Are Carl Zeiss Lenses Worth It

Maffe wrote:

All come downward to personal preference when we talk walk around lens

Exactly my point.

And so many people state:

Information technology’due south to heavy
Not broad enough
ninety% as skillful

It’s all subjective to the end user.

And then many times though I bet those that decide to get something other than what they’ve been saving up for or wanting all forth, feel similar they’ve settled on 2nd best. Or at to the lowest degree still wonder if the other would accept been meliorate.

If you can afford it, you won’t exist dissapointed.

kalpurush 🙂 wrote:

How skilful the Carl Zeiss is?

I have the a77 and I want to buy a mid zoom to compliment the a77, thus, thinking to buy Carl Zeiss 24 � 70mm 2.8 lens. Now, my concern is, is information technology worth the money buying this lens compare to the cheap Sony 16-50mm 2/8?

Usually, I would say, Carl Zeiss lenses are excellent. I am not a fan, but I am convinced by feel. I am using a couple of older Zeiss lenses for the Contax SLR system on my NEX and they are all not bad (but manual focus) – wonderful sharpness, color rendition and the particular Zeiss magic that is called “micro-contrast”.
I am regularly using the Sony Zeiss F/1,8 135mm (I retrieve of it as the best lens ever, at to the lowest degree in my modest earth). I used the F/2,viii 24-70 for a couple of days and must say – information technology is fast (likewise fast focussing), but non as sharp as other Zeiss lenses, particularly the corners are – wide open – amazingly soft.
The following links requite some support to my experience:
link 1 (photozone)
link 2 (artaphot)

If yous want to have a Zeiss lens go for the primes. If it has to be a zoom: The sixteen-35mm is said to exist excellent (as is the old Contax F/3,four 35-70mm, manual focus, which tin can be adapted to A-mount).

waldo_posth wrote:

kalpurush 🙂 wrote:

How good the Carl Zeiss is?

I have the a77 and I want to purchase a mid zoom to compliment the a77, thus, thinking to purchase Carl Zeiss 24 � 70mm 2.viii lens. Now, my concern is, is it worth the money buying this lens compare to the cheap Sony 16-50mm ii/eight?

Ordinarily, I would say, Carl Zeiss lenses are excellent. I am not a fan, but I am convinced past experience. I am using a couple of older Zeiss lenses for the Contax SLR organization on my NEX and they are all great (but manual focus) – wonderful sharpness, color rendition and the particular Zeiss magic that is chosen “micro-contrast”.
I am regularly using the Sony Zeiss F/i,viii 135mm (I recall of information technology every bit the best lens ever, at least in my minor earth). I used the F/two,8 24-70 for a couple of days and must say – it is fast (also fast focussing), simply not as precipitous as other Zeiss lenses, particularly the corners are – wide open – amazingly soft.
The following links give some support to my feel:
link i (photozone)
link 2 (artaphot)

If you want to have a Zeiss lens get for the primes. If information technology has to be a zoom: The xvi-35mm is said to be excellent (as is the old Contax F/3,four 35-70mm, manual focus, which can exist adjusted to A-mount).

Thanks for sharing your experience – my next purchase would be CZ 135 i.8 as well!

Arni Swarni wrote:

If you are really into the 24-70mm focal range, yous’ll terminate up bying the Zeiss anyhow!

Information technology’s a lot of coin, but if y’all use it oftentimes, it worth every penny…

Currently, I have 4 lenses which all are 50 mm and +, thus, 24 – 70 mm is broad enough for me!

Thank you for the advice – I will really recall virtually it!

Octupi wrote:

1 thing that would aid is to tell us your main focus of shooting? Portraits, landscape, bugs, dogs, kids?

I shoot almost everything! Not a pro like you, but have much interests!!
Please see my photostream at:

kalpurush photography | Wix.com
obayedh.wix.com

romke wrote:

if there are no budget restrictions i would opt for the cz. if light weight is of import, you fancy shooting somewhat wider then the cz offers and take no future plans gong FF, the sixteen-50 SAM might exist a more than sensible choice.

the choice is yours and it is not an like shooting fish in a barrel ane.

Many thank you Romke!

I don’t take a lot of upkeep for my photography, but can buy the CZ with my savings!! And I volition go FF but not too presently.

I don’t get information technology. If you lot are fifty-fifty thinking of getting the CZ 24-seventy/ii.8 and the 135/1.8 so what are yous doing with only an a77?

These are lenses for the utmost in image quality with no consideration for weight or toll. If that is what yous want why don’t you beginning with a FF camera like an a850 to get the best out of your glass?

You will probably get equally much IQ from a cheap minolta 35-105mm f/iii.5-four.five with an a850 thrown in at much the aforementioned toll.

Beyond a certain betoken cropped sensor cameras are just not cost effective with the drinking glass options available.