Photoclubalpha

Hi Valery, it was expensive when it came out, but it has come down in price a lot recently, I suspect as there are more Sony FF bodies to be released this year.

The Zeiss 24-70 appears very good but Kurtz Mungers' reviews of lenses in this focal range persuaded me to stick to the 28-75 instead. I think the big thing the 24-70 has is the tougher build quality which some may need. I do sometimes wish I could go to 24mm though

Birma, if you need a 24mm go for the 2/24ZA. There's no doubt that it performs much much better than the 24-70/2.8 ZA at 24mm
But you have to understand that lens, specially its curved plane of focus (if that is the right way to say it).

A very interesting idea Doc, I will look in to it.

Dr. Harout wrote:Birma, if you need a 24mm go for the 2/24ZA. There's no doubt that it performs much much better than the 24-70/2.8 ZA at 24mm
But you have to understand that lens, specially its curved plane of focus (if that is the right way to say it).

Agree, the Fix lenses all the time better than Zoom. I tried almost all of them for Sony A format. But my big concern it's my work, I NEED zoom all the time, as I use 16-80 CZ for a57(a77). Plus other view on the problem, a complete set of Fix lenses for FF Sony cost way more $$$$ than 24-70 CZ. I hope Sony some day can make some good lens with focal site 24-100(120) in A format, but so far it's looks like unreal dream.

I though there was talk of a Sony made 24-105mm f4? A very popular lens for Canon users (but it has it's problems reliability isn't great from people I know with one)
Sony's biggest problem is lack of lens competitiveness, they're just too expensive at times. Same reason the A99 was a disappointment, priced all wrong.

I'll probably stick to APS-C, the price premium for FF isn't worth it to me, despite having quite a lot of FF Lenses.