the 28-60 is amazing , light & small. I bought it separately, not as a kit, after finding out it's that good. Courtesy of our host, Jason Vong. Thanks. it's pretty fancy ; like to have 24 sometimes but easily get used to 28 again. After all i shot 28 ( rokkor, elmarit & angenieux) for years before zooms became usable. Those max apertures are sufficiently large for most portraits. (too many f1.4 crazies who never shift out of 1st gear; don't know from whom they learnt that crap). { they can't curse me as i am ONLY a very long time non-prof-photog; i'm in the most mathematical of the sciences, i'm not a "photog" ! }
The most vivid memory of a long wedding day spent with 2 bodies with zoom lenses,is the pain in the upper back so acute and a real obstacle to creativity and good mood. For long time I have used primes to feel happy to take photos till the end in a long shooting day. I welcome this zoom as I did Tamron 70 to 180.
I’m still waiting for the day when Sony will come out with a 24-105 f2.8 all in one lens 😂 (replacing the f4 version) that would be literally the only lens I would carry on my trips.
I love my 20-70 G even though its f4, lightweight and wonderful wide and tele reach for the body, I love it on both full frame and apsc, it’s perfect on a6700
I'd love a F2.8 version of the 20-70mm to use with my FX3 and FX6 cameras. Would happily embrace a little extra weight. 20-50mm doesn't work for me as a bigger range is required for shooting video.
Tbh I think the Tamron 20-40 is a little more exciting and more versatile then the 24-50. You can always crop to get a tighter fov, you can't go wider in camera without optics starting wider.
both modes combined, it's 20-60. Too bad i recently bought the 17-28 f/2.8. could have bought the 20-70 f/4 G (20-105 !) & a 16/17 prime or even a 10/11 aps-c (equiv 15/16.5 ). Still have that heavy 16 f/2.8 fisheye, last major use was at the last Wigstock in 93 taking portraits of trans & others w/ hand-held bounce flash. Don't worry about too much bkgd, it's all black. Spotted a young Erwitt there wearing a daily news name tag.
Definitely need more Lighter compact quality lens … carrying the A7R5 setup for the whole day can get tiring so have been using Q3 more often during recent trips in past few mths instead
Love Both cameras as they take great images. The A7R5 AF is snappier but i prefer the user experience of the Q3 and I feel more comfortable/confident taking street photography of people even when they are looking at my direction and with the lighter setup I take a lot more photos compared to when using the A7R5… a few French people even asked me which model am I using
Enjoyed using the Sony 20-70F4 G lens in Tokyo. As a light FF travel zoom, pls compare this 24-50F2.8 G lens with the 20-70. There are so many possible light travel lens combo with these options! It's not just about that one lens, it's more about the lens combo we bring along for our purposes. Wonder if Sony will launch a 50-135F2.8 G lens in the future to match this lens?
“Old People?” You make me laugh! I’m loving my 20-70 G and 70-200 Macro G II combo. Pushing past 70 now, weight is a huge issue. Wish Sony would come out with a super sharp, light weight 200-600, or even 200-500, say under 3 lb.
Weight of lense I feel can def be very subjective. I work out regularly so shooting with a 24-70 gmII doesn’t bother me one bit. And like you said in the beginning, It’s definitely nicer having that extra 20mm
wt. of lens grows w/ age ( & wt. ) of photographer. I used to shoot film w/ stuff much heavier than 24-70 gm2 without anti- vibration. I still carry a 7 almost everywhere, but stay off unnecessary wt.
The lens is more for videography than photography. Anyone who uses a gimbal will like this focal range and its weight since it will lighten up the load on a gimbal.
I'm a 35-150mm tamron user. I bought it to save money and have a very variable reach for portrait and sport. BUT... I do hate the weight 😂😂 still in dubio to sell and replace with 2 lenses (70-200 and 24-70) I honestly don't enjoy dragging 1.5kg lens along...
Same here, but for what I shoot, such a lens is actually the most convenient option. I think buying a Spider holster will improve my shooting experience.
Thank you for the video. I’m all for it and considering selling at least my 24/2.8 G and 50/2.5 G ( will keep the 40/2.5 G ) and taking this one lens along with my Batis 85/1.8 (or get the Sony) or the 20/1.8 G with my A7CR as my travel kit. Will still keep my 24-70/2.8 GM II for my full size A1 and A7RV and event work. Take care.
Yeah I agree I'd really miss my 70mm having to stop at 50mm. Especially for Street when I'm not wanting to carry out a Prime lens but just a casual walk.
Jason I'll back you up here, I owned the Tamron 35-150mm, and I couldn't STAND the weight/size and had to sell that lens eventually. Great versatility and IQ, but terrible usability in the real world for travel. I'm all for the lighter and smaller zoom options.
Seems like the Tamron 20-40 is a better choice for me. 20mm is nice and wide without being overly difficult to frame. I don't mind dropping the 10mm on the long end vs this Sony 24-50. Cheaper and lighter too.
Absolutley love the insane quality that we get from compact 7c series! Got a7c couple of mounths ago, and i love it so much, thanks, Jason, for great tip. Now dream about this 24-50 that would perfectly fit to my 85 Viltrox and then about a7c ii, of course. 10 bit, baby, i want it!
Only issue with that, is between 35-50mm would you favour that lens or the this one?@@realMysta With a 50-150 you can make it smaller by not needing to go so wide, and have a clear follow on like you get with 24-70,70-200 etc
@@bennyboy0773 35-150 for sure, once you use it you see how useful 35 and 150 is in similar situations to just get different views. It's far enough to make a difference and close enough to not be impractical. Like 35 and 300 are almost totally different circumstances, and you can swap lenses for those two different circumstances, but when you're shooting 35 you could probably still shoot 150 for a different POV, or additional reach. If I don't need 150, I'm using a prime 35. Only reason i sold my 35-150 is because I want the faster burst of a sony for action.
Are people really concerned about such small weight differences between lenses?? Sheesh people need to lift some weights, all of these lenses are lightweight baby, LIGHTWEIGHT BABY!!!!!
Being even older, the "light in hand" is getting to be of more interest/importance. It could mean more swapping but a weight friendly small 3 lens kit (and money) could start to pry me away from my 28-200 as my favorite "travel" starter. I don't see myself stopping at 50mm or 70mm on the long end, though. Crop helps but only goes so far.
Sorry I'm in the camp that the first 24-70GM is HEAVY. 😅 Hated using it and only ever did for weddings. But when the GMII came out, it's pretty much our go-to travel lens on big production days.
Jason, I'm an old retired dude that has been a shooter since the 60s, and I have a A7cr and buying the 24 to 50 for an upcoming Europe trip. So why not shoot in Super 35 and have a 30mp give or take, image and a 1.5x increase in lens zoom?
Fully agree... I have an A9 with 24/25 mps & in super35 mode even a 20-70mm F/4 gives acceptable results - must be brilliant to have only 30mps on latest high end Sony cameras used in Super35 mode!
Splurged on the 24-70 gm ii for my a7rv and then later decided I want small too so went a7cii. Now I’m here looking at this lol. Where does it end!! I thought I was good! Agree tho- for travel, this and the 85 1.8 might be my go to travel kit!
It seems like the lens worth comparing this one to the most is the 20-70G. Surely the 24-50G can simply be described as a faster version with a smaller zoom range?
After traveling with some friends, most have made a comment about how surprisingly heavy my 24-70GM II is lol It's hard to explain that it is considered "light" when some folks haven't experienced what it's like to use the first 24-70GM
After spending a lot on G-Master prime lenses, all I want now is a travel friendly zoom lens that doesn't compromise on the focal length. Something like 24mm-120mm would be fantastic. As long as it's optically good, like this G lens, even if it has a variable aperture like 2.8-4/4.5.
@@bennyboy0773 I understand it's not possible to get a compact 24-120. That's why I mentioned "travel friendly". I wouldn't mind not having OSS to keep the size and weight down. Tamron has a 28-200 f2.8-5.6 that weighs less than 600 grams. I believe Sony is well capable of making a 24-120 f2.8-4/4.5(or even 5.6 at the Tele end) without making it big & heavy.
@@MegaWeitzel The 24-105 is a fixed aperture lens, has OSS & came out 7 years ago. I wanted faster aperture at the wide end only and ready to sacrifice OSS, as cameras these days have decent IBIS anyway. Panasonic just announced a 28-200 f4-7.1 as well. Even though it's a slow variable aperture lens, it's only 3.7 inches long and weighs 413 grams & has 6.5 stops of IS! Nikon also has a similar lens that starts at 24mm. So, I see no reason why Sony can't come up with such lens. Tamron did it, 28-200 F2.8-5.6. I just want Sony make one themselves. If it's really not possible to start with 24mm at the wide end, I am fine with 28mm at the wide end.
My current filming setup is an a7siii and tamron 17-28 and 28-75 g2, ive never had an official sony lens before so im thinking about selling those snd going for this lens! Im mainly a gimble shooter and shoot car content! Im not too sure if i shoulfd go for it (i rarely use the 17-28 anymore since i live around the 35ish range, but i do enjoy going up to 75) i mean i like the sharpness of the tamrons, but will this sony be anymore sharper? Especially at 12mp anyways not sure how much of an improvement it will be, and i do like my tamron sun flares! Will the stabalization be better on the sony vs the tamron, as id like everything to be as stable as possible for the type of shots i go for! Id love to hear your opinion, thanks!
You CAN use it with the a6700 and it'd be good! But VS Sigma 18-50, you lose out on the wider end because the Sigma is technically a 24-75mm FF FOV equivalent where as this would get you 35-75mm on APS-C bodies.
Great job on the video Jason! Thanks for making it. As a crop shooter, I'm also considering the 16-55 F2.8 G lens. I sell a ton of that lens and have even had some success attaching it to the a7cR. Crop math makes it a 24-82.5, and it still lets in a ton of light.
It is perfect for 3 scenario: 1. For A7C series, small yet 2.8 with sharp result making it a perfect travel setup. 2. Video, even thou 24-70mm f2.8 GMII is light, its not light enough to be balanced on something like RS3 Mini, this will be. 3. Price, it will be near to $1100-1200 which is perfect for beginners, amateur and semi-pro.
@@user-pg5rt7ju4f if you mean Sony 50 f/1.8, it is one of the worst lenses in terms of sharpness, focus speed and especially video work. It isn't the perfect nifty-fifty.
@@JasonVong I mostly use 24mm for wide shots, 35mm-40mm for street/figure reviews, and 50mm for portrait/cosplayer photos. If I need further reach, I use my legs or APSC mode on my A7IV. The 20mm I have only used it a couple of times. With the new lens it would cover all the ranges I use while cutting down on weight and how many items are in my bag. Cutting down from 2 lens to 1 lens. Add the extra benefit of it being Native Sony Glass, that means better stablization. But after watching more reviews, it seems this new lens has a issue with the rear gasket/weather sealing, where its letting in moisture/fogging up the rear lens. That's a big no for me, as I travel quite a bit and I have been caught in bad weather before. I'll be keeping my current 2 lens setup for the time being.
I think this lens is more for videography than photography. Anyone who goes handheld or on a gimbal, 24-50mm is about the right range to get wide and zoom shots. Although I prefer 24-70mm range, these lenses are heavy and takes a toll on gimbals. This Sony 24-50mm sounds like a weird lens but I think its perfect for videography.
The more i see how bulky and short range they have this full frame lenses, the more i feel i should just stick (get stuck)😅 with the aps-c where i have plenty lens choice. I already have a power zoom 18-105 ( 27-157mm) Sony F4 and for the 2.8 i can buy the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8. I know the full frame is better in low light, but I shot with my sigma trio 1.4 at night, and nobody will tell that it is not a full frame, is unbelievable the amount of light those Sigma are capable to catch. I just starting to fade up. I WANT to buy a full frame , but i will probably use one lens to shoot indoors, and I will still travel with the aps-c or just my mobile phone and gimbal 😮.... This 24 50 is interesting for this indoor shooting where i can change range without changing the lens, but for travelling, I want to have a larger reach.
first 24 mm is not wide enough for me, on full frame. 18 should be the “wide” standard. 50 and 70 is not enough reach. I would have had 2 lens for everyday shoot. 18-55 1.8F GM, and a 70-135 mm F1.8 GM would be my dream team.
I still have 24-35 f/3.5 rokkor, 24-50 f/4 maxxum great for chinese banquets (just had to constantly check speed was 1/30s for ambient as i was only provided w/ asa(iso)100 film by cheap people. Had an excellent tokina 25-50 f/2.8 (ya,25!) for only 2 weeks (was robbed together w/ a new body in 82) great portraits under washington sq. arch. These foc lengths aren't new & i see the ghost of minolta (leica too) in sony (besides all that numbering in 7's ,9's, G ; no GM in those days ). These zoom ranges aren't bad; good & compact lenses. For 15 yrs since 9th grade to grad sch & beyond i owned only primes, the shortest was 28. Just zoom w/ feet, u get better perspective than from lazy zooming. Shot (composed)lots of slow chromes too . The sony 40 f/2.5 G is excellent but i am not buying as I have 40 summicron & 40 f2 rokkor adapted to 6 & 7. These were the most used on M -mt. film bodies. They are preferred over 35 summicrons. w/28 i was always in combat mode, esp. in group gatherings on streets. Bought T 17-28 f2.8 (v. good but not a "easy"lens;
Nope, I'll pass on this lens. Don't be deluded to think you are getting a great f/2.8 zoom for a steal. You will soon regret the max 50mm focal length. I go traveling fairly often and the lack of that extra zoom to at least 70mm is always bummer. If you think, Oh well, I could do with a small lightweight f/2.8 zoom as a "walkabout" or street photographer lens, nahhhh.... whatever happened to prime lenses?!! You should be using your 24 or 35mm f/1.4 or f/2 lens for those stuffs. If you are starting to feel your full frame lenses are too heavy to carry, and hence this 24-50mm is a good excuse to get it, then perhaps you should start to think if phone photography is better for you. I don't say this as sarcasm, but for normal general photography, nothing beats the modern mobile phone!
I love my 35-150 for street photography, especially for the 900 euros I paid for it, because some doofus decided to sell it on the most unpopular forum there is :D But I agree, it's a large and heavy lens, compared to something like a 24-70, or especially a bright modern prime like a 35 mm GM.
I think you should be very careul when comparing with the G2 sharpness-wise as The Tammy is a record breaking lens, even sharper than 99% of the prime lenses with a measured resolution of 79.visible lines per mm. I bet this one doesn"t even touch the 70 lpm mark. 9 lines îs huge!
This focal range doesn't make much sense to me at f/2.8, but then again I don't really care about lens weight. I think something like 20-45 f/2.0 would be super cool to see. Your point about this lens being catered to ZV-E1 users seems spot on. Good insight, Jason.
If this lens was out (much) earlier, I would definitely go for it with my AC7 and AC7ii. But I have already picked up a 24-70 GM II. Although I really like the body size and weight of this 24-50 F2.8, it could mean wasting my money spent on 24-70 GM II. Besides, losing 20mm focal length could be very inconvenient. I also worry that the photo quality can be not as good as 24-70 GM II.
Man, I just bought 24-70 GM II two days ago for my a7cII before knowing this 24-50 f2.8 G is coming out. Should I return it and get this one in May instead knowing this one is lighter, more compact and cheaper? 🤔
To me, the 24-105 is the ideal travel lens. Sure you don’t have the extra 2 stops you get with the 2.8, but for versatility in a grab and go package I don’t get what the other advantages would be with the 24-50?
Wow I just found out about the 20-70mm f4 last week and now this one is about to drop. Loving all the options we’re getting👏🏾 I have the 16-35 f4 zoom, the 20mm f1.8. Deciding which to get to replace my Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 is now kinda of tricky 🤔
Love this review as you're giving a really interesting point of view on this "weird" zoom range, which is something that has been missed by other reviewers. Great stuffs!
20-50 WILL BE PERFECT
I’m all for this! More compact zoom lens that can pair nicely with the 7c series! Now we need more compact prime lens !
Sigma I-Series. 'Nuff said.
@@careylymanjones Wish Sigma would make a 28mm f/2 I series and a 28mm f/1.4 ART series. Forgotten focal lengths these days.
A good zoom range for most street photographers who want something faster & fancier than the 28-60 kit lens.
the 28-60 is amazing , light & small. I bought it separately, not as a kit, after finding out it's that good.
Courtesy of our host, Jason Vong. Thanks.
it's pretty fancy ; like to have 24 sometimes but easily get used to 28 again. After all i shot 28 ( rokkor,
elmarit & angenieux) for years before zooms became usable.
Those max apertures are sufficiently large for most portraits. (too many f1.4 crazies who never shift
out of 1st gear; don't know from whom they learnt that crap). { they can't curse me as i am ONLY a very long
time non-prof-photog; i'm in the most mathematical of the sciences, i'm not a "photog" ! }
The most vivid memory of a long wedding day spent with 2 bodies with zoom lenses,is the pain in the upper back so acute and a real obstacle to creativity and good mood.
For long time I have used primes to feel happy to take photos till the end in a long shooting day.
I welcome this zoom as I did Tamron 70 to 180.
20-50 f2.8 is what sony should release. This lens is a wrong release.
I’m still waiting for the day when Sony will come out with a 24-105 f2.8 all in one lens 😂 (replacing the f4 version) that would be literally the only lens I would carry on my trips.
Would be nice! It would also probably weigh ten pounds.
Yes... At least you wouldn't have to go to the gym!
Sigma did it
I love my 20-70 G even though its f4, lightweight and wonderful wide and tele reach for the body, I love it on both full frame and apsc, it’s perfect on a6700
I'd love a F2.8 version of the 20-70mm to use with my FX3 and FX6 cameras. Would happily embrace a little extra weight. 20-50mm doesn't work for me as a bigger range is required for shooting video.
If you put on an apsc body why not 17-70mm/f2.8 tamron ?
@@peterstrachan1794 that would be phenomenal
@@tats8445 i use full frame mainly, that 20mm on a normal zoom is awesome. I have seen good reviews about that tamron
@@tats8445is the tamron larger than the 20-70? maybe lose on lightweight in exchange for more reach and better price?
Tbh I think the Tamron 20-40 is a little more exciting and more versatile then the 24-50. You can always crop to get a tighter fov, you can't go wider in camera without optics starting wider.
both modes combined, it's 20-60. Too bad i recently bought the 17-28 f/2.8.
could have bought the 20-70 f/4 G (20-105 !) & a 16/17 prime or even a 10/11 aps-c (equiv 15/16.5 ).
Still have that heavy 16 f/2.8 fisheye, last major use was at the last Wigstock in 93 taking portraits of trans & others w/ hand-held bounce flash. Don't worry about too much bkgd, it's all black.
Spotted a young Erwitt there wearing a daily news name tag.
Definitely need more Lighter compact quality lens … carrying the A7R5 setup for the whole day can get tiring so have been using Q3 more often during recent trips in past few mths instead
Besides the weight, any other advantages the Q3 offers over the a7R V for your use cases?
Love Both cameras as they take great images. The A7R5 AF is snappier but i prefer the user experience of the Q3 and I feel more comfortable/confident taking street photography of people even when they are looking at my direction and with the lighter setup I take a lot more photos compared to when using the A7R5… a few French people even asked me which model am I using
Enjoyed using the Sony 20-70F4 G lens in Tokyo. As a light FF travel zoom, pls compare this 24-50F2.8 G lens with the 20-70. There are so many possible light travel lens combo with these options! It's not just about that one lens, it's more about the lens combo we bring along for our purposes.
Wonder if Sony will launch a 50-135F2.8 G lens in the future to match this lens?
NGL, I prefer the 20-70G over this one! The 20mm on the wide end makes it incredibly unique and handy + the 70 reach! I don't mind the F4 at all!
l think minolta had a lens like that before the maxxum days.
there was also a 70-150 f/xx?
“Old People?” You make me laugh! I’m loving my 20-70 G and 70-200 Macro G II combo. Pushing past 70 now, weight is a huge issue. Wish Sony would come out with a super sharp, light weight 200-600, or even 200-500, say under 3 lb.
I see a new vid from Jason and I CLICK……… Gerald undone’s vid and then come back here to watch Jason’s. YEAH! Can’t go wrong with Jason Vong! 😅
Oh yeah. Like that: YEAH! Can’t go wrong with Jason Vong!
Weight of lense I feel can def be very subjective. I work out regularly so shooting with a 24-70 gmII doesn’t bother me one bit. And like you said in the beginning, It’s definitely nicer having that extra 20mm
wt. of lens grows w/ age ( & wt. ) of photographer.
I used to shoot film w/ stuff much heavier than 24-70 gm2 without anti- vibration.
I still carry a 7 almost everywhere, but stay off unnecessary wt.
The lens is more for videography than photography. Anyone who uses a gimbal will like this focal range and its weight since it will lighten up the load on a gimbal.
I want a 35-85 2.8, would be so fun!
That's the dream. My two favorite primes
From what I saw the performance at F2.8 is a bit ‘meh’. I think I would rather a 20-70 F4 and just deal with one stop less of light.
2:19 Tamron’s lighter and it’s 20-40mm 2.8! But no focus breathing comp..oh the dilemma
Waiting for the comment from Michael.....
Some have already chimed in 🫣
I'm a 35-150mm tamron user. I bought it to save money and have a very variable reach for portrait and sport. BUT... I do hate the weight 😂😂 still in dubio to sell and replace with 2 lenses (70-200 and 24-70)
I honestly don't enjoy dragging 1.5kg lens along...
Same here, but for what I shoot, such a lens is actually the most convenient option. I think buying a Spider holster will improve my shooting experience.
Thank you for the video. I’m all for it and considering selling at least my 24/2.8 G and 50/2.5 G ( will keep the 40/2.5 G ) and taking this one lens along with my Batis 85/1.8 (or get the Sony) or the 20/1.8 G with my A7CR as my travel kit. Will still keep my 24-70/2.8 GM II for my full size A1 and A7RV and event work. Take care.
Can you make a comparison video of this lense vs the tampon 20-40?
Yeah I agree I'd really miss my 70mm having to stop at 50mm. Especially for Street when I'm not wanting to carry out a Prime lens but just a casual walk.
The mark ii is not even heavy! Dude try the sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or the Version 1 GM version. 😂.
Jason I'll back you up here, I owned the Tamron 35-150mm, and I couldn't STAND the weight/size and had to sell that lens eventually. Great versatility and IQ, but terrible usability in the real world for travel. I'm all for the lighter and smaller zoom options.
If only it were a 20-50. 24-50 is too narrow
My wife asked me what I did to you 😂
Everything. And nothing at the same time 🤣
I'm one of those Tamron 35-150mm users. Though, I have a background shooting broadcast ENG cameras, so in that context it's not so bad.
Seems like the Tamron 20-40 is a better choice for me. 20mm is nice and wide without being overly difficult to frame. I don't mind dropping the 10mm on the long end vs this Sony 24-50. Cheaper and lighter too.
no buttons and aperture ring for me is a no.
Absolutley love the insane quality that we get from compact 7c series! Got a7c couple of mounths ago, and i love it so much, thanks, Jason, for great tip. Now dream about this 24-50 that would perfectly fit to my 85 Viltrox and then about a7c ii, of course. 10 bit, baby, i want it!
a 50-150 f2.8 would be really nice to match with this, for people that dont really need 200mm but still want a follow on lens
I’d settle for 50-105
35-150 sony native lens
Only issue with that, is between 35-50mm would you favour that lens or the this one?@@realMysta With a 50-150 you can make it smaller by not needing to go so wide, and have a clear follow on like you get with 24-70,70-200 etc
@@bennyboy0773 35-150 for sure, once you use it you see how useful 35 and 150 is in similar situations to just get different views. It's far enough to make a difference and close enough to not be impractical. Like 35 and 300 are almost totally different circumstances, and you can swap lenses for those two different circumstances, but when you're shooting 35 you could probably still shoot 150 for a different POV, or additional reach. If I don't need 150, I'm using a prime 35. Only reason i sold my 35-150 is because I want the faster burst of a sony for action.
24-90mm f2...or.....28-85mm f1.8 . I don't think there would be a better combination than that.
Are people really concerned about such small weight differences between lenses?? Sheesh people need to lift some weights, all of these lenses are lightweight baby, LIGHTWEIGHT BABY!!!!!
Lol if you never read your comment years from now, you'll probably understand why you sounded so stupid 😂
Exactly, just like how danny gervirtz pay contribute to his athletic background and continuous fit life, helps him shoot more
Sheesh, it's apparent you're not a photographer, just a hobbiest.
It shows your not out doing 3-6 hours of studio or street. Think before you speak
Yeah this is how I feel aswell. But I can see the appeal of carrying a small sling bag and ur mirrorless camera +2 compact lensew
OPAC 😂😂 I LOVE IT!! I totally agree!
Just my feeling, I guess Sony is going to make a 50-105/2.8 or 50-135/2.8.
Being even older, the "light in hand" is getting to be of more interest/importance. It could mean more swapping but a weight friendly small 3 lens kit (and money) could start to pry me away from my 28-200 as my favorite "travel" starter. I don't see myself stopping at 50mm or 70mm on the long end, though. Crop helps but only goes so far.
I am happy with my 20-70 f.4, wider, dof better compare from 70 f.4 to 50 2.8, small and light.
Love the 20-70!
I think they just missed the mark. If it was a 20-50 it would have made much more sense. Or an F2.
I am still with 24-70 GM, the first iteration. The only thing I miss is the aperture ring! The weight, really?
Sorry I'm in the camp that the first 24-70GM is HEAVY. 😅 Hated using it and only ever did for weddings. But when the GMII came out, it's pretty much our go-to travel lens on big production days.
Try the mark 2 version and u will sell your mark 1 away I'm sure.
Jason, I'm an old retired dude that has been a shooter since the 60s, and I have a A7cr and buying the 24 to 50 for an upcoming Europe trip. So why not shoot in Super 35 and have a 30mp give or take, image and a 1.5x increase in lens zoom?
Fully agree... I have an A9 with 24/25 mps & in super35 mode even a 20-70mm F/4 gives acceptable results - must be brilliant to have only 30mps on latest high end Sony cameras used in Super35 mode!
OPAC lol. We only look like we're 40 but we are actually 300 years old.
My back's cracking, getting specks of white hair, running out of breath even walking a few steps. Yep we ancient!
Splurged on the 24-70 gm ii for my a7rv and then later decided I want small too so went a7cii. Now I’m here looking at this lol. Where does it end!! I thought I was good! Agree tho- for travel, this and the 85 1.8 might be my go to travel kit!
It seems like the lens worth comparing this one to the most is the 20-70G. Surely the 24-50G can simply be described as a faster version with a smaller zoom range?
I agree with you 99% of the time but calling the 24-70mm GM II “heavy” is wild to me
After traveling with some friends, most have made a comment about how surprisingly heavy my 24-70GM II is lol It's hard to explain that it is considered "light" when some folks haven't experienced what it's like to use the first 24-70GM
Hi Jason! A minute in the video and I felt ATTACKED 😂😂😂😂
You said the exact combo I was thinking of, 28-50 and 85.
Or 14 gm
lol… my name is Michael… you know what they say any publicity is good publicity 😜
🤣
@@JasonVong hey brother quick question about the DJI osmos pocket 3… would I need to over expose when shooting in dlog by 1.7 or 2 stops like in slog?
As a 24-70 gmaster owner I am not getting this lens.
After spending a lot on G-Master prime lenses, all I want now is a travel friendly zoom lens that doesn't compromise on the focal length. Something like 24mm-120mm would be fantastic. As long as it's optically good, like this G lens, even if it has a variable aperture like 2.8-4/4.5.
Can't imagine you'll ever get a compact 24-120, especially anything
@@bennyboy0773 I understand it's not possible to get a compact 24-120. That's why I mentioned "travel friendly". I wouldn't mind not having OSS to keep the size and weight down. Tamron has a 28-200 f2.8-5.6 that weighs less than 600 grams. I believe Sony is well capable of making a 24-120 f2.8-4/4.5(or even 5.6 at the Tele end) without making it big & heavy.
You know that Sony already has a 24-105 F4. And now you want a lens that is even longer, and faster, and somehow that makes it smaller?
@@MegaWeitzel The 24-105 is a fixed aperture lens, has OSS & came out 7 years ago. I wanted faster aperture at the wide end only and ready to sacrifice OSS, as cameras these days have decent IBIS anyway. Panasonic just announced a 28-200 f4-7.1 as well. Even though it's a slow variable aperture lens, it's only 3.7 inches long and weighs 413 grams & has 6.5 stops of IS! Nikon also has a similar lens that starts at 24mm. So, I see no reason why Sony can't come up with such lens. Tamron did it, 28-200 F2.8-5.6. I just want Sony make one themselves. If it's really not possible to start with 24mm at the wide end, I am fine with 28mm at the wide end.
@@nabayan3897 makes zero sense, sorry - just use the 24-105 F4 :)
6:10 I agree for OPAC
Thank you President OPAC 😆
🫡
My name is actually Michael but I still appreciate you buddy!! 🫵🤣
Love ya Mike!
I'd really love an actual pancake prime. I currently have the 40mm G on my A7C II but would swap it in a heartbeat for an even smaller one ;-;
What?! Even smaller than a 40G???
My current filming setup is an a7siii and tamron 17-28 and 28-75 g2, ive never had an official sony lens before so im thinking about selling those snd going for this lens! Im mainly a gimble shooter and shoot car content!
Im not too sure if i shoulfd go for it (i rarely use the 17-28 anymore since i live around the 35ish range, but i do enjoy going up to 75) i mean i like the sharpness of the tamrons, but will this sony be anymore sharper? Especially at 12mp anyways not sure how much of an improvement it will be, and i do like my tamron sun flares! Will the stabalization be better on the sony vs the tamron, as id like everything to be as stable as possible for the type of shots i go for!
Id love to hear your opinion, thanks!
The tamrons are great but Sony may give better autofocus performance. You also aren’t getting the focus breathing compensation with 3rd party lenses.
how would this pair with the A6700? compared to the Sigma 18-50?
You CAN use it with the a6700 and it'd be good! But VS Sigma 18-50, you lose out on the wider end because the Sigma is technically a 24-75mm FF FOV equivalent where as this would get you 35-75mm on APS-C bodies.
Great job on the video Jason! Thanks for making it. As a crop shooter, I'm also considering the 16-55 F2.8 G lens. I sell a ton of that lens and have even had some success attaching it to the a7cR. Crop math makes it a 24-82.5, and it still lets in a ton of light.
just one of the many perks of being an a7R series user 😎
My name is Michael and I felt identified when you screamed ! jajaja 😂
Greetings from Chile and thanks for such good content 😄
hahahaha thanks for watching from Chile!
Nice video, Jason❤ And in my opinion, compact lenses is indeed the future of mirrorless camera system.🎉
It is perfect for 3 scenario:
1. For A7C series, small yet 2.8 with sharp result making it a perfect travel setup.
2. Video, even thou 24-70mm f2.8 GMII is light, its not light enough to be balanced on something like RS3 Mini, this will be.
3. Price, it will be near to $1100-1200 which is perfect for beginners, amateur and semi-pro.
"beginners" should run over to adorama, grab the 50 f/1.8 now on sale & live w/ it for at least a yr.
@@user-pg5rt7ju4f if you mean Sony 50 f/1.8, it is one of the worst lenses in terms of sharpness, focus speed and especially video work. It isn't the perfect nifty-fifty.
I have the Tamaron 20-40 f2.8 and the Sony 50 f1.4 GM in my bag. I am tempted on replacing the Tamaron with this lens.
Interesting! Why would you consider replacing the Tamron with this?
@@JasonVong I mostly use 24mm for wide shots, 35mm-40mm for street/figure reviews, and 50mm for portrait/cosplayer photos. If I need further reach, I use my legs or APSC mode on my A7IV. The 20mm I have only used it a couple of times.
With the new lens it would cover all the ranges I use while cutting down on weight and how many items are in my bag. Cutting down from 2 lens to 1 lens. Add the extra benefit of it being Native Sony Glass, that means better stablization.
But after watching more reviews, it seems this new lens has a issue with the rear gasket/weather sealing, where its letting in moisture/fogging up the rear lens. That's a big no for me, as I travel quite a bit and I have been caught in bad weather before.
I'll be keeping my current 2 lens setup for the time being.
24-50 distortion at 24 is a bit too high.
I think this lens is more for videography than photography. Anyone who goes handheld or on a gimbal, 24-50mm is about the right range to get wide and zoom shots. Although I prefer 24-70mm range, these lenses are heavy and takes a toll on gimbals. This Sony 24-50mm sounds like a weird lens but I think its perfect for videography.
I think I just don’t want to part with my 1100$ I’m tired of wasting money. Good luck to Sony
The more i see how bulky and short range they have this full frame lenses, the more i feel i should just stick (get stuck)😅 with the aps-c where i have plenty lens choice. I already have a power zoom 18-105 ( 27-157mm) Sony F4 and for the 2.8 i can buy the Tamron 17-70mm F2.8. I know the full frame is better in low light, but I shot with my sigma trio 1.4 at night, and nobody will tell that it is not a full frame, is unbelievable the amount of light those Sigma are capable to catch. I just starting to fade up. I WANT to buy a full frame , but i will probably use one lens to shoot indoors, and I will still travel with the aps-c or just my mobile phone and gimbal 😮....
This 24 50 is interesting for this indoor shooting where i can change range without changing the lens, but for travelling, I want to have a larger reach.
first 24 mm is not wide enough for me, on full frame. 18 should be the “wide” standard. 50 and 70 is not enough reach. I would have had 2 lens for everyday shoot. 18-55 1.8F GM, and a 70-135 mm F1.8 GM would be my dream team.
I still have 24-35 f/3.5 rokkor, 24-50 f/4 maxxum great for chinese banquets (just had to constantly check
speed was 1/30s for ambient as i was only provided w/ asa(iso)100 film by cheap people.
Had an excellent tokina 25-50 f/2.8 (ya,25!) for only 2 weeks (was robbed together w/ a new body in 82)
great portraits under washington sq. arch. These foc lengths aren't new & i see the ghost of minolta (leica too)
in sony (besides all that numbering in 7's ,9's, G ; no GM in those days ). These zoom ranges aren't bad; good &
compact lenses. For 15 yrs since 9th grade to grad sch & beyond i owned only primes, the shortest was 28.
Just zoom w/ feet, u get better perspective than from lazy zooming. Shot (composed)lots of slow chromes too .
The sony 40 f/2.5 G is excellent but i am not buying as I have 40 summicron & 40 f2 rokkor adapted to 6 & 7.
These were the most used on M -mt. film bodies. They are preferred over 35 summicrons. w/28 i was always in
combat mode, esp. in group gatherings on streets. Bought T 17-28 f2.8 (v. good but not a "easy"lens;
My name is Michael LOL
👀
If I knew this was coming. I might of held off on getting the 20mm 1.8 2 weeks ago
Still have time to return it
Love the 20mm! I think you should keep it unless you were looking for a zoom.
@@JasonVong I’m keeping it….
Nope, I'll pass on this lens. Don't be deluded to think you are getting a great f/2.8 zoom for a steal.
You will soon regret the max 50mm focal length. I go traveling fairly often and the lack of that extra zoom to at least 70mm is always bummer.
If you think, Oh well, I could do with a small lightweight f/2.8 zoom as a "walkabout" or street photographer lens, nahhhh.... whatever happened to prime lenses?!! You should be using your 24 or 35mm f/1.4 or f/2 lens for those stuffs.
If you are starting to feel your full frame lenses are too heavy to carry, and hence this 24-50mm is a good excuse to get it, then perhaps you should start to think if phone photography is better for you. I don't say this as sarcasm, but for normal general photography, nothing beats the modern mobile phone!
I love my 35-150 for street photography, especially for the 900 euros I paid for it, because some doofus decided to sell it on the most unpopular forum there is :D
But I agree, it's a large and heavy lens, compared to something like a 24-70, or especially a bright modern prime like a 35 mm GM.
Why do you keep yelling at me? :)
You know I love you
I think you should be very careul when comparing with the G2 sharpness-wise as The Tammy is a record breaking lens, even sharper than 99% of the prime lenses with a measured resolution of 79.visible lines per mm. I bet this one doesn"t even touch the 70 lpm mark. 9 lines îs huge!
I think it´ s better to have this lens paired with 85 mm 1.8 than carrying around heavy 24-70 all the time.
After Karen, micheal could the NEXT BIG THING, thanks to you Jason...😁. Really love you to make a comparison this lens and 20-70mm
As a Michael, I appreciate the love.
❤
Tamron 20-40 f2.8 all day long. Active stab and or gyro stab crops in so 24mm is not wide. 24mm was great but that’s not the world we live in anymore.
This focal range doesn't make much sense to me at f/2.8, but then again I don't really care about lens weight. I think something like 20-45 f/2.0 would be super cool to see. Your point about this lens being catered to ZV-E1 users seems spot on. Good insight, Jason.
I already have 35mm f2.8, is it still worth it to buy 24-50mm 2.8?, considering it is also f2.8?
2:48 😂 no offence taken.
Would of got my money if it had been an internal zoom, but I don’t like dust suckers!
If this lens was out (much) earlier, I would definitely go for it with my AC7 and AC7ii. But I have already picked up a 24-70 GM II. Although I really like the body size and weight of this 24-50 F2.8, it could mean wasting my money spent on 24-70 GM II. Besides, losing 20mm focal length could be very inconvenient. I also worry that the photo quality can be not as good as 24-70 GM II.
It would have been great if the aperture was set f/2.0, then the short range would have made sense.
I really want a 24-70 gmii but it’s so pricey . I might have to pick this up instead
Man, I just bought 24-70 GM II two days ago for my a7cII before knowing this 24-50 f2.8 G is coming out. Should I return it and get this one in May instead knowing this one is lighter, more compact and cheaper? 🤔
Why not 1.8 to compete with Sigma? 🙊
Sigma has a 24-50 F/1.8??
To me, the 24-105 is the ideal travel lens. Sure you don’t have the extra 2 stops you get with the 2.8, but for versatility in a grab and go package I don’t get what the other advantages would be with the 24-50?
Hi mate, I'm waiting for a 28 to 85mm 2.8 for all my photography and videography career. It never happen.
Given the a7 camera line, they didn’t need f/2.8 and that weight. F/4 would work fine for both regular size and compacts, at HALF the weight.
Wow I just found out about the 20-70mm f4 last week and now this one is about to drop. Loving all the options we’re getting👏🏾
I have the 16-35 f4 zoom, the 20mm f1.8. Deciding which to get to replace my Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 is now kinda of tricky 🤔
NGL, I prefer the 20-70mm F4 over this one! The range is too handy enough for me to ignore that it's an F4
@@JasonVong and there’s currently a $50 rebate on the 20-70mm f4. It’s easy to find through B and H’s website
Any zoom extension is pretty much a deal breaker for me. They are hard to balance on a gimbal and are extremely prone to dust, in harsh conditions.
You've justified it pretty well and I was triggered initially well done
Why would someone in thier right mid would buy a small camera like the A7C II and put a big grip on it? Why???
I agree the 70-135 would be super cool 😎
That would be the ultimate portrait lens!
They should have made it f2. There is not a real point to not get the 24-70/2.8.
How about a 20-60mm f2 to f4 variable aperture lens the size of this 24-50? one can dream :)
Love this review as you're giving a really interesting point of view on this "weird" zoom range, which is something that has been missed by other reviewers. Great stuffs!
It’s my new fav travel lens! If I want I crop in at 50mm and it becomes a “75mm F4”
This lens proves Sony is worried about Fujifilm.
Maybe can do a comparison between this lens and the Sony 16-55mm f2.8 G SEL1655G lens?
Sony needs to understand if they want us to use active in-camera stabilization they need to make the wide end wider OR give us IS in the lens.
Are we not supposed to see something at 2:23 where the lens gets partially comped out?
Good review, excellent pairing with 85mm!
I think you're right. This would pair wonderfully with my zeiss 85 mm.