my shooting style is with the 24-70 As an event photographer I have it on my camera 100% of the time.... I reccomend everyone should own a 24-70, I also have a 85mm 35mm and the 70-200... :) but the 24-70 is my day to day lens

I started with a 24-70. I now have primes too. I think they should be regarded as different tools. There are times when switching focal lengths is essential, but doing so with primes would result in missing moments and would be impractical. For those on a budget, it can be a great place to start and can help videographers/photographers discover what focal lengths they use or love most, and can then proceed to purchase primes on that bases.

Same. My first lens was 24-70. Most of my shots where at 70mm and all other shots around 24-40mm. I sold my 24-70 and now I have a 35mm and a 85mm. When I am going on a hike or if i am chilling with friends, i am using the 35mm. When i shoot street or portraits I like using my 85mm I think for people that start photography it's not the best advice to buy a 24-70 because those lenses are quite expensive. Buying a 35mm or a 50mm might be a better fit imo. Walking around and finding nice compositions is a fun aspect of photography. I really enjoyed your video. Keep up the good work and have a beautiful day 👍🏼

24-70 has given me more versatility than my prime setup. Dust on the sensor and constantly switching out was enough for me not to miss primes anymore.

I feel you bro. Only reason why Im holding to my 24-70 is travel. Travel light with one lens is so convenient.

First off, I absolutely love your work man! I had a similar experience with the Canon 50mm 1.4. I had been looking to “upgrade” from the 1.8 and finally pulled the trigger on it after watching a million KZfaq comparisons. I popped it on my camera, and quickly realized it was not worth the price difference and I actually lost some functionality because it couldn’t focus as close as the 50mm 1.8. Needless to say, it was swiftly returned. Also, my go to zoom lens for professional work like events and photo-journalism assignments is the 24-105. The images are sharp and I love the flexibility that the wide range of focal lengths give me.

I agree with you. I sold my 24-70 g2 tamron. I love my 35mm rf lens, and my rf 50 1.2. I do have the rf 24-105 for landscapes and travel photography. I don't mind the f4 for travel, bc I want to show the location/background anyway. And the 24-105 is so light and easy to carry around.

with you on not owning a 24-70 after having given it a good go as well!

I was introduced to Prime’s from the start and fell in love with them straight away My set up is Sigma 35, 85 and 105 Definitely need a wider focal length at some point but this is an expensive hobby for me so no rush 🙏

My 24-70 lives on my body. I do enjoy shooting with the 24, 50 & 85 primes from time to time. Can't beat versatility tbh.

I love your vibe dude. So calming and well-paced. Keep up the epic work, man. And awesome to see another Melbourne creator smashing KZfaq!!

For me, everyone raved about the Canon nifty fifty (and rightly so in a lot of ways). However I always found that it was either not wide enough, or not telephoto enough, sitting right in a weird middle ground for me. Now that I have a 35mm prime and an 85mm prime, I never use my 50mm. I haven't sold it yet but I haven't used it in ages so it's really about time I sold it to someone who will actually use and enjoy it.

For weddings 24-70 and 70-200. I'm Micro Four Thirds so I use the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 and the Panasonic 35-100mm f2.8. I don't like changing lens at weddings but for portraits and other things I like primes. Also their are weather reasons why zooms are better for weddings. You don't want to change lens if there is a lot of hummity in the air you can fog up the sensor and viewfinder.

When I first started doing photography, zooms were so bad that you had to shoot primes. As zooms got better, photographers started using more zooms. Now a good prime is still marginally better than a good zoom at a particular focal length. And primes in general offer wider apertures and lighter weight and smaller size. But, zooms offer more versatility in one lens. Over the years I've used both zooms and primes. Currently my go to lenses are the 24-70mm GM II and 70-200mm GM II. But, during 2020 and 2021, I acquired all of the Sony GM primes from 14mm to 135mm. I love the primes. But, sometimes it's just more practical to go with the zooms.

It is all personal style. I have a 16-35, but always seem to use it in the 24-35 range as the super wide look never seems to be right for me, so I would probably be better with a 24-70. My favourite lens of all is the 70-200 - that really more suits how I see the world

As a 24-70 owner I agree, I often wish for just a little bit more on the tele end. I'm ok with 24mm on the wide end. I find I shoot my 24-70 in the 28ish to 50mm range 90% of the time. So I'll keep mine, I have a 70-200 for the longer stuff. But completely get your point. A fast 50 is a joy to shoot and gives a very nice 'look'.

I agree. I have the 24-70 and debating on selling it… I honestly rarely use my 24-70 and have kept it as a “just in case” . I feel like I should sell it and then get a 16mm prime for my wide

1. Rf 35mm prime for video 2. Rf 24-70 for specific purpose & landscape photos 3. Rf 100mm for macro and portrait 4. Rf 100-500mm for telephoto which can be doubled with 2x adapter This is what I would have and am moving towards the same currently.

Thanks Mitch: it’s a Paradigm shift. Depending on the goal of the trip, I will consider from now on, among my Fuji lenses, one of these two kits: - Portrait & abstract photography: The stunning Fuji jewel (50mm f1.0 WR), and the surgical 70-300mm, plus the new 10-24mm f4, both OIS & WR; - Story & street photography: The new crispy 33mm f1.4 WR, between the excellent 50-140mm f2.8 OIS WR, and the versatile new 10-24mm OIS WR.

I'm an event photographer. I was once thought I would need a 24-70 to ease my work. Sold it after a week, im just gonna stick with 35mm + 85mm / 24mm + 135mm primes dual body.

Very nice drone shots, beautiful location. Thanks for sharing your travels and the content you provide. In my kit i have the Sigma 35mm 1.4, the RF 50 1.2 and Sigma 105 1.4. I take this kit on my travels and hikes, and serves all my purpose needs. if i need to crop in, the R5 has enough resolution. I cant live without any of these focal lengths, but if i must keep just one lens, it would be the RF 50 1.2. I prefer the 35mm focal length more, but that RF is just so magical (by that i mean sharp wide open with beautiful rendering, at least for my taste). When I was on the 5D IV, the 35mm 1.4 II lived on that camera for 99% of the time. To me its the technical qualities of a lens too, not just the focal length that prompt me to put it on the camera. Some lenses just have a special rendering, quality to them that draw me in. Still believe the Canon 35mm 1.4 L II is the best 35 in the market, and the RF50 best 50 even for the price. If anyone made it through this long comment, would like to share the remedy, and only remedy for GAS (gear acquisition syndrome), and that is to go out and shoot with what you have, create some art and be happy/proud of it, maybe even print it. It will help stop thinking about gear, at least for a while :)

To each their own, but I wouldn't want to be without a 24-70 (or perhaps 24-105 or similar). The point of a 24-70, in my opinion, is to be able to from from a wide angle of view to a short telephoto angle of view without switching lenses. If you shoot with two bodies, that may not be so much of a big deal (since you can have a wide angle lens on one and a short telephoto on the other), but if you are shooting with only one body, that lets you get very different looking images without having to change lenses. Obviously that can be more or less significant depending on how you shoot, eg if you are taking your time shooting landscapes, changing lenses to go from an UWA to a telephoto may not bother you at all. It's a different story though if you want me to able to go from an environmental portrait to a head and shoulders portrait in the blink of an eye, or you are wandering around and want to be able to take a variety of different styles of shot without having to carry and change lenses. I have owned lots of different zooms and primes over the years, but the more time goes on, the more I find that a 24-70 covers a lot of what I actually shoot, and a 24-70 plus 70-200 covers the vast majority of it. I would still want one or two wide aperture primes for low light and very shallow depth of field work, and I'm sure I could find a use for an UWA and a longer telephoto occasionally if I had them, but I can do an awful lot with a 24-70 and a 70-200.

This was as though you were looking through my camera bag. Everyone loves 24 but it's just not wide enough for me. I do so love primes! 20, 55, and 85. Covers everything but Africa, then it's 100-400.

I came to the same conclusion. I love the versatility on the wide and telephoto ends and have one fast prime in 35-50mm range then a 24-70 plus a bunch of primes.

I am mostly a prime shooter with 14, 20, 24, 35, 50, 85, 105 and 135mm but after buying a 24-70 I take that lens anywhere with me when travelling. Combined with the 14mm, 35mm and 135mm and every situation can be photographed... I dare say the 24-70 is enough and if you want wider shots for landscapes you can just shoot a panorama.

My ideal combo would probably be Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 with Tamron 17-28 f2.8. Huge range and you get the creamy wide aperture of f2-2.2 between 35mm and 59mm (I think).

If you start out the 24-70 kitlens is a great starting point. When I got the 85mm 1.8 I fell in love with primes. Then I bought the 35mm GM and noticed I’m not using it enough. I shoot with the 135mm GM. And on the wide angle I have the 20mm 1.8 because in APS-c mode I’ll get 30ish fov

Good question! I thought I needed a 50mm 1.8 which I still have but hardly ever use because I tend to let go of bokeh in favor of compositional flexibility. I use my 17-50mm 2.8 zoom lens instead of restricting myself to the 50, being an event photographer who needs to be ready to take a shot at each given moment. Having a second shooter on a prime or using a second body with the prime are among the other options if you still prefer using a prime lens.

I can relate to this so much. I started with the holy trinity and the 24-70 was always my least favorite to shoot with. Sold it and replaced it with 50mm to fill the gap.

I have to tell you, and this may be of topic... but your video is AWESOME for the simple reason of the background, location and how incredible the quality of your video and audio is. It makes me want to quit my career and just make videos for a living. WELL DONE!

This will be a long one, but have fun reading it: I've only been in photography for about a year and 3 months now, and I recently sold my Canon 90D for a Canon R6 (when I bought the 90D, I just wanted something that isn't sloppy for KZfaq videos back then, and the R6 was a result of me realizing that not only do I love photography miles more than videos, I absolutely love shooting in low light, and it's usually people to be specific. I would've went for an R5, but most of my work doesn't involve cropping, file sizes are questionable, and the R5 does not perform as well as the R6 in low light, hence the decision). The only issue I have when shooting people with the R6 is that the face tracking does deliver slightly blurrier shots, when compared to the eye tracking autofocus. Eye tracking is just so much sharper that I'll always try to make sure the eyes were nailed for AT LEAST ONE SHOT I bought a Sigma 18-35 with my 90D, then got a 70-200 (6 months in) when I realized I wanted to go Full Frame one day (hence the R6), because a limit of ISO 800 before noise kicks in was a bummer for me (The R6 nowadays can shoot at ISO 12,800, get the images mixed on DxO Pure RAW 2, and nobody will be able to tell that this image was noisy or post-processed to start with). The Sigma 70-200 Sports lens did deliver exactly what I wanted, at 50% of the Canon EF equivalent, and it was extremely practical for multi-purpose uses for me, so I bit the bullet and bought myself one Right now I'm just trying to sell my Sigma 18-35 (I genuinely love this lens, but the vignette in post is a serious problem!) so I can afford to get a 24-70 instead (a temporary solution until I can either afford Canon native lenses, or decide on what primes I want to continue shooting with someday). Beyond that, a drone is currently out of the question because the two countries I live in have very different laws for drones, so I'll keep it down for a while. Amazing landscape shots by the way man, you just earned a new subscriber!

I completely agree. I use primes for as much as possible, including everything I do 'for myself'. But I do have a 24-105 for client work that requires the versatility of a zoom. Sometimes you just don't have enough time to switch lenses.

I’m a videographer and I own multiple G Master Prime Lenses. 24 1.4, 35 1.4, 50 1.2, 85mm 1.4/90 2.8 Macro. Shooting events, and recently travelling international(after pandemic) again. I just realized that having zoom lenses will make my backpack lighter(I carry 2 bodies with me, Sony FX3 and FX30 with a 24mm and a 50mm or 85mm) and easier for me to carry when shooting around. Glad I just recenly got the Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM Mk2. I still love my prime lenses. But 24-70 is a versatile lens not to include in any shooting condition. My current daily carry for me creating personal contents and for work are Sony 16-35, 24-70, 50 1.2 and 70-200 Macro. 😊

As a 2nd photographer for weddings, the 24-70 was the lens that I was advised to get first. Yay, I got it! And I also only keep it just in case. It is my least favorite lens - ever. I'd rather shoot primes in 99% of situations, and recognize how versatile and useful a 24-70 can be, AND (for me) it feels the least creative and even less inspiring for anything I do.

I have the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8, The Samyang 75 and 45mm f/1.8 lenses, and the Sigma 24mm f/1.4. For superwide, I have the Sony 10-20mm f/4 on an APS-C body. It gives 15-30mm coverage, and is my vlogging camera/lens. The APS-C body lets me "double" the functionality of my lenses. The 70-180 becomes a 105-270. the 75mm becomes a 105. And the 24mm becomes a 36mm. So I'm pretty well covered for nearly any circumstance.

Returned from 2 weeks in Japan and realized the Fuji 60mm/f2.4 produced outstanding color over the Fuji 15-45mm kit lens! Sold the 15-45 right after the trip but I did like all of its photos in b and w. But I just bought a used Lumix LX10 for granddaughter and that has 24-72mm! I think stabilization will help her and it's a great zoom to learn on. When she's ready we'll start switching to primes.

Thank you! My newly acquired Sony A7C II has 2 primes, 24 and 35. I thought about a 50 but have been on the fence with that until you said, pick one you like between 35 or 50 and go with that! I'll keep the 35! My fuji gear gets me wherever I want to go MM wise! Thanks for this beautiful video!!

I go by the 1.7x factor. 28/50/85/135. Or, Fuji, 18/33/56/90. Pretty much covers everything I could want. I do have the 16-55 and 70-300. However, I don’t really find myself using them. Will most likely follow your lead and eventually get rid of the 16-55. Probably keep the 70-300 for any wildlife. Great video!

Absolutely brilliant video Mitch. Stunning visuals.

Love my primes (20mm G, 35mm GM, 85 1.8) but this weekend taking some casual photos of my Son's birthday party, the Sigma 24-70 2.8 was the one i picked for versatility and speed, just to be in and out, get a wide, a close up, put the camera down and enjoy everything. But for street and landscape, i'll take the primes.

I appreciate you adding your gear on the description! Nice video 👏

I bought 24-70mm 2.8 GMII as my very first lens and Sony alpha 1 in very few weeks. I think it's a good start to me to understand what focus width I like and then buy a prime (but before prime I want 12-24mm). I'm not a photographer I'm just a guy who can afford such stuff and I believe zoom lenses a good for start. Thanks for video, though, will test primes as well :)

I started off swearing on prime lenses! I was all about it and thought it was sharper and superior.. till 6 months in and I got tired of switching lenses for a photo or when im shooting a short film. It wasnt a big deal at first.. but some days it just got annoying and it affects my momentum during a set and having to swap step up rings and filters while changing lenses slowly became an annoyance. So I bought myself a 24-70 2.8 lens to just try out a zoom for the first time. AND MAN! It was a game changer for me because of the type of work I do.. the 24-70 is the closest thing to a perfect lens.. for my style. So I got rid of all my primes.. but I did keep the 50 1.2 gm and 135 gm prime lenses.. because those two are my staple glass for portrait work. But yeah.. the 24-70 makes your life so easy and I wish I would've made this lens my first purchase before buying the primes that I started off with lol

I use my 24-70 for portraits and it's usually at 35mm or 70mm. I get frustrated with that lens and since I prefer the telephoto side, I mostly use my 85mm plus at 1.4, delicious. I've been thinking for the past few days, why not just sell the 24-70 and get a 35mm, duh, it makes perfect sense! I have all my areas covered from 17-1,200mm (600mm with 2xs tele) and the 24-70 range would still be covered without it. Great video!

My set up with my 2 A7RV’s is my Sony 16-35mm f2.8 GM II & TAMRON 35-150mm f2-2.8 those lenses never leave my camera bodies. I shoot everything from events, weddings to portraits with those two lenses. I haven’t used my Sony 85mm f1.8, Sony 24mm f1.8gm, or my Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 in over a year. I think it’s time I let those three go.

Thanks so much for having a different view and preference from what the 'hive mind' considers the right answer. I too, find that I use lenses differently than most.

Getting back to photography after many years (Canon DSLRs), I began shopping for lenses to supplement my 28-135mm f/1.4 "kit" lens. Lots of hype around the 24-70 f/2.8, but the prices are nuts. So I picked up a 30mm f/1.4 for walking around, a 10-20mm f/4.0 for bright interiors, architecture, and landscapes, and a 50mm f/1.8 for general shooting. I'm just beginning to learn these lenses, but my early impressions are that I don't need a 24-70mm.

And now we have the Sony GM II 24-70. This lens is sharp as a prime! Sure it’s not a 1.4/1.2 but damn this new GM II is the must own lens.

Definitely always preferred primes. Zooms look cool, they're super nifty in fast paced settings, even had someone imply I couldn't get professional photos without one lol but it always just makes me wanna take my time and use a 1.4ish prime lens.

Dude, your videos are so timeless and well done. Always love your content and it never misses. I’m rocking an r6 with the 17-35, rf 35mm, rf 100-400 and so far I’m really digging it. Also can I mention how epic the scenery is of this video… incredible.

I switched from a Sigma 14-24 to a Sony 16-35 GM. Coupled with my Tamron 35-150 2.0-2.8, I am well covered on zooms as I rarely need more than 150mm. I also have the 35 1.4, 50 1.2 and the Sigma 85 1.4 primes, for when I can comfortably carry my full size bag.

I main primes, but for weddings it's gonna be the 24-70 all day. One lens covers 98% of all the needs without fumbling around

I've been shooting only primes for a few years as a portrait photographer, but recently I've been using the Sigma 24-70 DG DN. I still love my fast primes, but I've also found a use for the zoom that I use when the weather is bad, in shoots that efficiently is needed (i.e. I can't walk back and change out lens), and/or I have a small home studio where the zoom replaces a 50mm focal length (I do not own a 50 prime).

I keep my 24-70 as a just in case, only problem is the case never comes. 🤦🏿‍♂️

Subscribed for a long time 🙋‍♂️ since like 10 k. For many years I similarily thought a perfect 3 lens setup to be something similar: 16-35, 70-200 and a 1.4 prime in the middle. BUT now for my new brand I need to shoot a lot of portraits in tight spaces fast, and 24-70 seems necessary for the first time. Not tempting, but necessary. Also as I am mainly videographer then 24-70 seems like a great walkaround to do video, and then enters 28-70 f2 canon, which seems to fill that prime and zoom need. So really torn here personally and been thinking about this exact topic for months 😁

I had the Sigma 65mm F2. Loved that lens but barely used. I had the 16-28 f2.8 sigma but sold that too. Honestly, I think I'm gonna buy the new 16-35mm f2.8 GM2 and pay the money. I hope I don't regret it.

The 70-200 was a lens I think I absolutely needed. I got it, liked it for a few months but realized I was always shooting on the long end and didn’t need the 70-100 focal length. I decided to get the 100-400GM and absolutely love it. It’s such a beast of a lens, regardless of what you’re photographing. Architecture, landscape and even portraits are incredible with this lens. Since getting it, I haven’t once packed the 70-200 in my camera bag and I’m in the midst of selling it.

I have 1 lens - sigma 24mm f/1.4 art dg dn and sony a7IV ✌🏼

I have a Tamron 24-70 2.8 G2. It's a nice lens. I mainly use it for weddings/events where speed to get a shot is what matters. Otherwise, I don't have it in my bag.

24-70 and 70-200 are my go to lens. If I want to travel light I have the 35-150mm for Tamron.

For me it was the other way around. Had a 16-35mm and 4 fast primes. Eventually sold them all 2 years after getting a 24-70 and only kept the 24-70 since it was the only one I used.

If you are in a controlled environmanet (studio) Primes are king however there are certain situations where Zooms are necessary (like Evenets).

100% same here, had the Sony 24-105f4 and I shoot like everything on 24mm or on 105mm. Now I have a 85mm 1.8 and soon a 35mm 1.4.

I’m now simplified my choice of lenses, 14-35mm f4, 50mm 1.4, 70-200 f2.8 and the mighty 85mm 1.2. I did trade the 24-105 so I guess like loosing the 24-70, I’ll see how I go so far don’t miss it.

Really interesting. I used my 24-120 on my GH5 for years now and 90% of the times I don’t need anything else. I love 35mm primes as an addition, 50mm never fitted my style tbh. But I also never get used to 24-70 because it was always lacking at the telephoto end for me

I've gone from my Nikon 16-35 and 24-120 lenses to a 20mm and 50mm, and so far it's working out great. However, I'm keeping the other two lenses just in case I find a composition where the primes don't work. But when I travel I'll probably just take the two primes and my 70-200.

As someone who shoots events and portrait mainly I love my 50 and 105mm! I also have 24 as a wide angle

i also sold my 24-70 for the exact reason. People hyping this lens up way too much. 24 isnt wide enough, 70 isnt zoomed in enough. Even a kit lens can get the job done...

Interesting recital and comments. My point of view from needing to deliver stunning, profound and/or salable images was to keep it simple. So can focus on composition, color and lighting. Learned photo tech back on Kodachrome 25, so my technique is pretty developed. For decades, used primarily a 35mm, 50mm ( 50mm if there was enough room ) and a 105mm for headshots. Used for approximately 85% of my work. For specials, like alpine climbing or the many Vegas conventions shot I added a 24mm or 20mm. All primes. Weddings, added a 85mm - not my favorite length but useful for distant table portraits, and a 70-200mm so as to stay out of officiators way and not get tossed out of the extravaganza. Primes are lighter on the camera than zooms which yields better images for me. And faster in use. Plus, definitely want/need fast lenses, sharp wide open. So primes. All that said, older and wiser now. Have always done tons of events, with the above prime trio, but picked up the Nikkor Z 24mm-70mm F/2.8 S Zoom when it came out. First 24-70mm that I find acceptable image quality wise. In fact, it is really good, perhaps near excellent. And since older and lazier, just use this lens on the Nikon mirrorless system. Even though to this day, prefer by a large margin the DSLR D850. I am just too lazy to pick the thing up. In practice, the Z 24-70mm has been great. Not perhaps the best, as I thought it would be upon initial testing, but it does rock. My decision on whether or not to use it, or the primes comes down to how lazy I am, or do I need spectacular image quality ( the primes ) for a given situation. And I am now very lazy. But make no mistake, the primes definitely outperform the 24-70mm in every way, but I gots to ask myself, is it worth the effort. Or the dollars from the income. Just my take.

to me, i have the 35 1.8 and the 85mm 1.4 for my sony a73. i can shoot weddings, family photos, studio works and all that. i dont need any other

This is the exact reason I'm selling my 24 - 70mm 2.8. I recently bought the 70 - 200mm RF 2.8 for the Canon R5 and soon I'm getting the RF 15 - 35mm 2.8 L. I have the RF 50mm 1.8 to fill the middle if needed and it's going to be great for lower light shots. I think in the future I'll probably get an 85mm 1.2 for portraits and street photograpghy but not rush to get that as I think I'll have the perfect lens set up for my photography needs once I get the 15 - 35mm.

I can relate, I prefer shooting with primes even though the zooms are meant to be more versatile.

I actually have a couple of lenses in the 24-70, 24-105 range. They work well for me. But, I also have some primes and the one I use mostly is the 35 1.4. The 50 is too limiting for me. I have some longer focal length lenses, but rarely use them. If I travel, I have the 24-105 and the 16-35 with me most of the time.

Thanks for sharing your experience with comments on this lens....I use a 18-55mm on my D500 & I find it is a good focal variation ...as a hobbyist it suits my needs. I also use my prime for street work & I have an 28-300mm zoom which I love when out bush walking or sea landscapes... cheers 😀

Yes, this sounds familiar to me.. when I go for a walk in these scenarios I'm used to take 15-35 and a 70-200, focal length between these lenses ... no thanks :-) But if I have to go to a wedding, 28-70 f2 and 85 f1.4 are my best choice.

For me it was the tamron duo : 17-28mm and 28-70mm. I shoot on a Sony a7siii and I realise that even if they have a 2.8 aperture the focal length was not enough for me. I swith to the 16-35 f4 and 24-105 f4

I have a 24-105 and bought the Sigma 80mm f1.2 ... I gave it back within a month, since I couldn't get as close to small subjects as with the 24-105 and then focal length wasn't very versatile... It's too narrow for everyday shots and too wide for the "hey look what I've found" attention to small subjects, where I want to fill the frame as much as possible... I just kept the 24-105 on all the time and realized even though the 80mm was sharper and faster, i just use it way too little and it doesn't fit my needs. I'd love to see a 24-105 f1.8 which can focus even closer, to get sort of macro shots Or a 50-200 f2.8 with 20cm focus distance macro capability

I agree with you man, zoom lenses are good but they are not for everybody. Prime lenses let you move freely, to get your composition instead of zooming for the subject.

I replaced my 24-70 2.8 with RF 50 1.2 on my R5. Best decision ever, I use 50mm for video mainly and head to shoulder portraits and my RF 70-200 2.8 for everything else like landscapes to get a different perspective. My EF 16-35 is in my bag but haven’t used it in around 10 months.

Casually shooting a video on the top of a mountain, great content man!

I carry a 16-35mm 2.8, 50mm 1.2, and 70-200mm 2.8. It’s rare that I find a scenario where I can’t walk up the 16-35mm or the 50mm to fill the gaps. And given Sony doesn’t make any 16mm, 18mm, or 20mm fast primes, it’s not possible to carry the 24-70 and 70-200 with the same level of versatility. I do own the 24-70mm 2.8 just because of situations where I have to travel really light and can only bring one lens, that’s what I’m grabbing.

I owned a Sigma 24-70 2.8 - sold it. I owned a Canon 24-70 4.0 - sold it. I owned the Canon 16-35 2.8 sold it. The only Zoom lense left ist my Canon 70-200 4.0 which i only use for compressed landscape shots. The rest of my set up: primes from 15mm to 150mm.

You are the GOAT, literally hahaha. Im a 35mm kinda guy. I just LOVE its versatility. Wide enough for my taste, I can crop if I need to. At f1.4 portraits are just amazing. Im definitely not adding a 24-70mm to my kit. My primes get the job done! Cheers bro!

You have, again, confirmed my future selection. I have thought long and hard about how I am about to replace my stolen camera gear. I have 99% decided on R5, 15-35, 50, 70-200. And a macro - probably a Laowa 100mm f/2.8 2x Ultra Macro.

Thank you. Good to get this perspective which I have been moving toward myself. These lens decisions are always tough. I have a 24-70 2.8. But, I have been considering whether to sell it. I also have 15-35 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. No primes yet. I find I want wider then 24 when I shoot wide and longer than 70 when I shoot long. Almost always. I think the times that a 24-70 might be useful for me is when I am shooing family stuff indoors. Other than that - I don't find myself using it. A prime or two might cover that better. EDIT: 5 months later and my thinking is starting to crystalize. I purchased a 50 1.2 and an 85 1.2. Gorgeous lenses - both of them. So, I have 15-35 covered with my wide 2.8 zoom, a really good 50 1.2, and a really good 70-200 2.8 zoom. The 85 is icing on the cake. I really don't have much use anymore for a 24-70 zoom. Time to sell.

For me it is the 35mm. Everyone is so obsessed with it and I thought I like the look as it is also used widely in film. But I really can’t make it to work. Most of the time I grab my 50mm or 17-28 or 85mm. Almost as you do. I also have the 70-180 but don’t it use it that often.

Nice of you to give your presentation on top of the mountain, just natural as in studio. I be scared of the height....I take my F50 equiv for these mountain shots.

Mitch, I think its a two-way differentiation when it comes to choosing or not choosing 24 70 and serious photographers, for someone who is an advanced enthusiast like me or someone like you who is a professional and enthusiast but has more of freestyle or freedom of choice I would say regarding the work they do, so' for you and me or other adventurers, 24 70 makes no sense at all! I resonated with you a lot while watching you say it in the video. But for a lot of people with strict work demands like a wedding photographer who doesn't like to have or carry two cameras, basically has to satisfy clients in the best feasible package possible, then 24 70 is their way to go. Especially the 2.8 one and many many swear by it though, for instance, I would choose f4 with IS over 2.8 any day of the week and over that, I would rather go with a 16 35, so our choices basically convey who we are as people as photographers and thanks for making me realize it for one more time. Regards.

Dope footage!

I agree although for filming I don't wanna miss the 24-70 Sigma Art but I do own decent prime lenses from the Sigma Art series and the Sony G-Master- lenses as well! It depends what I'm doing. Shooting a wedding it's sometimes the best versatile choice.

I currently have a 16mm 1.8, a 50mm 1.4GM and a 24-105mm 4.0. Sony all three of them. I'm thinking about selling my 50mm and 24-105mm and replace them to a 24-70 2.8GMII and a 70-200GMII. Even tho I love my 50mm, I don't think I'll use it once I have the 24-70mm. I wish to only bring two lenses with me on my travels.

I’m about to buy a lens today! I have a 50mm for portraits and wanted to get a 24-70 for bigger groups (I’m taking pics for bands - not for concerts but just for their socials & album covers. I was also going to get a samyang 14mm f/2.8 for astrophotography. I’ve decided to get the sigma 24mm f.1 Art instead which can hopefully do both! As I don’t have a big budget. Wish me luck!

I still move my feet using 24-70, it is just a quick switch for me to switch from one focal length to another focal, but I agree that's not a lens for everybody's liking

the same with me! , 24-70 is go to lens but this lens makes me feel lazy , idk ! it not my shooting style , my current lens right is 35 and 85 and it works for me

I was always aware that you're more prone to just use the widest and longest ends with a zoom lens, but I never really thought about what a caveat that can be until you mentioned it.

I have not used a 28-75 Tamron lens for more than a year. Did not find any use for it. Mostly used Tamron 28-200 lens and primes 35mm f/1.8 and 20mm f/1.8 Sony lens. Planning to sell 28-200 and 28-75 and replace them with Tamron 35-150 f/2 - f/2.8 lens. Once I got a 35mm f/1.8 Sony lens I use less to none for a 20mm f/1.8 lens as well. So probably going to sell it too. My RX100VII is going to cover quick snapshots for travel if my A7IV is mounted with 35mm 1.8 or in the future 35-150.

drone shots are amazing Mitch!

Yeap a did the same...sold my 24-70 and went to prime lenses...and I don't regret it

Great video & topic For my weddings I mainly use 3 lenses, RF 15-35mmf2.8 sigma Art 50mm F1.4 & EF 700-200 F2.8 The Sigma provides the creative soft background arty stuff and the other 2 lenses the photojournalistic documentary side.

Amazing. Wow never thought it that way. Thanks Mitch