Sony 20 -70mm F4 Hands On Review | Curve Ball
Рет қаралды 20,319
Күн бұрынAn awesome new focal length, amazing sharpness, excellent hardware, and yet...only some of you should buy it...
Purchase: bhpho.to/3QYC4wa
Hit me up on IG: / learningcameras
Gear Used in this video:
Main Camera: bhpho.to/3WMuwhr
2nd Camera: bhpho.to/3j2MAWz
ND Filter: bhpho.to/3wq0Zzc
Favorite Memory Card: bhpho.to/3H5f4Hn
Backup Memory Card: bhpho.to/3iZwXiE
Action Cam: amzn.to/3DaLPBI
| All My Gear |
EVERYTHING I Use: kit.co/learningcameras
My music: geni.us/mymusic
My sound FX: geni.us/soundfx
Where I get stock vids: geni.us/stockvideo
My next level photo editing software: geni.us/luminar4
My new drone: bhpho.to/3oYXHyw
My ND Filters: bhpho.to/3c0PvJo
Cheaper ND Filters: bhpho.to/3lDed4T
My On Camera Mic: amzn.to/3oVdP3K
My Studio Mic: bhpho.to/3kpflrB
My Wireless Lav Mic: bhpho.to/3wuPrso
Check out my new merch!!!
Appreciate the support and feel free to tag me in it! geni.us/learningcamerasmerch
| Follow ME! |
Hey, I love checking in with you guys, talking gear, meeting up, answering questions, and checking out all the amazing content you have going on.
Facebook: / learningcameras
Dan's Insta: / learningcameras
Twitter: / learningcameras
0:00 Intro
0:36 Specs
1:45 Who is this for
2:43 Focal Length Matters
3:51 Image Quality
7:02 Video
8:43 Should You Buy It
@climbermacleod Жыл бұрын
Thanks Dan. I am very tempted to get this. I have a rock climbing channel and mainly filming myself. I rarely shoot video below F4 for rock climbing since I need a tad more depth of field and often head turning away/obscured so risk losing focus where I need it at F2.8. Also don't really want the backdrop super blurry. So the main 'con' of this lens isn't an issue. But the main pros of weight and extra range are really worth it for getting everything with one lens, while carrying 15kgs of climbing kit on a mountain. Currently use the Sigma 28-70 (chosen for low weight) but I also have the 20mm and 35mm 1.8 primes for studio/setup stuff. The decider for me for the 20-70 is if it is really sharp enough. I'd be willing to carry the extra ~200g of the 24-70GMII on mountains if it were that much better for image quality. Your review suggests the 20-70 might be the right choice.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
So this is definitely sharp enough. Basically the main reason to upgrade to the 24-70 is for the F2.8 aperture which if you already have a few primes, might not be worth it
@climbermacleod Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras Thanks. I think I will get it, but possibly will wait to find it for a better price than £1400 in the UK!!!
@Dave_Andre 11 ай бұрын
@@climbermacleod have you thought about the tamron 20-40mm 2.8?
@wildertainment 4 ай бұрын
Love your stuff Dave! I'm actually shooting rock climbing/mountaineering myself and eying this lense too...i actually still feel it's a bit big for alpine routes, but it doesn't seem there's many other lightweight/compact/versatile FF options...aside from the APS-C stuff (eg. For the time being I'm using my friend's 16-50 f3.5-5.6 pancake kit lense which i secretely love cause with the ZVE1 it all fits in my pocket...but I'm definitely getting some vignetting even cropped it 😅). Another lightweight FF option though would be the "crappy" 28-70 FF kit lense...which is much smaller than this 20-70...but meh you know 😏
@janezgradisar3194 Жыл бұрын
Because of small size and low weight this lens would be also interesting in combination with a new a7C mark II body with at least 33MP resolution. Would be great for nature/travel photographeers who do not want to carry too much gear.
@stevearita3267 Жыл бұрын
Great review! I am thinking of getting this lens to use for my day hiking kit. I have the 12-24 F2.8, which lives on my camera bodies, is sooo sharp, but just too heavy for an all day hike in the mountains. This lens being wide enough for landscape, but able to zoom to 70 and or 105 in apsc mode...will be a perfect "lightweight" compromise. Thank you for doing this review, so helpful!
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Awesome! Sounds like it would be an awesome fit if the 20 is wide enough
@bobratcliff4866 Жыл бұрын
Dan, great review but you should test out the use as a macro lens. It close focuses 3 inches from the lens front and is tack sharp. With the a7RV this is both a general walk around lens but a terrific close up/macro lens, something all those other 20 something lenses can't do. Works great with Focus bracketing on the RV
@nickyfoulkes8476 6 күн бұрын
I am considering this lens as I shoot landscape photography. I am about to move from Nikon Z7ii & ZF to Sony with the A7CR & A7RV. I am also going with the 24 and 40mm compact primes and the Sigma 90mm. So this would be my only zoom as don't shot long. What do you think? Thank you Dan.
@SilatShooter Жыл бұрын
I'm really debating on this lens. Definitely prefer to go lighter and smaller. So wondering of this vs primes like the small Sony G 24mm, 40mm, 50mm?
@drobinv Жыл бұрын
This lens makes me want to upgrade to Sony full frame. Paired with a fast normal prime I have most of my photo / video needs covered for travel. Was previously looking at the Panasonic S5ii series as well because of the 20-60 kit
@AudioJanitor Жыл бұрын
Had G9 & Gh5s. Went A7iv. Night and day, amazing camera. Seriously, every time I pick it up, it makes me happy even though I really could not afford it.
@lucasbim Жыл бұрын
I really want this lens. I'm been using 28~75 and 28 is too tight I will gladly go to a slower aperture and lose a bit of range for it.
@franknurnberger1102 Жыл бұрын
I will certainly rent it before I buy it. I do lots of corporate events with two cameras. One with a 70-180 and the other with a 28-75mm (and an additional 17mm in the pocket). 20mm would be wide enough for all my needs and as I tend to have at least two people in most of my wide angle shots I tend to close my lens down to aprx 3.5/4 anyways. So I would end up having a two-camera with two lenses setup and be done with it. Not sure I would miss the f2.8 in my wide angle/normal work. I had briefly considered the 20-40 tamron, but realised I do a lot at around 50-60 mm.
@codymichaelsouthgate9705 Жыл бұрын
Dang Dan, that was thee best lens review video I've ever watched. What else ya got? I'll definitely be giving your channel a follow and deep dive. Thanks for making solid informative videos with solod real world B-roll examples, nice studio lighting setup, great audio and a ton of useful information to help base decision making off of. For the client I'm building a gear list for, theis 20-70 sounds absolutely ideal for the FX3. Though it's going to take me time to wrap my head around full frame, and figure out just how loose a 70mm is going to be now.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Appreciate that Cody!!! Yeah, this is basically the perfect upgrade kit lens for the FX3. I'm not sure if they added the focus breathing compensation to that camera yet but either way there is minimal focus breathing on this lens so shouldn't be an issue
@codymichaelsouthgate9705 Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras so wait, The focus breathing compensation is a digital mask? The lens itself still has noticeable breathing? That's bazaar and to me undesirable. I'd Probably just leave that off.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
@@codymichaelsouthgate9705 Basically Sony knows much focus breathing their lenses have and will crop in to eliminate this. Typically it's about a 1.1x crop so pretty much unnoticeable but yeah, you can turn it off unless you are doing some rack focus or I actually find the Sony 35mm F1.4 breathing is so bad I can notice it in interviews if my subject moves forward so I turn it on when I'm recording static shots with autofocus
@codymichaelsouthgate9705 Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras Oh man, the breathing in an interview at f.4 with auto focus would look like a jogger heaving for air after a 10 mile sprint. Yeah, ok, that little function sounds quite handy.
@digitalclips Жыл бұрын
My 'single' lens for traveling light with an A7IV is the Sony G master 24-105mm, and I also have the Sigma Art 14-24mm f/2.8 if needed. I would love this lens but I can't see it worth dropping the 24-105mm for. Even if I didn't already own the 24-105mm, it would still be a tough call between them, to be honest, I like the extra reach and it is a superb lens too.
@mr.y1965 8 ай бұрын
The 20-70 F4 is really very sharp an much sharper than your old 24-105 F4. In Germany costs this 20-70 1100€
@JonathanBarrow Жыл бұрын
I use to vlog with the 16-50mm (24-75mm) apsc kit lens. 24mm was always too tight. Now shooting with the 10-18, I miss having reach. Especially when I only want to carry one lens. When I jump to full frame this year, this really might be the sweet spot
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Probably! The only downside is you might still want the active stability on so might be closer to 22mm but still better than a 24-70mm
@JonathanBarrow Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras I get that too, but I’ve never had it before. I can rely on IBIS. I’m sure I’ll pick my spots to use AS
@shaolin95 Жыл бұрын
Any eta on the R6 ii review??? You and Tony are the ones I am waiting for yet the ones taking the longest to post :/
@benldr Жыл бұрын
One more thing, how does this comparento the 24-70gm II with the GMII at f4?
@darrenhaken 2 ай бұрын
Dan, would you buy this, the Tamron 28-75 G2 (paired with an UWA) or the Sony 24-70 GM II for travel? I was leaning towards this lens but I can't decide if giving up the f2.8 is too much. For photography only.
@learningcameras 2 ай бұрын
The 28-75 is a constant F2.8 lens so you're not giving anything up with this except a few mm on the wide end since it starts at 28mm. Obviously if you also have a wide angle lens, giving up a few mm on the wide end is meaningless but if you don't, you might be better off with the Sony 20-70mm F4: bhpho.to/3QYC4wa The Tamron is a great lens and I have and still use it personally so nothing wrong with it, but if your trying to get to 1 lens, having 20mm on the wide end makes a big difference. I find going to F4 isn't an issue for travel since you usually don't want the widest aperture, it's mostly for portraits and detail shots that I'm reaching for F2.8 and wider aperture lenses
@jukeboxjohnnie Жыл бұрын
Great review. I may dump all my canon M6ii kit for this on an upcoming A7Cii...
@stevenwaldstein2249 11 ай бұрын
While I own f/2.8 GM lenses for 16-35 and 24-70 I also bought slightly used couple of Sigma DG DN Contemporary at f/2.8 16-28 and 28-70 for their smaller size for light travel. I guess I’m preferring to stay at f/2.8 than using this f/4 and the FE 16-35/4 G PZ. From 16-70 the pair is about the same weight ( differ by 79 grams ) With definitely less overlap though which can be an issue. Maybe if Sony came out with 28-120 or 135 f/4 I would prefer it improved reach. I can see that for those who don’t already have the range covered it’s a good choice though. Thanks for the video and the great cars.
@paulchiu 10 ай бұрын
Dan, when zooming the barrel sucks in air. Would this allow dust and sand into the lens groups or worst, into the camera sensor? I shoot in windy and rainy locales Thanks.
@learningcameras 10 ай бұрын
Almost every lens has an external zoom except for a few telephoto lenses so this is just something that you need to be mindful of. I wouldn't worry about wind/rain but if there is sand, I'd maybe ensure the area is clean before zooming. Or use prime lenses because I don't know a 24-70 that isn't an external zooming lens
@obayedh Жыл бұрын
Dan, I am looking for a 20/24mm native lens to buy - which les do you recommend? Sony 20mm 1.8 or Sony 24mm 1.4 or this 20-70mm lens? Without considering the budget, which lens is better in your opinion? Much thanks for your help :)
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Hey...I'd probably go with the 24mm or 20-70mm lens. The 20 gives a little bit of wide angle but not enough to really be a wide angle and it's less useful for normal shooting than a 24mm. The zoom is a great choice if you don't already have a zoom lens and you can use it to determine what focal length you like best
@Anonymous99997 Жыл бұрын
I am considering this lens to mate with my a7c for travel photography. I have the 2.8 trinity and an a7rIV, but would rather not travel with that equipment.
@eduardolumbrerasjr4786 Жыл бұрын
I’m currently in the market for a travel lens to pair with my 70-200mm and this one makes it very hard to choose between this & the sigma 24-70 ! I’m very intrigued with having the option of 20 mm but is sacrificing the 2.8 worth it? Plus the weight reduction!
@professionalpotato4764 Жыл бұрын
Personally I think it's better to get this with some f/1.4 primes. f/2.8 isn't that fast anyway and in low-light it's barely enough. If I'm shooting ISO 3200 f/2.8, I rather pull out a prime to go down to ISO 800. I think a 20-70 + 35mm GM would make quite a good lightweight travel combination.
@guesswho2717 Жыл бұрын
Do you still use that tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8 a lot? On the fence between that lens and the sigma 24-70mm ( & adapting my old canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS m2) till i have more Money. If i get the sigma i can get the a7rv. Tamron i would have to get the a74. 🤷♂️ coming from canon. I pretty much shoot all type of events from corporate, concerts, international conferences,… but also product shoots, ad’s, and nature. Want to get into selling large prints. So high mp would be best. But not enough $$$ atm for both. Never purchased a aftermarket lens either. Sigma is more trusted than tamron. But that lens had a dust issue which worries me.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
I do but only when I want it to replace my 24-70 & 70-200. If I don't feel like I need a 70-200 style lens, I'll usually just use a 24-70 because the 35-150 is really heavy. Also I tend to use it for photography only or videography on a tripod. It's a bit heavy for the gimbal. But I usually have a dedicated 16-35 wide angle lens with me so with the 35-150, I get much more usable range than a 24-70
@1Smendrik 11 ай бұрын
I'm amazed that you had any doubt about this lens. I've purchased one for travel photography doing away with my Tamron 17-28 f2.8 and Zeiss 24-70. I lose 3mm but my girlfriend doesn't seem to mind
@sandyande Жыл бұрын
Do u have to rebalance gimbal every time you adjust lens? Cheers sandy
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
If you have a strong gimbal, you usually don't or at least only have to adjust forward and backwards and it will be close enough
@jackryder6732 Жыл бұрын
I may buy this, my first Zoom lens on a 7iii
@benldr Жыл бұрын
I want this lens for Disney. I saw you using it at Dinsey! It looks so smooth. Did you have a gimbal in the park? I thought they might not allow them??? Please let me know you thoughts. I'm thinking of other lenses that are f2.8 but I keep coming back to this one. I have 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm f1.8 primes so this would allow me to have a zoom and a wide angle in one purchase. I can always take a prime for low light. They are so small (like my 35mm f1.8 Samyang). I can't shake the idea of getting this lens. I've contemplated the GM 24-70 version one used but it is huge!
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Hey! So I was shooting a wedding FOR Disney that actually took place in the park which is why I had a gimbal and shot there. I actually contract quite a few weddings inside the theme parks. They usually take place outside of park hours but sometimes they will just block out the locations we are shooting but yeah, I have to bring carts full of gear through the park when I shoot weddings. I'm pretty sure for guests you can't use gimbals, tripods, or even selfie sticks. Since you already have the wide aperture primes, I'd say this lens would be the one to get. I would only get the GM 24-70 if you rely on a zoom lens a lot in dark places so maybe wedding photography would be the best example
@benldr Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras I was wondering how you had gimbal footage lol. I went ahead and purchased the 20-70mm. I'm really excited about it. I think it will be perfect for my uses. A 24-70 f2.8 would be more useful if I needed the versatility for professional work. The 20-70 should be perfect for my uses. Thanks for the reply! I struggled for weeks making this decision but I think it's the right one for my uses. I think the opportunities I will have for photos will outweigh the times I need low light performance.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
@@benldr Awesome! Hope you enjoy
@jof1954 Жыл бұрын
Would the auto focus on this lens be better than on Tamron 28-75? Sony A74
@rickt.8866 Жыл бұрын
Definitely will be, the Tamron G2 version is no slouch though, I had one to compare. Plus I noticed first party glass autofocus performance is stellar especially on the A7IV.
@hellofath 8 ай бұрын
Hi, I’m wondering if f4 on full frame what is the aperture when the lens is used on aps-c?
@learningcameras 8 ай бұрын
It's about a 1 stop difference so F5.6 would be the equivalent when it comes to depth of field
@MegaSixpac Жыл бұрын
Is this lens the prefect travel lens for the Sony A7C if you are only taking one lens?
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Probably my favorite. They do have some super zoom lenses with long focal lengths but you lose quality with those and this has a constant F4 aperture which is better
@jackryder6732 Жыл бұрын
Great video.
@engelsperez5439 8 ай бұрын
Would you recommend it, if I can only get one lens for a ZVE1?
@learningcameras 8 ай бұрын
Absolutely, great lens for that
@olegvorkunov5400 9 ай бұрын
I have Tamron 28 to 75 f2.8 and it shows its age. Plus I cannot balance it on the gimbal crane m3 with a7iv. I tried 2 copies of Sigma 28 to 70 f2.8 and its video focus performance was horrible. I also have a Sigma 18 to 50 f2 8 apsc lens which is perfect, but it is apsc and I only get 14mpx for photos. I want to try this Sony lens for video and balance on my Crane M3 gimbal. Also, I have a Sony 16 to 35 f4 lens, and it is perfect for my gimbal. I hope I am not too redundant with the lens collection adding this Sony lens.
@paigecfrancis Жыл бұрын
I have the f4 zeiss and while this would be a nice addition, it’s hard for me to justify. Now if they dropped this in a 2.8 version, that’s a different conversation 🧐
@JessDemant Жыл бұрын
Great review, thanks 👍
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Appreciate it!
@willis0522 Жыл бұрын
Tamron 20-40 vs Sony 20-70 for video, which one you will pick?
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
I'd go Sony. The Tamron is basically a 16-35 and I'd probably prefer a 16-35 because the difference between 35 and 40mm is very small but the difference at the wide end with field of view is massive. Plus I don't feel like I need F2.8 as much for video with zooms...usually my subject is moving or I'm moving when I'm on zooms so having a bit more room on depth of field is usually good. And I'll use primes when I do more static shots and might want super shallow depth of field
@ntsan 11 ай бұрын
Definitely Sony because of much smoother Active IS on Sony lens vs 3rd party
@borispradel1037 Жыл бұрын
It’s a fantastic lens. I know in some countries its price isn’t justified, I bought it new for under $1000, and although there’s not a LR profile yet, it’s becoming one of my favorite zoom lenses, it’s versatile and tack sharp.
@stijnbuyse2155 Жыл бұрын
Here it is €1599 or about $1750
@mr.y1965 8 ай бұрын
@@stijnbuyse2155Germany 1100€
@HafizDenali Жыл бұрын
This lens was release a few days after i bought 24-70 gm ii 😂, but if not i'll be consider to get this one...but overall, gm ii is better for me and has it owns place...
@KeeeeenW 8 ай бұрын
Maybe I have a bad copy of this lens. I’ve been using this lens for a week and trying out different focal lengths. I don’t find this lens particularly sharp on my A7RV. I’m pretty spoiled by the 35 1.4GM and voigtkander 50mm apo. I guess there are some differences between zoom and prime lenses. I’m going to return this lens and stick with my primes for travel. My question is if I get the Sony 2470gmii, will I notice better sharpness? Or if they are equally sharp, I will still take the gmii for the 2.8 aperture when traveling at night or some occasional portraits.
@learningcameras 8 ай бұрын
Your definitely spoiled a bit by the 35mm lol but there shouldn't be a massive difference. The Sony 24-70 GMII is definitely sharper if both are at F4, but if you're running the 24-70 at F2.8, I doubt it would be noticeably sharper than the 20-70 but I haven't compared them. I personally use the 24-70 GMII for the F2.8 and I'll say i've never been disappointed by sharpness and I use it on the A1 the most. I picked mine up from B&H: bhpho.to/42nG7Hw
@KeeeeenW 8 ай бұрын
@@learningcameras thanks for the detailed reply! In this case, I will probably continue using my prime lens as my daily. If I needs the flexibility of zoom lens, I will pick up a Tamron 28 to 70 2.8 G2. Because the price of the Tamron is low enough, I would not expect the best sharpness from the lens (although I heard they were very close to 24-70 F2.8 GMII). If I were to buy a 24-70 2.8 GMII, I would probably pixel peep with 200% magnification to make sure every pixel worth the high price tag.
@firpofutbol 11 ай бұрын
we need a f2.8 GM version of this lens!
@kippwhyte1230 Жыл бұрын
I usually carry the 20mm 1.8 and 24-70mm 2.8 G2 when hiking and shooting waterfalls. I might have to buy one of these to save weight and have less items to carry. Thanks for the review!
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Definitely could be a cool single lens setup
@wingcreator Жыл бұрын
That’s why many people now recommend 14GM + 2070G for the wide to short tele setup.
@TaylorTeets Жыл бұрын
If price was not a factor, don’t you think the 24-70GMII would have better color, contrast and sharpness??
@kippwhyte1230 Жыл бұрын
@@TaylorTeets Yes it would and it is. That's probably why I still use it and haven't bought this lens yet 🤣
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
@@TaylorTeets Yep, it's a slightly better lens and has the F2.8 aperture
@BrandonShi Жыл бұрын
Hey Dan! I have a 24-105 F4 and a 20 mm 1.8. Thinking of selling both to get this lens and a 85 mm 1.8 prime! I make a ton of videos for brands and myself so I just want one lens as I travel haha
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
I mean, technically you have a bit more range now with the 24-105. If you were starting fresh, I'd say do it but depending on how much you'll lose in the trade, not sure it's worth it
@BrandonShi Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras hmm. Thanks Dan!! Appreciate your help. Probably going to lose 300 USD.
@BrandonShi Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras oh I forgot to mention, I shoot on the FX3!
@mr.y1965 8 ай бұрын
@@learningcamerasThe 20 under ist much important than 70+ and...the 20-70 F4 is much sharper than the 24-105, very much sharper.
@pierrep69006 Жыл бұрын
Nice review, but regarding sharpness, center sharpness is not really what I wanted to see: all lenses are sharp enough in the center, what matters the most is how they maintain this sharpness in the borders and corners. I hope next time, we get this kind of information :)
@tsizzle Жыл бұрын
This or the Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8?
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
I don't think the range on the Tamron is worth it. You're giving up a LOT on the wide end compared to a 16-35 and the difference between 35 and 40mm is small. Plus I'm less likely to need wide aperture lenses with wide angle so the F2.8 is less appealing
@rickt.8866 Жыл бұрын
This new 20-70 is much better glass as well. I owned the 20-40 and was let down with IQ especially at landscape apertures. Ended up selling my Tamron for this Sony and never looked back. One the other hand, my Tamron 35-150 2-2.8 is always going to stay in my kit! I love that lens!
@markshirley01 Жыл бұрын
Surely the Tamron 20 - 40 F2.8 is a good choice again this lens - on a A7R5 you can get 60mm at 30mp
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
I'm just not sold on the practicality on the 20-40mm lens compared to a 16-35. The difference in field of view between 16 and 20 is massive on the wide end but 35 and 40 is a minor difference. I feel like it's just not enough range on the long end to be worth losing a few mm on the wide end. Alternatively a 24-70 loses a decent amount on the wide end but gains a ton on the zoom
@rickt.8866 Жыл бұрын
The Tamron also falls apart at 40mm in sharpness. I shot landscape with it on my Christmas trip and was really disappointed with IQ. This new 20-70 is a breath of fresh air and a joy to use! By the way, I shot at f/5.6 and f/8 landscape aperture’s on the 20-40.
@TVe200 Жыл бұрын
For me 20 mm is interesting even for landscape photography. Since I own the Sony 20 f1.8 I will not buy the 20-70. I had to buy the Sony 20 since I did not find 28 mm wide enough.
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
Yep! That's why I own the 20mm 1.8 too. Plus for video with all the crops on, it's closer to 24
@lorenzo4262 Жыл бұрын
eBay What about in comparison with Tamron 20-40
@learningcameras Жыл бұрын
So that's basically a 16-35 shifted internally to a 20-40 and I still think I'd prefer a 16-35...its not a big enough difference on the long end to justify the loss on the wide. But optically it's designed like a 16-35
@lorenzo4262 Жыл бұрын
@@learningcameras Yes but i like 40 mm. It Is smaller and lighter than a 16-35 and It Is an f/2.8. But it seems not be so good at 40 mm. Si, if you have tried this i'd like to have your opinion. I own a 17-28 and a 45 1.8 that i want to sell in favour in only One lens. This seems nice, but Is an f/4 and the price Is very High... (In Italy particoulary) If the Tamron was good at 40mm..
@lorenzo4262 Жыл бұрын
@Pat's Production Hacks i'm agree, and it's the reason i've not bought for now. If i had to change both 17-28 and samy 45 1.8, i wish the tamron at 40 mm is sharp enough (at f/2.8. Samy is very very good, and also the 17-28. I can sacrifice 3 mm wide but i need it's sharp at 40mm f/2.8 (the tamron). This is expensive and f$. I think sony 20-55 f/2.8 is hard to realize, And how expensive will be?
@brettsherman7810 Жыл бұрын
This lens has me convinced to trade my FX30 in for an FX3. I can make this lens work for pretty much every shooting scenario with APS-C mode for extra reach. I agree for video, f/4 for full frame is where I want to shoot. F/2.8 gets too shallow and looks unnatural IMHO. Can’t wait to lighten my pack.
@MattShafter Жыл бұрын
Does no one understand that 24mm is not the same as 20mm. Yes, the 4mm DOES make a difference, especially if you're a landscape photographer. This lens rocks.
@aktube123 Жыл бұрын
F4 no way, not even F5.6.
@zampination Жыл бұрын
Too expensive for an f4 lens. Drop the price by 3 to 4 greens and it might be a solid consideration. In Europe especially this is a hard no. As i heard it will cost like 1600€ Yikes... And certainly a big NO NO
@jackyharuhiko Жыл бұрын
It’s great as a travel lens for my A7C especially here it’s selling at around ~USD1070. Lightweight (488g), good range, reasonable aperture. I don’t need to bring anything else. This is a big advantage.
@jamesmlodynia8757 2 ай бұрын
The closest lens to this is a 24-70mm lens that comes in f2.8 and f4. Going from a 24 to 20mm is a good difference, a 28-70 mm f2.8 gives you more ability to shoot in low light and if you need that ability get the f2.8 ,it will be larger, heavier with a larger filter thread. The 20-70 to me is a better option for landscapes, it gives you more focal length, is smaller and lighter and many landscape shooters perfer the f4 as unless you're doing Astro photography your aperture is typically f8 or higher. The other lens like the 20-40, 28 - 70 or 75 or the new 24-50 f2.8 are not as sharp across the entire focal length, don't have the range of the 20-70mm and the function buttons and aperture ring control of the 20-70. My feeling is the more choices you have the greater ability you have to get a lens that fits your needs and shooting style. I will be picking up this lens for my Sony A7II as a landscape and walk around lens, i have a few primes for this camera and I already have a 24-70 f2.8 for my Pentax K1 MKII and the Panasonic S5 and S5 MKII along with a variety of glass for my Nikon, Fujifilm and Olympus cameras.
@learningcameras 2 ай бұрын
You're not wrong and as a 1 lens system, I absolutely agree with you. But i do think most people who like the wider end of a lens will probably eventually get a wide angle lens and at that point, having the 20mm on the wide end doesn't help as much so it's in that case where going with a 24-70 or 28-70 constant F2.8 might be the better choice long term
Simon d'Entremont
Рет қаралды 669 М.