Input on short telezoom needed urgently!

[Pink Dragonfly]

Hi guys!

I've just started a 3 month apprenticeship as a press photographer at a small nationwide daily paper last week. It's going great Getting loads of photos into print, including the main front page photos twice. But I'm getting incredibly frustrated with the kit lens and the quality, bokeh, light, the works....I think probably because I've been using the 50mm a lot, it's my main street lens and I've been spoilt by it's great quality! But now I find it's just not flexible enough for the stuff I'm doing, demonstrations, student actions, taking over the university, police mass arrests... I need wide angle and preferably also more tele than 50mm (can't always get across police lines). In an ideal world an f2.8 18-200mm lens would do me just fine....But with monetary restrictions, what are my options? I have a feeling that my best bet might be the Carl Zeiss version of the kit lens 16-80mm. How big is the difference in image quality?

Please help me, and help me soon!!! Thanks you!!!

Mette

[Anbesol]

That 16-80 would be a great option, terrific range, and very uniquely so with that 16mm wide. If you can keep a prime handy (like your 28 and/or your 50) for those areas requiring that wide stop, that 16-80 would be a fantastic choice. If however you need to confine everything into one lens, and won't be able to keep a fast prime handy, you may want to consider faster zooms, like a 28-75 f/2.8. My personal choice would be a very strong inclination towards the Zeiss, but I can't imagine a scenario I wouldn't have a prime handy.

18-200 f/2.8 ;) lol....

Congrats on your new gig!

[Pink Dragonfly]

Thanks, Anbesol As I've received mothing but good advice from you previously, I also place my trust in you this time and the 16-80 is on its way to me now Should be here by Wednesday...

Mette

[Canuck935]

Hey everyone,

I haven't been around much lately, so I'm just checking back in .

Mette,

I'm glad to hear about your apprenticeship. It sounds like you have been successful thus far and I hope you are enjoying it. Congrats! :thumbsup:

As for the 16-80, it really is in another league when compared to the kit lens in terms of image quality. However, it's not exactly a speed demon. For lower light situations you'll still have to go with your 50. If you find you do need more speed then I'd give a good look at the KM/Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8.

Enjoy the new lens, don't forget to drop us a sample image or two!

[Pink Dragonfly]

Hi Canuck, great to see you again - haven't been around much myself lately either...Am I enjoying it? YES! I'm having the time of my life

Well, the 16-80mm is ordered and paid for - I got a reasonable deal from the guy that sold me the camera, so I prefer that to the Internet. This guy on a Danish photo site just told me that there is a great deal of variability within the lenses and that I should it check it carefully upon arrival. Any idea what that is about and how should I check it??? I've heard it for the Beercan, that there's a lot of difference between them, but I wouldn't have thought so for Carl Zeiss????

Mette

[pisco]

This guy on a Danish photo site just told me that there is a great deal of variability within the lenses and that I should it check it carefully upon arrival. Any idea what that is about and how should I check it???

Some of the CZ1680, specially on the 1st lot, the barrel is not as stiff, the manual focus ring has a little play (1 degree in my lens), and when it's @ 80mm and you zoom inn just a little, the image shifts to one of the sides (caused by the barrel being loose). My CZ1680 is one of those.
I could have returned it, but I didn't because it's sharp and does not have focus problems.
The only thing that sometimes bothers me is that when I walk with the camera hanging from my neck, withing 2 minutes the zoom is all the way out (it's loose so slides out, to 80mm).
In the end, I care for contrast, sharpness and focus. Based on this it's an excellent lens for me.

[Canuck935]

Look for the issues that Pisco pointed out.. The early ones had some quality control problems. I have not heard of newer ones having any such problems. Still, there is a possibility that you'll get an older one that's been sitting in a warehouse for a while. I got lucky and got a good one right about the time these issues surfaced. I wouldn't be too worried though, for every bad copy there were probably hundreds of good ones.

[Ultra Magnus]

I've had mine for a while now, and have not noticed the barrel creep. It's a great lens, very sharp, and not horribly slow, but not 2.8 fast either. It's a good compromise between range and speed.

BM

[Pink Dragonfly]

Thanks all for your input!

So I should be able to check it in the shop? Or get the nice guy in the shop to check it for me - a. He's nice, b.It wouldn't be in his interest if I came back in a week with a duff lens (I assume I would notice quite quickly once I start using it?) I'm afraid I'm rather useless at technical things :blush2:

Mette

[Canuck935]

Yeah it should only take but a couple minutes to check. Check for the image shift while zooming, and check for front/back focus issues. If there is no image shift and focus is spot on, I'd say you'd have a keeper.

[OldClicker]

Yeah it should only take but a couple minutes to check. Check for the image shift while zooming, and check for front/back focus issues. If there is no image shift and focus is spot on, I'd say you'd have a keeper.

What do you mean by and how would you check for, "image shift while zooming"? TIA, TF

[pisco]

Here is the "image shift".
Following picture is @80 mm


when you zoom out just a little, the image shifts (compare left side vs right side):



It's hard to notice on the lens. Yon can compare on the pictures:
- left side has zoomed out (more room on that side of the leg, you see more of the corner of that furniture)
- how the lighter piece of wood on right hand side did not zoom out (as well as the bright leg below it, this metal leg is 3/8" in diameter so if you zoom out you should be able to see more however it stays in the same place)
- how the frame of the picture of the kids has moved

Take a tripod with you to the store if you want to make sure, otherwise you will think that it's your imagination, specially after reading so much about it.

[pisco]

Canuck,
When you walk with your camera hanging from your neck, does the lens stay at 16mm? it doesn't pop out to 80mm?

Oh boy, I just did a "sharpness test" to compare vs the kit lens:





100% crop @ f/8, 70 mm, flash, jpg straight out of the camera 0 sharpness applied (camera is set to 0, I just cropped and re size to 800 pixels wide.

Any guesses which is which? Do I have a very good kit lens, or my CZ sucks?

[Anbesol]

The glass stand on the upper left is the smoking gun, the second has to be the zeiss. That is pretty impressive for the kit lens, but thats at f/8 without an out of dof transition visible. Wide open and looking throughout the dof transition, the difference would be glaring. Theres also the distinct color of the book, and the wood grain and background. Was this 100% crop then UPsized to 800? Looks like that or some added jpeg compression pp.

[Canuck935]

Well, the kit lens is at it's best around f/8-f/11. What really sets the Zeiss apart is that it is plenty sharp throughout pretty much the entire range. Also it depends where you took the crop from, if it's from the center there won't be too much difference, but the Zeiss should still resolve a little more and have better contrast. Take crops from corners or edges and you'll really see how the kit lens falls short..

Actually, I'll stop here and just post my source. See the Cameralabs 16-80 review for side by side comparisons.

To answer your question about lens creep, for me it's yes and no. If I'm out walking on the street I don't really get any lens creep, but when I'm out hiking and backpacking it does end up zooming out to 80mm.

[pisco]

Anbesol: In photoshop I zoomed inn until screen indicated 100%, then did crop what I could see in the screen. The size of this was 1800 x 1200, so I rezised to 800 x 533 to be able to post.
Canuck, The crop was from the center of the picture.

Thanks for your input, now I know why I like the lens so much.

Mette, sorry for stealing your thread, I hope the observations help you check your lens. And even though my lens has the "defect", you can see the pictures that it takes:

[Canuck935]

Hmm I'm thinking maybe we should get a 16-80 thread going too..