Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5 reviews

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: shadowfax001 review date: May-14-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL2470z SAL1635z
price paid:	550 USD (used)
positive:	Fairly sharp — even wide open Colors and contrast are great Nice focal range
negative:	Plasticky build No SSM 2/3 stop slower than competition Slight distortion and CA Some light falloff/vignetting at 16mm
comment:	Works well on both the A77 and A99. However, with it's APS-C design it is really not made to be used with the A99. In my opinion, this lens has better color/contrast than the 2470z. Since there is no SSM or SAM, the lens is not very good for video in AF mode. Build quality could be better as well. I purchased this lens refurbished w/ a two-year ADH for just over $600. Definitely worth this price. I'm not sure if I would pay $999 for a brand new 1680z.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Guy review date: May-11-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70 kit Sony 18-55 SAM kit
price paid:	400 EUR
positive:	+ great range + great IQ
negative:	- zoom creep - the rubber zoom ring has bad quality - generally not that good build
comment:	I have a rather beat up version of this lens. The original cap is broken and I received the lens as-is without a pouch/box. The focus ring is not completely smooth, but AF works without any problems at all. I really like this lens for it's IQ. I take it with me for my vacation trips and it performs nicely. The range is perfect and it doesn't weigh too much. The build quality of this lens could be a lot better. There is a lot of zoom creep, the hood is wonky, and the rubber from the zoom ring is detached almost completely (it streched out too much it seems).

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ABDurbs review date: April-26-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 28-75 f2.8
price paid:	$580 (new)
positive:	Sharp Reliable Nice colour Value for money
negative:	Build quality is the only negative I have, but even that is not bad just a little barrel "rattle". Would love it to be f2.8 at that price. Not weather sealed Not SSM
comment:	This lens used to sit permantly on my A700 now it sits on my A77. It is such a versatile and reliable lens. I have thought of changing it for the 16-50 f2.8, but I love the extra reach of this lens, and of course the price was better.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Aavo review date: April-26-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70 kit for KM5D Sony 18-70 kit for A700
price paid:	800 euro (new)
positive:	Great and enough fast standard zoom with longer reach
negative:
comment:	The greatist zoom I had for KM5D and A700 from 2006-2012. Owned one of the very first copies in Estonia and it was mounted all the time I needed zoom lens.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: psychni review date: April-15-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	MINOLTA 24-85 3.5-4.5 70-300G Tamron SP90 2.8 macro
price paid:	750 euro (new)
positive:	Sharp in the center Really good in Color Light and compact
negative:	Strong Fringes in the corners Not SSM Not Full Frame
comment:	Always a good companion and my standard lens to my A700. Now I owned a used A900 . Both A700 and 16-80 on ebay for sale... I was till now happy with this lens for the budget.. Now an old 24-85 is on A900 and waiting for a brand new CZ 24-70 2.8!! I strongly recommend sal16-80 if you are in APS format!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Pygmy review date: January-30-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 Minolta 35-105 (beercan)
price paid:	600 (used)
positive:	Perfect colours Great sharpness That special micro contrast making things pop out Great Bokeh
negative:	Fragile construction
comment:	Finally made the jump to try this lens, despite its mixed bag build reputation. It turned out my copy did have some oil splash or condensation on the inner lens element - luckily it doesn't affect picture quality. When it focusses the picture at times jumps a little in the viewfinder, it seems somehow a little lose so the build quality doesn't seem to be the best out there. Having said that, the optics are absolutely fantastic. I've been really happy with my Tamron which is extremely sharp as well - but there is just that extra micro contrast in the Zeiss giving the 3D feel. The Bokeh is an entirely different story compared to the Tamron, it's creamy and soft, especially at 80mm it's beautiful. I felt the Tamron had not always natural colours especially on my a77, but the Zeiss is cooler and more natural - just beautiful rendition. The zoomrange is also so much more handy than 17-50, I realized that I really make use of that 80mm in my walk-abouts and landscapeshots. All in all it's just the perfect lens - if only Sony would improve the build quality! I still highly recommend this lens!

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 2 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: arakpura review date: January-11-13
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony 16-105 minolta 50 1,7 minolta 50 macro 2.8 minolta 28-135 sigma 17-35 sigma 105 macro minolta 70-210 minolta 28 sony 18-200 minolta 35-105 minolta 28-85 sony 18-250 . .
price paid:	350 eur, used
positive:	colours are great good aperture for zoom lens bokeh light weight
negative:	build quality plastic build sharpness dark corners at 16mm unreliable (longevity) AF
comment:	I bought this lens with a big expectations and maby that`s why I was so disapointed. I must say, my copy, is one of the worst lenses I ever had. Sony 16 105 is much more sharper, it has allmost the same colours, OK, bokeh and colours are really great at zeiss and that is all good what I can say about this lens. The build quallity for zeiss lens and the price is to cry for, zoom creap, sharpness is normal but far from good-at my copy,...but if you compare it with kit lens 18-55, is exelent.... I think the glass in the lens is very good, but everything else what is arround this, so "wanted" lens, is beyond the expectations Minolta old scholl lenses, they should learn from them... sorry zeiss but this is not good for your name, which ment something a decade ago...or maybe just my copy was so bed, I sold it

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Alphaboi review date: June-11-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta AF 28-105 RS - Sony DT 50 1.8 SAM - KM 18-70 - Beercan - Tamron 17-50 - Sony 55-200 SAM
price paid:	550 USD (used)
positive:	- Excellent zoom range - Excellent color and contrast - Sharp at wide open (center) - Ultra sharp at 5.6(corner to corner) - Fast and accurate AF - Zeiss
negative:	- Price - Build quality could be better - Not SSM
comment:	I have had this lens for a couple of weeks now and I am very happy with its performance. It's better than Tamron in every aspect except aperture. My copy is sharper than 50 1.8. The color and contrast is fantastic, just amazing and this lens is very very sharp. Unique.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Argote review date: June-08-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma DC OS HSM 18-50/2.8-4.5 Sony DT 18-70/3.5-5.6
price paid:	600 (Used)
positive:	Nice Range (great walkaround) Good aperture (though not ideal) Great Microcontrast & Colors Nice heft (but not excessive) Focuses great on A65 Carl Zeiss It just FEELS right
negative:	No SSM Not as fast as other lenses (aperture wise) Some CA Expensive
comment:	Very good lens, a nice step up from the Sigma DC OS HSM 18-50/2.8-4.5 I had before especially on my 24 MP A65 (the Sigma was fine for my previous 10MP A200). I have noticed a bit of barrel distortion on the lower end of the zoom range but nothing too bad. Lens is very good walkaround overall. I just wish it had SSM (especially given the price). I don't think it's worth the $999 New asking price though, I'd go for the Sony 16-50, Tamron 17-50 or Sony 16-105 instead. It is cool to say you have a CZ lens though...

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Dan Berke review date: May-14-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-50 f2.8, sigma 17-70
price paid:	£400
positive:	Colours, bokeh, flare control, sharpness, weight
negative:	Aperture
comment:	Excellent lens. A great walkabout with perfect APS range making it suitable for landscapes to mid-range telephoto. Of course a constant f2.8 would be great but then it would weigh and cost more. The colours are a dream and the bokeh is excellent. Very sharp and well recommended. better than the Sigma 17-70 and on a par with the Sony 16-50

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Retyred review date: April-07-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 70-300G, Sony 100/2.8 macro, Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6
price paid:	£520
positive:	An ideal compromise between IQ and zoom range, making it an outstanding lens for general-purpose use. Very good IQ throughout its zoom range. Relatively snappy, quiet focusing, especially for screw-drive. I find the build quality quite acceptable, though note my negatives below.
negative:	Some zoom droop does occur but that is not a major concern for me. Never seen this before - but if you grasp the zoom ring too firmly it binds on the barrel and turning requires force. One’s instinct is to grasp even more firmly and that makes it worse. Only then does one realise what’s wrong and adjust one’s grip.
comment:	I bought my first Sony DSLR for use with this lens, having enjoyed the excellent performance of the Sony DSC-R1 with a similar, though not identical, Zeiss lens. I’ve now owned the CZ16-80mm for nearly 4 years and use it for over 90% of my pictures. Its performance on the A77 in terms of IQ and AF precision is even better than on the A700, though that was good. Highly recommended.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Prabu review date: January-22-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	550 (used)
positive:	sharpness weight colors saturation zoom range
negative:
comment:	This is a great walk around lens. The zoom range is perfect! 16-80mm, and with the digital tele converter on A65, it extends up to 160mm. I am not a fan of digital zooming, but that has made otherwise impossible shots possible. This lens is so sharp that even at 2x digital zoon on A65, the loss on quality/resolution is hardly noticeable. Produces excellent saturation and contrast and I hardly ever used post processing. Take the lens out in the sun and you get stunning images.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: pureaxis review date: January-19-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	730 USD (new)
positive:	-Sharp -Great range -Not heavy good balance on A65
negative:	-Not SSM -Focus ring do not have a good feel
comment:	Not sure why everyone complains about the build quality, I mean it is not as good as other Zeiss lenses but overall it is fine. Problem for me is not SSM and focus ring do not provide good travel, which is important for video.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: jakubh70 review date: January-01-12
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105, 18-70
price paid:	500$
positive:	Sharpness, color, contrast, range, speed
negative:	too many build issues
comment:	I have bought this lens occasionally second hand, but very little used. It gives excellent picture quality in almost every aspect. Great macro ability. What makes me somewhat dissapointed is the build that could be better for such quite an expensive lens. Zoom ring is smaller and definitely worse dampened than in cheap kit lens 18-70. At 16mm corner darkening is massive problem, worse than in 16-105 superzoom. Even using slim filters causes yet extra shading in corners at 16mm setting. Zoom creeps from time to time - no zoom lock. Distance scale and MF ring are a joke - you got maybe 10 degrees from MFD to infinity. I can't tell it's better than 16-105. Well, Zeiss people - you should learn from good old Minolta 18-70 kit which has a zoom ring working like a dream and lets use flters at all.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: cleoo review date: December-02-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL16105 SAL1870
price paid:	625
positive:	Carl Zeiss Lens! Sharp! Slightly better range than Kit
negative:	Zoom Creep Plastic Construction Price
comment:	I bought this because I was curious about what was so special about this lens compared to the SAL16105. I was already impressed with the SAL16105 so, it being a CZ, it should've been even better. The plastic construction does not justify its price. It occasionally squeaks when zooming in and out, maybe it was with my copy. The sharpness seemed about the same as the SAL16105. Walking around with the camera hanging off my neck, I quickly realize that the zoom creep happens too easily. It is a sharp lens, but I'll switch back to the SAL16105.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Manix review date: November-30-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 28-80 plastic fantastic sony 18-70mm
price paid:	950 AUD (new)
positive:	very good range , love the colours and contrast, on aps-c covers almost every most used focal lenght, acceptable bokeh between 50 and 80 mm wide open
negative:	build quality - is it zeiss or what ??? zoom creep , heavy vignette at 16 mm with cpl filter
comment:	have used it for almost three years now , and is about time to let it go... still almost perfect , just little bit too slow for my taste and I really don't wanna use it on a full frame ( lucky me ! ). from exif data I can see that it was mostly used on both ends and on about 50 mm in 35 mm SLR terms. anyway it was ( and still is ) well worth purchase - as a good walk aroud lens - nothing comes close to it ( but , take it with grain of salt - it just my personal experience and opinion ).

sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 2 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: boyzone review date: October-28-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 35-105
price paid:	548 USD (Used)
positive:	- Light weight - MFD
negative:	Build quality is very bad. My copy shown a fungus on the front glass.
comment:	Besides fungus, my copy unable to provide me good sharpness. Most of the time is mis-focusing when having a portrait. Total of 2 bodies (A580 & A33) I had tried and confirm is mis-focusing on the lens. Overall, I still love my build like a tank Minolta 35-105. I will trade this lens and go for SAL16105.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: tekwizard review date: October-21-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-55 3.5-5.6 Sony 35 1.8 Sony 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 SSM G Minolta 80-200 2.8 HS Minolta 135 2,8
price paid:	650 EUR (new)
positive:	- good range - sharpness - weight
negative:	corner sharpness could be slightly better on the wide end
comment:	Coming from the R1 this was a logical choice and it became my default walk around lens. The range is perfect as is the image quality and the distortions at the wide end can be easily corrected in post processing. The build quality may not be comparable with the full format Zeiss or the all metal Minoltas but it is not bad and the plastic makes the lens very light.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: petesidewalk review date: October-06-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 2.8 Sony 18-55 3.5-5.6 Sony 18-70 3.5-5.6
price paid:	440 USD
positive:	Contrast Fairly compact Range
negative:	Price Distortion Plastic build
comment:	Greay range, I would have liked more switches and tighter build. Good contrast and sharpness for a zoom. A lot of money for a blue crest, though. Great walk around lens, but distortion could be better on the wide end. Colors are nice and the lens isn't huge, also a plus.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Steve4D review date: October-06-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL16-105DT, 24-70Z, KM17-35D, SAL18-250, KM24-85RS, KM24-105D, KM28-105RS, KM28-135
price paid:	AU$585 - New
positive:	Very Sharp, Fast AF, Great Colour and Contrast Straight Out of Camera.
negative:	None for what this lens is designed for.
comment:	I started off with the 16-80z and then scored the SAL16-105 as part of an a700 Kit bargain package. It took me a while to decide between the two, but I ended up keeping the 16-80Z. The main disadvantage for this lens was - less reach, but there was just something special about the files it generated, that swayed me. I think that the AF was a bit better on my 16-80z/a700 combo too. If you need that extra reach, then the 16-105 is also a great lens. Is the 16-80z worth that little more? Well yea, I think it is worth it and I have had mine for over three years now. This lens is my a700 walkabout lens and will soon do likewise on my a77.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: drew review date: September-15-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony 18-55 sony 55-200 sony 28-75 sony 50 f1.8
price paid:	Rp 6250000
positive:	sharp colorfull
negative:	no swich af/mf
comment:	more heavy and better build than people said. best colour lens that I ever had but not sharper than sony fix lens

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: jamesmd review date: August-05-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	300€ (used)
positive:	very sharp , great IQ , very light
negative:	its not FF
comment:	I had this lens with my a700 , now with a900 I saw one at good price in excellent condition , and I think its a perfect copy too . Such great images straight out of camera , I'm really impressed . A great lens for taking always , its equivalent to a 24 120 so very versatile . the only thing on a900 is remember to use the inner lines in the viewer .

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 1 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: rtuss review date: July-13-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-55 kit lens
price paid:	500 CAD
positive:	Light weight Sharp Fast Great Colors
negative:	Unreliable (longevity) AF
comment:	This is a great lens! I never really used my 18-55 because the range just didn't fit my needs (it was a bit short on the long end) and so I found myself having to carry multiple lens. The build quality of this lens also feels much better and it seems to feel much nicer in your hands when shooting. After owning this lens for 13 months the AF wore out; this is common problem with this lens from what I've read. As the lens is also 2 months out of warranty Sony could not offer me any assistance and provided me with an estimate of $748 CAD to fix the AF. I guess this will now be an MF only lens. :(

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: nicols review date: May-11-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-250 Superzoom Minolta 28-105
price paid:	375 GBP (S/H)
positive:	SHARP!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good colours and contrast.
negative:	A little expensive brand new. Well documented QC and build issues with early copies.
comment:	A classic walkabout lens. I was offered a s/h copy at a good price but I took a long time to decide to buy, mainly due to the many well documented 'problem' copies out there. However, a quick play with this one convinced me it was a good copy and I was blown away at how sharp my photos looked with a little sharpening in DXO optics (its a supported lens on my a55 body). If you can get a good copy (and some now state that the the issues were mainly with early samples) for a good price, go for it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Crayfish review date: April-04-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 24-105 3.5-4.5
price paid:	850 USD (new)
positive:	great range for aps-c light weight colors
negative:	at wide angle too soft in angles
comment:	16-80 makes 24-120 at aps-c - great range I guess. For me this lens is well built, makes sharp enough images wide open. Maybe it's too soft in angles, and gives much vignetting with any of non-slim filters, but it's worth it. But not worth the price though - it's slightly overestimated for there is no alternative for it in the system. Compared to minolta 24-105 it gives much interesting colors and images... well... are of more depth :) Must have for travel shots!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: zozo review date: March-12-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	400 €
positive:	sharp
negative:	AF / MF button on lenses
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: cruiser review date: March-11-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24mm RS f2,8 Sigma 50mm f1,4
positive:	+good center sharpness +nice ook and feel
negative:	-distortion at 16mm -corner sharpness at f4
comment:	The size & shape, weight, and zoom range fits well with my A55. Build quality is good, but nothing that should be compared to old school GMinolta lenses. Center sharpness is very good wide open, but for corner improved corner sharpness you need to stop down. My primes are better in this respect. I don´t think there is a better lens in this zoom range for Sony, but there is still room for improvement.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: superdavis review date: March-07-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28 - 105 F2.8-4 Minolta 35-70 F4
price paid:	360 Eur (used)
positive:	- 16 mm - CZ colours - Perfect travel/city range - Fast enough for the price
negative:	- price if bought new - vignetting/distortion at 16mm, if filter used - heavy - not FF
comment:	As for many this is my main walkaround lens and has been there since as kit lens upgrade. Definately best walk around zoom lens in Sony range for begginers. When this is on, you hardly find a need to change your other lenses as it contains all - range, speed and colours. Was happy to find used one for resonable price, as I guess new is little to expensive for what it delivers.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: dcad10 review date: February-28-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Canon 17-55mm 2.8 IS Canon 17-40mm f4 L Canon 18-55mm 4-5.6 IS Vivitar series 1 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
price paid:	$550 USD
positive:	5x zoom range color rendition
negative:	corner sharpness at 16mm zoom creep crop sensors only
comment:	First with the negative. I would have liked for this lens to have a zoom lock as it slides to 80mm when hanging from my neck. Also, the corner performance is lacking at 16mm however considering the range this lens covers, I think it does an excellent job. If I want absolute quality, I'll grab a prime lens, however if I want a single lens for a day out shooting, I wouldn't hesitate to grab this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: dcisive review date: February-09-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Nikkor 16-85vr
price paid:	749.95(new)
positive:	Superb sharpness, color and contrast wide open. Quite fast to lock focus and is very accurate in doing so. I rather like the solid feel of the materials and it balances very well with a A55. Resistance to flare is very good. Next to no CA present at all times regardless of situation where it's used.
negative:	Price
comment:	Much has been said about this lens in regards to it's lack of consistency of build. Well, the 1st copy I bought was indeed faulty as it had poor sharpness on the left side of the frame. A 2nd copy now gives me ideal performance across the entire frame. I find it near instant to focus, even in lower light scenarios with a A55 body. Colors are so very rich as is contrast, which is high even wide open. Stopped down things only reach a higher level yet. My 2nd copy has no slop in the build and it is tight and accurate. Resistance to flare is exceptional with this lens as well as near non existent CA. It is expensive but in the end if it is going to sit on your body most of the time it can earn it's keep quickly. A sample can be seen here: http://www.pbase.com/traveler/image/132082669/large.jpg

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: saxbike review date: January-18-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-135mm Tamron 17-50 Sony 18-250 Minolta 24
price paid:	540USD
positive:	Versatile range Excellent resolution & contrast light & compact fast AF
negative:	ZOOM Creep mild (but very correctable) distortion Wish it was a constant f2.8
comment:	The Zeiss 16-80mm is a terrific lens, producing the best IQ I have seen on an APS-C sensor (a700). The resolution is extremely high and the color and contrast produce images that need very little post-processing. I did side by side comparisons of this lens with those listed above. At 24mm the minolta prime and Zeiss were indistinguishable except for a slightly better resolution in the extreme corners of the Minolta 24mm. When I put the Zeiss up against the Minolta 28-135 (you know, the "secret handshake"), I thought the latter would hold its own. Not the case at all. The Zeiss was far, far superior in sharpness and contrast. Even the colors were stronger, more saturated. Both the Sony 18-250 and the Tamron 17-50 did very well but I still found the Zeiss to be superior and finally sold these lenses. The Zeiss is on the a700 90% of the time, because it is an exceptional lens. I only have two criticisms: zoom creep and f3.5-4.5. Other than the creeping zoom, I have had no issues with the build. Manual focus has no play at all.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: sporky review date: January-17-11
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	kit lens
price paid:	700 USD
positive:	Highly practical: * zoom range * form/size Sharp Flower/non-rotating lens hood
negative:	Occasional misfocus on a100 wide+close Price
comment:	90% of my pictures are taken with this lens now. I'm very happy with it. Contrary to the negative reviews, I'm happy with the build and haven't noticed any lens creep yet.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: sagiluck review date: December-19-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	16-105
price paid:	sal 11-18 + SGD100
positive:	+ sharpest lens i ever used + zoom creep seems minimal with my copy + very good range + T* coat + good f4.5 at 80mm + hood not noticable when reversed + sharp wide open
negative:	+ dusty rubber ring + DT lens built + no SSM
comment:	my 16-105 has never exceed expectation in terms of sharpness but this CZ lens did. Traded my UWA for this lens for travel purpose ( which i believe at 16mm is good enough for landscape.. beside 11-12mm almost not usable in most situation ). my copy show little zoom creep.. none at 16mm, good enough for me. but zooming give 'cheap & loose' feeling. one thing CZ optics excel in is that you never need to step down to get great IQ. while stepping down still give slightly better result, it is not necessary.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: mcalbala review date: December-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-55 kit lens
price paid:	699 (new)
positive:	Great results
negative:	Heavier than kit lens
comment:	There is a noticeable difference between the photos taken with the kit 18-55 lens and the Zeitz 16-80 lens when taking the same subject at exactly the same settings, without magnification. The results are just sharper, the color rendition better and the photos just more precise. yes it is more expensive, yes it is heavier, but the results are significantly better. Recommendation is to have both, the Zeitz when it is practical and the Sony kit lens when the Zeitz is impractical. I went with the Zeitz instead of the Sony 18-105 for a couple of reasons, and am glad that I did.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: bartman review date: December-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 DT
price paid:	forgotten (new)
positive:	Sharpness Versatile zoom range
negative:	Heavy
comment:	My working horse that never has disappointed me. I'm hoping for a F2.8 version of this lens. Edit: built quality is disapointing: zoom creep, rubber of the zoom ring is wobbling and it has tiny speckles in the cemented front element which seems to be a manufacturing issue in a whole batch.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: huntsvilhawk review date: December-02-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18mm-70mm.
price paid:	750.00
positive:	Very sharp lens. Colors are outstanding. Sharp through 24mm and a little soft at 16mm.
negative:	For the price the lens could be faster.
comment:	I love this lens, I needed a wider lens and it fits the need perfectly. In good lighting it is as sharp as my Sony 50 1.8. I have only had it for a couple of weeks,but plan to use it primarily for group shots and Landscape scenes. It is a great walk around lens. The kit lens doesn't compare in any way to this lens, after all it is a Carl Zeiss lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: MukhinAlex review date: November-24-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-55 3.5-5.6 Sony 50 1.4
price paid:	950 USD (new)
positive:	- color - sharpness - very convenient range - hood included - nice bokeh and almost no distortion at the long end - metal mount
negative:	Slight barrel effect on the wide end. Could be soft in the corners wide open
comment:	I bought this lens about a month ago, though it's pretty expensive here in Moscow. Till now I'm mostly happy with this lens. Combined with the f42am flash it becomes a kind of universal walk around stuff - both for indoor & outdoor situations. Now I'm looking for a fast low light lens to shot indoor in natural light.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Roby72 review date: November-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 2.8 Tokina 28-70 2.6-2.8 AT-X PRO II Sony 16-105 Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 DC Macro
price paid:	650 EUR (new)
positive:	Sharpness Light and compact Zoom range Design Mono-cam building Focus ring does not rotate while focusing
negative:	No AF hold button No zoom lock No weather sealed No SSM Price tag Cheap building for a Zeiss
comment:	Sharpness: This lens is fabulous! I know I got a very good copy out of the box and I really enjoyed it by the first shot. I compared against lenses I've owned: Sig 17-70, Tam 17-50, Sony 16-105 and I prefer ZA 16-80 all the life! This lens has much more micro-contrast than all the other lenses and it performs very well at any aperture (wide open till F11 at least) Color: Very nice and neutral colors. Sigma 17-70 and Sigma in general have those yellow cast that I don't really like a lot. This one is pretty similar to other Minolta lenses I own. Build: Well...for the price and "ZEISS" you could expect much more. It feels a little cheap but I think it's better built than Tammy or Siggy...Tokina is on another planet!! In this lens focus ring doesn't rotate while focusing despite of old Sig 17-70 and Tam 17-50. My copy was perfect, no rings play and no nothing...simply well built...it only appears a little cheap on hand but lenses are superb and this is what matter. To notice, no zoom lock or focus hold button and no weather seal. Distortion: Only heavy at 16mm, OK after 24mm. Flare: Flares are very well controlled and this is where this lens wins hands down against Tam 17-50 especially. I absolutely didn't like Tammy at night shots against street lamp etc... This lens is way better than any other of the group with no halos, ghosts and flares on the frame. CA are controlled pretty well for its zoom range, I would say they are in the average. Vignetting could be a problem if you use a standard filter at 16mm...I use a Hoya HD Digital slim line filter but it still remains a little portion of dark corners only at 16mm against blue skies... So, at the end, if you don't need a faster, F2.8 lens i.e.and you think 80mm are OK for you despite 105mm of the Sony "sister" lens...and the price tag is not an issue, than go for it, you won't regret. (but you have to get a good copy)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: pulsar review date: November-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tam 17-50mm f/2.8 Min 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5
positive:	Light & compact. Fast focusing. Great range. Sharp, great colour.
negative:	CA - not bad for a zoom lens though. Aperture closes in too quickly as zoom in.
comment:	No argument needed for image quality and range. Build is not great, but you get a go-anywhere weight. It's perfectly usable wide open. Tam17 is little softer wide open, but aperture to aperture, they are comparable. Min24, which is about same size and length as CZ, is bit brighter at same focal lengths, but softer wide open. I didn't find CZ's vignetting and geometric distortion objectionable, but did for CA. Not an issue in 4x6 or 5x7 prints, but noticeable at corners in 8x10 prints. Should avoid min focal length and keep aperture 5.6 or smaller for minimize CA.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: marathonianbull review date: October-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105mm Tokina AX-T 270 AF Pro "I" 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 (Angenieux design) Minolta 35-105mm (1985 version) --- Others
price paid:	750 CAD (New)
positive:	Sharp Neutral Colors Great Range Light & Small Format Sturdy, in spite of general opinion...
negative:	A bit slow aperture, for the price...
comment:	A really great DT lens, offering well-balanced optical qualities for lightweight travelling. To be honest though, there are more satisfying options available for cheaper prices in the overall Alpha-mount heritage... Sony's own 16-105mm is as sharp as the 16-80mm in most real-life situations, a bit slower, but has better flare control and warmer Minolta-like colors; that particular Tokina AX-T 270 AF Pro "I" 28-70mm is sturdier, faster, even sharper, with glossier colors; and the old Minolta 35-105mm, queen of saturated colors and pleasing 3D effects, isn't as wide, but offers a handy Macro mode!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: hassenpheffer review date: October-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	-Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 -Sigma 17-70mm -Sony 16-105mm
price paid:	650.00 used
positive:	-Lightweight -Compact -Excellent optics -Common 62mm filter size for Sony's
negative:	-feels a bit cheap in the build -exterior finish is a dust magnet
comment:	I do mostly nature landscape photography and was looking for an excellent quality wide angle zoom. My previous lenses were the above mentioned, which all have their own strengths and weaknesses. For me I found this 16-80mm the best for what I do with a great focal length and a perfect compliment to my 70-300mm G lens. I got a decent deal on this one used, for to me it was a good deal. Personally I'd go with the Tammron 17-50mm if the shorter focal length isnt an issue for you as that lens is practically the same in quality but better in build and is faster. In a pinch I can use the 16-80mm with my Tamron 1.4x teleconverter with AF should I need more focal length or better close-ups. Either way, this lens is an excellent walk-about lens and covers nearly everything I want to shoot.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Petronix review date: September-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tam 28-75 mm 2.8 Tam 17-50 mm 2.8 KM 18-70 mm kit
price paid:	260 € (used)
positive:	It's mm range scharp en smootly zoom
negative:	Price new f-range plastic feeling construction only aps
comment:	After hesitating and looking .... for something better than the kit-lens in this mm-rang, with some better aperture ;-) .....a found this one one ebay for a good price.... well known....actually only that plastic feeling is the minus..... (perhaps also little bit of vignetting @ 16mm.... "The" travellens......;-)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: terenz review date: August-29-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70mm kit lense Minolta 28-85mm F3.5 Minolta 28-135mm F4.0
price paid:	400 CAD (used)
positive:	Light, very nice colours and sharp
negative:	build zoom creep
comment:	Delivers great colours. Don't notice any distortion. Bought this lense off someone who had migrated to Canon/Nikon. One drawback is the flimsy build compared to early Maxxum lenses. Afraid to break the focus mechanism when using manual focus

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Wirralpix review date: August-22-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50mm f2.8
positive:	Sharpness Colors IQ Lightweight Focal Range
negative:	Build Lens Creep Vignetting at 16mm Price
comment:	I bought this lens to replace the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 as a walk around lens and was very happy with the sharpness, colours and general performance apart from vignetting at 16mm with a slim circular polariser attached and lens creep while holding the camera downwards. Dissappointingly I noticed that the AF was way off only three weeks out of the 12 month warranty. To their credit Sony Center Service in Wales are repairing it under warranty as a good will gesture and are awaiting replacement parts but build quality lets this Carl Zeiss lens down.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: KlikArt review date: August-20-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:	Quality and solid construction.
negative:	Nothing.
comment:	I use it on the A700 and 85% of the time is the 16-80 on this camera.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Dreamer1973 review date: August-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 DI2 F2.8
price paid:	599euro
positive:	A very sharp lens Nice colours. Fast auto focus
negative:	Build quality is not the best I ever seen, Some vignetting wide open at 16mm, Focussing by hand is not easy to do, the focus ring does not turn smooth.
comment:	I will not recoomend this lens mainly due the build quality out-inside. My lens is already two times broken and repaired again in 2 years. But the Images it produces are excellent and thats the only reason I still have got it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 2 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: teejay review date: August-17-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-250 Minolta 24-85 Sony 50/1.4
price paid:	575 USD
positive:	Sharpness Colors Bokeh Range
negative:	inner barrel wobble vignetting at 16mm Focus hunting at 80 mm
comment:	Bought this second hand with CZ CPL to replace my 18-250. I do not regret it one minute. Great sharpness, contrast and colors. Very decent portraits at 80 mm wide open. The negatives listed above are known issues, but no deal-breakers for me. I did not list color fringing as a negative because it is vey easy to remove: it does not bleed but is sharply defined hence easily removed without residual fringing. EDIT Jan 12: the focussing mecanism just broke down - had to shell out E180 for repairs.... updated the build rating accordingly

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: louza review date: August-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM AF DT 18-70/3,5-5,6 (D) KM AF 17-35/2,8-4,0 (D) KM AF 28-75/2,8 (D)
price paid:	620 USD (used)
positive:	16-80 is perfect range for APSC very sharp light
negative:	worse build 62 mm filter mount
comment:	Good focus range and low weight makes this lens perfect for traveling. It is very sharp and also colors are nice. Its build isn´t as good as I would expect from Zeiss lens. What I do not understand at all is filter thread. 62 mm is very small for 16 mm and CPL (slim frame) can be used only with at least 77 mm reduction to prevent dark corners. In my opinion this design issue can be fixed very easily and the lens value would than be higher.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: MarkT review date: August-02-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 50/1.7 Beercan Minolta 28-85
price paid:	£560
positive:	Sharp (mostly), good range, great contrast, never had an issue with flaring.
negative:	Vignetting at 16mm, disconcerting movement in barrel
comment:	It is a great lens, but there's a wobbliness in the build which worries you for a while, then you get over it and realise it's all fine. I would have liked to have given it 3.5 for build but that's not an option. Generally, every picture comes out great, but I sometimes inexplicably just cannot get a sharp picture out of it. It happens rarely, so I don't know what I'm doing wrong, but it just feels like it has off days!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: jordo7 review date: July-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-135mm 17-35mm
price paid:	649 new
positive:	colors are very accurate and nice, sharp throughout
negative:	major distortion at <20mm (Made people in group shots at edge of picture very distorted.) price, not built like the other Zeiss lens for alpha
comment:	Nice lens with good qualities, but I expected slightly more out of it for the price. It is a nice walk around lens, but lacks performance indoors. For the money I still prefer the 28-135mm other than for wide angle coverage and MFD. Sharpness of zeiss is a little better, but color and 3-d effect of 28-135 are better.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vutrungphong review date: July-24-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	beercan Min 50 1,7 200G Min 17-35 D
price paid:	650euro (mint)
positive:	-Sharp: I think it would have what with the density of the glass, you can catch up so much details ! -Saturation: great ! Somewhat to much that I have to dial down the saturation -Weight + Zoom range: it's so light and effective that it never leave my A700.
negative:	-Build: not THAT cheap but feels (and IS) wacky -Price: it's pricey, but there is no other better, and it 's still a CARL ZEISS, don't let the plastic build fool you
comment:	I have this for over 2 years and this lens stay on my a700 90% time. It lacks of character somehow, it's not a really landscape/portrait/or wildlife lens, and certainly not the best in any specific field. But it can do just fine in every kind of photography, and I think that's what state its quality. Don't let the not-so-good-like-in-oldtime build fool you. This is a Zeiss glass for walking around, and it serve very well what it supposed to do. It's now the best choice for crop sensor. When you can afford it, buy it.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 1 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: ggeorgecv review date: July-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18- 70 sony kit lens 70-210 f4 minolta beercan
price paid:	685 Euro (new)
positive:	sharpness colours focal length F 3,5-4,5
negative:	manual focus ring a bit noisy when focusing price
comment:	I purchased this lens after kit lens 18-70 for my A 200. My camera improved with this lens. The only negative was the balance because the lens was a bit heavy for my A 200. Later I purchased A700 and it became a good pair with the zeiss. I was very happy with this lens until the day when it stoped focusing. The focus ring was stucked. Cost of repair 265 euro. Too much expensive. Τhe lens came and it worked 5 minutes. All the time it was working i was hearing an unusual sound. After 10 pictures it stopped focusing again and it stucked. I sent it back again. I wish i hadn't bought this lens. Now I have the lens and luckily it works.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: mystainsane review date: July-07-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	550 (like new)
positive:	Quick AF Great Colors Extra Sharp
negative:	Zoom creep Not that great of a build Distortion at 16mm
comment:	Great lens, I kinda had some backfocus problems with it but that was only when I was at the 16mm end.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: nitrosyl review date: July-03-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Sony 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens - Sony Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 24-70mm f/2.8 T* SSM - Minolta 28-70mm f/2.8 G - Minolta 50mm f/1.7
positive:	- very sharp at all focal length and apertures - very good flare control - very useful zoom range - decent build quality
negative:	- a bit of distortion at 16mm - vignetting at 16mm f/3.5 - f/3.5-4.5 is relatively slow
comment:	This lens has an extremely useful zoom range! In terms of resolution power, its performance is on par with many prime lenses. This would be the ultimate walk-around lens for any Alpha mount APSC user, if one can live with its relatively slow speed (f/3.5-4.5).

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: madecov review date: June-28-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 f.28
price paid:	500 USD mint
positive:	Sharp, Great color, Perfect balance on A-700, good focal range on APS sensor. really nice bokeh
negative:	manual focus is rough, a bit slower than some third party lenses
comment:	I had been considering purchasing this lens for a while. I came across an unused copy at a local Camera store and figured at the price why not. In good light the focus is fast and it locks right on. Color and contrast are impressive. This lens is tack sharp. I wish it had an f3.5-4 or f2.8-4 maximum aperture as apposed to 4.5. It could have had a slightly larger filter size and been faster. While it is a slower lens than the Tamron 17-50 having the 30mm on the long end is a nice feature to have. I have not used it in a landscape photo so I can not comment on the distortion at the wide end. It is a bit plasticky for a Zeiss quality lens. But I paid about the same as I did for the Tamron and it is a bit better built. Overall a very nice lens that just trounces the kit lens and is a little sharper than the Tamron 17-50

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Bill73 review date: June-13-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	$600Aus 2nd hand
positive:	Great auto-focus Very sharp - probably one of the sharpest zooms I have used and sharper than most primes. Awesome color Nice weight/feel Zeiss
negative:	Zoom creep when hang around neck. Manual focus is simply horrible - probably the worst of any lens I have used (to be fair I have NEVER had to use the manual focus on a single occasion). CA - but only in extremely limited circumstances. Build - it's a ZEISS lens but doesn't feel like it (whatever that is)!
comment:	This lens is always on one of my cameras - it gets used more than any other lens I own. It's sharpness is unmatched right from the get go - no need to stop down. It feels great, on and off camera. It looks great fully extended (with hood). This lens has a reserved and special place in my kit bag. In every sense it is my 'work horse' lens. The auto-focus is spot on and never misses. The manual focus is appalling and you will never want to use it - but you shouldn't have to ... it really is just terrible. Turning the manual focus ring is disconcerting to say the least - it feels as if the focus clutch is engaged and if you turn 1mm more you'll ruin it! It has a very 'clunky' feel and ... just feels so wrong. I thought there was something wrong with my lens for months - until I cruised some forums and discerned that it was just the design of the lens that was the problem. Alot is made of the manual focus and so it should be, but do not let this dissuade you from purchasing this lens. Also any lens with the hallowed name of ZEISS should feel .... more like a ZEISS lens! This lens does not.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Stinus review date: June-04-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 II APO EX DC HSM Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM G
price paid:	450 EUR (used)
positive:	focal range sharpness colours
negative:	vignetting and distortion at 16mm zoom creep
comment:	The focal range, sharpness (even wide open), colours and flare control make this an excellent allround lens. However, at 16mm vignetting and distortion are clearly visible. The bokeh is also good in my opinion. Because this lense uses screw-drive autofocus, the focus is quite noisy but the speed is acceptable (depending on the camera body of course). Build quality is ok, but nothing to rave about (zoom creep for example).

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Azazello13 review date: May-19-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	km 28-75/2.8 min 28-135 min 50/1.7
price paid:	700 USD (new)
positive:	- sharp at all FL and apertures - great aps-c zoom range - fantastic colors
negative:	- I got nothin - ok maybe distortion and vignetting at 16mm
comment:	I really think sony/zeiss hit a homerun with this lens as an upgraded standard zoom for aps-c. zoom range is perfect. it's not an f2.8, but it's really pretty fast compared with other similar zooms, and it is sharp even wide open so that helps make it functionally fast. colors are almost unrealistically vivid, but I like the effect (and it can be managed via camera controls and in PP). all in all, it's just a lens you are happy to leave on your camera about 75% of the time.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: syahrun review date: April-25-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sony 18-250 DT sony 18-70 DT sony 18-200 DT
price paid:	550 USD used
positive:	Very sharp Quick AF T* coated beautiful Colors Flare Control Nice Bokeh Useful range Zeiss quality
negative:	Manual Focus ring Vignetting in wide
comment:	Excellent lens, Like it so far.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: zalman_7 review date: April-24-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	550 USD (New)
positive:	Sharp throughout entire range. Color reproduction excellent.
negative:	Like stated before for the price build quality could be improved a little bit.
comment:	I enjoy using this lens and it rarely comes off my A700 body ever since I purchased it. It is the ultimate walk around lens for me.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: yakkosmurf review date: April-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 70-300 Sigma 10-20 Sony 70-300G
price paid:	650 USD (new)
positive:	Sharp at any aperture Excellent color and contrast Quick and accurate focus Very useful focal length range
negative:	Zoom becomes loose over time Exterior collects dirt easily Build quality on par with kit lenses
comment:	I picked up this lens with my a700 purchase trying to match the quality and focal length I was accustomed to from my Sony R1. The lens met my expectations in that regard. After using it for 2.5 years on my a700, I have been more than pleased with it. Sharpness is excellent at any focal length and any aperture, unlike the Sigmas which much be stopped down. Color is also significantly better than the Sigmas which seem quite flat in comparison. The only negatives are related to build quality. Mine now suffers from zoom creep if it's not returned to 16mm before walking with the camera around my neck. Zoom feel is also significantly more loose after 2.5 years of use. Seeing the plastic interior of this lens explains this condition. None of the problems have adversely affected the amazing image quality. I suspect, I'm one of the few people to use the lens on a FF camera. Recently, I picked up an a850 without the budget for a full frame lens. The 16-80 does a great job on the a850 in crop mode, yielding results equal to the a700. I will continue to use the 16-80 on my a850 until I can afford the 24-70CZ. I have not been happy with the colors and sharpness of the less expensive FF lenses available.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Canadapt review date: April-21-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 18-70mm Tamron 18-250mm Tamron 17-50mm
price paid:	500 USD used
positive:	Colour Sharpness
negative:	Build quality isn't Zeiss-like
comment:	I like this lens very much for its sharpness and colour but, I wanted a larger zoom range I wanted a better build quality for the price I wanted a faster lens however, none of these three things exist in a single lens with the sharpness and colour of this lens. The 18-70mm kit lens is not really a fair comparison, the 18-250mm is nowhere near as sharp and also not a fair comparison, and the 17-50mm is fast but by today's standards has such a limited zoom range. You can't have it all it seems - although who would have dreamed of such lenses as these even 10 years ago? The Sony 16-105mm was a contender but I'm a zealot for image quality. I'm keeping this one until that dream lens comes along! C'mon now - that 16-300mm f4, lightweight and sharp as a tack must be in the works? Make it with a 62mm filter size please :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: GEPhoto review date: April-12-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony Kit Lens, Minolta and sony prime lenses, Tamron ultra wide zoom.
price paid:	750 usd(New)
positive:	Fast accurate focus on a700 Love the IQ Focal Length really nothing like it
negative:	It doesn't look like a CZ the plastic extension tube says it all
comment:	Have this lens for several months now and it is my goto lens. It may not always be on my camera but it is always in my bag. From that Owl in the tree in my yard to a landscape with train going by i capture this with just one lens ie. as long as its a low tree its good not magic.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: photoBear review date: April-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 18-70 sony 18-70 tamron 28-300 tamron 70-200 2.8 beercan
positive:	Sharp over a very broad range good colour apetures are reasonable all things concidered Af speed very good possibly the best overall lens in its class
negative:	rubber grips worse than i thaught possible focus ring is vague, I would swap the ring decoupling during autofocus for more feel
comment:	I have finally baught this lens as a package with an A700 after much thaught and saving. I decided it was between this and the tamron 17-50 2.8 and I chose this for it's range and overall sharpness. I'm actually a little dissapointed with this lens or at least I would be if I paid full price for it. Don't get me wrong I still think it's the best zoom in its class but for its full price it isn't worth it, luckily I paid conciderably less for it so for me it was good value. The build shuld be better and I would trade the focus ring decoupling during AF for a more certain feel to the focus but its ok. If I ever find after market rubber grips for sony lenses I will get them and replace the awefull flutes, they collect dust and dont feel nice. Im now not sure if I shuld have saved just a bit more and gone the tamron but I do know I will get the results I want with this lens. The auto focus is great with both my 5d and a700 If you can find this lens cheap then go for it otherwise I'm really not convinced by it, its more of a good sony than a CZ if that makes any sense. I am so pleased with the A700 though

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 5	user: gdkalyanapu review date: April-10-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-75 f/2.8 Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Sony 50 f/1.8
price paid:	660
positive:	CZ IQ, Sharpness, Brilliant Colors, Decent AF spped
negative:	Zoom Creep, not a low-light lens, Plastic build. Barrel distortion
comment:	This lens is one of the best Sony lenses for APS-C cameras. The only real negative is the horrible zoom creep and distortion when using ordinary UV filter. If you want a CZ and use APS-C sensor Camera, Just go for it. You won't be disappointed with IQ.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: hooni review date: April-06-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ 16-35 Minolta 28-135 Minolta 28/2 Sigma 50 1.4 HSM Sigma 70-200 II
price paid:	$500 USD (used)
positive:	Range, Colors, Weight
negative:	Little expensive for aperture range
comment:	This is the only lense ever on my A500. It does its job very well and at times takes photos that pop more than my 850 with CZ glass. I wish it was a little larger aperture range so i could use inside, but all and all it was worth the price paid used.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vaughaag review date: March-30-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 18-70, Minolta 35-70, Minolta 28 f2.8, Sigma 28-135
price paid:	L285 Used A1 con
positive:	Good range, sharp, size,
negative:	CA when used in studio environment with flash's firing. Barrel distortion at 16 and 80mm, Price
comment:	I've had this lens now for about a month and used it a fair amount. I got it to replace my DT 18-70 kit lens and have been impressed with its performance in most environments. I have found that when used in a studio it produces allot of CA and have tended to change lens to avoid this. I've also had some CA problems when wide at 16mm with and without filters attached. When used wide open at 16-80 for landscape/portrait there is slight barrel distortion but this can be sorted fairly easily via PP.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ciupo35 review date: March-13-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 (kit lens) Sony 50/1.8 SAM Sigma 10-20/4-5.6 KM 17-35/2.8-4
price paid:	600 USD (used)
positive:	Universal zoom range, very good sharpness, nice colors, compact size filter not rotates
negative:	vignetting, barrel distortion, built not perfect, too expensive (new lens)
comment:	Very universal lens, sharpness is perfect, nice colors. Bokeh is ok, but not perfect. Too dark for low light/indoor shooting.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: 7red review date: March-06-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70, Tokina ATX Pro 28-75 f2.8
price paid:	600 EUR
positive:	Very sharp, nice range, building quality.
negative:	Expensive
comment:	Paid new in Feb. 2009

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: NIKO review date: March-04-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Konica Minolta Maxxum AF 28-75 F2.8 (D) Minolta Maxxum AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 (D)
positive:	Sharp optics, Good Neutral Colors, Good Contrast, Rather good Flare Control, Pretty good build, Zoom and Manual Focus Rings smooth and well dampened, has Focus Ring Clutch to prevent turning during AF, Fast AF mechanism with fast AF Lock
negative:	Only a minor wobble when extended to 70-80mm, having a Zoom Lock would have been nice, at wider angles it tends to miss focus, mild vignetting but not very noticeable
comment:	This lens is really darn good optically. It can and does produce sharp images even wide open. It does vignette, but very little. It really depends on the scene that you are shooting to be noticeable or not. With my thin UV filter there is no added vignetting like with a regular filter. It has good neutral colors and good contrast. I have heard some say that the colors may be too cold. I do not think so. Flare control is rather good as well. Go ahead and shoot with the sun in or just outside the image. It doesn't cure Flare, but it is resistant to it. Images are contrasty. However, I find them to be too contrasty at times. I find all to often I have to tone down the "lights" slide in Adobe Photoshop RAW converter a bit to bring out more detail in the "bright" areas and sometimes need to lighten the darks a bit (though not usually do I touch the darks) to help make the image look a little more natural to my eye. The lens possesses pretty good build. It feels rather substantial for a lens that primarily has a polycarbonate outer shell. The zoom and manual focus rings are rather smooth and well dampened. I have tried earlier versions of this lens and the focus ring was as rough if not rougher than my former Minolta Maxxum AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 (D) due to the AF clutch. These later models have improved greatly. I have no zoom creep, but that could change in time. A zoom lock would be most welcome even if it were not needed. I would have liked the zoom ring to be a bit stiffer like the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8. The focus ring with this later model acts like the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8 and 16-35 f2.8 in regards to the fact that when you bottom out the focus ring at either end of the focus range the rubber grip floats beyond the "stop" point. I like that feature. The only negative to build would be that when the lens is zoomed out to the 70-80mm range the zoom tube has a slight wobble. It's not bad, but I feel it could have been cut at least in half. Though the lens still uses the body driven AF motor it is fast to focus and AF lock is reasonably fast and it is not even using the F2.8 sensor (this applies to the A700). The focus is accurate at the longer focal lengths. However, when at the wide angles of 16 through 35, focus seems to miss more than I'd like. If I am close to my object of interest it focuses fine. If I am far from my object of interest I may get back focus unless it is a landscape scene. Then, all is fine. I believe if there is a problem it is due to radical lens design. After all, the image is being warped to fit more onto the sensor. Overall, a very good lens that is worth having if you want one lens to take the place of 2 lenses and still have a reasonable aperture.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: statequieto review date: February-23-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Tamron 17-50 - Minolta 50 f1.7 - Minolta 18-70 - Sigma 10-20
price paid:	499€
positive:	- Color - Exposure is better than my tamron, 0,3 ev brighter - Built quality, with tight tolerances
negative:	- vigneting - Heavy distorsion at wide end - Bad in low light conditions
comment:	I bought this lens after two years with the tamron. Only to compare both lens and decide with wich one stay. I had read a lot about the CZ but in my opinion is too expensive for what they offer and isn't better than tammy. It has a lot of vigneting without any filter. Using a polarizer is disapointing. It's wider than the tammy but at 16mm there are heavy barrel distorsions. You'd think that has better range, and is "almost" true,because 80mm is only two steps closer and bokeh at 80mm and 4.5, for me is worse than 50mm and 2.8. I don't find differences in sharpness at f5.6 or more but shoting at 4.5 in both the tammy is better than CZ. In fact you may loose a photo for not to have enough light, but not for giving a step closer. I sold the CZ.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Ch_Igriega review date: February-23-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-55 mm kit lens
price paid:	€299 (used)
positive:	-sharp -great bokeh
negative:	-poor indoor performance
comment:	found this lens by accident on a local photography shop. to bad it doesn't come with front cap (really like to have a zeiss cap). nothing bad to say about this one, except that it makes my other lenses useless :)

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: godsakes review date: February-18-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tam 17-50mm f2.8 Tam 24-135mm
price paid:	L375
positive:	Very sharp Colour fast AF
negative:	minor green CA expensive build quality lacking zoom creep
comment:	The CZ is a little sharper than the Tam 17-50mm and overall produces a more pleasing image with nicer colour & bokeh. However the CZ does suffer from a little green CA in extreme contrast conditions, in this respect i think the Tammy edges it on CA control. Build quality of the lens (for the price) is a tad lacking, mine also suffered from lens creep? shouldn't this come with a SSM motor? Since upgrading to full frame, I've really missed this lens, there's no equivalent FF walkabout lens that can match the range, image quality & AF speed of the CZ. The tamron 24-135mm I have isn't as sharp, has poorer colour & bokeh and the AF speed is no where near as responsive as this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: mrggt review date: January-27-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sig 10-20mm & 24-60mm f2.8
price paid:	L499 [new]
positive:	very sharp esp under the 80mm setting. lovely colours
negative:	distortion @16mm build could be better
comment:	when i first purchased this lense about 10 months ago i nearly returned it because of the level of distortion and also i did'nt get the wow factor when i first used it. But i will have to admit after looking at images at 100% and then comparing to the sigmas [even though i believe i have very good copies of this lenses] there was no comparison for sharpness and the colours & contrast is very nice indeed. Distortion at 16 mm along with the vignetting at this focal length is not good but is useable with care, with a little cropping, not pleased with that though for a L500 lense. All in all the lense is on my A700 80% of the time so all can't be to bad

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: touareg review date: January-05-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 kit lens Sigmas Minoltas
price paid:	650$ C (new)
positive:	Color Sharpness Range
negative:	Zoom creep DT only
comment:	My walkaround lens. Since I upgraded from the Sony 18-70 kit lens, there's always one attached to one of my A700. I actually have two and IQ is very good on both of them. The only downside is the zoom creep that appeared a little while ago on one lens and then on the other. Otherwise it's one of the gems in my kit.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: yavuzbahcekapili review date: January-02-10
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 18-70 Kit Lens Angenieux AF 28-70 f/2.6 Minolta 28mm f/2.8
price paid:	660 (used)
positive:	+ Very sharp + Very good optics + Color rendition (Very neutral) + Flare Control + Bokeh (In this class) + Zoom range is very useful
negative:	+ Build Quality + Distortion at both ends + Vignetting + Manual focus ring
comment:	I have just own this lens and make some experience with it. It was a used lens but a very good copy in exellent condition. As soon as I get it I made focus tests whether it has a problem or not. There wasn't any problem. Then I compared it to kit lens and Angenieux 28-70 f/2.6 First of all it has realy very very good optics. When I crop samples in %100 it was sure that carl zeiss was far better from Sony kit lens 18-70 and also better than Angenieux 28-70. Angenieux is a very good lens but its technology is somewhat old. But i can easily say that build quality of Angenieux 28-70 feels solid and is better than 16-80. According to its price 16-80 should be better. Flare control is superb. Color fringing is not problem and well controlled. There is no need to talk about sharpness. It is superb in its class. Angenieux has an advantage over 18-70 and 16-80 because it is a full frame lens so when it comes to corner sharpness and vignetting an also distotion it is better than 16-80. Of course Angeniex is a heavier lans and it is sometimes problem to carry out. When using in outdoor conditions the CZ 16-80 has a big advantage. I woulld expect that CZ 16-80 start from f/2.8 but unfortunately it would be much expensive. When i need f/2.8 i can use Angenieux but when i need f/2.8 is only for bokeh and CZ is not bad killing backrounds. It is of course a bit nervous and not soft but when you see kit lens' bokeh you say CZ is superb. In a nutshell if i had enough money i would buy a CZ 24-70 f/2.8 but i am realy happy with may CZ 16-80.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Watchman review date: December-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL1870 Minolta AF135 Tokina ATX Pro 100M SAL1118
price paid:	870.00 (new)
positive:	Fast Focusing Very Sharp Colors Great zoom range
negative:	Zoom Lock should be featured
comment:	I highly recommend this lens. I have not experienced vigneting at 16mm nor have I encountered anything negative with it other then the cost.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: sernine review date: December-05-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-85 Sony 18-70
positive:	sharpness colors range
negative:	cannot be used on full frame vignetting with polarized filter
comment:	Incredible colors! But vignetting even with a slim filter (this was not a problem with the Minolta 24-85 for full frame) Really good all-in-one lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Marvol review date: November-30-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 24-135 Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 Tamron 70-300
price paid:	part of kit
positive:	sharpness colour flare resistance range
negative:	slightly expensive focus ring
comment:	Not much to add to what has been said; this lens is mostly compared to lenses I don't know (Tamron 17-50 and Sony 16-105), so all I can say is that I am perfectly happy with this one. The strengths speak for themselves; the lens is sharp, contrast and colours are good and flare resistence is unbelievable - I routinely shoot straight into the -covered- sun and no flare, ever. The range is extremely useful; if I do find I need a bit more reach in a walkabout lens I use the Tamron 24-135. Build quality is no issue IMO; I've used this lens a lot, and it started with a slight slack in the barrel - but that hasn't worsened in over a year of use, so I think it'll be alright. Also the focus ring has sometimes been critised and yes, it isn't great for manual focusing. That said I think it is a feature of the design that it has a bit of play. Under lab conditions it seems to not score well with regard to distortion; all I can say is that in real life I find this a non-issue. My only gripe is strong veiling with bright objects just outside view; but this may be a filter issue, so won't be too critical of the lens (yet!) All in all a great lens that gets me 90% of the shots I usually encounter, and it won't let me down.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: madmath review date: November-19-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	-KM 28-75 2,8 -kitlens from the KM5D
price paid:	€ 500 in A700Z combo
positive:	-very sharp -beautiful colors -lightweight -image quality
negative:	-zoom creep, fixed with rubber band -some vignetting
comment:	Bought the A700Z combo as soon as the A700 came out in oktober 2007. Loved this lens from the beginning, I wash astounded by the sharpness and the colours this lens produces. It is almost always on my camera.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: pauljhenney review date: November-06-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	17-50 Sigma 2.8
price paid:	L560
positive:
negative:	Price
comment:	Finally bite the bullet to replace the kit 18-70. Road to Damascus moment. Sharp, did I say SHARP! Colours top notch. Build fine unless you are intending to ascend Anapurna using it as a piton.... Also, did I mention SHARP!!!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: RogerK review date: November-03-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18250, Sigma 17-70, SAL50 1.4, Tamron 70-200 2.8
price paid:	699 EUR
positive:	Excellent colours and sharpness.
negative:	A bit less well built than expected
comment:	A very good lens and considerably better than the SAL18250 and the Sigma 17-70, which last it replaces. As good as the SAL 50 1.4, and that's a prime lens. Less bokeh though, but that is due to 3.5 compared to 1.4. What surprised me though is that it seems a bit less well built than expected. That said, I wouldn't want to trade it for any other lens (except maybe the SAL2470CZ) and it is my standard lens and always on my camera, even indoors. Update: I have recently bought an A500, and this camera perfoms a lot better than my former A200 in low light. On the A500, this lens is even better and I love it even more. Most of the time on my camera. Colours are great, only downside it is not fast at 3.5. I would have wished 2.8, but I will not pay around € 1,700 (yet) for it's bigger brother the CZ 24-70.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Wordfreak review date: October-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-70 2.8 Sigma 17-70 2.8
price paid:	680 CDN
positive:	Great colours light and compact sharp well-balanced on a700
negative:	Only starts at 3.5 Could be even wider (14-80?) No macro Not designed for full-frame
comment:	Wonderful walk-around lens. On my a700 almost all the time. Good, solid feel and well-balanced. Light and compact, sharp little lens. Replaced my Sigma 17-70; nice to have a little wider, but at the expense of a decent macro. Colours much more vivid compared to Sigma, but build a little plasticky. Well worth the upgrade from the kit lens. Sigma wide zoom a close second though.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: stamper review date: October-16-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-300 F4.5-5.6 G SSM 18-200 F3.5-6.3 35 F1.4 (not fair, but in focal range) 85 F1.4 (also not fair, and just outside of focal range)
price paid:	550 USD (used)
positive:	Great color Useful range Small size Light weight
negative:	Doesn't "feel" solid
comment:	This lens was part of a lightly used package deal with an a700. My goal was to use this as a walkaround lens to in conjunction with a longer zoom (70-300G) when needed, and be a significant upgrade over my older a100 with 18-200 F3.5-6.3. I really like this lens. For my purposes, which include much travel and kid photography, it performs very well. The lens pairs very nicely with the a700, but I have used it with excellent results on the a100 as well. It's very sharp, for a zoom, and renders color beautifully. There is some vignetting at the wide end, especially when used with a filter (even a thin filter such as the Zeiss T* coated one). Coming from an "all in one" lens, I knew the range was shorter, but I still find it to be useful and it's actually nice to have a bit wider range than 18mm. As a walkaround lens, you can't really to wrong with 16-80 on APS/C. Lots has been said about the build quality of this lens, and it doesn't feel as solid as my 70-300G, which is roughly in the same price range. That's a shame, because the perception of this lens could have been a lot better by adding maybe $50 in material cost. On the other hand, my older 18-200 doesn't feel solid either but has never failed under certainly less than optimal conditions for years, so I'm hopeful that will be the same case here. Optically, this lens is in a different league from the 18-200. Sharpness is much better and colors are fantastic. Like the longer range zoom, it's not an available light indoor lens either. For those purposes, a prime like the 35 F1.4 or 85 F1.4 are much more useful, but obviously more expensive, heavier, and no zoom capability. So, just to add a bit to the controversial opinions about this lens, I must say that I enjoy it tremendously and it suits my general purposes very well. I have no plans to migrate to full-frame (yet ;-) but would hate to see it become useless in that application.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: JohnS review date: October-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 f3.5-5.6 DT 70-200mm f2.8 G AF 28 f2.8 AF APO 100-300mm f4.5-5.6
positive:	Image quality Colour rendition Low weight
negative:	Manual focus control
comment:	I read many reviews of this lens prior to purchasing and was definitely concerned about the apparent inconsistency regarding build quality. I was also very tempted by the good performance reports and decided to risk the possible bother of having to send one or two samples back for replacement. I kept the first lens received and have found the general build quality to be better than I expected. The weight certainly appears to be in the glass rather than the chassis but high quality engineering plastics appear to have been used and the overall effect is a pleasing balance of solidity versus weight. Regarding controls, the zoom ring has a smooth feel with no discernible backlash. It would be great if this also applied to the manual focus ring, but this is far from the case. My copy has almost 1mm of peripheral movement before a change of focus occurs. Once past the backlash the mechanism feels as if it comprises plastic gears which are meshed together too tightly – nothing wrong with plastic gear mechanisms and indeed they can be made to run extremely quietly, but not in this case! Initial comparisons to the 18-70 kit lens (taken close up at 50mm focal length in my office) showed no appreciable difference in resolution or general IQ and this did cause a brief moment of panic, although I was only making quick comparisons at the centre of the image. Thankfully, as soon as I took shots outside and made proper comparisons I saw huge improvements over the kit lens. Resolution at the centre remained very similar but the 18-70 loses resolution away from centre very quickly whereas the 16-80 allows pixel peeping across a much greater area before losing resolution. Colour rendition is also far superior across the entire frame. Some strong fringing effects are evident under certain conditions although these are generally only visible when zoomed in very closely. I have recently started using DxO, with the relevant lens correction module, which eliminates these. This leads me to believe that these artefacts are inherent in the lens design rather than being flaws in just my example. Can I recommend this lens? Yes, definitely. Build quality must be measured against optical performance and usability and I believe that Sony chose the correct compromises here. The ‘less than perfect’ manual focus mechanism will not actually get used very much on this lens by most users but the zoom control ring will, and this is of much higher quality. Criticisms by others that this lens is ‘lightweight’ are valid from an initial perceived quality standpoint but are a blessing when carrying the thing up a mountain. The zoom range and image quality of this lens ensures it is always in my bag.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: atlbrv405 review date: October-02-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70mm kit lens 24mm RS 70mm-200g ssm 85mm 1.4 CZ
price paid:	600 USD used
positive:	-Good Range -Light weight -Center is really sharp stopped down -good contrast
negative:	-Vignetting in corners wide open -can't use a filter without really dark corners wide open -Flares at all apertures -corners are not sharp even stopping down -Manual focus ring play
comment:	As most people who bought this lens, I was conflicted with the reports of really good and bad samples of this lens. I bought this lens used and have many good landscape, candids, and portraits shots because of this lens. However this lens is not fast enough for indoor use and requires a use of a flash or really high ISO. I am disappointed with the soft corners, and vignetting for the price. I do manage to flare this lens more than any other lens in my collection which led me to purchase the 24-70 CZ. I wish and wanted this lens to perform better but was disappointed in the end. Maybe I'm too harsh on this lens since I bought and used 70mm-200mm G as my first lens outside the included kit lens and was spoiled by its abilities. The build quality is above average but noticable looser than my 24mm-70mm cz, and focus ring is not smooth with some play. Also the the ribs on the zoom ring collects dust and a pain to clean. Bokeh is average and can be busy at times which was not a surprise. I used this lens about 60 percent of the time on my camera until I recently bought the 24-70 CZ. With this review I would still recommend the lens; just tough to swallow at the price and performance over the kit lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: JR review date: August-30-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18250
positive:	Sharp Nice Color
negative:	Manual Focus ring
comment:	This lens was part of a deal (I bought a used A700 together with this lens, a SAL 18250, some batteries and a 56 flash). Since then, I've sold my Sigma 28-70 2.8 simply becouse this CZ is much better in almost everything. I never use the Sal 18250, the difference is to big.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ce-kooistra review date: August-13-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	kit lens 70-200 SSM
price paid:	550 Euro (new)
positive:	Range Build
negative:	Soft wide open
comment:	Great walking around lens, covers a great range, 16-24 range is fun to use. Needs to be stopped down for sharpness. Build quality is good for this price, colors are nice. Always carry it with me. Excellent alternative if you're looking for a replacement of your kit lens and don't want to spend too much money. No FF lens!!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: ag.elf review date: July-31-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-70 f2.8 Beercan Km 17-35 f2.8-4 Minolta 50 f1.7 Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 Sony 70-200 f2.8 G
price paid:	710.00 CAD New
positive:	Range. Color. Sharpness. Build.
negative:	Nothing so far.
comment:	I have it for two weeks now, and my copy seems to be perfect. I love everything this lens is producing. It is sharp, and it has beautiful colors and bokeh. I will post some pics when I find out how to do that. Build quality is 5 for me. It is plastic but highest grade and ... Well! I`m very excited.

sharpness: 2 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: hemus0971hh review date: July-29-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 Sigma 28-70
price paid:	630 euro
positive:
negative:
comment:	Its great reviews and many of the images I’ve seen had me sold. After shooting some images inside and then reviewing them on the computer, I was shocked. They’re unacceptably soft (not just one and not only wide open either). I won’t keep this lens and I don’t think I’ll venture another copy. What a disappointment for what should have been a great lens.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Aj700 review date: July-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18200, CZ2470, SAL50F14
price paid:	630 USD
positive:	This is a OK lens.
negative:	doesnt live upto the Ziess name attached there.
comment:	its a OK value lens, compared to other offerings from Sony or third parties. for the 5x zoom they sacrificed many things.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Mr_Canuck review date: July-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105 Sigma 17-70 Tamron 17-50 Minolta 28-135 Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 35/2
positive:	Sharp all over. Nice colour, bokeh. Quite bright. Very useful range.
negative:	Build should be better, like 70-300G. Some vignetting at wide end.
comment:	I've tried numerous mid-range zooms, looking for one that could hold a candle to my favourite Minolta primes. The CZ 16-80 is the closest I've come. It's got better bokeh, colour and sharpness (noticeably) than the Sony 16-105 and Sigma 17-70. The Tamron has a comparable look but isn't as sharp, doesn't have quite as nice bokeh, and not as nice colour, nor the range, but it's not far off. The Minolta 28-135 is its equal or better in many ways except for flare which is its big issue; and range at wide end on apsc. The speed of the CZ alone is worth it over the 16-105 in my opinion. But it's also sharper and has better colour. I don't notice the 25mm difference much either. I'd say the CZ is worth the price difference if you want the best quality in an apsc zoom. The Sigma is in a different category and is worth considering because it's half the price. But it's more than half the lens for sure. So if you're on a budget... but I still prefer the CZ noticeably. Bottom line: a 24-120 equivalent zoom range at 3.5-4.5 with great colour, smooth bokeh and sharp corners... would've been a dream lens in film days. And it works great on the a700. I upped the distortion from 4 to 5 because considering the range, it is really quite good. They should've upped the build quality for the price (as everyone says), but it's fine as is. I really enjoyed using it during a recent vacation and for outdoor shooting at a wedding. It even pulled through indoors in a pinch.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: bonapart5 review date: July-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 100mm Macro 2.8 Minolta 35-70 f4 Minolta AF500 f8 Minolta 100-300 APO Minolta 28-75 2.8 Sony 50mm 1.4 Minolta 70-210 f4 Beercan Tamron SP AF 11-18Di II LD
price paid:	US$500 used
positive:	Sharp Light Good colour and contrast Quick AF on A700 Good build quality for the price
negative:	None really
comment:	Sharp lens with good Boket in right conditions Vignetting if using cheap filter(Sony and B&W thin not a problem),Good quality Zeiss lens for the money,I was not expecting G lens build

sharpness: 1 color: 1 build: 1 distortion: 1 flare control: 2	user: gustav7117 review date: July-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ 24-70 SAL 70-300G
price paid:	650
positive:	NONE
negative:
comment:	Poor QC. Always in repair.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: hallojenshans review date: July-19-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	tamron 17-50
price paid:	629 euro
positive:	sharp sharp sharp
negative:	plastic
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Ouverture review date: June-25-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- sal18-250 - tamron 17-50 - sal18-70 - minolta 28-75 f2.8 - minolta 28-85
price paid:	750 SGD (used)
positive:	- Sharpness across the whole frame - Reasonably sharp when 1 stop down - Good colours - Handles flare well - Good distortion control - Zeiss branding
negative:	- Not as sharp as expected for this price - Build quality not impressive as a 18-250 - Rubber grip a goner (as with all sony lenses) - Not useful indoors - Limited range for outdoors
comment:	Bought this lens 2 months back but sold it off within a month at no loss. :) Probably because of the Zeiss branding, expectations for this lens was quite high for the price. However, it did not turn out well for me as the sharpness of this lens can be obtained by my trusty and versatile tamron 17-50 at the same stops. Sharpness at corners are better than tamron17-50 but as I am not a landscaper and more of a portraiture, it does me no bonus. Even when I bought 18-250 at almost same price (new) as this cz1680 (old), I still prefer the versatility and sharpness of 18-250. Good for Zeiss dieharders, but does not work out for me.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: teodesson review date: June-25-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- 18-70mm (kit lens)
price paid:	800 SGD (used)
positive:	- sharp - range cover my 90% of usage - do I mention sharp?
negative:	- dusts love my rubber ring - vignetting if using cheap filter
comment:	A happy owner of CZ 16-80mm, this lens cover 90% of my needs. Build quality (especially the rubber ring) is only negative I can think (uhhhm maybe f2.8?), but the image results remind me no regret to have this lens.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: seevve review date: June-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Minolta and Sony 24-105/3.5-4.5 - Zeiss 24-70/2.8 - Minolta 28-135/4-4.5 - Minolta 24-85/3.5-4.5 - and many primes.
price paid:	700$ (used)
positive:	+ Universal all in one lens for APS-C cameras. + Great colors and contrast. + LightWeight. + Good sharpness from wide open at 35-80 + Fast AF
negative:	- Not great sharpness at wideend - vignetting at wide end. - Not great build quality. - non-SSM - extends on zooming - now weather resistance.
comment:	I think that 16-80 is one of the best (and may be the best) travel zoom avaible on the market at this moment at any system. Great and very useful range, image quality, great colors and contrast. Bokeh at 80mm is better than 70mm from Zeiss 24-70/2.8. So if You are not pixel peeper (such am i) i can Highly recommend Zeiss 16-80 for You. Yes, 16-80 is not ideal lens. Some expensive (but much better than competitors Canon 15-85 and one level with Nikon 16-85). There is no SSM/SAM like in Olympus 12-60 SWD (other great travel zoom). It is not Full Frame lens. At wight end Zeiss 16-80 is average IQ (vignetting and low sharpness). I have two travel with this lens and it deliver me many NICE pictures.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: leohendriks review date: May-31-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- sigma 17-70. - minolta 50/1.7 - minolta 24/2.8 - minolta 18-70
price paid:	500 euro (used)
positive:	- sharpness - range
negative:	- build quality
comment:	When my Sigma 17-70 broke, I looked for a replacement. I found the 16-80 secondhand. Sharpness is outstanding (open @ close range and infinity). Did find some CA wide open @ 16mm (but not concerning). Colors are good (better then Sigma: on par with vintage Minolta?). Macro not as good as with the sigma, but then you can't have it all. I use a Cokin P CircPol and have not encountered the vignetting issue like others mention. Build quality is not what I would expect. The front tubus seems to have some room to move: the optical axis can tilt somewhat. I have not seen any out-of-focus shots caused by this. I did find some minor distortion (other then from tilting the camera in wide angle shots). I tried to make it flare but did not yet succeed. Well maybe i should try harder. But I guess, one can find any weak spot as long as you know how to look for it. Build quality in the long run is my main concern. When placed on a flat surface the hood rests on the surface while attached to the front tubus. I consider the front tubus to be the weakest, most vulnerable part of the lens. I have used it now for 5 months. I did encounter the vignetting issue without and with filters (Cokin P). I tried to solve it (with filters) by buying the special Cokin wide angle filter holder. But that does do the job. So now I am back on using the regular P-size holder again and just paying attention to the angle under which I use the holder. My Mi 24/2.8 and 50/1.7 are both sharper in the corners wide open (24/3.0 = 16-80@24/4.0; 50/2.8 = 16-80 @ 50/4.5) than the zeiss. Center sharpness differs one stop also (Mi better). @ F/D=8.0 (nice sunny day) differences are beyond detection. I recently found out after pixelpeeping. Made some shots from my bookshelf for that. Not very concerning in my opninion. I have used the zeiss more extensively now and have less concerns on the build.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 5	user: rvmalsen review date: May-24-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	70-300G SSM
price paid:	€550 (new) cash back
positive:	+ Great Colors & contrast + Sharpness + Focal Length 16-80 + Light
negative:	- Build quility not what i expected - Distorsion - vignettering @ 16mm
comment:	Great walk around lens in combination with my A350 and my new A700. I realy like the zoom range of this lens. Build quility is less then i expected, but the image quility compensates that. Not a great lens for low light situations.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ianb review date: May-23-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-80 4-5.6
price paid:	L479 new
positive:	Crisp versatile Great focal length range
negative:	Small amount of vignetting at the widest angles.
comment:	The colours generated by this lens are superb and the perspective you can achieve allow for some very creative and stunning photos. There is some vignetting at the widest angle and clearly minor distortion, but both can be used to effect. Coupled with the Sony A700 you have a match made in heaven. It works well with the minolta 5D as well.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 2 flare control: 5	user: RolfGuenter review date: May-21-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-75mm Minolta 17-35mm
price paid:	550 EURO
positive:	sharp coating range
negative:	distorsion vignetting
comment:	I own the 28-75mm and the 17-35mm and was happy so far with this lenses. I bought the 16-80mm because I did not want to change the lenses so often during holidays. I was a little bit disappointed with the lens. It is making a crunching noise if You try to focus manually. It is not better regarding sharpness than my Minolta 28-75mm, may be my 28-75mm is even sharper. The distorsion at wide angle is not better than with the 17-35mm, but vignetting is even worser. Only the range and the coating are advantages in my eyes over the 28-75mm.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: andyxx review date: May-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL1870 Tamron 17-50 F2.8
price paid:	520 USD (used)
positive:	Contrast Color
negative:	A bit slow AF Expensive
comment:	i buy this lens because of the contrast and color. but a bit expensive for the price paid.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: PaulinUK99999 review date: April-22-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	CZ 50mm f1.7 (Contax mount)**
price paid:	Part of a700 kit
positive:	Sharpness Beautiful colours 1/4 price of 16-35 + 24-70 :)
negative:	Zoom creep* Slight vignetting at 16mm Flare not as good as hoped**
comment:	I use this lens a lot at 16-24mm and am very happy with it . I also like the close focus at 80 which is very handy in the field. My previous use of CZ lenses on 35mm left me with no flare problems, but the 1680 does seem to have more of a problem (though its also a vastly more complex zoom lens and not a prime). I use a B+W Slim Circ Polarizer and the slight vignetting is noticeable, but the results from the rest of the frame are superb. Only with the Polarizing filter on is there any slight zoom creep when pointed downwards, which started a year on.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: bhendjol review date: April-12-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tammy 17-50/ 2.8
price paid:	629 USD (used)
positive:	longer focal length than Tammy 17-50, that's it.
negative:	Vignettes at 16mm, soft at wide open. not a good indoor lens/ night photograph lens.
comment:	traded in the Tammy for this lens, thinking this would be a better one because of the name. It's not.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: zifoo review date: April-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28/2,8 50/2,8 sigma 10-20/4,5-5,6 sigma 70-300 APO
price paid:	450€ used
positive:	- sharp enough - small and light - range
negative:	- quite vineting at 16 mm
comment:	I think visible upgrade from a kit lenses. Its light, compact. Perfect if you dont want to wear all stuff.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: andrewlamwc review date: April-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony - DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sigma - 18-200 F3.5-6.3 DC Minolta - AF 24-105 F3.5-4.5 D Minolta - AF 35-105 F3.5-4.5 N
price paid:	619 USD (new)
positive:	+ Light weight + Great Colour presentation + Sharp + 16 mm
negative:	- Distorsion - vignettering @ 16mm
comment:	This is a must-buy lens for upgrading from Kit lens. High quaility with affordable price.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: Stan53 review date: March-30-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Kit Lens
price paid:	999 AUS (new)
positive:	Light Great Color Ease of use
negative:	Build Flare
comment:	I have used this for about 10% of my shots. I have found the color exceptional and it is sharp, I do not use enhancement on 99% of the shots. I was a little disappointed with a rattle in my lens took it back and they told me it was not a fault. It works okay just annoying. The focus adjustment does not feel positive but works OK has a little play in the movement which is concerning. Overall it is a versatile lens with great resolution even when taking photos of insects. You can crop down a great deal and retain the integrity of the shot. It can flare on the wrong angles to the sun but not unmanageable.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: raisiner review date: March-30-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 16-105 f3.5-5.6 Sony 18-70 Kit Sony 24-70 f2.8 CZ Minolta 28-70 f2.8 G
price paid:	700 USD
positive:	Almost perfect as a walk around lens
negative:	Nothing worth noting other than a little more reach would be nice
comment:	I love this lens! I want very good IQ (doesn't have to absolutely perfect), light weight and as little total weight as possible to cover most of the photo situations I put myself in. This lens teamed with the Sony 70-300 G and up to two more to fit the specific situation is almost perfect for me. This combination has nearly quelled my lens lust! The most common complaint about this lens is Build. I happen to think its "Build" fits what I want perfectly - light weight & compact. I have the much heavier & bulkier Sony 24-70 f2.8 - it takes somewhat better pictures but it stays home unless I'm after portraits of the family. Next most common complaint is Distortion. If I could give the lens a 4.5 for distortion at 16mm, I would but 16mm is getting pretty wide and distortion should be expected. If you're after the perfect picture, there are better lenses, but if you are wanting an excellent lens without the pro price (and weight/bulk) for an APS format camera, better consider this one.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: silversurfer review date: March-29-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-70 G Minolta 28-75 D Minolta 28-135 Kit lens
price paid:	699 USD (new)
positive:	Excellent replacement for kit lens. Great colors
negative:
comment:	I've had this lens only a few days, but impressed with it. It's my first real replacement for the kit in my gear. Sharpness is good, but didn't get a 5 because it's no sharper than my 28-70 and only sightly better than the 28-75. With all the rave about Zeiss, I expected a little more. Color gets a five because it actually looks better than the G or D. I gave build a 4, because unlike the minoltas compared against, it feels slightly flimsier. I don't have the problems others have mentioned, but have only had the lens a short time. Many of the complaints were noted after a year of ownership. My copy has no extreme distortion - even at 16mm/F3.5. There is some (of course!) at that focal length, but nothing to complain about. I also have not experience ANY vignetting yet. EDIT: Distortion was reduced by a notch after comparison with the 17-35G.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: brororn review date: March-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 17-35/3,5-4,5 Minolta 24-85/3,5-4,5 Minolta 28-70/2,8 G Minolta 80-200/2,8 G HS
price paid:	500 EUR (used)
positive:	Very useful focal length, reasonably fast, fast and quite silent focusing, quite sharp at tele end
negative:	Distortion at wide is strong and so is CA and vignetting
comment:	Bought the lens as used some time ago. I have mostly taken test photos to compare with my other lenses. I would not buy this lens as new because the price/performance is then not the best. But when you buy this used it is a good general purpose lens (and the issues will not bother). Focal length range is nice and so is maximum aperture. Focusing works very well, zoom ring works nice. The lens is reasonably sharp at long end. Build quality is OK but not quite at the level you expect for the price (as new). The distortion is strong at 16 mm. Sharpness at 16 mm is good when stopped down to F8, corners will not sharpen much. Chromatic aberration at wide end is also strong in the corners. Stopping down does not help. Colour is also a bit reddish when you look at white surfaces. Vignetting especially at wide end is pronounced, stopping down does not help much.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: R1user review date: March-27-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	DSC-R1 Sony 50mm 1.4 Sony 70-300 G SSM
price paid:	650 euros
positive:	- perfect range for travel - great saturated colours - sharp
negative:	- distortion at 16mm - vignetting at 16mm
comment:	I've bought this lens for the A700 and they make a nice couple, relatively compact, fast and image quality is fantastic. Saturation and contrast are sometimes even too high. However if compared with the stunning fixed lens of the DSC-R1, distortion and vignetting at 16mm could have been better. Build quality is also ok but not as good as the 70-300 G.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: chrishurley review date: March-14-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 17-70, Sony 16-105, Tamron 18-250
price paid:	600USD
positive:	Fast-ish aperture compared to similar lenses Fast focus
negative:	Expensive
comment:	I stupidly acquired a bunch of lenses at the same time- the 17-70, 16-80, 16-105 and 18-250. I had a very hard time deciding which ones to keep. In the end, the ability to recover a large chunk of money from the 16-80 made the decision slightly easier. I am an enthusiast/amateur, and I expect that I'm fairly typical for people in this group. Accomplished photographers will blow my efforts away with any old lens, so you'll have to read this understanding my background- I am learning, but I'm an amateur. I wanted to love the 16-80. I bought it with the intent of owning one great piece of glass, but I wanted it to blow me away and that just never really happened. I shot all of these lenses in similar situations and wanted to see the other lenses embarrassed by the optical performance of the CZ. I my untrained eye, the 16-80 just never delivered 700USD worth of performance. Now I absolutely saw an improvement over the 18-70 or the 28-105, but among this group, I was equally happy with the 17-70, 16-80 and 16-105. The 18-250 really holds up well also.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: brian33 review date: February-09-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 kit lens
price paid:	650 euros
positive:	- Super sharp - Love the color - 16mm - CA totally under control
negative:	- Vignetting wide open!!! - 80mm feels a little short
comment:	I love this lens. . . . stopped down. I hate its vignetting. I find vignetting difficult to deal with in post processing and it is major on this lens wide open. Not under all circumstances so you can learn when it's not going to be a problem but still. Otherwise when it is stopped down to f6 or so, I think the overall image quality is probably as good as you're going to get on a DT short-range zoom. 16mm versus the 18mm on the kit lens was like a wide angle revelation to me. The obvious question for someone looking to replace their 18-70 is this: what about the 16-105? I wish I could compare it because I think the essential point of comparison for the 16-80 would be the 16-105. The only thing I can say is I sometimes find 80mm to be a bit short.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: utcreeper review date: February-04-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL18-250
price paid:	$550 USD (Used)
positive:	Color, sharpness
negative:	Uhh.. not a 2.8?
comment:	Everything you've heard about this one is true. It lets me worry about the shot instead of the gear, which is what I like gear to do. Very sharp as long as I don't sneeze while the shutter is open.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: As Hope Dies review date: January-27-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 Sony 28mm F2.8 Sony 18-70mm Minolta 50mm F1.7 Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Minolta 70-210 F4 Sony 500mm F8
price paid:	800 USD (new)
positive:	+ sharpness + focus speed + zoom range + colors and contrast
negative:	- built quallity is very good, but can be better for this price
comment:	This is one of the sharpest lenses I own. I din't know that a wide angle zoom can be so sharp. My sample is even sharper then the superb Minolta 50mm F1.7(compared both lenses at F5.6),and can even be compared to a macro lens. Initially I had some focusing problems, but the problem was my A700, and not the lens itself. With this corrected, the focus is quite accurate at 24mm+. Colors are vivid and the contrast is everything but not flat. The build can be compared to an Sigma EX lens, but seems just a notch lower. Very nice portrait, group and walkaround lens in all.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: tommyrider review date: January-03-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Dt 18-70 Dt 18-250 Minolta 28-135 4 4.5 Sony 70-300 g SSM
positive:	-Very sharp even wide open -Great contrast and micro-contrast detail -Very versatile range -Light and portable -Fast AF -Nice portait lens@ 80mm -Flare control -Minimal focus distance.
negative:	-Sometimes "too sharp" -Cheap built for its price range - Weak DOF -Poor indoors performance - Noticeable vignetting @ 16mm but expectable for this type of lens.(Not really an issue)
comment:	This is the second copy i tried. This unit is very sharp across the entire range,and focusses fast and accurate with available daylight. I had some issues regarding af with artificial lighting indoors. Overall CZ 16-80 is an unique lens with its own presonality. I I sold my Minolta 28-135 to buy this lens ,but i`d must keep it. 16-80 in my opinion lacks of "some magic" , from the film-like looking images , DOF control and bokeh from 28-135. And in the other hand, cz 16-80 offers better contrast ,more usable range in aps-c, specially from the wide end, and its more versatile for everyday use due the better focus distance and its weight. A must have premium walkaround lens , serious glass inside,but it needs a partner for low light situations and better DOF and bokeh. (based in my needs) Maybe my next buy : a sigma 30 ex 1.4 or a Tamron 28-75 2.8.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Kurd Jam review date: January-01-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	-18-70 Kit lens. -Beercan. -Sony 70-200 f/2.8 G -Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 -Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 -CZ 24-70 f/2.8
price paid:	400 Euros (new)
positive:	-Light lens, ideal for walkaround purposes. -Good color rendition and sharpness. -Reasonably fast AF. -Versatile focal length.
negative:	-Too pricey unless you get a good deal on it. -Quality control issues? -Heavy distortion and vignetting until the 20mm range.
comment:	I bought this lens on June 2008, in order to replace the kit lens on my A100. Since then, I have shot a bit over 6000 pictures in a wide range of conditions. The first big difference was the drastic increase in the overall quality of my pictures respect the kit lens (not really an accomplishment, I know). I tried this lens in 3 different stores until I found a good deal for it, and I have to say that all the samples I was offered to test worked finely. I don't know if the good/bad copy thing has been blown out of proportion or not by Internet buzz. However I have never experienced any problems with any of the lenses I have been allowed to try. Back to the review, this lens' sweet spot seems to lie between f/5.6 and f/11 which is quite decent. Judging from my own experience, this aperture range is very practical for walk around purposes. The lens shows some vignetting from 16mm to 20mm, as well as some distortion too. It can be used to take landscape shots, but don't expect it to outperform other lenses devised for landscape and architecture photography. I have only had problems with flare when nearly including the sun into the frame; CA is extremely well controlled too and you won't be finding much of it. Finally, the main problem I found with this lens is the price tag. For nearly 700 Euros in most stores, one would expect maybe a bit more from it (constant f/4 aperture?, more metal in the construction, correction of the vignetting issue? Just to name a few from the top of my head). Based on the performance alone, I can wholeheartedly recommend the CZ 16-80. One should keep in mind that the Sony 16-105 for example, offers almost the same performance and a longer focal range at a lower price too, though. If you find a good deal on the CZ, and don't plan on buying a full frame camera until they cost less than your first newborn baby, then by all means buy this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Jimmy review date: December-27-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75 2.8 KM 17-35 2.8-4.0 KM 18-200 3.5-5.6 Minolta 35 1.4 Minolta 85 1.4
price paid:	550 USD (used)
positive:	Sharpness from 5.6 Color Manual focus ring is good (for a zoom) Zoom range
negative:	Nothing consider the price and the zoom range
comment:	I have had this lens for a couple of weeks now and I am very happy with its performance. I most of the time use primes, since I have not been too happy with the performance of my earlier zoom lenses. This lens has made me change my mind. The sharpness is excellent at 5.6 and the colors are great!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: daddyman review date: December-18-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 15-30 Sigma 28-70/2.8
price paid:	450 USD
positive:	Very sharp Excellent colors Wonderful contrast
negative:	Would prefer 2.8 aperture
comment:	I really like this lens, traded in the above 2 Sigmas for it and don't miss them at all. I do mainly landscapes and was constantly switching between the two. Hiking for landscapes is much more enjoyable now. The lens is very sharp except at the corners when wide open and is relatively distortion free except for what is normal at the wide end. There is some CA at 16mm, though. I generally don't go wider than 18 for shots I plan to print. Build quality is in line with price of lens. Got a great deal on the lens with MS Cashback. To summarize, it's one of my favorite lenses and is on the camera 75% of the time.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: hallojenshans review date: December-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 2.8 17-35 mm Sony 70-300 mm
price paid:	729 Euro
positive:	Sharpness Color control Bokeh
negative:	Plastic
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: tthomsen review date: November-29-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony SAL-1870 DT 18 - 70mm F3.5 - 5.6 Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC
price paid:	690 USD (new)
positive:	Very high center resolution Very good performance at 80mm and wide open Very good color reproduction and contrast
negative:	Noticeable loss of corner resolution at some large aperture settings Noticeable chromatic aberration in the corners at 16mm
comment:	My copy has on the Sony DSLR-A300 a center resolution of well above 2000 LPH and corner resolution is typically between 1500 to 1700 LPH, measured in the range of biggest aperture down to f8. One special observation is the very good telephoto performance at 80mm at the wides aperture of f4.5: 2200 center, 1700 corner. The one negative exception is at 50mm and f4.5, where the LPH value falls to 1950 center and 1200 corner. Consequently, center resolution is exceptional, corner resolution is mostly tolerable, with 50mm/f4.5 unsatisfactorily. Here are the focal length/aperture settings that I typically use for my copy: 16mm: f4.5 - f16 24mm: f5.0 - f16 35mm: f5.0 - f16 50mm: f5.6 - f16 80mm: f4.5 - f16 Chromatic aberration is noticeable in the corners at 16mm, becomes less visible at higher focal lengths and disappears towards the center. I did not notice any distortion, vignetting or flare that is worth mentioning. Color and contrast are natural and quite attractive. Build-quality is acceptable for amateur-use. Focusing is fast and accurate, even at low-light conditions. The minimum focal length of 16mm saves an additional wide angle lens. One practical note: Use low-profile or slim-line filters with this lens, otherwise you will have vignetting at wide angles. Overall the lens is quite usable through its entire focal length, when you keep a few large aperture values in mind that you might want to avoid because of noticeable corner blur. I use the lens for about 90% of my photos and can currently not think of a better lens that has the same combination of versatility and image quality.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Capetown review date: November-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 20 F2,8 Minolta 24-50 F4,0 Minolta 35-105 F3,5-4,5Beercan Minolta 28-85 F3,5-4,5 Beercan Minolta 35-70 F4 Beercan Tokina ATX 28-70 F2,6-2,8 Sony 18-70 F3,5-4,5 Kitlens Minolta 50 F1,4 Minolta 50 F3,5 Macro Sony 50 F2,8 Macro
price paid:	400 Euro NEW
positive:	Very good sharpness 16-50 F3,5 Good sharpness 50-80 F4,5 Very good sharpness >5,6 16-80 Zoom range (FF) 24-120mm Good flare control Quick AF
negative:	Build quality not typical for Carl Zeiss - but you get what you pay for! Little distortion at 16mm Only for APS-C
comment:	This is my best walkaround lens. You can get pretty good results with this lens. Too german Foto-magazines gives 83/100 Points in combination with the APS-C Chip of the Alpha 350 - thats a very good result for a zoom (for a zoom in this zoom range its exellent). Fully open aperture gives sharp and contrasty results in the range 18-50mm. For better sharpness you have to step down F5,0 in the Range 50-80mm. At F 5,6 this lens are very sharp in the center and in the borders of the picture. Today I don`t use my Monolta AF20 2,8 anymore. The CZ 16-80 gives very good results in this zoom range. The sharpness and contrast is the same in my opinion. In the 50mm range the Minolta prime 50 F1,4 (at F2,8) is better in any case. My old Tokina 28-70 2,6-2,8 (Pro VS.I AT-X 270) are a little sharper. But the CZ 16-80 gives a better contrast and has a very good flare control. And in case of zoom range and wight the CZ 16-80 is mutch better. My old Minolta 24-50 F4 gives pretty good results. But today with APS-C the zoom range is only 36-75mm. The colours are sligly better than the CZ 16-80. I would like to point out, that the CZ 16-80 is a very good walkaround zoom. When i go outside, it`s 50% on my camera. The build quality is good enough but not typical for Carl Zeiss products. I would by this lens again - but not for the official Sony price of 800 Euro!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: lattiboy review date: October-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-135mm Tamron 17-50mm Sigma 17-70mm DC Tamron 35-105 SP Kitlens Tamron 24-135mm
price paid:	680
positive:	SHARPNESS! Contrast and color EXCELLENT range Quick AF Flare control
negative:	Mediocre build quality distortion @ 16mm Quality Control
comment:	This lens is sharp. I mean, seriously, sharp. Combined with the amazing contrast is, quite frankly, astonishing. As you can see, I've owned most of the "good" zooms in this range and nothing comes close. I thought for a long time this lens was regarded so highly because of the cult-of-Zeiss, but it's because it is fantastic. Nothing TOUCHES this lens in the range. If it breaks, I will buy another. Although not mentioned often, I find the bokeh with this lens to be VERY good, especially considering the max aperture. It has a distinctive look to it that gives an almost paint-like texture to your shots. Here are some pretty hi-rez samples. http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=zeiss&w=24281925%40N02

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: overeema review date: September-07-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	€ 619
positive:	Zoom range Image quality even at full aperture Focussing speed (on a 350) Relatively low weight
negative:	At wide angle it course a shadow when using built-in flash Plastic barrel modest speed (F/ 3,5-4,5)
comment:	Excellent standard zoomlens for most pictures At wide angle it casts shadow of itself in pictures taken with builtin flash

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: panchito review date: September-04-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	BEERCAN SONY 50 1.4 MINOLTA 100-200 4.5 MINOLTA 100 2.8
price paid:	1199 NZD
positive:	SHARP,GREAT COLOURS VERY VERSATILE
negative:	VIGNETTING AT THE WIDE END PLASTICKY FEEL
comment:	SPENDS 80% OF THE TIME ON THE CAMERA, VERY VERSATILE LENS I DONT SEEM TO SUFFER SOME OF THE PROBLEMS MENTIONED IN POSTS HERE. AN EXCELLENT KIT LENS COMBO WITH THE A700 AND A100 AS WELL.

sharpness: 2.5 color: 2 build: 1 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: palmerop review date: September-03-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	700
positive:
negative:	Poor QC. Always in repair.
comment:

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jtjo63 review date: September-02-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-70g
price paid:	?
positive:	Sharp. light, versatile
negative:	filters take your corners of
comment:	This lens is used as my travel lens if i don't want to bring the big gun. It is light, quick and sharp and if you don't need the 2,8, it is great. Filters are an issue I have not yet resolves but the range of 16-80 safes you bringing an additional lens with your 28-70.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Bruce review date: August-26-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 100-300 D APO F4.5-5.6
price paid:	Kit with Alpha 700
positive:	Sharp Nice Bokeh Colors
negative:	Annoying back focus around the 24 mm
comment:	Very good lens, a little bit pricey but if you want something better than usual you always have to pay more than usual. Very good colours, but compared to my Minolta 100-300mm D APO, the Minolta has the better colours without any doubts.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: popo review date: August-23-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron AF 28-300 F3.5-6.3 LD AD IF Sony 50mm f/1.4
price paid:	510 GBP (new)
positive:	Good quality throughout zoom range
negative:	Vignetting at 16mm Backfocus under some conditions Could be better value
comment:	My most used lens for general indoor photos and wide angle scenery. My sample has some suspected backfocus issues under 24mm at distances around 1-3m, but this is minor and I might not have noticed it if I didn't hear of other people's problems here. Lens is on verge of vignetting by itself at 16mm, any filters will take your corners off. Some CA on wide end.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: v34jg review date: August-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	50/1.4
price paid:	700 USD
positive:	Sharp
negative:	Boken ok, not the softest.
comment:	Sharp lens, works well for architectural photography. I wish it had a wider aperture, also wish the filter size was a little larger. I am getting some vignetting from my “slim mount” protective filter. A 67mm instead of a 62mm might be useful.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: mobydick review date: August-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- Nikon AFS 16-85/3.5-5.6 VR DX
price paid:	650 EUR (new)
positive:	- Compact and lightweight - F4.5 at the long end - Fast AF - High and consistent resolution at the long end
negative:	- Decentering issues - Strong vignetting at the wide end - Tendency for backfocus - Manual focus not well implemented - No SSM
comment:	I really, really wanted to own and use this lens, but after testing four different exemplars over a couple of months I finally had to give up without success. Success means: To find an exemplar without any unacceptable decentering and with reliable AF on my A700. Exemplar #1 had accurate AF and very good consistent sharpness, only at 16mm it showed a centering defect on the verge of being acceptable. In hindsight, I should have kept this lens. But it was my first attempt, and since I wanted this lens especially because of the 16mm, I sent it back with the strong hope of getting an even better exemplar. Unfortunately, this hope failed. Exemplar #2 was really dismal. It showed a severe centering defect between 35 and 60mm, at 50mm it was just crazy. I wondered how this lens managed to get through quality control. Exemplar #3 was overall a disappointment. Not as sharp as #1, and especially weak at 50mm with rather bad centering (but not as bad as #2). Exemplar #4 would have been a keeper optically. Good at 16mm, decentering at 50mm within acceptable limits, but unfortunately with consistent backfocus on my A700... If the A700 had AF fine adjustment per lens like the Nikon D300, I would just have dialed a correction value in and would have kept this lens, but since the A700 does not have this very important (IMHO) feature, I sent #4 back and gave up. Thus, in theory the CZ is a nice lens, in practice it has considerable quality control issues. Compared to the Nikon AFS 16-85 which I use on the D300, the CZ is optically weaker at the wide end where the Nikon really shines. The strong end of the CZ is the long end. At F5.6 at 80mm, the CZ has consistent and very good resolution over the whole frame. And exemplar #1 showed this characteristic even at 50mm. Manual focussing with the CZ is difficult because the manual focus ring is not nicely implemented (mixture of resistence and play). I would strongly prefer the CZ with SSM focussing, even if the lens gets slightly larger with internal focus motor. The price between EUR 650 and 700 is too high in my opinion. With SSM and with consistent optical quality and quality control it might be justified, but not in the present state.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Mark_k review date: August-06-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 50/1.4, Minolta 24-105D Canon 24-105/4
price paid:	600
positive:	Small size, weight and sharpness
negative:	Price, build quality and absence of SSM
comment:	I have been hesitating to have this one, for the price, for the DT format and for the reasons I have so many alpha mount standard zooms Yet it surprises me with its sharpness and colour. The useful sharpness at aperture 3.5-4.5 is an extra. I have to admit my Alpha 700 has it mounted all the time

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: banzen review date: July-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70 kit lens Sony 50/1.4 Tamron 28-75/2.8
price paid:	550 USD
positive:	sharp range
negative:	price vignetting
comment:	I bought this lens to replace my kit lens and wasn't disappointed. Comparing to the kit lens, this lens is a lot sharper. Its extra 2mm at the wide end is very handy for landscape shots. I also find the lens to be sharpest at the long end which is unusual for a zoom lens. Comparing to my 28-75/2.8 which is very sharp already, I think the Zeiss image is a little bit sharper and the extra zoom range is also a plus. I don't miss the 1-2 stops difference since I always use flash with the 28-75 indoor anyway. Only wish Sony can release a SSM version of this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: donalf review date: July-07-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	konica minolta 28/75
price paid:	600 euros
positive:	color sharpness
negative:	price
comment:	this is a really fabulous lens re sharpness and color

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: kathyk review date: July-03-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-70/2.8G
price paid:	$600usd
positive:	Very sharp lens with good color. Good contrast. Close focusing. Fast focusing.
negative:	Bokeh.
comment:	For being a zoom it is extremely sharp I think. Good contrast, picks up nice detail. I really like the WA shots esp. for landscape types of composition. Another plus is nice close focus, I appreciate that in a lens. I think bokeh is the drawback for this lens, which for WA small aperture it's just not an issue. Build is decent, has a bit of a fragile feel to it though nothing really seems cheap or anything. Narrow rubber focus & zoom grip are indeed prone to collecting grime/dust. Have read there is vignetting with a filter, I have an old Minolta filter and have not noticed a problem, but maybe haven't noticed it yet or something. It was my intention to never buy a DT lens but with this one I am pleased.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: chthoniid review date: July-03-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-70 Tamron 90/2.8 Minolta 50/1.4 Minolta 70-210/4
price paid:	NZD 1580
positive:	Very sharp Accurate colours Versatile range
negative:	distortion and vignetting at the wide end.
comment:	I was not satisfied with the quality of the shots from the 18-70 kit lens and upgraded (2007) to the CZ16-80. This was a very effective upgrade. I find that the CZ16-80 is as sharp as my Tamron 90/2.8 and my G lens. It is sharper than the beercan or 50/1.4. Colours aren't as warm as the mysterious Minolta renditions, but are well rendered without appearing washed out. The range is extremely versatile and this makes the lens my ideal travel lens. I've not had any problems with flare or chromatic aberrations. Build quality is a little less than I would prefer, but more solid than the Sony kit lenses. There is distortion at the wide end, and when using the lens for landscapes some perspective correction is often necessary. Slim filters are also almost mandatory to avoid vignetting at the wide end. The DOF preview is very much your friend [:)]. I've had nothing but good experiences with this lens. I include three sample shots: [URL]http://chthoniid.zenfolio.com/img/v2/p737484229-5.jpg[/URL] [URL]http://chthoniid.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p1066049412-5.jpg[/URL] [URL]http://chthoniid.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p377747484-5.jpg[/URL]

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: lionking review date: July-01-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70mm
price paid:	600
positive:	superior optics of Carl Zeiss, very sharp, great colors, fast AF
negative:	plastic build
comment:	it has been my standard lens for 3 months and i like its quality, i am planning to get 3 more Carl Zeiss lenses (85mm, 135mm, 24-70mm).

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: laguire review date: June-16-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	cz 24-70, sigma 24-70, 18-70 kitlens, 50/1.7
positive:	Very sharp across the range except in the corners at wide. Very useful focal range.
negative:	Softer corners at wide end. Distortion at wide end.
comment:

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: nygus review date: June-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-70G 35/2
price paid:	730 CAN
positive:	awesome range pretty sharp across range small and light
negative:	not punchy not razor sharp at any aperture
comment:	This is awesome walkaround lenses. Although is always pretty sharp across range it is never razor sharp even stopped down (and strange softer edges at 24mm). Photos are not as punchy as from 28-70G or 35/2, but that expected. I didn't noticed any issues with flares. I didn't noitced any dark edges (I'm using Kenko UV lowprofile filter). Little barrel distortion at 16mm. Anyway for a price I expected little more, but this lens tends to be on me camera all the time - because range is so nice and don't weight a ton, like 28-70G... Also there is little bit of focus problems on A300 (on wide), on A700 is much better.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: sweip review date: June-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Standard Sony 18-70 Tamron 28-75/2,8 Canon 17-80/4-5,6
price paid:	kit with a700
positive:	Very usable focal lenght 16-80 Good sharpness Great skintones Good portrait lens
negative:	Would have been nice with constant aperture, but there's the 28-70/2,8 to look forward to and save money for. Could have had SSM.
comment:	I had high expectations on this lens. The sharpness and picture quality had to be not good, but great for me to not lay my photography on the shelf cause of to high demands and to small wallet. This lens together with my new a700 did not dissapoint me. Sharp, nice skintones and a smooth feel while zooming. A bit more plastic feal compared to similar prices Canon and Nikkor lenses, but not in a bad way. Great focal lenght and almost the optimal standardzoom to have. Couldn't find a competitor with other camera brands. This is without doubt the lens that will be fitted most of the time. After reading some good reviews with the Sigma 17-70 i had that one in mind to, but after trying both the Sigma and the Zeiss fitted on the camera i went for Zeiss and have no regrets. I feel this lens a bit sharper than the Tamron 28-75/2,8 i bought earlier. Haven't tried the Tamron on my a700 yet though.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4	user: raydsr review date: June-03-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony DT 16-105mm premium kit lens
price paid:	689 USD
positive:	inspires confidence in your hands very sharp in most situations
negative:	bad in low light not sharp at 16 mm in low light expensive
comment:	i thought i loved this lens until i did some meticulous comparison tests against the Sony DT 16-105mm kit lens. over and over again the kit lens out-performed the CZ - especially in low light. other than the weight (the CZ is two ounces lighter) the kit lens is a better choice for everyday shooting in my opinion. i returned the CZ for a refund after 14 days of ownership.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: willielam review date: June-01-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	minolta 28-75mm 2.8 minolta 17-35mm 2.8-4 minolta 50mm 1.4
positive:	Sharp, good color and contrast. Good control of flare Great zoom range
negative:	price
comment:	Great lens but expensive.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: johnbirch review date: May-12-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75 2.8 Min 50 1.4 O Sony 18-70 kitlens
price paid:	650 usd (new)
positive:	Good range Sharpness Colors Contrast
negative:	Build (although it's pretty good) Filters cause vignetting at 16mm
comment:	This lens is a great replacement for the kitlens. It is sharp wide open through the entire range. I am not sure about corner sharpness, I haven't done enough research. The colors and contrast are really nice. Definitely not Minolta colors, but very nice anyways. It is a little slow, but has enough other benefits to compensate for it. People complain that the build quality isn't great (it is plastic), but I disagree, it has a heavy quality feel.

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: Stef. review date: May-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron AF 2,8 17-50mm Minolta 1,7 50mm Minolta 1,4 50mm Sigma AF 3,5-4,5/ 18-35mm Tamron AF 3,5-6,3/ 18-200mm Tamron AF Aspherical LD 3,5-6,3/ 28-300mm Minolta AF 3,5-4,5/ 28-85mm Minolta AF 3,5-4,5/ 24-105mm Minolta AF 4,-5,6/ 35-80mm
price paid:	L 500
positive:	sharpness weight range quality of the images af speed
negative:	lens rattles slightly when shaken can not fit more than one filter without vignetting
comment:	I guess I was lucky with my lens as it is sharp throughout all apertures. I just love it and it is the lens that I usually have on my body. I did like my Tamron 17-50mm a lot but am happier with the CZ due to the 80mm instead of only 50mm. It does rattle somehow when shaken but frankly I don't bother as it does its job fantastically well and I would not want to exchange it for another one. Would buy it immediately again!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: vnhvn review date: May-02-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	4-4.5/28-135 3.5-4.5/24-105
price paid:	600 euro (new)
positive:	sharp, lightweight
negative:	construction OK, but expected more for the price.
comment:	This lense is quite sharp in the centre, but I was disappointed with the lack of sharpness at the edges wide open. This unsharpness was reason for me to send it back to Sony's technical department. They replaced the lens mechanism. This solved the problem. But I find it strange that it passed the QC in the first place. This lens is a little bit sharper than the 24-105 and to have 16 mm that works as 24 mm on the 7D is a bonus. The 28-135 is great, but it starts really with 42 mm and is quite big and heavy. The 16-80 is easier to walk around with. Wish: that it would go to 90 mm, thus including the classic 135.

sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 3	user: minfansony review date: April-24-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	10-20mm Sigma 18-70mm Sony 28-85mm Beercan 70-210mm Beercan 90mm Tamron 70-300mm Sigma Apo 100-300mm Minolta Apo 50mm 1.7 Minolta 24mm Sigma 500mm Reflex Minolta
price paid:	L479
positive:	Sharper at tele end Good zoom range Good colours and contrast Sharper than 18-70 on the edges
negative:	Struggles to focus at wide end Soft at wide end Doesn't handle flare well Build quality Distortion at 16mm Can't use filters, vignettes badly
comment:	I was really expecting a lot from this lens after reading a lot of positive reviews, although I had heard about a few quality issues. When I finally got my lens after waiting 6 weeks for it to arrive (back in June last year) I was somewhat dissapointed. The build quality was not what I was expecting from a L600 lens! The focus ring is just horrible to use, you can feel the gears working and it sort of has a grinding feel. The zoom ring at the wide end is very jumpy and not very smooth. The focus rubber ring has come off twice and I treat this lens with respect. The lens will not focus at 16mm, I have to focus at long end then zoom back out, which becomes a pain after a while. Had the lens 9 months now and I'm going to send it back to Sony to see if they can fix any of the above problems. I did send the lens back after 2 weeks from new, but the replacement was worse, so kept the original. Would love to try one of the lenses people have given 5 out of 5 for sharpness!

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 5	user: wross review date: April-24-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II Minolta 100mm f/2 Minolta 200mm f/2.8
price paid:	500
positive:	Build
negative:	Price IQ Price Distortion Price
comment:	I read up on this lens extensively before purchasing. The one thing that was consistent was that the reviews were not consistent, because the quality of the individual lenses seems to not be consistent. Still, the people who love this lens rave about it, so I took the plunge. Next time I'll listen to my better instincts. The sharpness of my first informal shots wasn't anything spectacular, so I did a more formal side-by-side test against a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 XR Di II. I shot a tripod-mounted series of tests at max apertures, f4 (or 4.5 where that was the closest available), f5.6, f8, and f.11, at focal lengths of 16(17)mm, 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm. At every aperture/speed/focal-length combination, the Tamron was either slightly sharper, or I could see no difference. I reshot the series with a different subject, and recorded the same results. The difference in sharpness was roughly equal to one average pass of PP sharpening. Noticeable and meaningful. On a less technical level... When I took my first shots w/ the Minolta 100mm f/2 and the 200mm f2.8, I clearly thought "Wow, THAT is a sharp image." When I took my first shots w/ the 16-80, I thought "That's it??" On other aspects of performance, the lens was very good, with the exception of edge distortion at the wide end. From the wide range of reviews out there, I've got to think that either SOME of these lenses are extremely good, or we're trying to convince ourselves that they're good after we spent so much money for them. I've only tested one, and this one didn't live up to the hype or the price. Advice: Buy this lens only if you can get a refund if you're not happy.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 3	user: whitecat review date: April-06-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	680 USD (new)
positive:	Sharp! Great contrast
negative:	Vignetting Flare
comment:	A great lens! However, I had a problem with vignetting with a UV filter on the lens. Much better without the filter. My copy of the lens doesn't control flare very well. However, in most situations, this lens is a joy to use and provides excellent results. Recommended.

sharpness: 3.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: steunix review date: March-21-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 1870 Minolta 50/1.7 Sigma EX DG Macro 24-70/2.8
positive:	Useful range
negative:	Vignetting Build
comment:	For a lens worth 650€ (in Italy), I'd honestly expect something (much?) more. As others have said, build is not faulty by itself, but surely not a very high standard; the plastic fine grips for zoom and focus rings are badly thought, they just collect dust. Honestly, I haven't noticed that huge step from kit SAL1870 (of course, in relation to the cost): vignetting is evident at 16/18mm, sharpness is not that good at all, epecially in the corners, plus I had frequent focus errors in low light conditions that I had not with the kit lens. Maybe I have been a victim of the sadly known 16-80 low QC, what I can advice is to test the lens before buying.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3	user: jakobdam review date: March-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105 Minolta 50mm f/1.7 Tokina 24-70 f/2.8 ATX-PRO Minolta & Sony 18-70 (kit) Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 SP XR Di LD II
price paid:	1100 USD (new)
positive:	- Sharpness - Bokeh - Contrasts - Colors
negative:	- Vignetting
comment:	* Image quality: * Sharpness is as good as can be in a zoom lens. It beats all zoom lenses I've ranged it against, and in some cases, even my 50mm prime. Colors and contrasts are rendered beautifully, adding a depth and colorful appeal to all images. Flare control is not as well controlled as one might have hoped. The Zeiss coating can apparently only do so much. The flower hood helps a great deal, of course - but even so, you should watch out for flares. I've rated flare control 3, which might be a bit too harsh - but the price taken into consideration, I feel that 3 is fair enough. The bokeh is nice, but not perfect. It does very nice portraits and the like, with a good blurry background - but I truly miss f/2.8 as the Tamron can deliver. The bokeh itself is wellrounded most of the time, and somewhat smooth without annoying jaggies and edges. Vignetting is this lens' big (and maybe only) flaw. At 16mm f/3.5, the corners are a bit darkened - though not VERY much, it's visible. The problem gets big when you want to apply a polarizer - even the slim polarizers will cause the corners to grow noticably darker. * Built * The built quality is good, without being exceptional. I like that they've kept the housing in high quality plastic, instead of heavy metal that would've made the lens much heavier. The zoom is smooth to operate, and the focus ring is precise enough for doing manual focus. The supplied flower hood does a fine job, and the leather lens case is nice to have I guess, though I don't use it myself. * What I use this lens for... * The large zoom range is extremely handy, and this lens has replaced both my 18-70, 24-105 and in most cases the 50mm prime as well. Most of the time, you'll be extremely happy with this lens. Especially for studio shots (portait, model/fashion, product etc.) this lens is the perfect choise. It gives you very high image quality combined with large flexibility. For landscape purposes, it's a bit tougher - due to the vignetting problem. The Cokin P-filters also causes a big deal of vignetting, so I guess the Z-PRO or X-PRO (or maybe Lee) might be the only way out as slide-in filter systems... Distorsion doesn't become a problem other than if you're very picky - maybe some indoor architect photographers will say differently, but for the general and even somewhat demanding usage, distorsion is kept on a absolute minimum. My final verdict for this lens, price and features combined, will be 4,5 stars out of 5. Or in dpreview terms; highly recommended (just). :)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Kwozzie review date: March-05-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony SAL1870 Kit lens
price paid:	$950 NZD (new)
positive:	Look, feel & weight Sharp Sharp Sharp Colour & Contrast
negative:	Manual Focus ring (minor) Zoom Ring (minor)
comment:	Why on earth did I wait so long to get this lens?? Picked it up yesterday on short notice as a deal too good to miss came my way. Have only played with the lens this morning but so far my opinion is WOW!! Initial Thoughts; The lens is well balanced on my A100, has fast focus, MUCH faster than the kit lens. I took note of other reviews regarding build quality and sure, it's all plastic and is lightweight compared to other Zeiss lenses but IMO it's very good and waaay better then the 18-70 kit lens. The manual focus ring has a small amount of play, similar to that on the Sony 50mm F2.8 Macro, possibly because of the internal clutch mechanism, however I can get used to it and IMO makes "fine focus" a little easier. The zoom is firm but smooth and the zoom ring is quite close to the camera body, but again I'll get used to it. Both of these things are minor problems IMO and should not deter anyone from buying this lens. Interestingly I (so far) have not had any back focus issues which was a big problem with the 18-70 (see my review). Images are tack sharp, colour and contrast are excellent, precisely what you would expect from CZ.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Wayne review date: March-01-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	16-105 SAL 18-70 SAL 17-35 Sigma EX
price paid:	620 USD
positive:	Very sharp Excellent contrast Very low distortion Good flare control (with hood and MRC filter)
negative:	Build is just OK
comment:	This is a must have for anyone with the A700. It provides a good range and very sharp images. I turned down the contrast (in camera) down 1 from where I set it for the other lenses. The color is a little colder than the Minolta colors from the legacy Maxxum lenses, but still much better than from the third party lenses. The only negative is in the build, which although solid, does not have the feel of the old generation 1 maxxum lenses.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: PBnbaByJ review date: February-15-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	50mm 1.7, SAL-85F14Z
price paid:	659 USD NEW
positive:	Sharpness, AF speed, Color accuracy
negative:	none
comment:	I just might have found my new favorite lens. Fast, accurate, amazingly sharp. Yes, the build quality isn't the same as the Zeiss 85mm, but then this is an APS-C lens, and it cost a fraction of what the other Zeiss' run. The only thing that keeps this from being the perfect lens is a bit of vignetting wide open, but totally acceptable IMHO. The days of constant lens changes are over for me, this will spend most of it's time attached to the body.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ICE29 review date: February-14-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	28-75/2.8, kit lens
price paid:	1100 USD
positive:	Superb sharpness, contrast, color, much better than 28-75
negative:	some distortion at 16mm, serious focus problems at 16-24mm ! UPDATE: backfocus even with A700
comment:	I was looking forward to get this lens and was shocked by image quality! It's great! Build is good, reminds me of old 24-85, no zoom creep (my 28-75 has this). But I discovered that my A100 together with this lens just can't focus properly on anything closer than 3 metres, when using FL 16-24mm! I ALWAYS get serious back-focus at these focal lengths, which is very very annoying. Now I don't know if this is camera or lens fault (my a100 has problems focusing with kit lens at 18mm sometimes, but most of the time focus is spot on!). I will try it on another camera. UPDATE: tried on A700 and A200, seemed to work well. Just recieved my new A700 and tried AF, after some quick shots of objects in my room it seemed to af perfectly, but when I tried CZ with A700 outside, it couln't capture a single picture of objects in 1 - 3 meters distance that would be in focus. Objects closer than 1m are well focused. Very strange. UPDATE2: after months with this lens, I find it almost perfect! I learned how to focus on the wide end (was more my fault than camera's). Only thing that still annoys me is vignetting @16mm when using CPL, but I can live with that. But colors and sharpness are superb!

sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: bill_bly_ca review date: February-13-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 28-70 2.8 (Pre Zen) Kit lens 18-70 Minolta 35-70 f4
price paid:	609 USD (Used)
positive:	Sharp, Very Sharp Build quality (explained below)
negative:	Hood not great, but not always needed
comment:	==== Edit Dec 09 ==== Purchased just after Jan 2008 The build is very good. Killing my A100 in a fall and performing flawlessly after 2 years since with continuous use. (4 to 6 hours a week average) This lens is mostly used on a 7D and intermittently on an a700. Wide open almost all the time. The rubber grip does fill with finger grime quite quickly. Zoom creep has become pronounced. I have stopped using the hood for the past 6 months and notice no change in image quality.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Spanky review date: February-13-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony: 18-70mm 75-300mm 50mm f/1.4
price paid:	700 USD (new)
positive:	Sharp Colors Good Range
negative:	Build Quality could be better (See comments)
comment:	This lens is as sharp if not sharper than my 50mm f/1.4 prime lens which I feel is a sharp lens to begin with. The range is awesome and will stay on my camera most of the time unless I need the 1.4 from my prime for low light conditions or smoother bokeh. Only issue I have but very minor IMO is that at 16mm and at full zoom @ 80mm, something seems to be loose inside. Anywhere in the middle, it's fine. Doesn't effect the photo taken which is the main thing. Very happy with this lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: kaveh review date: February-11-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75/2.8, Minolta 75-300, Sony DT 16-105, Sony 50/1.4,
price paid:	700 USD
positive:	Sharpness !!!! Contrast, Colors, SHARPNESS !!! SHARP ! SHARP SHARP ! RANGE !!
negative:	if i have to say something negative its the build quality, but considering it as a DT zoom lens its ok !
comment:	the built quality is better than most of the lenses i compared it to, but its not like the 100-400 APO or 85/1.4 CZ... its really sharp, the colors are great, theres no CA or flare (which were my problems with 16-105 specially when the aperture was wide open)... the range is great !

sharpness: 1 color: 1 build: 1 distortion: 1 flare control: 1	user: twb119 review date: February-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24-70SIG Kit lens 90mm Tam 50mm1.7
price paid:	650 USD new
positive:	Rating all ones because if it doesn’t work it doesn’t matter how sharp it is
negative:	Sharp piece of junk, the focus ring became lose so I sent it to Precision Camera for repair and they said it would be cheaper to purchase a new lens than repair. And a new one is $850
comment:	Do not recommend build quality is terrible, haven’t abused it in any way and three years later have a door stop, as Precision Camera said it would cost more to fix than a new lens costs.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 5	user: camfan review date: January-10-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105
price paid:	70000 JPY
positive:	- Sharpness - Great color - Practical zoom range - Flare Control - Decent build quality
negative:	- Distortion at wide end - Vignetting at wide end while wide open - Zoom & focus rings collect dusts easily
comment:	I use CZ16-80 as my travel lens(my favorite for now) instead of the old Minolta 24-105D. On my A100, the zoom range is much better than 24-105D as I got precious wide angles of 24-36mm(16-24mm on APS). I am greatly satisfied with its color and sharpness. Also the flare control is very good with T* coating. Both distortion and vignetting at the wide end are a little annoying but still acceptable. What bother me more are the zoom & focus rings, which collect dusts so easily and hard to be cleaned even with my air-blower or brush.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: wildeye review date: January-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tokina 17 3.5, Min 20 2.8 RS, Min 28 2.8, Sig 18-125, Min 24-105, Min 50 1.4
price paid:	700 USD (new)
positive:	Sharp, wide MF ring
negative:	vignetting at wide end
comment:	I am very happy with this lens. What I was looking for when I got this was 1) wide angle range, 2) sharpness, 3) a good manual focus ring. This lens delivers it very well at a fair price. When I want a little bit more low light capability, I go with the Min 20 indoors or the Min 50 outdoors. Both of those lenses perform ever so slightly better and let me stay at ISO 400 or less. I gave it a 4 on build just because it is plastic. There is no zoom creep, the MF ring is easy to find and the weight is just right. Hopefully it will remain that way. I'm revising my comments after getting a Min 100 macro. Compared to the macro, the CZ manual focus feels a bit rough (plasticy feel?) but better damped than some of my other lenses. I never had to learn what not to do with this lens. Wherever I set it, it performs well. With my other two zooms I had to keep in mind that the extremes weren't perfect (the Sig much more than the Min) and I didn't always choose to shoot at the extremes of focal length or aperture. On this lens everything works. In my dreams it would be an f2, would zoom out to 300 and would work on full frame (if and when the day comes). Oh yeah, and the check is in the mail. But I digress......

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: bobba review date: January-08-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70 kit, 70-210 f/4, 50 f/1.7, 28 f/2.8
price paid:	640 USD
positive:	Sharpness better than some primes. Contrast is wonderful--night and day over the 18-70 kit. Build is good, not great. CA and fringing very well controlled.
negative:	Slight focus issues at 16 mm wide open. More an issue with A100 than the lens.
comment:	This lens is one my camera all the time. The images that the a100 produces with this lens are special. Color saturation, contrast and image sharpness are all superb. Well not mentioned a lot, this lens is a very good portrait lens. I have taken some home studio shots of my daughters and have been extremely pleased with the results. Comparisons: My 50 f1.7 is better in low light (obviously), but the CZ out performs it in corner sharpness and equals/just beats it in center. Bokeh is decent/pleasing with the CZ, but the 50 bests it thanks to the f/1.7. I did a side by comparison on a tripod with the 18-70 kit to check it out the differences. Sharpness was way better on the CZ in the corners, center was better on the CZ but not by much. Where it shines is in contrast and color. The CZ images just has a pop to it. The colors are richer, shadows a little brighter. Also CA, flare and fringing are much better controlled on the CZ. Really no contest. Build is good. Way better than some have noted. It feels very solid and has none of the "clunking" or image shift that was noted by others when the lens was first released. I am finding the CZ to be a great companion to my trusty beercan of 22 years. They make a great two lens combo. The only slight negative I've noticed is that focus is not always accurate at the wide end (16mm). The A100 has a tendency to lock before it hits true point of focus. As the camera/lens usually focuses from infinity end, focus is sometimes behind my subject. This only matters when the subject is less than 10 feet away though. This is easily remedied however, as I usually will zoom in, lock focus, then zoom out if focal plane is important for my shot. Overall, I would highly recommend this lens for anyone looking for a significant upgrade from the kit granted you have the coin to afford it.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: tunafish review date: January-08-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 17-80 kit lens
price paid:	US689
positive:	good built, sharp at times
negative:	center blurr wide open at 16 mm
comment:	I was excited having bought this lens after reading all the positive reviews. Having tested it for 2 weeks, I am now disappointed. At 17 mm F3.5 the center is extremely blurr. I wonder if I actually have gotten a defective glass or is this a common problem with this lens ? The Sony performed much better.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Wodan review date: December-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 18-200
price paid:	600 EUR (new)
positive:	- Sharp, very sharp - Great colours - Very useful zoom range - Fast AF
negative:	- Distortions at the wide end - Prone to vignetting at wide end, esp. when wide open; almost impossible to find filters that don't cause (extra) vignetting
comment:	I bought this lens, because I was a bit disappointed with the Sigma in terms of sharpness and colour. And because the Sigma showed quite a bit of vignetting at 18 mm. Well, this lens certainly is much, much sharper and its colours are great! It also is even more prone to vignetting than the Sigma. But then again, the extra 2 mm at the wide end really make a difference. All in all, I'm glad I bought it.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: moire review date: December-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SONY 18-70 kit KM 50 1.7 KM 70-210 4
price paid:	~600 USD
positive:	Fast AF Sharp, sharp, sharp.
negative:	As always with my quality you have to pay a premium price
comment:	Excellent everyday zoom! I really like the build quality and the feel on the lens. I don't know where all the complaining comes from.

sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: mozgy review date: December-21-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sal 18-70 (kit) sigma 17-70
price paid:	680euro (new)
positive:	front end does not rotate, corner sharpness
negative:	price, build
comment:	not worth the price at all. a little wider then the kit, colors are the same as the kit, center sharpness also (edges are sharper, but not that much). only worth if you cant live without circ polarizator filters, since the front element does not rotate. If you ask me – even the kit is built better then this lens! I hate the position of the zoom ring – its to close to the body. I mean – dont get me wrong – the pictures are ok, but its overpriced and overrated – i would givee it an 0.5 max rating for IQ over the kit. It maybe would be have been worth the money if it was f2.8-4.5, but its not. I really dont understand whats the fuss around about this lens - its not "that" good - i was much more impresed with a sigma 17-70 F2.8-4.5 and its twice cheaper than this one! I would have never bought this one over the kit lens if i had some time to test it!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: dsensi review date: December-10-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL 18-70 (kit lens)
price paid:	699 USD (new)
positive:	- excellent colors - very very sharp images - fast focusing - wide end very useful (16mm)
negative:	- price - some vignetting at 16mm - build quality could be better
comment:	After reading many reviews, I decided to buy this lens as a replacement for the kit lens (18-70). I've been using this lens since last week, and I've taken around 1000 pictures so far. I must recognize that this lens really makes a huge difference when compared with the kit lens. The color and the sharpness are outstanding. Now I was able to see what a 10MP camera is capable of. I find the wide end (16mm) excellent for photojournalism or architecture. Yes, there is some vignetting at 16mm, but it disappears when the lens is stopped down a little bit. The build also could be better. But the quality of the Zeiss glass is excellent, the lens focuses fast, and the overall results are impressive. I recommend this lens to any Sony Alpha system user.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: DaveK review date: November-22-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	- 28 2.8 (sold) - 50 1.4 - 50 1.7 (sold) - 100 2.0 - 100 2.8 Macro (sold) - 17-35 2.8-4 (D) (sold)
price paid:	600 Euro
positive:	- Sharp; - Colours; - Zoom range; - AF speed; - Handling; - Min focus distance (great plus); - Bokeh (better than expected)
negative:	- I had to get used to the place of the Zoom ring - vignetting with (slim) UV filter at 16 mm - distortion at 16 mm
comment:	It's my first Sony lens and first CZ :-), and the first none Full Frame lens I bought. I use almost all primes from the old days and some great white stuff... they are all metal ones which I like a lot. This one is plastic, but from a professional kind of plastic. It doesn't feel cheap at all Bought it as a kit with the A700. For a zoom it's very, very sharp, even wide open. I haven't really tested flare, but my 17-35 give's red dots on my pictures when the sun is in the lens. I use two walk around lenses now, this one and the 80-200 HS APO. For other occasions I like to use my primes. Let the pictures taken with this lens speak for themselfe. I think this is a great lens!

sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: ja review date: November-21-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: pschoone review date: October-31-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	24/2.8, 28-85/3.5-4.5, 35-70/4, 35-80/4-5.6, 35-105/3.5-4.5
price paid:	650€ new
positive:	Very very sharp; Brilliant colours; Great zoom range; Compact for its range; Min focus distance; close-up (sort of macro with with autofocus)
negative:	Build; Price (but worth it)
comment:	I bought this one because my 24mm was not very wide anymore on APS-C and I was going to South-West USA (Grand Canyon and the like). The 16-80 is a great travel lens, and due to the large zoom range I am happy not to have to switch lenses so often. In the past I have had trouble with dust when travelling in Africa in an open truck and switching lenses. The red dust on those dirt roads is going everywhere (into your nose, ears and camera). I read about how sharp it is and was not disappointed. It seems to be sharper than the 6MP sensor can deal with. Maybe someday I will have a a700 or better. The only thing I was a bit in doubt about was the fact that the lens does not support a full frame sensor and sooner or later I would want to have one. But since the FF does not exist and I wanted the lens for the USA this was in the end not a crucial argument. In the mean time I read somewhere that from 24mm it would work on an FF. A pleasant surprise was its capability to make close-up photos. On the 35-105 I can only make macro photos with manual focus, but the 16-80 performs very well with autofocus. Mine does not have the build weaknesses some people had, but surely it does not feel as solid as the metal ones I also own. And I must admit that after reading about people returning 2 or more of these lenses until they were happy, I bought it somewhere where I could first try it on my camera. Note that it is important not to forget to take off the lens cap when you use the built-in flash, as it obstructs the light beam.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: eccl review date: October-27-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	16/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2, 28/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.7, 50/1.4, 85/1.4 10-20, 20-40, 18-125, 28-75/2.8, 24-105/3.5-4.5, 28-135, 28-85, 28-135
price paid:	699.99
positive:	Sharp and fast focusing. Start at 16mm. Legendary CZ image quality.
negative:	Built could be better
comment:	Folks it is true. A CZ is a CZ is a CZ. This is a very very sharp zoom lens and it is the ultimate kit lens for Sony/KM. I have tested it against my collection of primes and this CZ 16-80 is almost as good wide open and has same sharpness stop down. Very impressive! This is now my new kit and travel lens. I was trying to decide between the CZ and 16-105 but at the end image quality takes over. If you are looking for the best zoom lens that covers 24-120mm (equiv) for your APS-c DSLR, look no further. Highly Recommended.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: DFadel review date: October-26-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	18-70, 75-300 KM Kit lenses Beercan Sigma 105mm EX DG macro Sigma 28-200 Sigma 135-400 Sony 70-200 SSM G
price paid:	699.99
positive:	build sharpness and color very fast focusing
negative:	price
comment:	I don't understand what all the complaints are regarding build for this lens. I think it is very well built, compared to the EX series from Sigma, for example,which have good build reputations. Not as beefy as the SSM G, but to me as solid feeling and much lighter in proportion. Very fast focusing (especially on the A700), faster than the SSM G. Sharpness and color are excellent. I rated distortion a 4, but that is at 16mm; is it possible to have a 16mm lens with no distortion on this sensor size? The vignetting is pronounced (funny as I often add it anyway to my photos).

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: jkbales review date: September-22-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sony 18-200, Minolta 70-210 f4, Zeiss primes at 85mm & 135mm
price paid:	599
positive:	Outstanding sharpness, color and contrast. Focuses fast and accurately. Nice zoom ring feel. Very good mount tolerances.
negative:	Manual focus ring sloppy. Barrel distortion and viginetting at 16mm.
comment:	It's a great lens. Not as good as the Zeiss primes, but superior to any zoom I've used. I think it'll be my primary lens from now on. Very wide angle shots will need distortion correction in post and I'll have to watch viginetting, especially with filters attached. Mechanically, this is the worst Zeiss SLR lens I've ever seen, which still makes it above average. Optically, it's outstanding, better than any Canon, Nikon, Minolta or Sony zoom in the under-$1800 price range.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Jeff Pittman review date: September-15-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
positive:
negative:
comment:	For the most part, this lens has replaced my 28-70 Minolta lens (which I also love using) due to it's reduced weight, outstanding color and sharpness and wider angle which makes it a close replacement on the 7D for the 28-70 on my Maxxum 9. A great lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: AndrewME review date: August-31-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Beercan, 50 f/1.7, kit lens
price paid:	549 USD
positive:	Excellent color SHARP!
negative:	Some quality control issues Needs expensive thin filters Will make your other lenses jealous
comment:	I think I have found lens nirvana. I do not like changing lenses a lot (nor does my wife like to wait for me!) so the range on this is great. This lens is fantastically sharp wide open at all focal lengths. Pictures with this lens are excellently saturated and dripping with color. Very natural color rendition that gives a sense of clarity to photos. I don't think I knew what my A100 was capable of until I got this lens. Mine has none of the build issues that others have complained of; the barrel is tight and does not wobble at all. Zooming is very smooth with nice resistance. However, I did have to try two other lenses before I got one that would focus correctly. The first two had significant backfocus issues. My A100 focuses perfectly with all my other lenses including a 50mm f/1.7 so I was surprised at this. I would urge anyone buying this lens to try a few out in a store before deciding on one. It is too expensive to not be 100% happy with it! However, when you get one that is perfect it is well worth the price.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ab012 review date: August-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	17-35D, 17-35G, 20 2.8
positive:	sharp sharp zoom excellent range starting from satisfactorily wide 16mm flare control excellent light, great for travel
negative:	build is not G class (but then price is also not G class) Contrast and colours different from 70-200SSM
comment:	Excellent range.. the perfect travel range IMO :) Sharpness and contrast brilliant throughout the range. I dont hesitate at all to use this lens wide open, and trust this lens enough to have used this lens as my only lens in some absolutely once in a lifetime (and extremely important memory-wise) shots!!! Besides sharpness and contrast another thing I really appreciate is the excellent flare control (better even then some of my primes). The T* coating definitely works! The colours are pleasant (but see below) with great contrast. Bokeh is great for a zoom lens of this type. This lens has been blasted for build not being super in many reviews which IMO i find unfair. Keep in mind this is not a $1000 lens and see the comparabily priced C/N lenses in this range and it is not too bad at all. Couple that with the excellent optical performance and this IMO is a no-brainer unless you need FF coverage. (Having said that.. the G does have a brilliant build which this lens just cant compare with :) ) Slight warning - those hopeing to use 16-80+70-200SSM as a no gap combo may be slightly annoyed (like me) due to the fact that the constrast and colours of the 2 lenses are quite different. Both good in their own ways but it means your pics will have 2 different sets of looks to them depending on the lens used (in the overlapping fl)

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Josioau review date: August-12-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 zoom 'kit' lens; KM 17-35mm f2.8-4.0 zoom; KM 24-105mm f3.5-4.5 zoom.
price paid:	660USD
positive:	Great brilliance, clarity, sharpness.
negative:	Dirt trapping grooved rubber zoom and focus grips. Zoom creep after it loosens up. Rubber focus grip has come loose.
comment:	Compared to other other lenses I've used on my Sony Alpha DSLRs, this lens delivers strikingly sharp, naturally coloured and well saturated images. Equal to those I get with my Sony 50mm f1.4 prime. The photos are life-like and brilliant. At times almost a polarized filter level of crispness and saturation. Great bokeh. Feels solid and well balanced in use and marries well to the Alpha body, both physically and in terms of photographic results. Great zoom range and will now be a permanent fixture on the a700 camera except when I need the extra reach of one of my tele lenses or the 50mm f1.4 for low light situations and portraiture. Two criticisms are that over the years the zoom creep has loosened, and also the rubber focus ring has come unstuck - fixed with double sided tape. Very highly recommended.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Rigoletto review date: August-07-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SONY 18-70 3,5-5,6 KM 17-35 2,8-4 MINOLTA 50 1,7 KM 28-75 2,8
price paid:	Proof from Sony IT
positive:	Very low distorsion from 24mm to 80. Sharpness. Incredible resistance against flare. Good control of chromatic aberrations. Big quality of the images. Good neutral rendering of colors.
negative:	Plastic build. For APS-C only. Price.
comment:	This lens has a very low distorsion from 24mm to 80 (from 35 to 60 the distorsion is virtually absent) and also at 16mm it is not too noticeable considering the focal lenght. The sharpness is very good; especially at 35mm and 80mm is excellent even at TA all over the frame (in the corners too). To obtain a flare with this lens is not too simple: you must shoot directly the sun and not always you can do it! The T* traitment is real effective against the CA that you can see only in strong contrast scenes at the border of the frame. The general quality of the photos is amazing! Brilliant neutral colors and clear, narrow details, create an image that seems to come out from the sheet like an impressive three-D effect. My test in PDF format (only in Italian): http://tinyurl.com/yv5rcq

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Janvb review date: July-27-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Kitlens, KM17-35, KM 28-75/2.8, Tamron 17-50, 28/2, 35/2, 50/1.4,....
price paid:	635 Euro (new)
positive:	sharp, colour, weight, autofocus speed, range
negative:	Build, Manual focus ring ( not tight, hard to use) , vignetting wide open at 16mm
comment:	I had to get used to this lens, especially the speed 3.5/4.5 after using the tamron, The more I use it the more I like it. A lot is said about the build and it's true it's not that solid, but on the other it's small & light and I find that important too This is one excellent lens to use outside, stopped down 1-2 stops it's (almost) as sharp as (some) primes, even zoomed in to 100%. But the thing that suprised me the most is the AF speed, it is so fast for a zoom, often it focusses instantly on my 7D . Great zoom, spot on !

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: PieterB review date: July-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	630€
positive:	Very sharp, nice colours, pretty fast, wide end (16mm).
negative:	MF ring awful. Build quality not brilliant, dirt stucks in surface. Price
comment:	I like this lens a lot. Especially the very sharp pictures, from left to right, from top to bottom. It is always sharp. I alo like the colour separation and the absence of fringing. I am keen photographer of landscapes so the 16 wide angle is very useful. It also focuses rather fast. I don't seem to have a lot of vignetting. I don't like the MF ring. You can get used to it but in fact it is pretty stupid. There is a lot of play and you never know what you are doing. Nor do I like the finish of the product. Dirt gets trapped between the ribs. I'm not so sure about the build quality. It's not bad, but neither is it very good. It is worse than my Sigma EX 70mm lens. All in all, I'm glad I bought this lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: ssssssssssssss review date: July-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	SAL1870
price paid:	RM3250 New
positive:	sharp, very very sharp.
negative:	f3.5-4.5
comment:	No regrets paying for it and it's definitely gonna be my keeper DT lens. Colors are great, handles flare very well. Apparently I got a good copy. There is no vignetting at its 16mm widest opening.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: hallojenshans review date: June-29-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	729 Euro
positive:
negative:
comment:	The best zoom lens I ever had!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: hallojenshans review date: June-28-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta AF 2,8 17-35 mm Minolta Af 1,7 50 mm Sony 18-70 mm
price paid:	729 Euro
positive:
negative:
comment:

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 1 distortion: 3 flare control: 5	user: almassengale review date: June-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 18-200, kit lens, Minolta 50mm, Sigma 105mm, Sigma 30mm
positive:	Amazingly sharp, compact, great range, flare resistant, good at any f stop and great corner to corner.
negative:	Don't like the ribbing because it catches dust like you wouldn't believe. Could be faster. I didn't love having to buy a new ultra slim CPL and UV but had to because of vignetting. But i'm just nitpicking. Iffy build. My manual focusing ring came apart a year out of warranty and the plastic on the zoom ring is very loose three years in.
comment:	I had read tests that showed that this was the sharpest standard zoom out there in MTF tests and it is indeed excellent optically. Stunning corner to corner sharpness 16mm is pretty wide. I like the colors too. Very rich and better than other zooms i've used. Blows away the superzoom I used as a walkaround before this in that (and every) regard. Does distort a lot at 16. The build quality is a huge disappointment. Two years in I did have a problem where the manual focusing mechanism came apart causing me to have to get the lens repaired. 18 months later the same thing happened. And the rubber zoom ring are loose and falling off. Its very difficult to adjust the zoom because they have so little purchase on the metal, An old all-metal tank it is not and frankly i'm not sure if its worth spending a lot to fix it again. I've got some great shots from it but at times I wish i'd gone with a different lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: adriann review date: May-30-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Various canon lenses.
positive:	Sharpness Contrast
negative:	Manual focus ring is very sensitive - need to be very precise.
comment:	This lens was one of the reasons I moved to an alpha and I'm yet to be disappointed with it. Its very sharp with good contrast. Scored it 4 for build rating mainly because I find the focus ring very sensitive. Feels solid enough otherwise. Scored the colour at 5 because it seems good to me, but I shoot mainly black and white so I would not regard myself as an expert in colour. Colours seem pretty vibrant though. Have shot into the light with it and have yet to notice flare.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: carolya review date: May-28-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50 f2.8 Sony 18-70 kit lens KM 28-75 D F2.8
price paid:	700 USD new
positive:	Sharp Great color and contrast Compact Good focal range
negative:	Build could be better
comment:	I'm very happy with this lens. The colors, contrast, and sharpness of this lens make the photos look more vibrant and 3-D. It's my new walk around lens.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: crouton review date: May-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 18-70 M 70-210 4,5/5,6 M 100-300 APO M 50 1,7 M 135 2,8 Sigma 2,8 28-70 Sigma 2,8 105EX
price paid:	720€
positive:	Sharp Range Color Contrast
negative:	Short range manual focus ring Pricing
comment:	High quality compact all roads lens , expensive but not so much . Good focusing speed , useable wide open , large range , sharpness comparable to fast lens . A very good standard , i like it . Thanks Zeiss

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: mavan review date: May-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	17-35/2.8-4 Minolta AF D 24-105/3.5-4.5 Minolta AF D 50/1.4 Minolta AF 24/2.8 Minolta AF 100/2.8 Macro Minolta AF
price paid:	690 euro
positive:	Sharp ideal range on a dslr camera (focal length) good color and contrast compact and not to heavy
negative:	expensive zoom and focus ring a bit stiff distorsion on the wide end some chromatic abberation *need a slim UV filter because of vignetting
comment:	This is the ideal lens for reportage photography on a dslr. Ideal walk arround lens for travelling. Good optical quality . Delivered with a nice leather lens-bag. Very sharp at tele...almost like a prime 50 or 100 macro. At 24mm sharper in the corners then my Minolta 24/2.8 prime! Some CA...but easy to reduce in Lightroom. Some vignetting at wide and wide open apertures also easy to reduce. You need to use expensive slim filters(uv and polarizer) Zoom and focus ring a bit too stiff. Difficult to focus manual at wide end. Minolta build quality ,but Carl Zeiss price ! When you buy a lens like this you mite expect TOO MUCH because it is a Carl Zeiss....so be aware and don't get your hopes too high ! BUT I LIKE THIS LENS !!!!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4	user: gipipa review date: May-05-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	sigma 10-20 many lens for pentax film camera
price paid:	720 EURO (new)
positive:	sharp color yield outside focus
negative:	build quality
comment:	excellent

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: kostjan review date: April-27-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 105mm 2.8 EX, Minolta 50mm 1.7, Minolta 70-210mm 4 Beercan, Vivitar 28-210mm 3.5-5.6 18-70 3.5-5.6 kit..
price paid:	900 CAD + tx (new)
positive:	- Sharp sharp sharp, wide open or stoped down (close to my macro lens, really) - Good distortion control at wide end (for what it is) - Light, portable, with non-rotating front element - Very pleasant colors and bokeh
negative:	- Slowish (3.5-4.5) - Focus and zoom rings collect dust easily and are hard to clean - Zoom ring is a bit stiff - APS-C only (for wider than 27mm)
comment:	This lens is amazing... I was sckeptical at first about the value of dishing out 1000 bucks for something that is speed-wise is not much better than the kitty, but I really wanted a wider-longer lens for my incomming trip (and had awful experience with IQ of cheaper superzooms in the past), so I took a plunge. All I can say is - wow... My sample is amazingly sharp at all appertures (even wide-open or closed down) and free of defects some of the others noted with theirs. The build quality feels solid and the weight is just right - although I wouldn't have minded if it were metalic instead of plastic. Distortion is handled pretty well at wide angle (though it is present and can be visible, but nothing that isn't easily correctable and definitelly better than kit).. There is some CA, however, in certain conditions (notably tree branches in winter), but I am yet to see a lens on a digital body that can avoid it altogether (maybe the pro ones?). Bokeh is nice and pleasant (comparable to the beercan and the 50mm prime). I like the colors too. The downside is that it's 2/3 of f-stop slower than "competition" at wide end (3.5 vs 2.8 for Tamron 17-50 and sigma 17-70), but I'm not bothered with that since for my DOF I usually shoot between 5.6 and 11. All in all, a great lens very well worth the price, if not for its sharpness at wide angle alone.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: minoltaclubuk review date: April-24-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Konica Minolta 11-18mm, Tamron 14mm f2.8 SP, Konica Minolta 17-35mm, Sony DT 18-70mm, Konica Minolta 18-200mm, Sigma 18-125mm.
price paid:	465 GB pounds (new)
positive:	Despite a high retail price in the UK, the real cost to a pro (VAT reg) user is about $800 equivalent - not too steep.
negative:	I took me three lenses before I found one which was free from serious manufacturing faults.
comment:	I have written a full review of this on photoclubalpha.com - http://www.photoclubalpha.com/1680/1680.html It's best to read this (especially the section dealing with the faults present) as it's too long to post here. The symptoms which affected two of the three lenses I eventually tried before keeping one are: When the AF operates, at middle to longer focal lengths, a sideways twitch or displacement of the image may be seen in the viewfinder When the zoom ring is turned, the movement is not very even, and at 80mm the action appears to pass a slight 'lump' or soft detente, and drop into place at 80mm. While this is OK, once at 80mm, the ring has about 1mm of play, and when you zoom back again, this play first puts the image out of focus, then starts to zoom When holding the lens and firing the shutter, some movement or slight shock is transmitted throught the zoom ring, as if the aperture actuation is moving an internal part When the lens is held and lightly shaken, something inside moves and makes enough noise to sound 'loose'. Even with a perfect lens displaying none of the other faults, there is a slight movement when shaken, but this is similar to the 24-105mm and most other lenses My first (faulty) sample appeared very sharp indeed centrally on most shots, but had some issues with variable poor edge sharpness and strong CA. I did not test the second sample (same problems as the first) for optical quality but returned it immediately to its packaging. The third lens, which I have kept, appears slightly less bitingly sharp centrally but has even coverage with no serious fall-off and much lower levels of CA. It requires the same degree of CA correction from raw, however, which is interesting. The result is sharper over the entire frame. This lens is an exceptional design optically, and the contrast and detail present in images exceeds any other comparable zoom (not that any really exist). However, the mount quality is poor; the metal A-mount is machined to a looser tolerance than older Minolta A-mounts, the plastic and metal body does not feel like a class lens, and the issues I encountered appear to be assembly QC problems. When buying a CZ 16-80mm, be prepared to ask to try one in a real store, or be very critical when receiving a mail order one, and willing to return it for replacement immediately if necessary. Don't get attached to the lens if you think it may be short of perfect in assembly quality!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Thatkatmat review date: April-20-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tam 17-50 2.8 kit 18-70
price paid:	$699
positive:	Sharpness color contrast focal length
negative:	some vignetting at 16mm with a polarizer otherwise none
comment:	Much much better than the kit and IMHO better than the Tam 17-50. The extra focal length, the colors, contrast, the IQ (almost never hunts unless its dark or I’m aiming at water in spot focus), just about every aspect except speed is better. I don't seem to notice that it's not a 2.8 so...no worries. I agree with the review below mine that the build doesn't bother me a bit, I think it feels good on my a100 and am not worried about it falling apart any time soon. The only problem I see with it is the vignetting at 16mm with a circular polarizer on. Strange........there's none without the CP. But really as long as you know what to expect it's not too big a deal. The color and cotrast is fantastic, just amazing and this lens is very very sharp. Really glad I made the decision to fork out $700 for this fine lens.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: edrice review date: April-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75 KM 18-70 Minolta 24-85 Minolta 24-105 KM 18-200 Minolta 50/1.4 Minolta 50/1.7 Minolta 28/2 Minolta 100/2.8 Macro
price paid:	699 USD (new)
positive:	Excellent range Incredibly sharp throughout the range Excellent color and contrast Light and compact
negative:	Corners clipped at 16mm with polarizer and hood mounted
comment:	I've held off on doing any lens reviews in Dyxum and am glad I did. This lens now sets the standard for which to compare my other zooms. This lens is about to cause some upheaval in my lens collection and threatens to reduce their lot. It's that good, and even some primes now no longer hold the same mystique they once had. I put this one in a class with my 100/2.8 macro and 28/2. Bokeh is mostly OK but I have also gotten some excellent bokeh samples from it doing close-ups. I am not one of those who associate being heavy and made of metal as having something to do with build quality and I see the build and functioning of this lens as nothing short of excellent. In fact, the lighter the better as I have been carrying lenses to mountain tops for more than three decades. The range is perfect for hiking especially when combined with my 100-300APO. Distortion means nothing in my landscapes. Also speed does nothing to very little for my landscapes as I rarely venture far from f8. I've never understood why people buy a slower lens and then complain that it's not a 1.4 or 2.8. Go figure. Anyway the more I use it, the more impressed I get. I've reached lens nirvana with this one. It was a long time coming.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: fother review date: April-11-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:
price paid:	A$1000 (new)
positive:	excellent range, excellent quality, very fast AF.
negative:	zoom ring is too close to camera body?
comment:	Lens performance is excellent, and is everything I expected it to be. Photo quality has been outstanding. The only criticism I can think of is that the zoom ring is quite close to the camera body so can be hard to use if you have big hands.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4	user: monte920 review date: April-02-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Sigma 17-70mm KM 17-35mm KM 28-75mm
price paid:	659 USD(new)
positive:	1. Good color (cooler than warmer) 2. Good contrast 3. Good sharpness 4. Compact size & weight 5. Convenient range
negative:	1. Light fall off (dark corners) very obvious at 16mm f3.5 2. Mild distortion at 16mm 3. Relatively small apertures 4. Feels more like Minolta than Zeiss (which may not be bad) but priced like a Zeiss (bad!)
comment:	A great but expensive kit lens!

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Old Pirate review date: April-01-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Kit 18-70, 50 1.7, 100 2.8 macro
price paid:	685 USD (new)
positive:	Very sharp, excellent colors As sharp as my 50 and 100 primes at all apertures it appears.
negative:	So sharp you have to be careful where you focus.
comment:	This lens will do most of my normal stuff and will make a good travel lens and a perfect "party", "grandchild event", etc. One of the few things in recent memory where the product met expectations formed during an extended period of anticipation.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: gm4jjj review date: March-31-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM28-75D, KM18-70DT, Minolta 100/2.8 macro, KM17-35D, Tamron 17-50, Minolta 24-85
price paid:	459 UKP (new)
positive:	Excellent zoom range (ideal) Very Sharp Great colour and contrast
negative:	Sometimes a bit hesitant at getting AF on my A100 - wideangle AF accuracy is poor. Slight image shift when zooming
comment:	Exceeds my expectations for a 5X zoom range. This has become my favourite lens for everyday use. I previously had to carry a couple of lenses to cover this range. I gave build a 4 only because : A) It is plastic and I hate the Sony style rubber grips which collect dust in the fine ribs too easily. Does not really have a high quality feel about it. B) The zoom ring has backlash and there is a bit of image shift associated with this. Mine has a very tiny bit of backlash in the zoom at 80mm and I now do see a bit of a jiggle in centering of the image as I zoom back just as the backlash in the zoom takes up. The shift in image centering is almost exactly half of the centre AF focus square in the VF. The image moves to the right as the zoom is reduced from max to min. I don't notice that the focus jumps at this point however. It may do, but not visibly in the VF. Unless it gets any worse (I don't think it has since I got it) I will hang on to mine, with the option of repair under warranty if I need it. I'm going to Switzerland on holiday and would not want to be without this lens. Auto focus is poor at 16mm end of range, it is best to zoom in and lock focus then zoom back out.

sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: groovejet review date: March-29-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	KM 28-75 f2.8 KM 18-70 f3.5-5.6
price paid:	1149 AUD
positive:	Great zoom range Very high sharpness 1-2 stops down Has a quality feel
negative:	Already at f4.5 by 35mm
comment:	I love this lens. Such a great zoom range in a small package with excellent sharpness to boot! I'm used to using a KM 28-75 f2.8 and mostly shoot at f8 for best sharpness. The Zeiss offers very similar sharpness at f8 from 35mm upwards. The KM 28-75 is slightly better at 28mm, but the Zeiss of course can go right down to 16mm. Shots taken at 16mm and f8 are very crisp. At all focal lengths this lens should be sharp enough at f8 for the most discerning users (me being one of them!). Performance at larger apertures is still very good and should satisfy most users. There's a bit of noticeable light falloff with large apertures at 16mm, but not enough to concern me. UPDATE 15/04/07: I've had a Sony Alpha A100 for 1 week now and have taken some shots using this lens on the new body. It's definately delivering the goods! The detail present in tall grass strands is very impressive, thanks to a camera body and lens that both offer very high resolution. My appreciation of this lens continues to grow. I've noticed that at 16mm on the Alpha, if you AF on the horizon and keep a lot of sky in the shot then the camera will underexpose by 1-2 stops. As long as you are aware of this you can add positive compensation to fix it, otherwise keep most of the sky out of the frame until you have locked metering.

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: richard_b review date: March-25-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105D, Minolta 70-210 f4 (beercan)
price paid:	659 USD (new)
positive:	Sharp, good color and contrast. Good control of flare Great zoom range
negative:	Distortion at wide end A little softness in corners at the wide end at f3.5
comment:	Beautiful lens, very sharp in the center, a little softness is visible in the corners at the wide end, but sharpens up on stopping down. I have seen very little evidence of flare or CA. There is some distortion at the wide end. Very reasonable bokeh. I ran a test series (wide open, f5.6, f8, f11, f16 at 16mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 80mm, 100% crops) Click here to view test. For some real world sample shots, click here

sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: cpwhk review date: March-19-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP: tested on full frame:24MP
compared to:	Tamron 17-50, Tamron 24-135, KM 18-70 kit lens, Sigma 17-70 (sold), Minolta 28-135.
price paid:	660 USD (New)
positive:	Sharp, even at wide open Focus is fast and right on Great colors with nice contrast Very useful range Good distortion and flare controls Compact and decent build quality
negative:	Expensive than Tamron and Sigma Smaller aperture compared to Tamron Small Chromatic aberration Some vignetting at large aperture
comment:	Having been waiting it for such a long time that I bought the Sigma 17-70 and later the Tamron 17-50 to replace my KM kit lens. The Sigma is a decent lens and I sold it because of its back focus problem on my KM D5D. Tamron 17-50 is a great and fast lens but I find myself need more than just 50mm on the far end. The CA of the old heavy Minolta 28-135 is so bad that I returned it to the seller. I picked up a used Tamron 24-135 before I bought the CZ 16-80. My copy of CZ is sharp at all apertures and focal lengths. It is as sharp as and/or even sharper than the Tamron 17-50 and Sigma 17-70. Great colors and contrast. Very good highlight and shadow details. Distortion and flare are well controlled. Compact, well build and good balance with my D5D and a700. Although small CA and vignetting are found, it is not worse than that of Tamron, Sigma and other brand lenses of this range. It is an excellent lens for travelling and everyday use. Photo samples here.

Dyxum.com - Home of the Minolta / Alpha-mount dSLR photographer.

Feel free to contact us if needed. You can support future development by making a donation.

Lens index page

Fixed focal length

Macros

Zooms

Teleconverters

Comparative view

DOF Calculator

Dyxum Lens Database Reviewing Guideline

Lens Glossary

Suggest a lens

> Dyxum lens forum <

Support dyxum when buying lenses

Support Dyxum purchuasing at B&H

lens image

Summary ratings

sharpness: 4.67

color: 4.81

build: 3.88

distortion: 4.22

flare control: 4.56

overall: 4.43

total reviews: 200

Forum sample images

Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5 lens details