1. Welcome to TalkEmount.com—a friendly Sony E-mount camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Featured The great big zoom debate

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by quezra, Jul 19, 2018.

  1. Sony FE 24-70/2.8 GM

    4 vote(s)
    11.1%
  2. Sony FE 24-105/4 G

    16 vote(s)
    44.4%
  3. Tamron 28-75/2.8

    13 vote(s)
    36.1%
  4. Sony FE 24-70/4 Z

    2 vote(s)
    5.6%
  5. Other

    1 vote(s)
    2.8%
  1. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    996
    Aug 22, 2012
    Sonyzooms.

    Alright, we've got a pretty darn awesome selection of fixed aperture zooms these days.

    Each one seems to win at something:
    24-70/2.8 GM: IQ
    24-105/4 G: Reach
    28-75/2.8 Tamron: Bang-for-buck
    24-70/4 Z: Size

    If you picked only one, which would you go for and why?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. NickCyprus

    NickCyprus Super Moderator

    Oct 11, 2012
    Cyprus
    Nick
    I'd say it depends from what you shoot and what's your budget.
    First we used to complain that we didn't have many lenses in the E-mount ecosystem, now we have too many too choose from that makes the decisin a tough one :D 

    For me that I do some weddings and some landscape, AND IF MONEY WAS NOT AN ISSUE (which is), I'd probably go with the GM (one can dream right - I can't afford it) :) 
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul TalkEmount Top Veteran

    921
    Feb 14, 2016
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Paul
    I picked the 24-105, I think that provides the most diversity and is reputed to be an excellent lens.
    I have the 24-70 f4 and its a great lens, it has a varied reputation but from my experience it's a great lens.
    The 24-70 f2.8 to me is an overkill for the casual shooter, it's big and expensive and how often do you really need f2.8? The IQ may be excellent but I find nothing lacking in the f4 version.
    The Tamron is a 28-75, for me 28mm isn't wide enough, I like my walkabout lens to have 24mm. As an aside the RX100 Mk1 and Mk2 cameras had 28mm equiv wide zooms and that was always a limiting factor for me and one of the reasons I moved to the Mk4 version which has a 24mm wide angle zoom lens. (I now have the Mk6 which has a 24-200 equiv lens "whoop whoop" :thumbup::yahoo:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 13, 2012
    Netherlands
    Ad Dieleman
    I now have the FE 4/24-70 but if starting over I'd go for the FE 4/24-105 because I'd favour 105mm on the long end. The FE 2.8/24-70 is too large and heavy for me.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Deadbear77

    Deadbear77 TalkEmount Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Sep 14, 2012
    Northeast Ohio
    Kevin
    I went with the tamron, no complaints yet.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. bdbits

    bdbits TalkEmount All-Pro

    Sep 10, 2015
    Bob
    At this time, I am a prime kind of guy, so my purpose for a zoom is general, including indoor events. I have an A7ii, so I want f2.8. I really want the 24-105, and if I was on an A7iii I would likely vote for it. But practicality points to the Tamron 28-75 for me, at least for now.
     
  7. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    David
    I gotta have at least 24mm on the wide end. 28 just won't do. And versatility is more important to me in a zoom lens than low-light capability. So it's the 24-105mm for me.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. davect01

    davect01 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 20, 2011
    Fountain Hills, AZ
    Dave
    These lenses need to start at more like 18mm.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  9. AlwaysOnAuto

    AlwaysOnAuto TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Feb 17, 2015
    Hate to say it, but they all look too big for me to want to lug them around.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    996
    Aug 22, 2012
    This seems a personal decision with a lot of factors such as what lenses you already have, budgets, and portability different for everyone.

    At the risk of being boring, I'm increasingly gunning for the 24-105 too. My reasoning is that I already have primes for what I want, so the zoom has to do something the primes can't, which is where zoom range comes in. I thought about the Tamron (especially its great price), since I already have the wide angle covered, but felt maybe crimping the zoom range too much would make it too much in the neither-here-nor-there zone, and the speed wasn't that important when I have primes for speed.

    The main problem is the weight. That thing completely, irreversibly brings you into DSLR-weight territory, and FF DSLR at that (a Rebel with 18-200 is lighter!).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. orlcam88

    orlcam88 TalkEmount Regular

    108
    Dec 24, 2017
    Long Island, NY
    I had the 24-70/4 Ziess for a very short time period. I couldn't take the distortions any longer. I returned it and waited for the 24-105mm to be on the market. no regrets.
     
  12. WNG

    WNG TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2014
    Arrid Zone-A, USA
    Will
    I prefer primes, but faced with these 4 choices, for my shooting preference of nature, landscape/cityscape, and no flash low light walkabouts, Tamron 28-75. It's fast, small, sharp, cheap. Like me! :D 
    I found 28mm to be wide enough for most shots. If I need a wider focal length, I'll pull out of my pocket, the Samyang FE 24mm f/2.8. If I am sticking with zooms, then I prefer a trio of 12-24mm, 28-75mm and 70-200mm. More likely I'd only carry the first two. Otherwise, Samyang FE 24mm f/2.8 and a manual-focus 135mm f/2.8 prime to complement the Tamron.

    The GM is too big carrying all day just for the 24mm. The f/4 zooms aren't fast enough for my use.
     
  13. Luke

    Luke TalkEmount Regular

    27
    Aug 27, 2013
    I feel like my el cheapo kit zoom is good enough. If I need more IQ, I'll slap on a prime.

    Although the Tamron is tempting....to get f2.8 throughout the range.....at the long end, it really could replace a prime and double as a portrait lens. You can control subject separation with working distance.

    I've been thinking about the FE 24-240mm. That offers something I don't have which is range.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Hawkman

    Hawkman TalkEmount All-Pro

    Sep 10, 2013
    Virginia, USA
    Steve
    This is an interesting conundrum, and one we are fortunate to have now... no matter how much it vexes us. (Whoa, who wrote that?)

    As for me, my needs/wants now focus more on "professional" requirements, as I am working photography professionally, so to speak. I'm doing primarily real estate photography, and for that my Sony-Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 is more than adequate. If I do any portraits (very rarely), then I turn to my FE 85/1.8 or FE 50/1.8. As for zooms, I'm sitting on my kit FE 28-70/3.5-5.6 and LA-EA3 + Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USD to fill out zoom ranges. But those two are admittedly just stop-gap measures for casual use until my budget permits upgrades.

    I'd say that right now my next purchase will most likely be that new Samyang/Rokinon 24mm f/2.8. It really "scratches an itch", so to speak. On APS-C I never had a 24mm equivalent (i.e., 16mm), and I've come to like the field of view of the 24mm FF focal length via my FE 16-35. Indeed, for APS-C, I've always thought that an affordable 24/2.8 (as a 36mm equivalent) would be a killer proposition. So the new Samyang/Rokinon "kills two birds with one stone." (Enough already!)

    But that's not what we are here for in this thread. So, let's take a look at the constant-aperture standard zooms we have:

    Lens --------------- Pro -------------- Con
    24-70/2.8 GM: --- IQ --------------- $$$ Cost and Size
    24-105/4 G: ------ Reach ----------- $$ Cost
    28-75/2.8 Tamron: - Bang-for-buck - No 24mm at wide end
    24-70/4 Z: -------- Size ------------ $ Cost and not exceptional compared to others

    With that, my vote goes to the 24-105/4. I've rented it and used it on an A7iii, and with the added high ISO abilities of the A7iii, I didn't find much need for more than f/4 in a low-light indoor event situation. My only concern with the copy I had was that the zoom ring seemed rather tight, which would make smooth zooms in video difficult.

    Second place (and it's a really close second for me - and could be flipped based on cost alone if this goes from a wish list to reality) goes to the Tamron 28-75/2.8. If I'm sticking with my A7ii (not the new A7iii), then the f/2.8 would be helpful in indoor event situations. While I'd like 24mm at the wide end, I suppose I could turn to the Samyang 24/2.8 prime in such situations.

    Sorry... that was a bit long and rambling. But as others mentioned, the choice is really a personal one based on each person's intended uses, priorities, and budget.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2018
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul TalkEmount Top Veteran

    921
    Feb 14, 2016
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Paul
    I'm really surprised to hear your comments about the 24-70 f4, I've not had any issues with my lens and my mate has one too and loves his.
     
  16. orlcam88

    orlcam88 TalkEmount Regular

    108
    Dec 24, 2017
    Long Island, NY
    Steve, that may have been the copy you had at the time cause my version is smooth and have no issue with zooming.
     
  17. orlcam88

    orlcam88 TalkEmount Regular

    108
    Dec 24, 2017
    Long Island, NY
    If you used it on the A6300, then it probably doesn't show as that's an APS-C.
     
  18. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul TalkEmount Top Veteran

    921
    Feb 14, 2016
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Paul
    I had an A7R2 for 2 years and used it on that, I've recently sold my full frame kit and kept the crop sensor system.
     
  19. orlcam88

    orlcam88 TalkEmount Regular

    108
    Dec 24, 2017
    Long Island, NY
    It was mentioned in reviews but I ignored it cause they said it can be corrected in post. Unfortunately, photoshop nor lightroom did enough to correct. It got worse as you go up to 70 mm. The turning point was when I was doing a group shot and the people on the left and right were umm larger than they should be.
     
  20. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul TalkEmount Top Veteran

    921
    Feb 14, 2016
    Aberdeen, Scotland
    Paul
    I had no issues, I shoot landscapes and the images were always fine, but horses for courses.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.