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

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: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	sig 10-20mm & 24-60mm f2.8
price paid:	£499 [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 £500 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: Stinus review date: December-12-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 Minolta AF 50mm f/1.7
price paid:	450 EUR (used)
positive:	focal range weight size sharpness colours flare control
negative:	distortion at 16mm
comment:	An almost perfect allround lens: very sharp (even wide open), nice contrast and little distortion (only noticeable at 16mm). Considering it's maximum aperture of f/3.5-4.5 the bokeh is also quite nice. For the price it should have had a metal body imho.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	17-50 Sigma 2.8
price paid:	£560
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 4,5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Aj700 review date: July-28-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	SAL 18200
price paid:	630 USD
positive:	good bokeh with proper light flare control is really better. nice colors and sharpness is OK.
negative:
comment:	coupled with a Beercan in my A700 I find this lens to be totally enough for the range which I covers. Focusing is also much better when compared to the previous SAL18200 which I was using. At these F values its a good value lens, compared to other offerings from Sony or third parties.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 4,5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: seevve review date: June-17-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
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. Great colors and contrast. LightWeight. Very good sharpness from wide open at 35-80 Fast AF
negative:	Not great sharpness at wideend vignetting at wide end. Not great build quality.
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. Great and very useful range, image quality, great colors and contast. 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 17-85 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	Minolta 28-80 4-5.6
price paid:	£479 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 5 flare control: 5	user: silversurfer review date: March-29-09
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
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.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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:	£ 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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:	£479
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 £600 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: twb119 review date: February-09-08
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	24-70SIG Kit lens 90mm Tam 50mm1.7
price paid:	650 USD new
positive:	Good range Sharp good bokeh
negative:	build is just OK
comment:	Very happy with this lens so far, the plastic build doesn't bother me for now, just wonder how it will holdup down the road 10 years from now. I was surprised with the bokeh, its not great but good. I held off buying because of the net chatter about poor build quality wish i had got it a lot sooner, if you are a pro I could see how the build quality is not up to par, but for my use it is fine. It is in MHO a great walking around lens.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5	user: Josioau review date: August-12-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
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.
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 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. 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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 4 flare control: 5	user: Klipsen review date: August-02-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:	Minolta 24-105 mm.
price paid:	Circa EUR 735 (new, local shop)
positive:	Everything I wanted from my Minolta 24-105 mm - and more.
negative:	Nothing at the moment, but being APS-C only, it won't be much good on a future full frame camera.
comment:	Results on full frame are just as good as on APS-C, and because the camera automatically switches to the smaller format there's no circular images; but a 24-120 mm full frame would be better.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
compared to:
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 5	user: almassengale review date: June-23-07
	tested on film camera: tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP: tested on full frame:25MP
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.
comment:	This lens rocks! Beg, borrow, and steal to get it. I had read tests that showed that this was the sharpest standard zoom out there in MTF tests and it is amazing. Stunning corner to corner sharpness at any f stop that rival (and probably exceed) my primes. Even my macro can't out class this. The range is very useful too on APS-C. 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. In terms of build, i'd say it feels similar to my Sigma EX glass though the focusing ring isn't as smooth. Two years in I did have a problem where the manual focusing mechanism came apart causing me to have to get the lens repaired. An old all-metal tank it is not. The upside of not being bulletproof metal is that it isn't big and heavy. The compact size on it is very nice. It could be faster but again that would make it bigger which isn't always a good thing in a walk-around if you are traveling for ten hours a day with the camera on your neck. It is expensive but when you compare it to Canon and Nikon's top level standard zooms the price is fairly favorable. Canon's 24-105 4 is over $1000 for instance and that isn't as sharp a lens. Personally I think the expense is worth it. I want my walk around to be as high quality as possible because it will spend the most time on the camera of any lens I own. This one really fits the bill. You cannot buy a sharper and better walk-around for this mount. Perhaps the 28-75 would be up there but the range really wouldn't work for me on APS-C because I do too many landscapes.

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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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: tested on full frame:25MP
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.

About lenses

Fixed focal length

Macros

Zooms

Comparative view

Teleconverters

DOF Calculator

Dyxum Lens Database Reviewing Guideline

Lens Glossary

Suggest a lens

Support dyxum when buying lenses

> Dyxum lens forum <

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

Summary ratings

sharpness: 4,68

color: 4,81

build: 4,05

distortion: 4,28

flare control: 4,61

overall: 4,49

total reviews: 129

You can support dyxum purchuasing this lens from

Forum sample images

Support Dyxum purchuasing at B&H