Sony A6000 plus Zeiss 16-70 lens

[Paulo Bizarro]

Good morning all,

A friend of mine has graciously agreed to lend me the above camera and lens for a quick evaluation. I don't see much discussion here about this camera, and lens. It seems since the introduction of the A7 series, the interest on Sony's APS-C mirrorless cameras has somewhat abated?

So is there anyone here that has experience with this combination? I have never used these Sonys, but my recent experience with the RX10 has been very positive, so I jumped at the opportunity.

From all the reading I have done so far, it seems like a very good combination between size and image quality. Hopefully I will make some interesting images with it, and will post some here.

Kind regards.

[allegretto]

a6000

You know, I've been through a bunch of front-line manufacturers over the years Nikon,Canon,Leica,Hasselblad,Contax, but never took Sony seriously as a still camera company. More for videos

Two years ago swept by hype and curiosity I picked up an RX-1. It was a revelation. Wow what a nice, albeit limited item. But was lugging a D4 and howitzers around.

Anyway, never liked the feature set of NEX so kid of ignored it. A7... blah. A7R... was really interested but got some bad juju on the shutter thing

A7s... gotta have it. Not gonna bore 'ya, you've already heard it. Flat out amazing.

So I figured I'd rent the A7R and check it out. Even more disappointing with slow AF

Rented a a6000.. it ROCKS. AF just about as fast as my Canon 6D with the Zony lenses

you will be lens limited with that set up

With an A7s and an a6000 there is nothing you can't do. On a tripod at A7R wheelhouse settings the a6000 is AT LEAST as good in terms of detail.

Gotta say the only problem is native lens availability. Leica and EF glass work well, but no AF

[Paulo Bizarro]

Thanks for your feedback and thoughts. My photographic interests revolve around landscapes and seascapes (with some night/starscapes), plus travel, and some portraits of my family.

Through the years, I have mostly used Canon, and for my small travelling kit I have tried many things. For the latter, this is where I want to evaluate the A6000 with the 16-70 lens. APS-C is plenty for my travel photos, especially with the quality of Sony sensors. I will use my Canon 6D plus the new 16-35 f4 lens for the rest; I have just too much familiarity with the system to drop it altogether.

As for lenses, Sony has been slowly but surely introducing new ones, so I have no doubts that there will be enough to keep me happy in say 1-2 years time. All I would need would be a traditional set of 21 (or 24mm), 50mm (already exists), and an 85 (or 100mm) lens.

[XE11]

i have a6000 and a7r. and fuji S5 pro and XE1 before that.

skin tone is not very good on sony. but DR are superb.

three things i want to complain about A6000:

1) the inclusion of AA filter. so even with a very decent lens ( i tried with a few leica and zeiss lens), the minor details are never captured.
2) shutter sound is very loud comparing to XE1.
3) there is no level gauge. when the A6000 was first launched, it was near 1000USD as a package...i would expect electronic level gauge would be standard for that kind of money.

for a7r, i do almost exclusively manual focus because it is just too slow. A6000 hits the right spot when it comes to AF. as said above, it's the lens that limits the speed of A6000, but as newer lens come onto the market, we can see A6000's true ability (for example, going with 70-200mm F4).

raw files from sony are generally tuned so you have maximum flexibility to do post-processing and ultimately that's what led me to change from fuji to sony.

[XE11]

sorry, i just realsie, you are also looking for 16-70mm.

i have only tried it in the shop.  to me, i feel the 16-70mm is the perfect lens for it (IQ, speed, size, weight, price). together with 10-18mm F4. this makes one mighty travel package.

it is carrying the zeiss name, however, i dont think it is quite matching the true Pro-grade lens from other brands (nikon, canon's 24-70mm for FF), even sony's own 24-70mm f2.8. 

[allegretto]

as noted elsewhere the AA-filter is for the video crowd. Apparently very important. Yes, it's not as good with eh M-glass as the A7s, which is amazing

It does focus faster than the A7s by almost 1/2 the time I'd estimate, sometimes even faster low light.

Forget AF in the A7R is right...! But put the a6000 and the A7R on the same settings, good tripod and watch what happens, don't play with res, just differentially enlarge. The a 6000 is just as good at ISO<800 and wide open. It's really quite nice and while I too miss the level, that can be compensated anyway

As I said, I would have bought eh A7R but that shutter and the obvious bounce at critical speeds just sucks

My best advice to the OP though is to bite the bullet and get the Zeiss/Sony zooms. Even with th crop sensor, the lens is just cleaner and has OSS

And the 55mm 1.8 also is a very nice lens with right now AF. I mean Canon-fast almost as fast your 6D which as you know is a monster. I have one too. Lightning!

Cheers

i have a6000 and a7r. and fuji S5 pro and XE1 before that.

skin tone is not very good on sony. but DR are superb.

three things i want to complain about A6000:

1) the inclusion of AA filter. so even with a very decent lens ( i tried with a few leica and zeiss lens), the minor details are never captured.
2) shutter sound is very loud comparing to XE1.
3) there is no level gauge. when the A6000 was first launched, it was near 1000USD as a package...i would expect electronic level gauge would be standard for that kind of money.

for a7r, i do almost exclusively manual focus because it is just too slow. A6000 hits the right spot when it comes to AF. as said above, it's the lens that limits the speed of A6000, but as newer lens come onto the market, we can see A6000's true ability (for example, going with 70-200mm F4).

raw files from sony are generally tuned so you have maximum flexibility to do post-processing and ultimately that's what led me to change from fuji to sony.

[Paulo Bizarro]

My best advice to the OP though is to bite the bullet and get the Zeiss/Sony zooms. Even with th crop sensor, the lens is just cleaner and has OSS

And the 55mm 1.8 also is a very nice lens with right now AF. I mean Canon-fast almost as fast your 6D which as you know is a monster. I have one too. Lightning!

Cheers

Thanks everybody, very useful information. I have been watching the Sony A7 series with interest. For now, the A6000 plus the Zeiss 16-70 is what I will be able to borrow from my friend, so I will give it a spin. In the future, I can see myself migrating towards something like the new A7 MKII (with IBIS, which is fantastic) with a trio of primes, to cover my needs. One of these primes will no doubt be the 55 f1.8, it seems that in 2015 there will be a new 85 f1.4. What is missing to me right now is some sort of "landscape" lens, like a 21 f2.8 or 24 f2.8. I know that there is a new FE 16-35, but... a lens in that range and characteristics will have to be really good, as good as my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 are right now.

[JV]

I know that there is a new FE 16-35, but... a lens in that range and characteristics will have to be really good, as good as my Canon 6D and 16-35 f4 are right now.

I own the A7s and I have been going back and forth as well regarding this lens.

I only had the 55mm, eventually decided not the get the 16-35mm but I did get the 35mm/f2.8 in the meanwhile.

I might get rid of the 35mm/f2.8 when the faster 35mm/f1.4 comes out if it is really good.

The lack of native lenses is really an issue IMO.  I really hope that Sony finally will start delivering on those lenses next year.

About the 55mm, it is a very good lens but I also have 6 Fuji X-mount lenses and those are equally as good with some of them being better IMO.

[allegretto]

Be careful

The Zony 55mm 1.8 is deceptively sharp and neutral. All the way out.

The Fuji lenses, while nice are APS-C and when I had my X-Pro remember them as "good" when I evaluated them. I'm far more sanguine over the Zony. But maybe it's the bodies too... they rock!

I own the A7s and I have been going back and forth as well regarding this lens.

I only had the 55mm, eventually decided not the get the 16-35mm but I did get the 35mm/f2.8 in the meanwhile.

I might get rid of the 35mm/f2.8 when the faster 35mm/f1.4 comes out if it is really good.

The lack of native lenses is really an issue IMO.  I really hope that Sony finally will start delivering on those lenses next year.

About the 55mm, it is a very good lens but I also have 6 Fuji X-mount lenses and those are equally as good with some of them being better IMO.

[mcbroomf]

I bought a copy of the 16-70 and returned it.  Not very good at the wide end .. very disappointed as it's a Zeiss.  I was using it on a 5N or 6 (can't remember)

I also bought the a6000 and returned it.  I got some grid looking banding in the sky on some shots (rather like shadow banding you see on Canon 5D2 files if pushed too much). 

Both of these issues may have been sample/QC problems but I elected not to get them replaced.  You can google a6000 and 16-70 reviews and find those issues though. 

It's good that you are borrowing the combo and can try.

[JV]

The Fuji lenses, while nice are APS-C and when I had my X-Pro remember them as "good" when I evaluated them.

Just out of curiosity, which ones?

[allegretto]

Just out of curiosity, which ones?

A 23, 35 and a 18-56 zoom IIRC

Have to go back to my eBay pics to be sure. But they were the good ones at the time

There is nothing wrong with Fuji or their sensors... I just screw around a lot with cameras while I take pictures

cheap vice...

[XE11]

if you can live without zoom. for A7 series i would just go with canon 17mm TSE (full shift to give 11mm, no shift to give 17mm, then take a 1.4x TC to give 24mm), Zeiss 55mm F1.8, then either canon 85mm or contax g 90mm F2.8 (use with techart adaptor to give full AF).

for myself, i was very close to order the 16-35mm f4 from sony, but soon after announcement, canon rumored to release a 11-24mm. This is very important lens if it is true, because i have both a6000 and a7r, 11-24mm will give perfect coverage for both.

my daily carry is a7r + SAL70300G (LA-EA3) + either Leica MATE (28-50mm F4) or contax G 24-85mm (quite heavy/big, but if i need AF for normal range, this is my choice).

do watch out for weight tho. what i found is that im quite happy to have around 600g-700g hang around my neck all day long (fuji XE1 + 16-50mm, a6000 + 16-50, A7r + light prime). but once going zoom. the weight goes by a lot. and of course the new a7ii body-only already taken up nearly 600g.

[akclimber]

Hi,

I own an A6000 + 10-18 & 16-70.  My main cameras are fullframe Canon and Nikon DSLRs.  I purchased the A6000 to try out a mirrorless camera and to use a lightweight hiking/exploration camera.  I had no real expectations about the performance of the camera and lenses when I purchased them and was half expecting to end up sending them back or selling them (I hadn't shot with a cropped camera in a long time and wasn't sure about the mirrorless performance, etc).  Well, I have to say that I love the little, light, take anywhere camera.  The image quality at reasonable ISOs is very impressive, as is the AF and video.  And the available apps for the camera can also be very useful/fun.   As for the lenses, the 16-70 is good, not great, but I find the 10-18 a real winner. For the money, the A6000 is a terrific deal.

Cheers!

[JV]

For the money, the A6000 is a terrific deal.

It even gets better: $746 for the a6000 with 16-50mm and 55-210mm Lenses
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1105052-REG/sony_alpha_a6000_mirrorless_digital.html

[Paulo Bizarro]

Thanks again for all the feedback. I now had the chance of taking the kit for a spin, and the results are quite good. Will post some images, once I have time to go through them.

[sabesh]

I switched from M43 and Fuji to Sony, just for this lens. It's the perfect vacation / walkaround zoom. No other manufacturer has anything like it (24-105 FF equivalent with constant aperture).

I now use the A6000 + 16-70 and A7S + 16-35/4 in tandem for vacations and walkaround (I hate lens swapping). I'll have a prime in the bag for subject isolation shots.

[ErikKaffehr]

No,

The AA-filter is not for the video crowd. It is intended to reduce colour aliasing errors. Video has about a third of the resolution so it would need OLP-filtering that would make the camera useless for stills. Most Sony still cameras have pretty bad issues with moiré when used for video.

Some recent cameras read the complete image for video and do a correct downsampling to 1080p. That is the right way of doing it. The Sony RX10 does this.

Video cameras obviously have adequate AA-filtering for the sensors they use.

Best regards
Erik

as noted elsewhere the AA-filter is for the video crowd. Apparently very important. Yes, it's not as good with eh M-glass as the A7s, which is amazing

It does focus faster than the A7s by almost 1/2 the time I'd estimate, sometimes even faster low light.

Forget AF in the A7R is right...! But put the a6000 and the A7R on the same settings, good tripod and watch what happens, don't play with res, just differentially enlarge. The a 6000 is just as good at ISO<800 and wide open. It's really quite nice and while I too miss the level, that can be compensated anyway

As I said, I would have bought eh A7R but that shutter and the obvious bounce at critical speeds just sucks

My best advice to the OP though is to bite the bullet and get the Zeiss/Sony zooms. Even with th crop sensor, the lens is just cleaner and has OSS

And the 55mm 1.8 also is a very nice lens with right now AF. I mean Canon-fast almost as fast your 6D which as you know is a monster. I have one too. Lightning!

Cheers

[dlqdprn]

I have been using this combination for about a month now. a6000 and 16-70 mm specifically. JPEGs are fine, but it will produce spectacular images if worked in Capture One. One needs to pay particular attention to sharpening. I have read comments from people who say this lens is not "sharp" wide open. It's f4. it's very sharp. It's very clear. It has good, perhaps excellent color. BUT, everything changes in the hands of users who have settings wrong then blame the gear. I did this myself recently. I was unaware that OSS was ON by default in every mode. I was shooting some high speed carting with the lens, and produced some super images, but there was some unexpected ghosting while panning. Sure enough, I really needed to turn OSS OFF by default. I don't blame the camera or the lens. I blame my laziness for not paying attention. The a6000 sensor produces fantastic images from the 16 - 24 mm range, all others are simply excellent. I have a Hoya EVO CPOL for it, even better. Don't get lured into buying an L bracket because none are designed to permit the remote cable to work without extenders, and that just defeats the purpose of having an attached L bracket. ( as of 1-1-2014 of all designs available ). I have limited my printing to 13x19 and the images are just awesome, again assuming you take the time to develop the image properly for printing, something which takes into account paper, luminosity, black point, size specific sharpening and so and and so on. I find the system to be developing slowly but surely. Not quite pro level, but fun and clearly capable. (ps, this is my first post to LL :-) )

PS, C1 v8 does not have a lens profile for this lens yet, so you might need to work it a bit as opposed to "this lens causes distortion". :-)

[gbdz]

My Little Sony and the Zeiss zoom have been with me for two weeks now. Unfortunately, it is the rain season now so not much fun going out shooting.
My 'real adult' set is a Canon 5DIII with EF and EF L lenses.  Needless to say, my expectations were mixed.
The first impression was that the camera-lens combination is bigger than what I expected. The second was that the lens zooms the wrong way.
The picture quality seems to be about the same as from the FF Canon. Of course the optical variables are different so the DOF/angle of vision will be different also. Peanuts. Surprising, though, the pictures that come out of this little machine. they are crisp and clear. the autofocus is up to the task as long as there is light.
Once the sun goes down this por thing loses the focus. The Zeiss zoom seems to block the autofocus light. Or something. Bad experience there.

Battery life is mediocre after the 5DIII. As I am not sure whether I  am going to keep this camera, I have not ordered the charger or extra batteries yet.
They will be on the shopping list if I keep this Sony.

There is of course vignetting and distortion on the short end of the zoom. A click on LR takes care of it.
The Metabones adapter has not arrived yet. People seem to say that it is no good with AF and not so hot with MF either. The discussion about this matter has acquired features of a religious discourse. I will see what my experience is before I say anything at all.

Sony is very good in adapting the possibilities of in-camera picture processing. As a mastodont myself, I do RAW. Probably the out of camera .jpg would be "good enough" for most purposes. Again 'they' say that the -jpg machine on the Sony is hard handed. Whatever. The RAW files are good.

The camera shoots at 10 fps and it sounds very impressive. My model did not like it at all. Maybe she gets used to it. She told me she prefers the 'real' camera but the reason was that I spent too much time fiddling with the Sony because I do not my way about it like I do the 5DIII.

My feelings about the a6000-Zeiss 16-70 combo thus far:
- not as portable as I would have liked
- AF not as efficient as I would have expected
- picture quality is pretty amazing
- the user interface is not something that you'd call intuitive but not the worst there is
- this combo is definitely a downgrade from a FF Canon system, no two ways about that
- the flash is silly but fills in nicely at -1 stop

Who would buy this and for what?
- Honestly, I have no idea why a DSLR shooter would switch but maybe with some more getting used to I'll figure it out.
- Canon users, get the SL-1.

"Next time, take the real camera, please!"
65mm, ISO 640, f/4.0 at 1/100s, ambient light from the evening sky