped in.
Did they sony-fy the 20mm f2.8, the 50mm f1.4, the 70-200 2.8, and a few others!? No, they did not, they relabeled them.
Of course that they came with the Zeiss line, a very nice and much appreciated move, yes they have built the 70-400(award winning) and a few others which are very well built with high optical quality, but in fact, they haven’t sony-fy that much untill last year, when they introduced new lines of cameras with vastly improved features, but consumer orientated.
In the higher end camera spectrum, as I pointed out, the others were still much more committed…lenses&cameras.
Just take a look at the recent announcements for Canon for example…the 200-400 mm, the 500&600mm f4, a recently changed 300 f2.8, and the rumours are that we are going to see the 5d mkIII this year.
Your saing that some guy is a Nikon fanboy..well it sounds to me that you are acting as if you were Sony’s defender in this case…just that nobody’s blaming them for something in particular.
All that’s been said is just proving interest in some cases, concernt in others for Sony’s products and marketing.
The Minolta “artifacts” played a major role in keeping Sony in (DSLR) business untill last year and it seems to me that it still plays a very important role these days.
They did so over those 8 years you were speaking of.
It wasn’t untill last year that Sony came out with a new mount, the E-mount, so again…what did they shed!?!!?
They built upon Minolta legacy and it worked just fine for all of us…let me not remember you of the hotshoe on their flashes which was developed by Minolta along with features that are still present in Sony’s upgraded flashes.
You are not even a Sony fanboy…just another reminder of Steve’s comment above…at least to me!!