repleo Loc: Boston

I am about to pull the trigger on a used Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T 24mm F1.8 for my Sony A6000. I already have the Sony 18-105mm F4 G OSS zoom and really like it. I shoot mostly landscapes and find that most of my shots are right around the 24mm mark. I use a tripod a lot so I'm not worried about the absence of OSS.

I tried a Sigma 19mm f2.8 EX DN Art lens but found it a little too wide, found it difficult to manually focus and just felt it didn't offer any improvement over the 18-105 so I returned it. I didn't really give it a proper trial, I just wasn't WOWed by it. I rarely return anything - but full marks to Amazon!!!

By all accounts the Zeiss is a really nice lens. I have read every user and expert review I can find and haven't seen a negative review yet other than about the price.
However, I would like to hear from any hoggers who have experience of BOTH the Zeiss 24mm and the Sony 18-105. DxOmark scores the 18-105 at 15 points verses 24 points for the Zeiss which seems like a substantial improvement, but I would like hear of any personal experiences. Will I see a significant improvement over the 18-105? I am hoping for improved color and contrast as well as sharpness. This will be my first Sony/Zeiss lens. I don't want to spend the $$$ for the Batis nor the Loxia.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

If it has the name Zeiss or Leica for glass, that's convincing enough for me.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

The name Zeiss alone should indicate the value of owning that, or any other lens they manufacture. They are among the finest optics produced anywhere.
--Bob

Houstoncatlover

I've been using the 24 mm for years. First on a Nex-7 and now on my a7R II, set to crop sensor. It's a great lens. My use has been for kitten photos. Very sharp, great contrast and minimum focus distance is 6 inches. Guessing you'll be happy with it.

chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon

Sony G glass is equal to or better than Zeiss glass (and just as expensive). While the 24mm Zeiss is good glass, you may not notice any difference in the image quality. The difference would be the benefits of a prime lens vs zoom lens. Size and weight area also different.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

That's not always true. There are 2 Zeiss's - Zeiss Jena are usually pieces of shit!!

repleo Loc: Boston

Thanks guys. I pulled the trigger !! Going to Ireland and the Dingle Peninsula in a couple of weeks. Hope to come back with some shots to post.

paul - uglyhedgehog.com

I want to ask you a question: I have been thinking about the 18-105 and have heard that it is quite the optical gem?! Not actually sure about the IQ, as you are the first person I have asked about the sharpness, IQ,... those types of issues about the 18-105. Could you please give me your opinion about your 18-105. I mainly use the Sony 10-18 and am blown away with the sharpness, IQ and just the wonder of the angles. But it seems that the 18-105 would be a perfect compliment to the 10-18... Your suggestions would be most rewarding to me. Thank You so Much - Paul Hill

repleo Loc: Boston

That was a pretty old post, but my devotion to the 18-105 has not changed. Since then I have acquired an A7rii and the stellar Sony FE 24-105mm f4 G. The IQ of the FF set-up is undoubtedly superior but, the 18-105 on my A6000 is still my favorite travel and walk around gear. I have recommended the 18-105 as the 'one' lens for A6xxx series many times here. I think it would be a perfect compliment to your 10-18 and predict it will become your favorite lens.

paul - uglyhedgehog.com

Thanx so much for getting back to me. I always thought the 24-105 would be good to have. I tend to be an avid pixel peeper, as best I can, which the IQ is always a concern to me - of course, cost is always a factor in my case. Being as I know how good the 10-18 is in its IQ, would the 24-105 be of equal IQ to my ultra wide - in your opinion? Thank you so much for your expertise and help - IQ is always such a subjective issue. Paul

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Do you realize this lens will be just as difficult to manually focus as was the Sigma you returned? And, why are you comparing two entirely different lenses?

repleo Loc: Boston

Paul, I don't really pixel peep. I do read all of the e-mount lens reviews, tests and MTF charts etc and they do influence my purchase, but my 'likes' are really based on my own subjective impression of the pictures I get out of the lens. In terms of IQ, I really go by the overall result that I get. I am not skilled enough to determine if success is due to corner sharpness or due to color or contrast etc. I just know if I like the results or not. I really like the results I get from the 18-105. To be honest, I am more concerned with composition than sharpness. The 18-105 has the perfect range for what I typically shoot - landscapes, cityscapes, family, travel etc.

I am not familiar with your 10-18 so I can't compare it to the 18-105, but I think I would find it too wide for me for general use. I have a 12mm Rokinon which covers me if I want anything wider than 18mm. You can do a more technical comparison on DXO mark which will show that the 18-105 is a hair better than the 10-18 in terms of sharpness, but they have the same overall score. The 18-105 is relatively poor in terms of distortion but the lens correction profile in ACR takes that out in one click. You might also consider the Sony Zeiss 16-70 F4 or the new Sony E 18-135 mm

paul - uglyhedgehog.com

Okay - I understand much better about how you see your photography and that really helps me more than you know. If the 18-105 DXO marks are a bit better than the 10-18, then I see no reason to seriously consider that lens. I will also take your advise and look at the 16-70 & the 18-135, but your remarks have given me much more of a real world view of the 18-105 - and I do so appreciate your information. Thank You so Much!

repleo Loc: Boston

My limited experience with the Sigma was that it was more difficult to manually focus than any of my other lenses. Don't recall why. Not sure which two lenses you were referring to. I was looking for a wide prime that might offer a substantial improvement over my 18-105. The 19mm Sigma wasn't it - as I said I just wasn't 'wowed' by it. The Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T 24mm F1.8 was everything I was looking for. Its been 18 months since I originally posted this thread and I can say I have been very pleased with it.