Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5 field report on line

Well, it seems that I finally managed to finish writing this review.
It's on line now.

My gratitude to Ivica Bujas for the sample lens provided and to brettania and CTYankee for helping me with my bad English :)

In case you have additional questions about the lens or the review please ask; I will try to answer if I can.

Since I have another review in preparation I would appreciate any criticisms or suggestions about how to make these reviews more useful in the future (but please, don't ask for charts, test targets, thousand of comparisons shots etc .. i'm not a technician .. just a guy who love taking pictures:)).

Happy shooting.

Edited by Kiklop - 16 May 2007 at 17:00

Thanks for the review. I generally agree with your conclusions, although I think you may be a bit harsh on the quality of construction issue. However, this also could be a result of the apparently variable quality control issues, at least with the early versions of this lens (one would assume that this issue will get addressed). I bought the lens and, luckily for me, at a local store where I could handle and check out the lens prior to purchase. My own view is that the construction quality overall is fairly solid, but that the mechanical refinement (e.g., how smooth the zoom and focusing actions are) is not up to expected CZ standards. While I have no proof, my "guess" is that Sony/CZ decided to sacrifice a bit on the mechanical refinement side to focus on the optical quality, for the intended price point. As you noted in the review, compromises are required somewhere, both for a zoom generally, but also to hit a price point.

While the vignetting at wider focal lengths can be an issue, the probability is that most of the time at these focal lengths the lens will be stopped down at least one or two stops, which reduces the amount of vignetting. Thus, from a practical perspective, it may not be as much of an issue (except in low light, maximum aperture shooting). I have not found the distortion to be an issue in my shooting thus far (wedding, events and general purpose - not architecture). If you are into architecture, this may not be your lens of choice, or you may come to rely on post-processing distortion correction. Again, a relatively minimal problem for most from a practical photography perspective.

I totally agree with you the AF speed is about the same as the 28-75/2.8 (which I have). In the store, prior to purchasing the lens, I compared the two and could detect little difference. However, in lower light levels the slower maximum aperture of the CZ can slow down the AF more than might occur with a 2.8 maximum aperture lens.

As you found, it is in the area of resolution, contrast and flare resistance where I think this lens really shines. It is why it has become my "standard" lens for use on my 7Ds (and A100 when I use it).

Thank you for the excellent review Kiklop. I agree with you on many counts and agree with Mark about the quality. I think Sony delayed release of this lens to fix some issues (CA issues esp) reported in the early production copies. I think the newly released lenses are generally fine - at least mine is. It is not the G-quality build but I love it.

I don't think it is that over-priced especially since it covers the range of 17-35 and 28-75 D. It is little bit slow but for my typical use, it simply works fine. I sold my 17-35 D and 28-75 D and don't regret the decision at all...

It is becoming standard lens on my 7D as well...

Cheers,
Rajan

ab012 wrote: Thank you for the excellent report. Is it just me or are the contrast of the images with this lens veyr strong/nice? I am on my work laptop with its crappy screen and yet the pics still look very nice.

Thanks bernard; all images used are straight from my 7D and are taken mostly on a very sunny days. Since i didn't change my 7D settings to be as "neutral" as possible i think it is a combination of 7D output and the lens that is equally bringing these results (which i love btw).

I uploaded two additional raw files available for downloads .. since this is the best way of judging images.

Thanks Kiklop, you have made a great review.

I have sold my Sigma 17-70 to get this CZ, but I am not sure the price I have to pay for it, gives me a 2X quality zoom. I was very happy with the Sigma, so maybe I will wait to see a better build in this convenient lens.

So I will wait a little bit more

thanks for the extensive review! better put together than my cosina review (which has made me famous on google:P)

keep up good work as always!

Thanks Mladen for a great review.

It's all about expectation. Different people will have different expectation for the price paid. I do agree that SONY could have done better with the built on this CZ. CZ means QUALITY and is expected.

Due to the lens good optical quality and range, it will get used and out in the field a lot more than other lens. Do hope you are wrong on "...have the feeling that the lens isn't built to last for years or even decades". If it does fails, hope it fails during the warranty periods and not just after the warranty expires.