The halo at 0:52 has nothing to do with fringing and it also has nothing to do with the lens loosing contrast. You closed the aperture to f/16 to get that sunstar, but diffraction applies to the entire shot, not only to the sun. So, every single point point on your shot is smeared around in a star-like pattern, which lowers the overall contrast and produces noticeable halo around all high-contrast transitions.
@@m4rcin847 do you think they can just magically make the lens of the exact same quality for half the price? There’s compromise just depends on what you’re happy with
@@JonnyRoams Its not magic, its G branding just to pay more. Just look at 28-200, great quality, great range, half the price. Look at Viltrox 16 vs Sony GM 14 - that's how You make excelent lens without milking your customer. Whole Sony system would be dead long ago if not 3rd party.
Just bought it. Versatility looks insane. Can’t wait to use it all the vacation. With 200/600 or 300 gm, it’s the ultimate combo for wildlife photography. All in just 2 lessens. Nice video and wonderful places/photos.
I wouldn't call that at 0:52 fringing. Fringing or CA is only green or purple. That's just natural backlight glow. That said, I'm wondering if a 20-70 + 35GM or 24GM would be suitable for a travel setup (photo + vlog), or if I should get the 16-35 f/4 pz with the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8...
Yeah the glow was much more pronounced and unpleasant compared to what I see on the GM lenses however. As for your second question. I suppose there’s some personal preference there. I have tried all the lenses listed and I really love the GM primes. I sold my 24 in favor of the 20 G, since I find it unbeatable for Astro, but I absolutely love the 35GM. I think 20-70G and 35GM would be my pick
What did you end up choosing?? I'm in the exact same position!! I like the 24-70 but it's too big in my opinion, and having a good prime would be nice...
@@bobstevens5202 Depends on where you travel. I travel mostly to Japan and since I stay in asia, wider lenses are better. I went with the 16-35mm f/4 PZ and it stays on most of the time. I use the Sigma 35mm f/2 for low light or portraits. I recently picked up the Tamron 28-75 g2 and 70-180 G1 in Japan too, but I don't use the 70-180 much.
I recently got a A7RIVA, and Tamron 20-40mm f2.8, i think this lens is the best paired with A7R or A7cR, the one button crop makes this a 20-60mm f2.8 lens. Super35 mode still gives you 26MP
I’m thinking the 20-70 G and 70-200 GM with the occasional 2x is all I need to carry for landscape. That is 2.25 lb lighter than my 16-35, 24-105 and 100-400 setup.
Feels like such a versatile setup for sure. Although I’ll admit, I think the 2x tele converter is one of my worst photography investments. Makes the AF so slow and degrades the sharpness very considerably
wonderful review! just sold my 16-35 f4 to invest in some type of 24-70 and I think this 20-70 may be perfect! then I just get a 16mm prime if I need wider
I do prefer this one yes. It’s easier to crop in in post at 70 (or use apsc mode)but you can’t get wider if you’re stuck at 24. This one is also much smaller, has the aperture ring, and I think it’s a bit sharper as well
I just saw yout tamron 20-40 2.8 review. I'm can't decide between this sony 20-70 and tamron 20-40 for vlogginf. Currently useing Sigma 16-28. 16 is ok, but 28.... I love to cath b-rolls with longer focal length, and then i use Tamron 28-75, but is sooo anoying when I have to constantly change lenses... I want one allarounder. Which one in your oppinion is better? :) Greta video btw!
real life accidents along with insurance commercials… A 4000 dollar repair? I have never paid that much to the Wetzlar folks for repairing one of my Leica’s after a crash. What dit you do? 👍🏼😅
… great pictures and a great lens I own also. 👍🏻 But to be fair: i don’t know, if i could trust you about PPA and the insurance - the a1 story and the 4.000 $ price tag for repair it sounds a bit to weird. 😂
It's a terrible portrait/people lens. The skin tones are not acceptable. Otherwise a good roadtrip travel lens. I'm a people photographer so I returned the lens.
Which shot from the trip is your favorite?
The halo at 0:52 has nothing to do with fringing and it also has nothing to do with the lens loosing contrast. You closed the aperture to f/16 to get that sunstar, but diffraction applies to the entire shot, not only to the sun. So, every single point point on your shot is smeared around in a star-like pattern, which lowers the overall contrast and produces noticeable halo around all high-contrast transitions.
Alright all seriousness, this lens looks killer, and honestly f4 these days is more than enough with modern sensor lowlight performance. Loved this!
Would pair nicely with that fx3 you’re gonna buy 😅
@@kylemeshna just gonna keep the fx30 out of spite now 😂
The only killer here is price. Tamron could do that for half the money.
@@m4rcin847 do you think they can just magically make the lens of the exact same quality for half the price? There’s compromise just depends on what you’re happy with
@@JonnyRoams Its not magic, its G branding just to pay more. Just look at 28-200, great quality, great range, half the price. Look at Viltrox 16 vs Sony GM 14 - that's how You make excelent lens without milking your customer. Whole Sony system would be dead long ago if not 3rd party.
Just bought it. Versatility looks insane. Can’t wait to use it all the vacation. With 200/600 or 300 gm, it’s the ultimate combo for wildlife photography. All in just 2 lessens.
Nice video and wonderful places/photos.
Would love to get some insights into why you chose the f-stops you did for the specific images.
I wouldn't call that at 0:52 fringing. Fringing or CA is only green or purple. That's just natural backlight glow.
That said, I'm wondering if a 20-70 + 35GM or 24GM would be suitable for a travel setup (photo + vlog), or if I should get the 16-35 f/4 pz with the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8...
Yeah the glow was much more pronounced and unpleasant compared to what I see on the GM lenses however.
As for your second question. I suppose there’s some personal preference there. I have tried all the lenses listed and I really love the GM primes. I sold my 24 in favor of the 20 G, since I find it unbeatable for Astro, but I absolutely love the 35GM. I think 20-70G and 35GM would be my pick
What did you end up choosing?? I'm in the exact same position!! I like the 24-70 but it's too big in my opinion, and having a good prime would be nice...
@@bobstevens5202 Depends on where you travel. I travel mostly to Japan and since I stay in asia, wider lenses are better. I went with the 16-35mm f/4 PZ and it stays on most of the time. I use the Sigma 35mm f/2 for low light or portraits. I recently picked up the Tamron 28-75 g2 and 70-180 G1 in Japan too, but I don't use the 70-180 much.
I recently got a A7RIVA, and Tamron 20-40mm f2.8, i think this lens is the best paired with A7R or A7cR, the one button crop makes this a 20-60mm f2.8 lens. Super35 mode still gives you 26MP
I’m thinking the 20-70 G and 70-200 GM with the occasional 2x is all I need to carry for landscape. That is 2.25 lb lighter than my 16-35, 24-105 and 100-400 setup.
Feels like such a versatile setup for sure. Although I’ll admit, I think the 2x tele converter is one of my worst photography investments. Makes the AF so slow and degrades the sharpness very considerably
2x TC is one of the worst things you can spend your money on.
@@TsvetanVR never used it. I do use the 1.4 TC on my 70-200 and it’s very sharp and fast focusing.
wonderful review! just sold my 16-35 f4 to invest in some type of 24-70 and I think this 20-70 may be perfect! then I just get a 16mm prime if I need wider
I'm starting to fall in love with this lens.
It’s such a good one
You prefer this over the 24-105 due to able to get to 20? How do they compare performance wise?
I do prefer this one yes. It’s easier to crop in in post at 70 (or use apsc mode)but you can’t get wider if you’re stuck at 24. This one is also much smaller, has the aperture ring, and I think it’s a bit sharper as well
I just saw yout tamron 20-40 2.8 review. I'm can't decide between this sony 20-70 and tamron 20-40 for vlogginf. Currently useing Sigma 16-28. 16 is ok, but 28.... I love to cath b-rolls with longer focal length, and then i use Tamron 28-75, but is sooo anoying when I have to constantly change lenses... I want one allarounder. Which one in your oppinion is better? :) Greta video btw!
Ah man that’s a tough choice. 20-70 more all around. 20-40 better In low light. I think I’d choose the 20-70 though
Looks really great!! Epic trip brotha and love the portrait and lines with Mahala 😮🙏🏻👊🏼
Absolutely man! Such a fun time
real life accidents along with insurance commercials… A 4000 dollar repair? I have never paid that much to the Wetzlar folks for repairing one of my Leica’s after a crash. What dit you do? 👍🏼😅
That first song is so reminiscent of the Home Depot theme song 🛠️
How doers get more done
What do you think about its video capabilities?
Super impressed there as well. Fast responsive AF, the declicked aperture is perfect, and the size handles nicely as well.
Wish Sony made a 20-70 f2.8 instead of the rumored 24-70 f2.
IT ME!!! Such a sick video brother
Not gonna be the only time broski
Were the stars actually captured with this lens? What was your exposure time on that? Surprised to see such crisp pinpoint stars on an f/4
Its not about lens anymore, sensors this days are so good in low light that even if u have f4 u can still work with it
Think critically for 1 second LOL
… great pictures and a great lens I own also. 👍🏻 But to be fair: i don’t know, if i could trust you about PPA and the insurance - the a1 story and the 4.000 $ price tag for repair it sounds a bit to weird. 😂
The A1 story is very much real. I was photographing seascapes in Iceland and a wave knocked over my camera. Fully flooded and fried the motherboard
I’m a big Kyle fan boii
3:14 just shot 3 panels and stitch them
Can you survive 2023 with digital stabilization!? IBIS or nothing.
Anti Tripod gang lets goooo
Let’s goooooo
Next time use a prime😮
Nikon; hope you are watching...
fringing? what? I don't see any.
It's a terrible portrait/people lens. The skin tones are not acceptable. Otherwise a good roadtrip travel lens. I'm a people photographer so I returned the lens.
What would you recommend instead?
@@jharrelphoto I recommend the Sigma 24-70mm art lens. It's very sharp and renders skin tones well.
I mean you would switch out to a prime in those situations... Traveling with a 2.8 zoom these days just doesn't make sense 🤷