This in my opinion is a nearly perfect lens for landscape photographers who know they wont be needing super ultra wide or tele on any given shoot. 20 is absolutely plenty wide for 90% of landscapes and 70 long enough for quite a bit as well. f/4 doesn't make a difference since were shooting at f8-f11 anyways. My two cents.
I feel like I (a non-photog) learned some things about evaluating lenses. My cat, though, was thoroughly entertained by the frequent gesturing with the cursor. Despite his rapt attention, I have my doubts that he learned anything at all. I hope you can incorporate this feedback into your future videos and the overall direction of your channel.
As a Canon shooter, I really would love something like this for the RF mount too. I now have the 14-35 which I love. A 24mm isn't quite wide enough for my preferences, so a 24-70 or a 24-105 wouldn't fit me that well, but then again the 35mm that I can get to with my current zoom lens isn't quite far enough. 20mm would be wide enough, and 70mm would be perfect
This lens looks super useful for video work. My current setup is an 18mm f2.8 for gimbal work, 24-70mm for general purpose, 35mm f1.4 for night shots. That lens could replace the 24-70 and the 18mm for most day shots including wide gimbal shots. Especially since it's light enough to go on a gimbal. The 24-70 f2.8 lenses are too heavy for gimbal use. Only time when it would come up short would be for low light gimbal shots where a wide prime lens would still have an edge.
I had ten review videos of this lens and I was having confusion on which video to click first until I saw Gerald has also uploaded. There is no doubt now which video I would pick first
I have the 24-105 F4 and would pick this up for city walking and parks. The macro repro ratio of 0.39x is pretty good and the sharpness alone is worth the money.
tbh I really don't see why you'd get this over the 24-105mm. Unless you REALLY don't want OSS, the 24-105mm is a way better all rounder. (probably cheaper on sale too)
4mm of extra width is a big deal. I do a lot of backcountry photography and I don't want to have to carry 2 lenses to get ultrawide and mid telephoto. I've been accepting my 16-55/2.8 (Fuji) as a do-it-all, but I always want a little more width. This lens is an ideal compromise for landscape and travel. It's just wide enough to get that truly ultrawide feeling but you don't have to sacrifice all of your reach for it.
For my needs, the sigma 24-70 f2.8 does everything this does but better at the same price. Works great with AF, image sharpness is fantastic with the A74’s over sampled video and the lower aperture let’s me take on more nighttime scenarios. This is a great lens, yes, but what I already have does great for me. And I’m so happy with it, that if I had to buy a similar lens to put on another body at the same time, I’d just get another one. I’ve had coworkers borrow the sigma on a shoot with me and we’re truly impressed with the result when they reviewed the footage later. Makes me wonder what took Sony so long to release this lens.
One notable difference is the weight: 488g for the Sony vs 835g for the Sigma. That makes a big difference as a travel lens, and I suspect the vloggers care a lot about it too.
@@charleycrissman That is true. My sigma is a hefty boi. Didn't think about it much due to what I use it for, locked down on a tripod or gimbal. Don't often use it while holding it with one hand. It was also my first full frame lens and I assumed that the bigger glass just meant it had to be that heavy.
@@TrevorWilliams215 The 20mm also makes it much more useful for vloggers than 24mm. For self-handheld talking heads, 24mm is just a tiny bit too narrow (especially w/ active steady shot) and 20mm is just about right. This is definitely for the hybrid traveling vlogger that needs a single, smaller lens. For me, I'd actually use it over my Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for traveling cityscape photo since it's a lot smaller and 20 can give some interesting portrait-orientation building potential. My issue is the price. I don't think it should be $500, but $1100 Sony is just charges that extra $ because Sony. I feel like $800-900 would have been much more reasonable for this one.
This feels like a phenomenal all purpose landscape lens. Super sharp, usually stopped down more than f/4 anyway, and 20mm is wide enough for like 99% of general shots. Plus the light and compact nature of it, I'd buy it for general hiking and travel photography in a heartbeat
For me, you're such a cool guy! Your reviews have been objective and very helpful. If your life gets too busy (family life and career) just do fewer videos. Would hate to see you disappear completely. I shoot Sony APS-C and live in New Westminster, BC. Maybe I'll run into you someday, and introduce myself as one of your subscribers. Happy Holidays to you and your loved ones.
I would have loved a comparison with the other sony FE f4.0 zooms. It seems so obvious and its missing in all the reviews of this lens. Only walk throughs, look at the pretty clickable aperture ring, no pricing, or did I miss it? I mean, at least compare it from memory and link to the other videos? I do love the honesty about the silliness of sunstars and ‘loca’ hype comparisons though.
The greatest appeal for me is less weight. I'll likely replace my 24-105mm and hopefully, with the a7IV in-body stabilization, loss of sharpness won't be an issue. Comments? Further, I seldom take images in the 70-200mm range.
Yes! It really did come true! I've been wanting a lens like this for so long and even had the Panasonic s5 for a while mainly because they were the only one having a similar lens. It might not be "perfect", but I anticipate it will be one of the most popular lenses down the line. Most of us are not professional, and mainly want a lens that is good (enough) and can cover anything from slightly wide to slightly tele. For me everything below 20mm and above 70mm and everything below f/2.8 is for specific situations where it's okay to change lenses. So yes... It would have been awesome if it could have been 2.8, but not for the added bulk. Can't wait for this lens to hit the markets 😁🥳
Yeah I'm waiting for my Panasonic s5ii and decided on the 24-105 but if they had this as the kit lens instead of the 20-60 variable, I'd have a really tough time deciding.
@@kvendy Exactly. I've used 24-70's before and was never too impressed with 70mm. 85 and beyond are where I like to play for most things featuring people
I just tested the 20-40 in anticipation of replacing my 17-28. Then I read the rumors about the Sony 20-70. I have to think real hard which one is more useful for my landscape work. I want to see more corner sharpness samples, wide open, from 20-70 before making a final decision.
Christopher Frost's review video shows the corners at different focal lengths at wide and mid apertures. They're a little soft and need stepped down to improve. At 70 it was pretty sharp.
@@alchemist_x79 Thank you for the heads up. I did look at Chris' review and the corner sharpness looks pretty good to me. I do landscapes and f8-f11 are pretty standard for me.
Super useful focal range -- I wish this were more common. Coupled with APSC crop mode, this could be a single lens to cover all my video needs. Something weird about the coatings or design makes the image, especially the highlights look really cheap though. Also shame it doesn't have stabilization. Would pay quite a bit more if it had a nice image rendition and were stabilized. But with those shortcomings it's not worth it.
It's great for vlogging, wide shooting , tele shooting with crop mode (will be 105mm), small, compact, macro shooting,, constant F4 for video shooting. Best all around lens
Thanks for this review! When I need a wider angle than 20mm, I rely on the Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III. For close-up shots, I use the FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS. However, the FE 24-70mm f/4 G is my go-to zoom lens for most situations. It's the best zoom lens I've ever owned and it's perfectly suited to my needs.
Hey Gerald, I see you do regular reviews of lenses. Would you please consider reviewing cheaper lenses (manual lenses, since they can e easily found for less than 150 bucks or if buying vintage often much cheaper). Your opinion is highly valued here, it would be nice to be able to understand how different cheaper lenses perform (ofcourse leaving the review open to subjectivity as vintage lenses and cheaper lenses have a less technical look to them) so as to make buying decisions easier for the people who can't afford expensive lenses Thankyou Edit: grammar and typos
20mm vs 24mm is significant. 200g less weight is also pretty significant. OSS at these wide angles is mostly irrelevant as long as you have a relatively new ibis body. Having macro capabilities in the same lens is a big plus. The only benefit to the 105 is that you can go from 70-105. But you could just take a couple steps forward with the 70. You can't do anything to make the 105 lighter weight or focus closer though. I think they both have their uses. For me the 20-70 is much more appealing. Though the tamron 20-40 also appeals atm.
I'm probably a cynical, contrarian, curmudgeon, but I just can't see paying $1,100 for this lens. Not at f4, with mediocre bokeh and no OSS. $850 seems more fair to me based on the competition vs what you actually get.
After seeing the Panasonic version, I was hoping for a constant f-stop version for Sony and it looks great. The tamron version is nice for the 2.8 but I need range more than anything.
@@avigkazanjian3601 Yeah it is lol. I try vlogging with my 28-200 Tamron and it barely passes, I have to really stretch my arm out but it's possible. I have the 20mm f/1.8 prime and it works perfectly fine for vlogging
Reminds me of the Canon 24-70 F4. One of my favorite lenses. It would be hard to go away from the 2.8 life but it was fun to have a macro lens in my zoom with IS. Thanks for the photo review GU
For the same price as 24-105, which is on sale currently, it’s lighter, larger magnification (.39 vs .31), wider but no stabilization. It’s a tough choice, but I would pick 24-105 for travel and this 20-70 is a good alternative to 24-70 f2.8, less than half the price, lighter and good images.
Thanks as always for a great review. For travel I’ve got the 24-105/4 G to pair with the new PZ 16-35/4 G. Like the range on this lens but want something to use from 50-150 so I don’t know what to pair this lens with. For my real work I really defer to my 24-70/2.8 GM II though. Also like the small size and weight of the Sigma 16-28/2.8 and 28-70/2.8 DG DN pair for travel. A lot of choices now for sure.
Size and weight absolute priority that’s why these days you won’t see lot many travellers using an actual camera to shoot because they have got tiny phones easy to carry etc., I myself sometimes use my phone and I hate to do that because I don’t want to pull that heavy 2.8 lens which is btw only 24 so might as well use the wide angle on the iPhone.
Your reviews are simply fantastic. Another absolutely brilliant video Gerald, thank you. I'm looking to purchase this lens along my A7IV, just wish it came as a kit lens option, I feel like they should step up their kit lens game, haha.
I appreciate your thoughtful and thorough review. Given that so many shortcomings like CA, vignetting, distortion can be corrected digitally, do you still strive to buy lenses without them? After all, every little correction affects IQ to some degree. Cheers
I would like to see recommendations for a lightweight, fast setup but professional looking mobile version of podcast lighting equipment for two participants, that is usable in various locations, without needing to rent from a near shop each time
I've owned the Sigma 24-70mm but I mainly shoot home/travel videos of my family, but it was just too heavy. I don't think F4 is an issue for my use and I just ordered one.
@@ChristopheLanglois It's awesome. It's saved my back/neck/shoulders during long outings. That 20mm on the wide end is underrated. I shoot with the a7s iii so the F4 is not really an issue when the light gets a little lower. Highly recommended due to the size and weight.
@@tripham8026 thank you for getting back to me. This lens sounds appealing... the only negative for me is the fact that I enjoying more and more the telephoto look, hence my hesitation between the 20-70 G and the Tamron 28-200. I appreciate the overall build quality and picture quality are far apart though... any thoughts?
I'm thinking of the 24-105 or this 20-70. I didn't like the little bid wider shot and I don't think I will ever go over 80mm. Hmmm... I will probably get this even though it is a fraction more in price as that extra width probably worth it for me. It looks super sharp
There's an online tool called camerasize that lets you compare body & lens sizes (with images to scale) 24-70 f/2.8 GM II - 88 x 120mm, 695g 20-70 f/4 G - 79 x 99mm, 488g So the 20-70 is almost an inch shorter and 30% lighter
The only thing that would make this lens a buy (without OSS) would be if it didn't telescope and they kept the focus / zooming internal. Just makes zero sense for me to gain 20mm at F4 instead of the 24 I already have with the 24-105 which is just immensely more useful than this lens. I'll keep that and my 20mm f/1.8 and keep getting great stuff 🌈
I think this is for those that do travel vlogging talking-head type shots but cannot afford the space for a 20 + a 24-70, 24-105, etc. and need just one lens. While that isn't my use case (I carry a 24-70 f/2.8 + 35 f2 when I travel) I understand people wanting both the 20 and the zoom all in one. I could ditch it for the 24-70 f/2.8 and choose it over 24-105 f/4 just for the size savings alone for travel city photography. My one gripe is the price. Wish they'd knock $200-300 off the asking, I feel like $1100 is pretty steep.
7:30 actually I was seriously thinking adapting this lens to my Nikon Z9 with ETZ21 adapter...to accompany my Z 70-200, replacing my Z 24-120, for vdeo... now it seems like a bad idea, because of the distortion, but still, really great lens!
If this was F2.8, I could see it, but for the money, I would think it'd be better to go with the 24-105 F4, which is only slightly more expensive... Wouldn't that make more sense?
What is your opinion in comparison of this lens and tamron 20-40 ? if you do not take into account the difference in focal lengths and look at the image quality ?
Hey Chris, do you think sony will release a 24-105 f4 mark ii. It's really what I've been waiting for. If not, then I'll settle for this one. What's your best guest?
@@syllamoon9 I'm' curious, why do you think they'd need to release a mark ii? The mark i is not all that old, and doesn't really have any issues. (that I'm aware of?)
@@david.stachon I know, it's a great lens, I've just seen some articles saying they intend to release a mark ii. Maybe it's just a rumor but it's not inconceivable. It would be great if it were even smaller then the current one, I guess it's the potential reduced size that is attractive for me.
I'm really wanting a 24/20-70mm PZ lens. F4 would be fine, but preferably F2.8. That's what the FX6 is missing. The 28-135mm PZ is too heavy for the camera, and the 24-105mm is fine, but would be way better if it were a PZ lens.
I care about distortion and vignetting a lot. processing images even further is just not it. I want good optical lenses. You can of course digitally correct almost anything but that mechanical goodness is special and separates good and great lenses.
Coming from Canon 5D MK4 and 24-70 f2.8 for most of group shots at wedding ceremony and reception, I have always kept f-stop above 4.0 to avoid blurring people not in same focal length. Now planning to switch to Sony a74, I am thinking to buy this cheaper and lighter lens as compared to 24-70 f2.8. Any suggestions pls?
In Europe, this lens costs 1600€, which is wayyy too expensive for what it offers. The distortions alone are enough of a reason to not buy this at such a high price. The 24-105 is 900€, sometimes even 800 or 850 when on sale, which is a much better buy imho. Sony is being super greedy in Europe lately, they need to calm the f down.
Sony isn’t being more greedy then usual, this lens cost what they always charged for f4 G 😂, it was only the 24-105 they offered at a more aggressive price, the rest not so much in fact it’s been €1499-1699 on all the others.
This lens is great, but for video application it's hard to stack a VND and Black Mist without having the filters in the frame up to 35mm. It makes the Nisi Swift System unusable. Still looking for a solution.
I think sunstars don't really make that much sense when it comes to modern lenses with a lot of aperture blades, older lenses with fewer blades produce nicer sunstars I think
GERALD please help with a monitor question. Trying to find a monitor for my a7iv where I can see the AF square box, face tracking and tapping for autofocus ON the actual external monitor as well as the sony lcd screen while recording video. Can't seem to find any monitor that supports this. I've seen the portkeys monitor that supports touch to autofocus but I find it so strange that there isn't one monitor on the market that shows the touch tracking box on it. I feel like I would constantly be looking at the LCD screen which defeats the whole purpose of a monitor. Any advice?
Please takie into consideration during next rewiews that Sony has wired price engine for their stuff and for example this glass is VERY EXPENSIVE in Europe: The Sony FE 20-70mm F4 G price is £1,400 / € 1,600 / $1,099.
We are starting to deliver video in both 16:9 and 4:5 (Instagrams new format) so we’re having to shoot a bit wider. This lens is the perfect zoom range for me and I can get away traveling with a single lens (using APS-C/ClearImage when I need extra reach)
It’s always a relief when Gerald reviews the new gear because I KNOW which review to watch first
The quality of your content does not fall far behind. Keep up the good work!
Christopher frost does the best reviews but I do enjoy Gerald’s videos
If Gerald doesn’t review it, it’s not worth buying!
agreed
This in my opinion is a nearly perfect lens for landscape photographers who know they wont be needing super ultra wide or tele on any given shoot. 20 is absolutely plenty wide for 90% of landscapes and 70 long enough for quite a bit as well. f/4 doesn't make a difference since were shooting at f8-f11 anyways. My two cents.
I feel like I (a non-photog) learned some things about evaluating lenses.
My cat, though, was thoroughly entertained by the frequent gesturing with the cursor. Despite his rapt attention, I have my doubts that he learned anything at all.
I hope you can incorporate this feedback into your future videos and the overall direction of your channel.
As a Canon shooter, I really would love something like this for the RF mount too. I now have the 14-35 which I love. A 24mm isn't quite wide enough for my preferences, so a 24-70 or a 24-105 wouldn't fit me that well, but then again the 35mm that I can get to with my current zoom lens isn't quite far enough. 20mm would be wide enough, and 70mm would be perfect
Man, the light is looking CRISP in that studio. Also - I want that lens
This lens looks super useful for video work. My current setup is an 18mm f2.8 for gimbal work, 24-70mm for general purpose, 35mm f1.4 for night shots. That lens could replace the 24-70 and the 18mm for most day shots including wide gimbal shots. Especially since it's light enough to go on a gimbal. The 24-70 f2.8 lenses are too heavy for gimbal use. Only time when it would come up short would be for low light gimbal shots where a wide prime lens would still have an edge.
Such a cool focal length range! I love seeing more manufacturers trying new things.
Tamron 35-150 f2.0-2.8 love it
@@aroncontinuousconversation Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 - the new "secret handshake" 😂
@@aroncontinuousconversation Yeah I’ve been playing with a loaner from Tamron this week and… I’m sold.
@@LiveMyJourneyTom I like that. 🖖🏻🤣
@@JesseDriftwood I used to be Sigma only with off brand lenses. Not anymore.
I had ten review videos of this lens and I was having confusion on which video to click first until I saw Gerald has also uploaded. There is no doubt now which video I would pick first
It's a tourist lens: Wide for the scenery, macro for textures, tele for your kids, or girlfriend.
Agreed. That’s where I’m town on buying it versus the 24-70mm right now. That 20mm f1.8 I had was a great focal length
wot if you need the wide for the girlfriend ? and macro for ...
@@robinprobyn1971lmaooo
@@robinprobyn1971asking the important questions!
I have the 24-105 F4 and would pick this up for city walking and parks. The macro repro ratio of 0.39x is pretty good and the sharpness alone is worth the money.
Having an f4 lens without OSS is a no go for me… But fantastic review as always!
for me gladly trade OSS for wider lens
@@takoflame4948 can't have both?
24-105 f4 G has OSS
@@agenericaccount3935 and pay more. no thanks
@@takoflame4948 dude got my 24-105 for $900 7 months ago, this 20-70 is $1100
Excellent anniversary gift for my wife, and the release date is before our anniversary 👍
tbh I really don't see why you'd get this over the 24-105mm. Unless you REALLY don't want OSS, the 24-105mm is a way better all rounder. (probably cheaper on sale too)
4mm of extra width is a big deal. I do a lot of backcountry photography and I don't want to have to carry 2 lenses to get ultrawide and mid telephoto. I've been accepting my 16-55/2.8 (Fuji) as a do-it-all, but I always want a little more width. This lens is an ideal compromise for landscape and travel. It's just wide enough to get that truly ultrawide feeling but you don't have to sacrifice all of your reach for it.
For my needs, the sigma 24-70 f2.8 does everything this does but better at the same price. Works great with AF, image sharpness is fantastic with the A74’s over sampled video and the lower aperture let’s me take on more nighttime scenarios.
This is a great lens, yes, but what I already have does great for me. And I’m so happy with it, that if I had to buy a similar lens to put on another body at the same time, I’d just get another one. I’ve had coworkers borrow the sigma on a shoot with me and we’re truly impressed with the result when they reviewed the footage later.
Makes me wonder what took Sony so long to release this lens.
One notable difference is the weight: 488g for the Sony vs 835g for the Sigma. That makes a big difference as a travel lens, and I suspect the vloggers care a lot about it too.
@@charleycrissman That is true. My sigma is a hefty boi. Didn't think about it much due to what I use it for, locked down on a tripod or gimbal. Don't often use it while holding it with one hand. It was also my first full frame lens and I assumed that the bigger glass just meant it had to be that heavy.
@@TrevorWilliams215 The 20mm also makes it much more useful for vloggers than 24mm. For self-handheld talking heads, 24mm is just a tiny bit too narrow (especially w/ active steady shot) and 20mm is just about right. This is definitely for the hybrid traveling vlogger that needs a single, smaller lens.
For me, I'd actually use it over my Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for traveling cityscape photo since it's a lot smaller and 20 can give some interesting portrait-orientation building potential. My issue is the price. I don't think it should be $500, but $1100 Sony is just charges that extra $ because Sony. I feel like $800-900 would have been much more reasonable for this one.
This feels like a phenomenal all purpose landscape lens. Super sharp, usually stopped down more than f/4 anyway, and 20mm is wide enough for like 99% of general shots. Plus the light and compact nature of it, I'd buy it for general hiking and travel photography in a heartbeat
Canon's EF 24-70 F4 hits a magnification rate of 0.7x. This is a cool lens though, getting that extra 4mm on the wide is definitely worth considering.
The G in G Lens stands for Gerald.
For me, you're such a cool guy! Your reviews have been objective and very helpful. If your life gets too busy (family life and career) just do fewer videos. Would hate to see you disappear completely. I shoot Sony APS-C and live in New Westminster, BC. Maybe I'll run into you someday, and introduce myself as one of your subscribers. Happy Holidays to you and your loved ones.
Was hoping for a power zoom. Good travel lens
I would have loved a comparison with the other sony FE f4.0 zooms. It seems so obvious and its missing in all the reviews of this lens. Only walk throughs, look at the pretty clickable aperture ring, no pricing, or did I miss it? I mean, at least compare it from memory and link to the other videos? I do love the honesty about the silliness of sunstars and ‘loca’ hype comparisons though.
The greatest appeal for me is less weight. I'll likely replace my 24-105mm and hopefully, with the a7IV in-body stabilization, loss of sharpness won't be an issue. Comments? Further, I seldom take images in the 70-200mm range.
Yes! It really did come true! I've been wanting a lens like this for so long and even had the Panasonic s5 for a while mainly because they were the only one having a similar lens.
It might not be "perfect", but I anticipate it will be one of the most popular lenses down the line. Most of us are not professional, and mainly want a lens that is good (enough) and can cover anything from slightly wide to slightly tele. For me everything below 20mm and above 70mm and everything below f/2.8 is for specific situations where it's okay to change lenses.
So yes... It would have been awesome if it could have been 2.8, but not for the added bulk.
Can't wait for this lens to hit the markets 😁🥳
Yeah I'm waiting for my Panasonic s5ii and decided on the 24-105 but if they had this as the kit lens instead of the 20-60 variable, I'd have a really tough time deciding.
One piece of the puzzle is missing. The price is pretty rediculous.
Artlist took Storyblocks' spot.
i was about to get this lens but I found sony 24-105 f4 G at similar price, feels more capable for my uses
I’ve had that for a couple years now. I’ve wanted to sell it at some points but I can’t seem to let it go. It’s just too useful 🤣
@@yuanzofficial yeah it's so versatile, you go to the wild or vlog out you have 24mm, want a beautiful portrait 60-90mm
@@kvendy Exactly. I've used 24-70's before and was never too impressed with 70mm. 85 and beyond are where I like to play for most things featuring people
Interesting lens for sure! I just picked up the 20-40 F2.8 from Tamron and don't think I'll be returning it. Id rather have F2.8 then a bit more range
I just tested the 20-40 in anticipation of replacing my 17-28. Then I read the rumors about the Sony 20-70. I have to think real hard which one is more useful for my landscape work. I want to see more corner sharpness samples, wide open, from 20-70 before making a final decision.
Christopher Frost's review video shows the corners at different focal lengths at wide and mid apertures. They're a little soft and need stepped down to improve. At 70 it was pretty sharp.
@@alchemist_x79 Thank you for the heads up. I did look at Chris' review and the corner sharpness looks pretty good to me. I do landscapes and f8-f11 are pretty standard for me.
@@alchemist_x79 Those corners are not "soft" by any mean!
@@boristahmasian9604 And did you make a Decision? I am also currently really interested in that Tamron lens…
Gerald: love this format-easy going. Ending was classic!!
For run and gun shooting and vlogging, this focal range is perfect. And the size/weight of it would probably mean it'd rarely leave my camera body
Super useful focal range -- I wish this were more common. Coupled with APSC crop mode, this could be a single lens to cover all my video needs. Something weird about the coatings or design makes the image, especially the highlights look really cheap though. Also shame it doesn't have stabilization. Would pay quite a bit more if it had a nice image rendition and were stabilized. But with those shortcomings it's not worth it.
Finally! Been waiting for this one...
It's great for vlogging, wide shooting , tele shooting with crop mode (will be 105mm), small, compact, macro shooting,, constant F4 for video shooting. Best all around lens
Thanks for this review!
When I need a wider angle than 20mm, I rely on the Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III. For close-up shots, I use the FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS. However, the FE 24-70mm f/4 G is my go-to zoom lens for most situations. It's the best zoom lens I've ever owned and it's perfectly suited to my needs.
Great job on the video Gerald! Thanks for making it.
Hey Gerald, I see you do regular reviews of lenses.
Would you please consider reviewing cheaper lenses (manual lenses, since they can e easily found for less than 150 bucks or if buying vintage often much cheaper).
Your opinion is highly valued here, it would be nice to be able to understand how different cheaper lenses perform (ofcourse leaving the review open to subjectivity as vintage lenses and cheaper lenses have a less technical look to them) so as to make buying decisions easier for the people who can't afford expensive lenses
Thankyou
Edit: grammar and typos
This lens or the Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8?
hi, what you think between this and tamron 20-40 in terms of sharpness? especially 40mm f/2.8?
Great lens for landscapes. This plus the Tamron 70-300 or 50-400 and that's a complete kit with minimal weight and cost and top level image quality.
I've just seen the price in my country. And for that price I can get Sigma 16-28 and Sigma 28-70 both F2.8.
Dont see why you'd get this over the 24-105 F4 OSS? There's some small differences, but this feels like a really weird release.
200g less? and 20 not 24 which for travel lens i think is better
I have the 24-105 and I don't get it either but I'm thinking the 20mm is great for vlogging?
20mm is much wider than 24mm.
20mm vs 24mm is significant.
200g less weight is also pretty significant.
OSS at these wide angles is mostly irrelevant as long as you have a relatively new ibis body.
Having macro capabilities in the same lens is a big plus.
The only benefit to the 105 is that you can go from 70-105. But you could just take a couple steps forward with the 70. You can't do anything to make the 105 lighter weight or focus closer though.
I think they both have their uses. For me the 20-70 is much more appealing. Though the tamron 20-40 also appeals atm.
So a good travel lens especially on the alpha 7c ii for a compact daily carry.
Would this be a good replacement for my A7C kit lens? Open to suggestions, but so far I think I might like the 20-70. Seems fairly versatile.
This seems like the perfect travel lens. I've been hauling around my 24-70 g master around SE Asia and looking for something lighter.
I'm probably a cynical, contrarian, curmudgeon, but I just can't see paying $1,100 for this lens. Not at f4, with mediocre bokeh and no OSS. $850 seems more fair to me based on the competition vs what you actually get.
After seeing the Panasonic version, I was hoping for a constant f-stop version for Sony and it looks great. The tamron version is nice for the 2.8 but I need range more than anything.
Amazing lens for Vloggers in my opinion. You don't have to take a 1635 along with a lens with longer focal length like a 2875.
20mm is not wide enough for vlogging
@@avigkazanjian3601 lol, it absolutely is. Plenty of people vlog at 24mm but I find that a bit tight. 16-20mm is the sweet spot.
@@avigkazanjian3601 Unless you have T-Rex arms, 20mm is usable for vlogging for 99.9% of the population 😄
@@avigkazanjian3601 Yeah it is lol. I try vlogging with my 28-200 Tamron and it barely passes, I have to really stretch my arm out but it's possible. I have the 20mm f/1.8 prime and it works perfectly fine for vlogging
High quality kit lens with constant max aperture.
Reminds me of the Canon 24-70 F4. One of my favorite lenses. It would be hard to go away from the 2.8 life but it was fun to have a macro lens in my zoom with IS. Thanks for the photo review GU
This lens No is ?
@@Chris-ey7zy yea, 20-70G is not OSS equipped. It relies on IBIS
For the same price as 24-105, which is on sale currently, it’s lighter, larger magnification (.39 vs .31), wider but no stabilization. It’s a tough choice, but I would pick 24-105 for travel and this 20-70 is a good alternative to 24-70 f2.8, less than half the price, lighter and good images.
E-mount has electronic focus compensation. Varifocal lenses can adjust their focus while zooming. If you zoom fast in MF you can notice the lag.
Thanks as always for a great review. For travel I’ve got the 24-105/4 G to pair with the new PZ 16-35/4 G. Like the range on this lens but want something to use from 50-150 so I don’t know what to pair this lens with. For my real work I really defer to my 24-70/2.8 GM II though. Also like the small size and weight of the Sigma 16-28/2.8 and 28-70/2.8 DG DN pair for travel. A lot of choices now for sure.
Size and weight absolute priority that’s why these days you won’t see lot many travellers using an actual camera to shoot because they have got tiny phones easy to carry etc., I myself sometimes use my phone and I hate to do that because I don’t want to pull that heavy 2.8 lens which is btw only 24 so might as well use the wide angle on the iPhone.
Your reviews are simply fantastic. Another absolutely brilliant video Gerald, thank you. I'm looking to purchase this lens along my A7IV, just wish it came as a kit lens option, I feel like they should step up their kit lens game, haha.
I appreciate your thoughtful and thorough review. Given that so many shortcomings like CA, vignetting, distortion can be corrected digitally, do you still strive to buy lenses without them? After all, every little correction affects IQ to some degree. Cheers
Perfect for wedding's gimbal work!! 💯
Gerald, when this lens zooms, moving internal component in and out, does it suck in rain or sand in windy areas? thanks.
I would like to see recommendations for a lightweight, fast setup but professional looking mobile version of podcast lighting equipment for two participants, that is usable in various locations, without needing to rent from a near shop each time
Great review man! 👌🏽
I've owned the Sigma 24-70mm but I mainly shoot home/travel videos of my family, but it was just too heavy. I don't think F4 is an issue for my use and I just ordered one.
So how do you find the 20-70? Happy with the switch for family/travel photography and videography?
@@ChristopheLanglois It's awesome. It's saved my back/neck/shoulders during long outings. That 20mm on the wide end is underrated. I shoot with the a7s iii so the F4 is not really an issue when the light gets a little lower. Highly recommended due to the size and weight.
@@ChristopheLanglois and that minimal focusing distance is so good for some psuedo macro shots in a pinch.
@@tripham8026 thank you for getting back to me. This lens sounds appealing... the only negative for me is the fact that I enjoying more and more the telephoto look, hence my hesitation between the 20-70 G and the Tamron 28-200. I appreciate the overall build quality and picture quality are far apart though... any thoughts?
I'm thinking of the 24-105 or this 20-70. I didn't like the little bid wider shot and I don't think I will ever go over 80mm. Hmmm... I will probably get this even though it is a fraction more in price as that extra width probably worth it for me. It looks super sharp
Kit-lens with proper technical characteristics.
Would be nice to see how it compares (the size) to 24-70 F2.8 GM2 :(.
There's an online tool called camerasize that lets you compare body & lens sizes (with images to scale)
24-70 f/2.8 GM II - 88 x 120mm, 695g
20-70 f/4 G - 79 x 99mm, 488g
So the 20-70 is almost an inch shorter and 30% lighter
The only thing that would make this lens a buy (without OSS) would be if it didn't telescope and they kept the focus / zooming internal. Just makes zero sense for me to gain 20mm at F4 instead of the 24 I already have with the 24-105 which is just immensely more useful than this lens. I'll keep that and my 20mm f/1.8 and keep getting great stuff 🌈
I think this is for those that do travel vlogging talking-head type shots but cannot afford the space for a 20 + a 24-70, 24-105, etc. and need just one lens. While that isn't my use case (I carry a 24-70 f/2.8 + 35 f2 when I travel) I understand people wanting both the 20 and the zoom all in one. I could ditch it for the 24-70 f/2.8 and choose it over 24-105 f/4 just for the size savings alone for travel city photography.
My one gripe is the price. Wish they'd knock $200-300 off the asking, I feel like $1100 is pretty steep.
One big advantage is the weight.
How does this lens compare with Sony 24-105 or Nikon 24-120 image quality wise ?
Now this please as an F2.8 from Sigma (L-Mount).
I know: it's gonna be big, heavy and expensive. But it'd be the last Lens I'll ever need! 😍
7:30 actually I was seriously thinking adapting this lens to my Nikon Z9 with ETZ21 adapter...to accompany my Z 70-200, replacing my Z 24-120, for vdeo... now it seems like a bad idea, because of the distortion, but still, really great lens!
If this was F2.8, I could see it, but for the money, I would think it'd be better to go with the 24-105 F4, which is only slightly more expensive... Wouldn't that make more sense?
What is your opinion in comparison of this lens and tamron 20-40 ? if you do not take into account the difference in focal lengths and look at the image quality ?
for image quality at minimum focus distance, lenses for smaller sensors like MFT are generally superior, to lenses for full-frame.
Community: we want software updates.
Sony: 20-70 F4
TH-camrs: you need this lens.
Me: 😑
such a great all arounder of a lens.
Hey Chris, do you think sony will release a 24-105 f4 mark ii. It's really what I've been waiting for. If not, then I'll settle for this one.
What's your best guest?
@@syllamoon9 I'm' curious, why do you think they'd need to release a mark ii? The mark i is not all that old, and doesn't really have any issues. (that I'm aware of?)
@@syllamoon9 the lens doesn't have any issues so i dont really see a need for an update to be honest.
@@david.stachon I know, it's a great lens, I've just seen some articles saying they intend to release a mark ii. Maybe it's just a rumor but it's not inconceivable. It would be great if it were even smaller then the current one, I guess it's the potential reduced size that is attractive for me.
@@syllamoon9 ah interesting.
I don't know if I should trade sigma 28-70 2.8 for this 20-70 f4 sony
I'm really wanting a 24/20-70mm PZ lens. F4 would be fine, but preferably F2.8. That's what the FX6 is missing. The 28-135mm PZ is too heavy for the camera, and the 24-105mm is fine, but would be way better if it were a PZ lens.
why can I see a center dust spot at 20mm but not at 70mm?
having this up full screen on my main 4K monitor made for a trippy, groovy outro screen 😂😂
Kinda seems like a budget lens - although super nice to be parfocal. Also I absolutely agree with you on sun stars, I don’t get it 😂
Like those old Yaris commercials.
"It's a lenssssssss"
Cool! Thanks for sharing it ✌️
Still waiting for 85mm 1.2 gmaster
Does this lens have image stabilization?
I care about distortion and vignetting a lot. processing images even further is just not it. I want good optical lenses. You can of course digitally correct almost anything but that mechanical goodness is special and separates good and great lenses.
I scrolled past 4 other reviews videos to watch Geralds.
Coming from Canon 5D MK4 and 24-70 f2.8 for most of group shots at wedding ceremony and reception, I have always kept f-stop above 4.0 to avoid blurring people not in same focal length. Now planning to switch to Sony a74, I am thinking to buy this cheaper and lighter lens as compared to 24-70 f2.8. Any suggestions pls?
13:42 its better to do at maximum closed aperture in order to see not bokeh but image
In Europe, this lens costs 1600€, which is wayyy too expensive for what it offers. The distortions alone are enough of a reason to not buy this at such a high price. The 24-105 is 900€, sometimes even 800 or 850 when on sale, which is a much better buy imho. Sony is being super greedy in Europe lately, they need to calm the f down.
Sony isn’t being more greedy then usual, this lens cost what they always charged for f4 G 😂, it was only the 24-105 they offered at a more aggressive price, the rest not so much in fact it’s been €1499-1699 on all the others.
Interesting focal length, tho it's still on how well it works when it is actually released
This lens is great, but for video application it's hard to stack a VND and Black Mist without having the filters in the frame up to 35mm. It makes the Nisi Swift System unusable. Still looking for a solution.
Didnt think of that , good point ! I just got the Nisi VND but without the BM filter , I wonder if it would still vignette ?
@@robinprobyn1971Great point, yes with a step up ring from 72 to 82mm and just using the True VND you'll see the filter on the extreme corner at 20mm.
@@C4ProductionsSD ah ok thanks for checking
I’d like to see a comparison with the 24-105 mm F4
ill consider if the price is right. i hope they’ll drop the price of 24-105 G
I think sunstars don't really make that much sense when it comes to modern lenses with a lot of aperture blades, older lenses with fewer blades produce nicer sunstars I think
Great review! If I had a full frame, a no-brainer!! 🙂
This could be a great catalyst browse vlogging lens, you could crop to 24mm in it
Will this lens focus fast enough for dogs running ? Thanks
For the next video: “I’m still waiting on my Sony firmware updates”
GERALD please help with a monitor question. Trying to find a monitor for my a7iv where I can see the AF square box, face tracking and tapping for autofocus ON the actual external monitor as well as the sony lcd screen while recording video. Can't seem to find any monitor that supports this. I've seen the portkeys monitor that supports touch to autofocus but I find it so strange that there isn't one monitor on the market that shows the touch tracking box on it. I feel like I would constantly be looking at the LCD screen which defeats the whole purpose of a monitor. Any advice?
I have tamron 20-40 f/2.8 … should i change ?
Please takie into consideration during next rewiews that Sony has wired price engine for their stuff and for example this glass is VERY EXPENSIVE in Europe:
The Sony FE 20-70mm F4 G price is £1,400 / € 1,600 / $1,099.
I don't understand the purpose or market for this lens as a 24-105 f/4 with additional optical steady shot is already available..
We are starting to deliver video in both 16:9 and 4:5 (Instagrams new format) so we’re having to shoot a bit wider. This lens is the perfect zoom range for me and I can get away traveling with a single lens (using APS-C/ClearImage when I need extra reach)
Internal zoom and it’ll be an instant buy to pair with my 1635 pz for now I’ll stick to 50 and zooming with my 🦶😂
wait what? is the storyblocks deal gone?
A lente sony 14mm F1/8 para vlog não é uma ótima para a noite? Também da para usar em crop 21mm f1/8 ? não é versatil?