Hi,
I sort of have noted that Zeiss lenses generally are regarded superior. I have or had 10 of them, 8 Hasselblad lenses (40/4, 50/4, 80/2.8, 120/4 (2 samples) 150/4 (2 samples) and 180/4 and 2 Sony Alpha zooms (24-70/2.8 ZA) and 16-80/3.5-4.5 ZA. I enjoy shooting with all of those lenses but I don't know if they are better than other lenses I had. On the Sony Alpha ZA zooms sharpness is excellent over a large sweet spot, but outside that sweet spot they need to be stopped down to f/8 for acceptable sharpness. The 24-70/2.8 ZA suffers for bad corner/edge sharpness even at f/8.
Regarding the 24-70/4, I have only seen tests about it. It is a new generation lens that is not corrected for distortion, that is handled in software. It doesn't shine in most tests, but Tim Ashley, who used to post a lot about lenses, is very happy with it.
So, my guess is that Zeiss lenses are OK, but may not live up to their reputation. Some lenses are excellent, like the 100/2 Macro, the 135/2 APO and the new Otus 55/1.4. Of the Hasselblad lenses I have the 180/4 is best. But, I have made excellent images with each of them.
Best regards
Erik
Michael,
in the video you say something along the lines "man the Zeiss lenses for the sony are so good". Now I have the FE 24-70 f/4 and I have to disagree here. At 24mm my copy is just plain bad. 2/3 out to the borders the images gets terribly soft and in the corners of the frame there is really nothing left you could call an image. The softness is symetric on all sides /corners, so I believe the lens is properly centered. Whats even more frustrating is that stopping down does not make a difference at all. The lens is just as bad at f/8 as it is at f/4. When zooming in, the border and corner softness somewhat eases, but stays unsatisfactory for most of the focal range. At first I thought I was doing something wrong here or had a defective copy, but when photozone tested the lens and came to the same conclusions, I am now lead to beleive the lens is just designed badly. Now you make this statement how good the zeiss lenses are with the fe 24-70 mounted to your 7r. Have you made a different experience? is your copy better than those tested out there?
Addiding to that: I beleive the mirrorless reviolution will not succeed without good quality fullframe lenses. I bought my A7 with a hope to replace my 5DIII 24/105 combo. I do lots of big size gallery prints and the 24-105 is very adaquete for this. For the Sony there is however no standard af zoom which can reach the (not perfect) quality of Canons 24-105. This is VERY frustrating.
Can you maybe elaborate a bit more on your experience with the fe 24-70, so that I can judge wheter it makes sense to test a different sample? Thanks!