Sony SEL1670Z Vario-Tessar T E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS

Comment

I rarely take the time to write reviews but with all the mixed reviews and information surrounding this lens I thought I might share my experiences. Firstly, what everyone says about the quality control is 100% accurate. YOU MUST TEST YOUR COPY OF THIS LENS FOR DECENTERING! I purchased two copies of this lens from Amazon (from Murphy, fulfilled by Amazon) and a used/tested copy from eBay ($635). Both copies from Amazon were decentered and were returned (probably should of just paid taxes and got one direct from Amazon). However, the one from eBay was flawlessly sharp edge to edge at both 16mm and 70mm. The superb performance of this lens (when you get a good copy) is the reason for the high review rating. It is hands down far and away the best performing zoom lens available for the Sony NEX/a6XXX series. Additionally, I purchased a Sony G 18-105mm for comparison and for those that are debating between the 18-105mm and the 16-70mm take my advice and spend the extra coin and spring for the Zeiss (save some coin and find a used one on eBay that has been tested to be a good copy). The G 18-105mm is a decent lens if and only if you plan to shoot mostly video due to its power zoom, however, its not at all much of an upgrade over the 16-50mm kit lens. The barrel distortion is out of control, its heavy AF and its presence with the 72mm front element makes it a full frame sized lens on a camera body that was designed to be compact. IMHO the size and weight of the G 18-105mm defeats the purpose of the Sony a6XXX camera system. The color rendition, contrast, sharpness, size and weight of the Zeiss makes it the hands down winner as an everyday kit lens replacement. How to test your copy for decentering: 1. Download a test chart. 2. Print out 4 copies and tape them in the corners (see pictures). 3. Use a tripod and position your camera/lens so that at 16mm the test chart reaches each corner of the viewfinder. 4. Shoot in RAW at the highest quality. 5. Turn off steady shot! 5. Set your camera to manual and set your aperture to f4, ISO 100 and shutter speed to whatever you need given your lighting situation to get your EV value (exposure comp) to 0.0 6. Use a remote or shutter timer to avoid and hand shake. 7. Snap your photos and use Capture One to evaluate the corners of your photo to verify that there is no blur (youll be able to see if it is decentered). The first picture is an example of a bad decentered copy taken at 16mm f4 and the second one is an example of a good copy from eBay. Not sure how much youll be able to see with any real detail on Amazon but if you were to zoom into the corners on the first photo the upper and lower right hand corners the numbers are blurred. The third photo is just a final test shot to illustrate the lenses abilities although slightly under exposed I think it is a decent representation (23mm, f4, 0.5s, ISO100, Tripod mounted, no edits just straight export from RAW to JPEG). I did comparison shots between the 16-70mm and the Zeiss 24mm prime of this picture at f4 and I looked everywhere for loss of color and detail and the 24mm prime at f4 barely edged out the 16-70mm with ever so slightly better corner detail.

Show more

Comment

There is a lot to like about this lens and there is a lot I like about this lens but at the end of the day, it is being returned. I have wanted this lens for well over a year now. I liked the focal range, the constant f4 aperture, the somewhat compact size, the chance for high quality contrast, color and images from Zeiss. It just seemed to be the type of lens you leave on for 90% of the time. However, I have read a number of reviews and while many people praise this lens, there are a lot of people who were disappointed with it for a variety of reasons. The overarching reason seems to be the quality control with this lens and that turns out to be the reason I returned it. Most of the complaints I’ve read have focused on the decentered issue with this lens in having an imbalance between corner and even center sharpness and softness. I have to say, that testing the lens for the short time I had with it, there did seem to be some issues with some corners being softer than others but for me it wasn’t horrible and the center sharpness was superb and more comparable to a good prime than I expected. Center sharpness was good to great through most of the range and apertures and while the corners were not consistent with each other or themselves at different ranges and apertures, they were decent. The only zoom lenses I own are the kit 16-50 and the 18-105 f4 so I can really only compare the lens to these two lenses without going into comparing this to a prime. It was far and away better than the kit lens as expected in terms of the constant aperture, the focal range, and image quality in general. I also expected it to be slightly better in image quality than the 18-105 but felt the image was a good bit better than I expected making it a pleasant surprise. I really like the 18-105 but the Zeiss 16-70 was far more compact, slightly wider although losing distance, and the image quality seemed to noticeably surpass it. It sounds great so why did I return it? While I believe my copy was maybe slightly decentered, the image quality was still good so it came down to two issues I had with the lens. The first somewhat minor issue was the zoom ring. It was smooth until about the 50mm mark where it almost gets stuck making for very bad zooming if you’re using this for video. This might change with some breaking in but from my experience with Zeiss lenses, their rings are buttery smooth and this was disappointing to say the least. My second major issue the straw that broke the “cameras” back was what looks to be a large dust particle inside the lens. I have added pictures to show it. I know dust isn’t necessarily an issue inside the lens and I know that eventually even the best of lenses will get dust inside due to the nature of their design but for my new $1000 Zeiss lens that already has a sticky zoom ring and slightly decentered issue, I couldn’t justify keeping a brand new lens with a large piece of dust in it brand new. I have purchased a number of lenses on Amazon and none of my Zeiss or Sony lenses have ever got to me with a large piece of dust clearly inside the lens. In the end I want to like this lens for all the good that it has. The compact size for the focal range and fixed aperture not to mention good image quality for a zoom is really one of a kind for native E-mount glass. Add to that image stabilization, T* coating, and Zeiss colors and contrast and you have a truly amazing lens….on paper. In reality it didn’t turn out the way I had hoped and I’m not sure if there is something inherently flawed in the design or if this could be the amazing lens people want it to be if it just had good quality control. For now because of the potential it has and the image quality I have seen, I am comfortable giving this 3 stars. I’ve heard good copies of this lens exist and if that is true, I can still recommend taking the gamble to see if you get one. The price is high which is going to make me hold off on taking the gamble again right now, but unless Sony releases something similar to this soon I think I’ll probably end up taking the plunge again eventually. This could be the ultimate travel lens for Sony E-mount cameras but if you don’t want to take the gamble and don’t mind a bigger lens with slightly inferior image quality, the Sony 18-105 F4 PZ lens might be a better option at a fraction of the cost. (Pictures - 1.)16-70 on A6500 2.)Zeiss 24 f1.8 on left 16-70 f4 on right 3.) Dust inside brad new lens)

Show more

Comment

My two copies that I bought from Amazon were horrible and was returned. This review is for one I bought elsewhere. If you manage to receive a good copy this lens is amazing! But good luck on finding one. It took me three times before I got my current copy which is very sharp in the center at all focal lengths. And pretty sharp in the corners at all focal lengths as well for a zoom lens. If you have bought a copy, I advise you to take a couple of shots at every focal length and review them on the computer. Preferably a flat surface with some fine details. From my experience you can tell pretty easily if you have a good or bad copy. Good luck!

Show more

Comment

Next to zero image quality difference between this and the Sony 18-105mm. I bought both to see how much better the Zeiss would be and was shocked to find it VERY hard to determine which lens took which picture. At twice the price (theyre asking 1k for this thing now!), you get less zoom and no discernible image quality improvement. I returned this and kept the 18-105 Sony G series. For 500 bucks on amazon warehouse deals, it is a way better value than this zeiss.

Show more

Comment

Updated review: March 6 2019 I reordered this lens and tried it with the a6400 which has an immensely better sensor than the a6000. I was hoping to see better IQ with this lens. I did not see smearing in the photos as with a6000 because the a6400 sensor is that much better. The lens also produces sharper images on the a6400. However, I ended up returning the a6400 and 16-70 lens because the IQ in the videos, besides for low light and high contrast scenes, literally looked the same as my RX10 camera with its outdated 1" sensor. The photos were nice though, but they are not as sharp and detailed and rich as with my d500 and 16-80mm lens. I did add a star to the review as I now think its an nice lens, but I dont think the IQ matches the price. I think its the best standard lens for Sony crop cameras. I compared it to the Sony 18-105 lens and I found the 16-70 to be slightly sharper than 18-105g. The 18-55 kit lens is not usuable in my opinion and 18-135mm lens has a maximum 5.6 aperture which I hate and I would never buy a lens with such a small maximum aperture. I buy only maximum f4 lenses to get the best IQ in low light ( 24-105mm FF equivalent lenses with f2.8 maximum aperture would likely be too heavy even for crop sensor cameras, so Im content with f4). Original review: On an a6000 camera, this lens is not sharp at all. And theres tons of smearing in low light. I understand that people are desperate for a good standard zoom lens for the a6xxx series, but I found all the standard e-mount zoom lenses to be sub-standard in IQ in comparison to other apsc lenses, the Sigma 17-70 2.8-f4 on a Canon sl1 and the Nikon 16-80 f2.8-4 on a d500. Those lenses are sharp. It may just be the a6000s sensor that causes the lenses to produce images with bad IQ. I will look out for an a6700 .(Hopefuly it will have more effective IBIS and a shutter sync speed faster than 1/160 that the a6500 has .) I will repurchase this lens again and see if the IQ is better.

Show more

Comment

This is a well-constructed mid-zoom lens for the Sony e-mount crop sensor camera - used on a6500. Equivalent 35mm zoom range is 24-105mm. The optical quality of my copy was fine, albeit without running laborious pixel-peeping tests to indicate any degree of "de-centering", as has been the predominant complaint. Color rendering and contrast are good, and I havent noticed any excessive color fringing or softness on the edges. Generally speaking, this is a solid lens, deserving of the Zeiss name. Pros: - Lightweight and compact - f4 through zoom range - good build quality Negs: - A bit limiting if you desire shallower depth of field and wider field of view - Not quite as pleasing IQ as faster primes, e.g. Sigma 30/1.4 - A little pricey Overall solid choice for minimal compromise mid zoom for a6xxx series.

Show more

Comment

I tried 2 copies from Amazon, and end up returning both. I tested both with a test chart under the same light condition using manual mode. 1 copy have soft corners all around, the other one is much sharper, but I found a big piece of dust sit inside the lens dead-center. However, both copies seem to have a slight sharper left side image than right side. For a $900 Lens, which is not weather sealed, having such variation from copy to copy is simply not acceptable.

Show more

Comment

The SEL1670Z is a solid performing lens worthy of the a6500 and a price of about $700 for the international version; MSRP for the USA warranty version is a bit steep however. The biggest pitfall is the fairly slow f/4 aperture; you will find yourself pushing the ISO to 3,200-6,400 on overcast days and nearly always when indoors shooting free-hand. The build quality is good however the telescopic zoom has a plastic construction, likely to limit weight, and one fears the long-term wear taking on and off the lens hood will have on the barrel. Additionally, I received one lens with obvious particulates sandwiched between different lens elements; though dust is an inevitability with lenses, one would expect better quality control right out of the box. I had to return mine for another as it impacted shots at small aperture settings. Obvious softness in the corner unless stopped-down to f/5. Chromatic aberration (purple or green fringing near highlights) is well controlled at aperture values of f/5 and smaller. The first lens was also slightly less sharp than the replacement sent so buyer beware of manufacturing inconsistencies. Be sure to properly test the lens within the return window to ensure you have a sharp and clean lens. Two out of three lenses I have used had significant defects. The 16-70mm range is excellent and will cover the majority of your shooting needs however, bird-watchers and sport/action photography will need more reach and landscape photographers will likely enjoy the new SEL1224G for added width. All-in-all it is worth upward to 80% of MSRP but no more.

Show more

Comment

Ive now owned FOUR of these (three of which were returned), and also tested one more in a local store, they all had issues that are hard to swallow given the price tag. The one Im stuck with (I didnt realize the de-centering defect in time to return it) will have to be RMAd to Sony, or sold used at a considerable loss. Many refer to de-centering issues plaguing this lens, it shows up as a portion of the image being abnormally blurry. Im not talking about corner softness which is expected especially on a zoom of this range, but a good chunk of the upper half right side of the image being completely blurry while everything else is sharp. Three copies of this lens were bad at 70mm with one corner being abnormally blurry whereas everything else was sharp. The one Im stuck is perfect at 70mm but the right side is awfully blurry at 24mm (consistent with one lens review posted online), so was the one I tried at the local store. Stopping down to f/8 (I mostly shoot landscapes) unfortunately doesnt help in any way. I dont think I had crazy expectations for this lens, Im perfectly fine with border/corner softness wide open. However, I do expect sharpness shooting landscapes at f/8.0 where everything is at infinity focus. Depending on your shooting style, even bad copies may work for you (close ups or portraits with defocused background are great with this lens), but for landscapes the unpredictable image quality is just not acceptable. Having tried so many copies I have lost hope finding a good one that wont show any de-centering across the entire zoom range. In retrospect, I should have kept one that was bad at 70mm but OK on the wide end because thats the range Im most likely to use for landscapes. If this was supposed to be the best travel lens for the E mount system then Im afraid my A6000 will be sold very soon... Now onto the positives: the center is extremely sharp even at f/4.0, bokeh is very pleasant, it is ultra light compared to similar f/4 zoom lenses, and the range covered makes it in theory a fantastic travel lens. You also get a nice blue Zeiss logo on the lens. If you decide to go ahead and get this lens, just realize that despite the price tag you may have to go through many copies before getting a good one. As such, I can only recommend buying this from Amazon or anywhere with a hassle-free return policy.

Show more

Comment

Looks like I lucked out, because the lens I received has no issues. I’ve taken a few hundred shots with it on the a6400 and dont have any of the off/de-centered or focus problems. I do think it’s a touch soft at 70mm - but only for classic telephoto shots. 50-70mm for portraits @ f4 looks pretty close to what I get with the 24-105 on the A7iii. I was nervous when I bought this, but I really wanted see for myself. I like having the 16 rather than 18 of the 18-135 or 18-105. I tried each of those, as well. Both are great, and if I did more video I’d go with the 18-105. For a travel setup with the a6400, I really like the 16-70 along with a fast prime. I’ll update this if I notice any problems, but so far I think the lens is great. And again, looks like I got lucky in getting a good copy.

Show more