Zeiss Loxia 25mm ƒ/2.4 Non-Review

Lens sample kindly provided by LensRentals, who do not demand that we mention them or link to them in return.

I want to point out that LensRentals has a "Keeper" program, whereby you can buy the equipment you've just rented. You can try a lens and, if you like it, keep that exact lens.

Roger Cicala of LensRentals has made it abundantly clear why this is a useful service...because there is sample variation in lenses. (Especially zooms.) After testing lenses and writing about them for many years, I can name many instances in which one lens I used had that little something extra that I was unable to find again when buying another copy of the same lens. With my current Sigma 30mm, the opposite was the case—the review sample had slight decentering, and the one I bought for myself doesn't. (Although I keep looking for it, slightly neurotically.) Anyway, the Keeper program gives you some nice flexibility that way. If you rent a lens that you think is particularly spot-on, you don't have to worry about finding another one that's every bit as good; that very one can be yours.

Getting to the point
Anyway, I won't be reviewing the Zeiss Loxia 25mm ƒ/2.4, because it's due back today and I wasn't able to complete all the trials that give me a seat-of-the-pants idea of how the lens performs. Two reasons: 1.) bad weather, 1.) more bad weather, and 2.) because the Leica M10-P Reporter got here and (can you blame me?) diverted my attention.

I'm not very good at keeping my attention undiverted, if you haven't noticed.

But the manual-focus Zeiss lens gave me its gifts anyway. I learned a few important things from it. The obvious one is that I personally (your mileage really might vary here) would not be happy with a full-time manual-focus lens on this particular digital camera, meaning the Sony A6600. I could be happy on most days in most situations, but I've been using autofocus pretty much since the Nikon N8008 (a.k.a. F-801) came out in 1988. I'm kinda used to it, after—how long has it been since then? Twenty years? Whatever. Also, I turn 65 seven days from now—meaning, my close-in eyesight isn't what it used to be. It's good for my age, and I'm not complaining—I don't wear glasses except for reading and at the computer—but what weaknesses I do have tend to be brought out by the demands of mucking about with a variety of camera viewfinders. So there are just going to be situations where I would want AF, and it's no use pretending that wouldn't be true. I've always considered that one good way to deal with the complexity of modern hobbyist and professional cameras is to make a list of the core features that actually do matter to you personally—and "excellent low-light center-spot AF aquisition" is one of the items on my list.

(As an aside, I've found over the years that this is one of the reasons why up-to-date technology is so seductive: it's that there's usually just one or two things it provides that you want. With most tech items, it might be true that you could use an older model and might even be happiest with it, except that there will be just one or two new features that you really like and consider valuable. I first learned this when I photographed with a beautiful old Nikkormat FT-3 (1977) in the '90s. I could deal with everything about it, except that the old-fashioned groundglass viewfinder was just so dark. I really preferred the brightness of then-current viewfinders. A similar example in cars is that most modern electronic frippery doesn't appeal to me—but a backup camera is a useful and sensible safety feature that I would want on any car I own. And so forth. With most tech stuff, there's always something.)

So what the Loxia did for me was get me to try the AF on my Sigma 30mm...and, it turns out, it's better than I thought it was. The focus-by-wire ring is very smooth and well-damped and pleasant to use; plus, the ability to switch quickly back and forth from AF to manual focus using the AF/MF/AEL switch is actually very nice. 

You getting this? Trying the dedicated manual-focus lens was what made me realize I'm satisfied with the manual focus of the AF lens. So, that's a thing I learned. I was curious about a manual-focus lens, and now I don't have to be any more. Thank you, Loxia.

Beautiful sharpness, wake unto me*
Very quick/rough take on the pictures from the 25mm Loxia, its visual qualities: it's a highly pleasing lens. The two things you will obviously need to make up your mind about are the bokeh and the "sun stars." Bokeh rendering is a matter of taste, but, to my taste, the Loxia is a bit below average. It's coherent enough, without obvious flaws, but I don't care for it. Of course, if you're using this full-frame lens on full frame, it'll be quite wide, and bokeh isn't going to be very apparent in most shots. Maybe a little more so as a 37.5mm angle-of-view equivalent on APS-C. (Note to Millennials and Gen Z's: stop shooting everything wide open. Just stop. You need to stop.) The other thing you'll notice right away are the pronounced ten-point sun-stars, which seem to peak at ƒ/4. (See this published example, although this is at ƒ/11. This one is actually faintly doubled, probably from refraction through the "aperture" of the spaces between the tree branches.) Again, this is entirely a matter of personal taste—I don't like sun-stars. But maybe you do.

Beyond that, the imaging of the lens seems beyond reproach from what I can tell from having not reviewed it (smile). Smooth, high contrast, high resolution, and very good with highlights. I'm going to go out on a limb and say this lens would be one to try for yourself if you're looking for outstanding IQ in an ultra wide angle on a higher-megapixel (I mean like 45 MP or higher) full-frame camera. Especially if you like your tripod and especially if you shoot in color.

While I'm out here on this limb, let me come around full circle and mention that traditionally, one of the reasons to buy a high-end lens from a high-end maker such as Leica or Zeiss was that they had higher standards for the specs of the lenses they'd let out of the shop. That is, less sample variation. Uncle Arthur Kramer, long-ago lens guru of the old Modern Photography magazine of sainted memory, used to say the cost of a lens reflected how many lenses in a production run the manufacturer was willing to throw away. So one of the things driving the relatively high cost of the Zeiss Loxia 25mm (list price $1,349) might be higher quality control. I don't know that and I'm not saying it's true. But it might be.

The thing we missed here? A proper showdown (at high noon) between the Loxia and the much cheaper Sigma. Ah well, life is fulla mightabeens and couldabeens, aina?

Mike
(Thanks again to LensRentals)

*Stephen Foster reference. Where else you gonna get that? See what TOP does for you?

Book o' the Week

Ara Güler's Istanbul, one of the more amazing books in my collection. I'm also amazed it's still in print. Not only does it culminate a longtime habit and a vast body of work for the Turkish photographer of Armenian descent, one of the few world-famous photographers from Turkey—a labor of love—but it's a unique and wonderful example of photographic bookmaking. If you don't buy this, at least see one sometime.

This book link is a portal to Amazon.

Today at B&H Photo

Original contents copyright 2020 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Comments

[Adam Isler]

I feel ya, Mike. When I got into my mid 20s and had a family and a career my Beseler-based darkroom went in a box and eventually to a school. My Minolta SLRs went in a closet. When they all came out again the world had started going digital and my first thought was to simply use my beloved cameras and have all my negatives scanned as part of the processing. I tried with one roll and got a CD of crummy jpegs. But what really got to me was my absolute need for autofocus, lacking from my Minolta SrT101, XE-7 and xd-11. I bought a digital camera with autofocus (the Konica-Minolta Dimage A1) and have not looked back.

[Bob Rosinsky]

As for contemporary manual focus lenses, Cosina Voigtlander lenses are amazing. The 21 f/1.4 is especially nice on the A6600.

[Brian]

i fully understand this issue, being the other side of 70 these days. i just sold my loxia 24, 35 and 50 for this very reason.

feeling good about this i treated my gas with a sony gm 50 1.2. what a revelation. i never felt as good about a lens as I did when i owned the nikkor 58 1.4G which parted my way when i got into Sony a few years ago. I still feel good about the Sony GM 1.2. A lens a french impressionist would be happy with in the way it paints with light. (also 3 lens out only one in!)

I really never understood the bad press the nikkor received, it had outstanding rendition but not the sharpest tool in the box.

[William A Lewis]

I hear the phrase "sample variation" and I think immediately of my FSU leica mount lenses.

I have a Jupiter 12 35/2.8 lens in Leica m39 mount. It is possibly the second, perhaps third, best 35mm lens I have ever owned. (a Canon 35/2 FD that I owned beat it for sure, and my EDC Voigtlander/Cosina 35/1.7 is even with it. Yeah, it's that good.)

OTOH, one of the usually great FSU lenses, the Jupiter 8 50/2 Sonnar clone? I have one that stinks. The focus is adjusted correctly but it's still fuzzy at best. It annoys me to no end when I look at it. Fortunately for that niche, I have my Nikkor HC 50/2 (also a Sonnar clone) that is an utter delight to shoot with.

As an aside, my Industar 22 (a 50/3.5 hybrid of Tessar and Elmar) is very good as well but you have to be especially, amazingly, incompetent to screw up _that_ design LOL!

"If it wasn't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all" is the motto of the connoisseur of cheap lenses.

[Gary Mortensen]

"(Note to Millennials and Gen Z's: stop shooting everything wide open. Just stop. You need to stop.)"

No truer words...

[brian]

Although using a full-frame 24-25mm lens on your APS-C might not be the easiest way to produce the sort of bokeh that you prefer, the Sony 24/1.4 GM may have the bestest bokeh of any such lens with your Sony camera. (Some Sony enthusiasts think that that lens in crop mode produces the nicest bokeh of any 35mm-e lens this side of the Sony RX1R II.) Unfortunately, there's a size penalty:

https://bit.ly/3rZjMzQ

My regularly-used lenses are all manual focus (the terrific Voigtlander 35 and 50 mm APO lenses--although you would not appreciate the bokeh of the former--and a Zeiss 85/4 along with the Loxia) 25. I do have one autofocus lens (the Zony 55/1.8) that I pull out at Christmas, but I don't enjoy it as much as the other lenses. I suppose that despite the focusing issues I could be happy using good lenses on a Leica M. (I still miss my Mamiya 7.)

[Robert Stahl]

Am absolutely in 'Shangri-La' with three manual lenses from
Voigtlander: 35mm F2.0 Apo-Lanthar, 50mm f2.0 Apo-Lanthar,
& 65mm F2.0 Apo-Lanthar Macro and Sony's A7iv camera body.
Sony's 'focus assist' feature makes manual focusing a pleasure.

[Daniel Speyer]

Mike, I also dislike sun-stars. Maybe okay if the image is meant to suggest/be associated with a sci-fi theme (as it relates to the 4 point stars [artifact] from large mirror telescopes), but for most images for me, it ruins them.

I often think perhaps I could have lens(es) modified to remove the aperture blades and replace them with a fixed round hole—or if possible maybe waterhouse stops or the addition of a smaller circle/washer than the lens wide open, so opening the aperture blades the added round aperture becomes the limiting area.

Actually I forget that my Pentax Q fish-eye and 35mm equivalent (toy in name only) lenses, and the new to me Holga 120, have simple circular apertures—so I guess I went from my glass half empty to half full!

[Doug C]

Do you think you would like manual focus with the Loxia on the Sony if it allowed wide open aperture focus as we have on SLR cameras?

Trying to focus stopped down, even with the focus aids, just doesn't work for me. And I see that most people miss focus with mirrorless most of the time.

I know it would make the difference to me.

[James]

Yes I can blame you for being distracted. You didn't have any deadline for the Lecia. And about the weather part, maybe I can blame you about that too. How bad was it? Didn't you just go on about how the mid-single-digits is fine weather? And even if if it was blizzarding, don't you have some still-life subjects you can do the shootout with? You've been living in places with northern-US weather for a long time now.

[James]

Also, I don't think 25mm-e is ultrawide anymore. Maybe it was once, but it is just barely wide of normal these days. Normal being the about 26mm-e of modern phone cameras.

[Trevor Johnson]

Kirk is the GOAT

[Tex Andrews]

Note to Millennials and Gen Z's: stop shooting everything wide open. Just stop. You need to stop.

Smile of the day. And thanks for that tidbit about lenses "thrown away".

[Al C.]

Odd. You cite aging eyes and complain about the MF Loxia when you have focus peaking and magnified view to assist with MF, but look forward to the viewfinder M10-P?