Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: ski542002 on December 12, 2017, 04:38:57 pm
-
Hi:
Zoom range and lens speed not withstanding, does anyone have any opinion as to which lens will reproduce a sharper image and a more distortion-free image at a given aperture/focal length. In the case of the 24-105, I know the comparison between the two lenses would stop at 70mm. Coming from Canon, I've shot with their 24-105L for 10 years and found it to be a very capable lens. Moving to the A7RIII, I'm torn between the faster 2.8 aperture, or the longer zoom range.
Thanks in-advance for any opinions!
-
Hi,
I only have the GM lens, so I can not compare... but since the lens just started to arrive to costumers end of las week, you will probably have to wait a bit for a nice face to face between the two lenses.
Regards,
David
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
I own the G-Master and it is an incredible lens. I have shot extensively with the 24-105mm but have yet to pull the trigger. Most likely next year. It is a scary good lens. The G-Master just blows me away. Frankly, the 24-105mm range is very useful. If I get it it will be mated to the a9. The a7r III will keep the 24-70mm. For the price, I think you'll find the 24-105mm an incredible purchase. I know other content providers feel the same way.
-
If you were happy with the Canon 24-105 then the new Sony 24-105 will not disappoint but it isn't in the same league as the 24-70GM. The comparison in quality is similar to the comparison between the Canon 24-105 and the Canon 24-70 II - similarly the 24-70 is better especially at the wide end. You trade some image quality for versatility. Do realize that the a7r III will reveal any lens weaknesses more than your Canon would have (unless you were shooting with the 5DsR) due to the higher resolution and lack of AA filter.
-
Thanks everyone for the replies. Any extra range I would need beyond 70mm, for now I'm going to use my 70-200 F4 L, Canon lens with the Metabones and then move up to the Sony GM 70-200 when I eventually purge my Canon gear. Don't shoot sports so I don't need superfast af. Will plan to go with the 24-70 Sony.
-
QT Luong just published here in another thread his review of the 24-105, basically quite similar to the Canon version, much better than the 24-70 f4 version https://www.terragalleria.com/blog/sony-fe-24-105mm-f4-g-oss-lens-detailed-comparative-review/
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
I wish they would make a pro quality 24-200 f/4, similar to the Olympus 12-100 f/4. That would be the only lens I need (with fex exceptions). :-)
-
I wish they would make a pro quality 24-200 f/4, similar to the Olympus 12-100 f/4. That would be the only lens I need (with fex exceptions). :-)
Although oft ignored, the 24-240 f/3.5-6.3 is a decent enough lens within its limitations. Stop down to f/8 and the quality is reasonable, especially at the wide end. There's a bit of strange donut vignetting at 240, but it's OK at 200. And given that it's cheap and has OSS, it's a valuable member of my lens case.
I use it in the mountains when I need to be travelling light and the conditions are not friendly to swapping lenses. Blown spindrift on the sensor is a MUCH bigger problem for me that getting 20-ish megapixels of resolution instead of 42 megapixels; it's still better than a GH4 even with a really nice lens. It can be the difference between getting a shot and not getting it.
Has anyone tried the 28-135 f/4 Sony lens? It's video centric and I don't think I've seen resolution charts etc for it but that's a great focal range for people photography.
Cheers, Hywel
Attached are a shot with the weird donut vignetting effect and "regular" decent snowy shot from the lens which is current on display in a local gallery at 24" x 36" print size. The wind was blowing so hard in vortices around that "cauldron" that it was almost picking me off my feet. A superzoom and lots of image stabilisation was the most sensible way to approach photography in those conditions, I reckon. If I could afford the weight I might try a two-body solution with a 24-70 or 12-24 and 70-200 in future.
-
https://esupport.sony.com/US/p/compatibility.pl?comp_project_id=18
regarding the focus shift on closing the aperture that has been reported
-
Has anyone tried the 28-135 f/4 Sony lens? It's video centric and I don't think I've seen resolution charts etc for it but that's a great focal range for people photography.
refer to this
https://luminous-landscape.com/sony-pz-28-135mm-lens-review/ (https://luminous-landscape.com/sony-pz-28-135mm-lens-review/)
-
Perhaps a good range but not really a good size unless you want a 300/2.8 size lens for your standard lens. Here it is compared to the 24-105 on an a7R III
-
Lens rentals analysis of the lens... quite good results for this kind of zoom https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/02/mtf-tests-of-the-sony-fe-24-105mm-f4-oss/
http://dgpfotografia.com
-
Lens rentals analysis of the lens... quite good results for this kind of zoom https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/02/mtf-tests-of-the-sony-fe-24-105mm-f4-oss/
http://dgpfotografia.com
Too many flaws for the asking price. For that cost I want better than "at least as good as the Sigma and the Nikon" (24-120).
-
It makes me look at my Nikon 24-120 F4 with different eyes.
I use it a lot but I love to hate it. It's like looking for love your entire life and not realizing you had it next to you all along ;). Well, not really but you get the point.
-
The new Tamron for E mount 2.8/28-75 seems quite interesting provided that the quality is there.
I just realized a Sony A7Riii with the 2.8/16-35 and Tamron 2.8/28-75 is lighter than a Nikon D850 with the 2.8E/24-70.
-
The 24-105 is tempting, I could use the extra reach frequently and don't really care about the 2.8 of the GM 24-70 (still need to use it once in a while). But as much as I can praise the reliability and image quality of the GM I'm afraid, and therefor have not purchased, the 24-105 is a bit more like the 24-70 f4, soft flared when backlit and overall just not as sharp. The GM version is actually on par or better then some fixed focal length from other manufacturers, be that good or bad. So I guess subject and photographic filed could make that decision. Controlled environment with little backlight and shooting portrait, the 24-105 comes out on top, landscape and general photography, no matter the light, it's the GM 24-70 (and maybe a little cropping).