4.20.2016

What the Focaccia??? I was ready to be disappointed by this lens. But then I shot with it and...

Full frame shot. Jpeg. Standard.

Long story shortened. Bought a lens after reading and researching widely. The reviews were mixed. Actual users on Amazon.com loved it (for the most part). Metrics driven DXOMark gave it two thumbs up. The denizens of the web, and the signal repeaters crapped all over it and let me know (gently, of course) that I was a moron for even considering a lens that was "incapable" of sharpness, and that was "so soft in the corners I could use it for toilet paper..."

The truth was not somewhere in the middle. It was out there just waiting to be discovered by anyone ready to spend $4400 on the lens and the right body on which to test it. So, after days and days of rain we finally got a classic, Austin Spring day. Lots of sunshine and its friend, high humidity.

Well, I had been writing proposals and doing post processing (and writing too many blog posts) so I splurged and spent some time walking around this morning with the A7R2 and its friend, the Zeiss 24-70mm f4.0G ZA zoom lens. I must have gotten a defective one because it looks sharp as a tack everywhere I look, and at every focal length. I shot mostly at f5.6 and I tried to find crappy-ness but have been largely unsuccessful. Plus, I think the color in  the straight out of the camera, medium res Jpegs is just super deluxe. If you click on the images you'll be able to see them bigger. 

The quality of a lens is about more than just pinpoint sharpness everywhere. It'a also about color, contrast, saturation and a personality. I think I'll be just fine with the new wide angle to short telephoto zoom lens. I think most people will be happy with it, provided they put it on the right body...

A central crop of the frame above.






10 comments:

Daniel Walker said...

Ok, what is the right body other than the a7RII

Kirk Tuck said...

I presume the lens works well on all the A7 series bodies. It also works for me on the a6300 and a6000.

Kirk Tuck said...

I'm wondering what happened to all those knowledgable photographers who were so adamant about the shortcomings of this lens. No rousing debate?

milldave said...

Probably gone to eat some pie.
Humble,of course!
Regards,
David

Wolfgang Lonien said...

My friend Markus has the cheaper 28-70 and 7M2 combination which are also nice. In case someone is interested, see his Flickr stream. And I think he also kept his 77Mk2 - don't know yet for sure, I'll meet him on Saturday.

EdPledger said...

Curious how you are finding the stabilization of your new set-up compared to what you were getting with the Olympus EM5II, or with the bridge cameras. I have the A6000 but, pushing elderly, really need the IBIS of my Olympus. Next body probably will be FF but has to have IBIS. Not too surprised by the results with the Zeiss zoom, very nice colors. Will be awaiting some comments on the a7RII with some vintage Nikon glass, whether the 105 or....did you keep the 50-135 (I think that was one you have used...)??

Thomas Kr├╝ger said...

...and also greetings from THE focaccia city Genoa in Italy! ;-)

A Foolish Man said...

Today's lenses are all great. People get way to wrapped up in tests. Yes if you are trying to decide between two similar lenses you might want to check out reviews, but otherwise all modern lenses do a great job.

benatmer said...

I agree Kirk, in the real world it's not bad at all. I'm just trying the 24-240 to see if that's usable too...

Kirk Tuck said...

EdPledger, the stand alone IBIS of the full frame Sonys is nowhere as good as that of the Olympus EM5.2. That's one of the prime advantages of the smaller sensor. But Sony does have one good trick up their sleeves in that department. The Sony A7R2 uses both the IBIS and the lens stabilization to get a lot closer to Olympus territory. The camera handles the up/down, side to side motions while the lenses hand yaw and pitch. Bigger geometries and more effective with the combo. Still not in the same ballpark though. But getting there.