Just want to say I've watched so many of your reviews and I love how you have the template down to a science. All the stuff we need to know, presented so clearly and transparently, and with no fluff and no hype. And you're a fellow believer in Christ? Amazing.
His channel is the only place I go to to find out about lenses. I remember back in the day when he used to shoot some kind of a brick house to determine the image quality.
This is a very difficult zoom to make well and Sony have to be applauded. Given Sonys relatively small E mount it doesn't seem to be negatively affecting their lens designs much.
This isn't True! The Sony RF 28-70mm f/2 has been around for years! and Canon is copying it all these years later! This is why Sony is leading the way. The new Sony RF 24-105mm f/2.8 IS USM Z is another thing I think Canon will end up Copying Sony on... This is why Sony is leading the way! The Canon Lenses use In-Body Camera corrections for their lenses which is why their lenses are smaller and more compact and sharper, where the Sony lenses might be larger, but they are more optically sound! and this is why Sony is leading the way! I doubt anyone is going to read this far, but this is sarcasm because I think it's funny. all of the things that I have listed are truly about Canon's lenses and how/why they are sharper and who's copying who lol. overall, I think I am funny 10 out of 10 for funniness! 😂🤣
@TigaWould If Canon leads the way, then how come they abandoned their DSLR line and started doing mirrorless cameras like SONY, with features like eye-AF, tracking etc, just like it's been with SONY cameras since they created the E-mount in 2010? Canon's lenses are not sharper than SONY's. If anything, it is the latter that usually resolve more and are lighter and not as bulky as Canon's.
Thank you for your lens review. Not only this one and all previous reviews. Have a wonderful Christmas wiwth your family and of course a Happy New Year.
The close up performance is fine. Giving it starts at f2, by f4 it is pretty sharp. My sigma 24-70 at f5.6 seems worse than this at f4 at minimal focal distance.
@petrpohnan875 Funny if that's true because distortion breathing looks more awkward than focus breathing. Moreover, in my opinion focus breathing matters the most for stage filming where the frame is carefully positioned
I preordered this and can say it’s impressive. Although I don’t see it as an ideal portrait lens,I think it’ll have a lot to offer in weddings and events. Very fast sharp and clean images while delivering a bit of character. Notably the bloomy highlights are what I noticed.
Merry Christmas Mr. Frost, and have a Happy New Year! I have learned so much about lenses through the years following your channel. I look forward to more reviews as lens tech improves... As always, keep up the good work and keep'em flying.. From the little red planet, somewhere in TX...snicker.
I've tested it recently in a photography store. It seems great to hold as well - quite the size and weight of some DSLR-era 24-70mm f/2.8. Great lens, but unfortunately at a price point you expect for a constant f/2. Also, not as fat/thick and heavy as Canon's barrel-like 28-70 f/2L RF! And the focus throw is so suprisingly short!
3:34 is the lens optically corrected for focus breathing or is it using Focus Breathing Compensation feature, to digitaly correct focus breathing by cropping?
Another superb review, I'd be lying if I told you I'm not jealous of the Sony system. I love Canon's superb color science and incredible autofocus locking especially for shooting birds, however I get jealous of most lenses that work on Sony as Canon never releases a good internal focusing 600mm zoom lens. This could've been in my lens arsenal if I was on the Sony system.
@@radoo86 LOCA will always be the worst when zoomed all the way in and at the minimum focus distance on a zoom lens. Go test your own zooms and see how bad the LOCA is
I have the Canon 28-70 f2 at work and despite being a pretty good lens - not great mind you - it's like having a large brick around your neck and I hate it. I'm pleased Sony has shaved some weight, but I didn't buy this one with my new Sony kit and instead went for the 24-70, 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 for similar money and much better image quality in the 2 fields of view I use the most. IMHO, the new Sony f2, like the Canon, isn't really a replacement for primes because of size and weight and anyone considering these lenses should hand one off their neck for a bit and think about that. That said, I can see a place for the new f2 in video where changing lenses is not a great option. Thank you, as ever, for the excellent review.
No, no, no - don't hang it off your neck. Maybe use a Peak Design or Sun Sniper strap, or a Spider Holster system. It's lighter than a 70-200 lens, though.
@@adamadamisSo much this. It boggles my mind how many people buy an expensive camera and then only use it with the original strap, which is way too short for shoulder carry. Anyone should get a peak design or similar.
How I wish I could afford to pick one of these up right now. It weighs less than my most commonly used lens and would be a dream for almost everything I shoot.
@@SliverCreations A lot softer? What do you mean? Christopher Frost about Canon RF 28-70mm f/2: At F2 we see razor sharpness at al lfocal lenghts. Both lenses are extremely sharp for any photography job.
I got to use this lens today, I really like it. Its a bit on the Chonky side of things but it was great. Not changing from my primary Tamron 35-150 will still be my go to.
@@catalystJJ The range, I don't need to change lenses in the middle of a Wedding or Event It covers the 24-70 and 70-200, Yes I loose some on the wide, and some of the narrow but that is nothing my feet can not adjust for. A lot of the time I am doing Beach weddings here in FL, The less im changing the less chance of dust and debris getting in my body and messing with the sensor. Also I shoot at ComicCons and I like having only one body on me because of the size of crowds.
Nice review as always. But as a long time viewer I'm still confused about whether or not you refocus for the corners when checking corner sharpness, to rule out potential field curvature. If not, that's definitely something you need to start doing! Merry Christmas!
Good point. However, what about a scenario where you want everything in perfect focus? Example, when you photograph a painting or poster for reproduction purposes, and you want sharpness in the middle, and also the corners? With some lenses, you can focus in the center, and the corners are fairly sharp also. Maybe that's also a fair way to test, as long as one is consistent?
Dear Christopher, thank you for the informative video; as your videos always are. Thank you! Suggestion; close focus distance is a strange concept as they vary between lenses. It might be an idea to consider a 'standard' close distance test for non macro lenses. Say the 70cm of Leica M lenses, to pick a random reference for close sharpness test.
Wow, what an impressive feat by sony again. I can't believe it's only been about 3 years since the release of the 24-70 GM II and I sold everything to buy that one, now there's this on the market for only a few hundred more dollars. I think I still prefer it to this though, I don't know how I feel about carrying an extra stop of glass in the zoom range.
looks like a great lens. assuming this will be very important for portrait shooters, I'd guess the corners being slightly softer isn't a big deal at all. Now the weight savings vs. the Canon 28-70 is a huge deal!
Hefty price tag... But then again... What does a full set of 2.0 primes cost 😅 At the same time I do feel more comfortable not having a lens that expensive on my camera. Handeling something of this value would make me very nervous. But it looks super useful and flexible for sure.
Thank you for this review. Brilliant! Question between this and the Tamron 35-150 is there a noticeable delta in sharpness and contrast? I know the Tamron has to creep to something like 2.3 at 70mm so not totally comparable. Thank you as always!
I believe they all do nowadays. Similar to how our spectacles' lenses are plastic. They perform brilliantly, and are a bit lighter, so as long as the results are there, why not. I think Canon's kit zooms have been using plastic lenses for many years.
Hi Chris: You habe proven the close up image quality isnt the greatest, and lets just assume, Sony never had intentions to make this a second macro lens. If thats the case , your LOCA test would suffer from it, since it highly relates on close up IQ. Could you SEE any LOCA in landscape focus (28mm infinity) or portrait focus (70mm 3-10m)?
Expensive lens but considering it's potentially replacing the need for primes, the 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and even an 85mm. Makes this a bargain by comparison.
Can someone Help me? Whats the Point of this Lens when there is the 24 70 2.8? Is it the larger aperture? I'm looking for a 24-70 and this might be an alternative but I don't get why this exists. I'm no video shooter so pls apologize my ignorance.
Seems like a really nice lens, but a bit much for my pocket book. I will keep my Tamron 28-75 G2 for now =) I got it fort $500 used in perfect condition.
Would you say anyone can answer your question when you don't even tell us about your use case? Obviously this is a better lens, but that doesn't mean it's right for your use case. But since we don't know your use case, it's impossible to answer.
… in terms of sharpness it’s a nearly equal performance. the 24-70 FM II has a significant better close image quality and a higher magnification ratio, but the 28-70 is not bad at all. if you need or want the f2 go with the new lens and get also the f1.8 20G or the f2.8 16-25 G for shooting wide angle pictures - or if you have the money: get the f2.8 12-24 GM. 😏
70mm didn’t seem as sharp in center as 28 or 45mm but corners were sharper for nice even sharpness. Nice performance overall for this lens. Not a surprise since Sony rarely misses.
@@hardywoodaway9912does it really matter? If a lens has such a curved focus plane that the corners are soft then it doesn’t really matter. Not like anyone is going to focus their photos for the corner and ignore the soft center.
@@StymyParsleyYes it matters because in real world those corners might be perfectly sharp, but maybe 20cm closer which isn't something you'd notice. You really need to look up how this works.
@@fotografalexandernikolis yes I know how this works lol, my point is if you’re shooting wide open then it doesn’t matter, it can be sharp but if it’s out of focus then it’ll look soft. If the corners can be sharp if you focus on them it doesn’t matter wide open, but it would matter stopped down like when taking a landscape, which Chris showed. I know this very well because I have a lens (Mitakon 35mm f/0.95) that’s actually sharp in the center but has both corner softness wide open but also extreme field curvature. So extreme that even at f/11 it smears like a transition zone between in and out of focus but isn’t soft.
@@StymyParsley If the field curvature is mild then the corners will only be soft if you shoot a flat surface. If you shoot a landscape for example the corners will be sharp, but at a slightly different distance. I'm just saying that's why it's not as bad as actually soft corners.
If only this would have something like FE 28mm F2's MFD (25cm) i would sell everything i have to buy it. The one lens which replaces 3 primes and weights just 0.9kg... Simply throw lightweight tripod and the camera into backpack and you are ready to go ANYWHERE capturing ANYTHING.
Not a lens for me even if I had a Sony camera. Too big and heavy, with a limited zoom range. However it feels like this is what we’ve come to expect from Sony, and they did not disappoint.
Un ottica Sony GM andrebbe verificata con un sensore più moderno tipo Sony A7R IV o A7R V, ormai la Sony A7R III è un bel pò vecchiotta. Sensore e file RAW obsoleti. Buone feste.
The weight is impressive compared to the canon one but it has a cost: the bokeh... It is not nice on the sony one. It is hard/vibrant. And the bokeh balls that are cut 😆
I still think 24-70 and 35-150 are a little more wedding-y zooms. In this Sony production, the longitudinal aberration and close-up images actually look terrible 😬
If Sony could make such a lens with the small APSC E-mount, I am sure that Nikon would be capable of producing a 28-70mm f/1.4 S and a 24-105mm f/2 with the same size and weight on their massive Z mount.
Out of curiosity, I just re-watched CF review of the 6 years old RF 28-70 f2. Let me tell you, this new Sony lens DID NOT catch up, it got blown out the water in most IQ metrics, except focus breathing(but still noticeable). What a shame, Sony had SIX years and still fell short, especially in the corners at ALL focal lengths. Here re-watch it again if you don’t believe, go ahead, don’t be scared 😱 th-cam.com/video/xuBq_Z_wuDs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=aO0rAeL5hEmgaDd0
@@Greatbylook I suppose they're just fine with the 10+ year old equipment, as most customers are looking at images on their mobile phone screens anyway.
… if you compare it with the images of the R5 and R8 here on CF channel: not on any tested focal length. The Sony and it newer lens design has a massive advantage over the six years old Canon.
Looking at this review objectively for the price, I think Chris has exposed a relatively poor performer in this lens despite his high recommendation comment at the end.
Will use Honey to check if there is a discount on Amazon.
Chris deserves better😅
Bwahahaha! Good one ;)
😂😂😂
😅
🍯🐝 hehehe what a scam!
Just want to say I've watched so many of your reviews and I love how you have the template down to a science. All the stuff we need to know, presented so clearly and transparently, and with no fluff and no hype. And you're a fellow believer in Christ? Amazing.
His channel is the only place I go to to find out about lenses. I remember back in the day when he used to shoot some kind of a brick house to determine the image quality.
Your review photos always bring back some fond memories of Aberystwyth (my uni about 10 years ago).
Have a great Christmas!
I was my Uni 20 years ago :-)
This is going to be a banger review. Got mine last week and im in love with it.
Now I moment for our sponsor! No hold up you know we don’t do that love it . Marry Christmas
Thanks Christopher! I have this lens in use now for 1 week and has become my standard lens for marriages and documentary work
3:37 That zoom out looked just like it does on a television camera! I love that!
Was waiting for this review!
I refused to look anyone else review before Christopher did his.
Finally!
Thank you!
This is a very difficult zoom to make well and Sony have to be applauded. Given Sonys relatively small E mount it doesn't seem to be negatively affecting their lens designs much.
This isn't True! The Sony RF 28-70mm f/2 has been around for years! and Canon is copying it all these years later! This is why Sony is leading the way. The new Sony RF 24-105mm f/2.8 IS USM Z is another thing I think Canon will end up Copying Sony on... This is why Sony is leading the way! The Canon Lenses use In-Body Camera corrections for their lenses which is why their lenses are smaller and more compact and sharper, where the Sony lenses might be larger, but they are more optically sound! and this is why Sony is leading the way!
I doubt anyone is going to read this far, but this is sarcasm because I think it's funny. all of the things that I have listed are truly about Canon's lenses and how/why they are sharper and who's copying who lol. overall, I think I am funny 10 out of 10 for funniness! 😂🤣
@@TigaWouldWhat 😂😂😂?
Sony x Canon?
@TigaWould If Canon leads the way, then how come they abandoned their DSLR line and started doing mirrorless cameras like SONY, with features like eye-AF, tracking etc, just like it's been with SONY cameras since they created the E-mount in 2010?
Canon's lenses are not sharper than SONY's. If anything, it is the latter that usually resolve more and are lighter and not as bulky as Canon's.
@@dunnymonster ...and it only took Sony 6 years to become 2nd on the market with such lens :-D .
@@petrpohnan875imagine being a fan of a brand that doesn’t care about you whatsoever as long as they can get a ton of money out of you
Merry Christmas Chris. Thank you for your videos.
Thank you for your lens review. Not only this one and all previous reviews. Have a wonderful Christmas wiwth your family and of course a Happy New Year.
The close up performance is fine. Giving it starts at f2, by f4 it is pretty sharp. My sigma 24-70 at f5.6 seems worse than this at f4 at minimal focal distance.
Watching these lens review videos is a happy place for me. Thank you kind sir
This has to be the most impressive optic ever made.
Thanks for the honest review of this lens I have been waiting for
Still waiting for a 24-105 F4 Mk II. Would readily buy it.
What's wrong with the MK1?
@@fotografalexandernikolisnon linear manual focus function. I’d get the MK1 if it had it.
@@giacomom2370 isn't that a firmware issue with the camera body?
@@fotografalexandernikolis not in the case of Sony. Only selected FE and E lenses carry that linear manual focus function.
@@giacomom2370 good to know, thanks!
3:29 Looks like the distortion pattern depends on focus distance
That is really terrible behavior. But clearly this is the price for overcompensating the lens against focus breathing.
@petrpohnan875 Funny if that's true because distortion breathing looks more awkward than focus breathing. Moreover, in my opinion focus breathing matters the most for stage filming where the frame is carefully positioned
I preordered this and can say it’s impressive. Although I don’t see it as an ideal portrait lens,I think it’ll have a lot to offer in weddings and events. Very fast sharp and clean images while delivering a bit of character. Notably the bloomy highlights are what I noticed.
Love your work, Chris. Merry Christmas!
I love it, but I'm not sure it would replace an 85mm f/1.8 lens.
Very impressive.... I'm hoping for more F/2 zooms, would absolutely love a 35-85.
Merry Christmas Mr. Frost, and have a Happy New Year! I have learned so much about lenses through the years following your channel. I look forward to more reviews as lens tech improves...
As always, keep up the good work and keep'em flying..
From the little red planet, somewhere in TX...snicker.
I've tested it recently in a photography store. It seems great to hold as well - quite the size and weight of some DSLR-era 24-70mm f/2.8.
Great lens, but unfortunately at a price point you expect for a constant f/2. Also, not as fat/thick and heavy as Canon's barrel-like 28-70 f/2L RF!
And the focus throw is so suprisingly short!
How would you compare this to the Tamron 35-150 or the sigma 28-45mm?
3:34 is the lens optically corrected for focus breathing or is it using Focus Breathing Compensation feature, to digitaly correct focus breathing by cropping?
Digitally not.
Optically, I'd imagine. The a7RIII doesn't have FBC.
Optically corrected
thanks for answers
Another superb review, I'd be lying if I told you I'm not jealous of the Sony system. I love Canon's superb color science and incredible autofocus locking especially for shooting birds, however I get jealous of most lenses that work on Sony as Canon never releases a good internal focusing 600mm zoom lens. This could've been in my lens arsenal if I was on the Sony system.
Thank god for that longitudinal chromatic aberation, I almost sold everything I own to buy this lens.
😝
@@radoo86 LOCA will always be the worst when zoomed all the way in and at the minimum focus distance on a zoom lens. Go test your own zooms and see how bad the LOCA is
the mega distortion at the wide end make the corners go lumpy wide open because the in camera corrections are squeezing those pixels hard.
I have the Canon 28-70 f2 at work and despite being a pretty good lens - not great mind you - it's like having a large brick around your neck and I hate it. I'm pleased Sony has shaved some weight, but I didn't buy this one with my new Sony kit and instead went for the 24-70, 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 for similar money and much better image quality in the 2 fields of view I use the most.
IMHO, the new Sony f2, like the Canon, isn't really a replacement for primes because of size and weight and anyone considering these lenses should hand one off their neck for a bit and think about that. That said, I can see a place for the new f2 in video where changing lenses is not a great option. Thank you, as ever, for the excellent review.
No, no, no - don't hang it off your neck. Maybe use a Peak Design or Sun Sniper strap, or a Spider Holster system. It's lighter than a 70-200 lens, though.
@@adamadamisSo much this. It boggles my mind how many people buy an expensive camera and then only use it with the original strap, which is way too short for shoulder carry. Anyone should get a peak design or similar.
Used mine for its first wedding yesterday. Didn’t miss a beat although at a winter wedding I still needed my f1.2 50mm
Not a Sony user or fan but they deserve the praise for their lenses. Especially when comparing to their designs from 10 years ago.
How I wish I could afford to pick one of these up right now. It weighs less than my most commonly used lens and would be a dream for almost everything I shoot.
Would love to see this lens compare to Canon RF 28-70mm F.2 L 😊😊😊
The canon version is a lot softer at F2
@@SliverCreations I definitely wouldn't say a lot softer. Maybe just a bit.
@@SliverCreations A lot softer? What do you mean?
Christopher Frost about Canon RF 28-70mm f/2: At F2 we see razor sharpness at al lfocal lenghts.
Both lenses are extremely sharp for any photography job.
I don't feel like there is much of a comparison. The age alone of these lenses is something that is a huge advantage for the Sony.
A comparison across different sensors and systems is compromised to begin with
I got to use this lens today, I really like it. Its a bit on the Chonky side of things but it was great. Not changing from my primary Tamron 35-150 will still be my go to.
I also have the 35 - 150mm for weddings. Why won't you switch? I'm thinking of getting this lens too.
@@catalystJJ The range, I don't need to change lenses in the middle of a Wedding or Event It covers the 24-70 and 70-200, Yes I loose some on the wide, and some of the narrow but that is nothing my feet can not adjust for. A lot of the time I am doing Beach weddings here in FL, The less im changing the less chance of dust and debris getting in my body and messing with the sensor. Also I shoot at ComicCons and I like having only one body on me because of the size of crowds.
Can you use 82mm filters with a 86mm step down ring with no vignetting?
Just like the Canon version I'm curious how it compares with the Tamron or Samyang 35-150 f/2?
Tamron or Samyang 35-150 f/2 does not exist.
Nice review as always. But as a long time viewer I'm still confused about whether or not you refocus for the corners when checking corner sharpness, to rule out potential field curvature. If not, that's definitely something you need to start doing! Merry Christmas!
Good point. However, what about a scenario where you want everything in perfect focus? Example, when you photograph a painting or poster for reproduction purposes, and you want sharpness in the middle, and also the corners? With some lenses, you can focus in the center, and the corners are fairly sharp also. Maybe that's also a fair way to test, as long as one is consistent?
@adamadamis Both ways of testing are important yes. For reproduction purposes a macro lens is most certainly the best option.
Dear Christopher, thank you for the informative video; as your videos always are. Thank you!
Suggestion; close focus distance is a strange concept as they vary between lenses. It might be an idea to consider a 'standard' close distance test for non macro lenses. Say the 70cm of Leica M lenses, to pick a random reference for close sharpness test.
Cannot really agree to be a dream lens for wedding photographers. Those 4 mm on the wide end are dearly missed :( ... 28mm is just not wide enough.
Wow, what an impressive feat by sony again.
I can't believe it's only been about 3 years since the release of the 24-70 GM II and I sold everything to buy that one, now there's this on the market for only a few hundred more dollars.
I think I still prefer it to this though, I don't know how I feel about carrying an extra stop of glass in the zoom range.
I want an internal zoom of this lens and the Canon RF
So many options - not enough money! Thanks for the content.
Can we get a review of the “old” Nikon Z6?
looks like a great lens. assuming this will be very important for portrait shooters, I'd guess the corners being slightly softer isn't a big deal at all. Now the weight savings vs. the Canon 28-70 is a huge deal!
You could do a comparison vid with 24-70 GM II , Sigma II and this 28-70 2 :)
Hefty price tag... But then again... What does a full set of 2.0 primes cost 😅
At the same time I do feel more comfortable not having a lens that expensive on my camera. Handeling something of this value would make me very nervous. But it looks super useful and flexible for sure.
Unusual for you to like such a specialized optic. It must be really stellar. Is it possible to compare it to the Sony FE GM 24-70 2.8 II? Thanks!
Great Lens and thanks for the Review. But the quality of sharpness at this focus point is a no go for such a price level (7:46-7:49)….disappointing
Thank you for this review. Brilliant! Question between this and the Tamron 35-150 is there a noticeable delta in sharpness and contrast? I know the Tamron has to creep to something like 2.3 at 70mm so not totally comparable. Thank you as always!
Will you check samyang prima 35 1.4 P?
0:03 😆😆😆 i had started wondering what changed.. you almost got me.
Hi. I was wondering if many, or any, big expensive lenses use plastic internal lens elements to reduce the weight.
I believe they all do nowadays. Similar to how our spectacles' lenses are plastic. They perform brilliantly, and are a bit lighter, so as long as the results are there, why not. I think Canon's kit zooms have been using plastic lenses for many years.
@@adamadamisalso for weirdly shaped elements (as in RF 28mm f/2.8)
CF! Would love a review of the Voigtlander Ultra-Wide set - 10mm/12mm/15mm
Hi Chris: You habe proven the close up image quality isnt the greatest, and lets just assume, Sony never had intentions to make this a second macro lens. If thats the case , your LOCA test would suffer from it, since it highly relates on close up IQ. Could you SEE any LOCA in landscape focus (28mm infinity) or portrait focus (70mm 3-10m)?
Expensive lens but considering it's potentially replacing the need for primes, the 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and even an 85mm. Makes this a bargain by comparison.
Very nice lens but 6 years after Canon! That is an eternity!
I'm sure we're all eager to find out if this lens made it to your Xmas stocking!
😂😂🤣
You made me laugh here 😊
'wishing you a very good time
This lens or two Sony primes?
Not ditching my 35 GM and 20-70 for this. If it's 35- 85 f2 I might
Can someone Help me? Whats the Point of this Lens when there is the 24 70 2.8? Is it the larger aperture? I'm looking for a 24-70 and this might be an alternative but I don't get why this exists. I'm no video shooter so pls apologize my ignorance.
Aperture is twice as bright
Grazie per la traccia audio in italiano 👏 👏 👏
Haha you caught me off guard with the sponsorship joke.
Aperture ring clicks at every 1/3 of an f-stop.
What an absolutely incredible lens, I wonder if I can afforr… oh.
Seems like a really nice lens, but a bit much for my pocket book. I will keep my Tamron 28-75 G2 for now =) I got it fort $500 used in perfect condition.
I'd suggest you make a comparison with the Sigma 28-45mm f1.8 some day. They share a lot in common, but each makes the race in different regards.
Would you say this lens is a better choice than 24-70mm GM II ?
Would you say anyone can answer your question when you don't even tell us about your use case?
Obviously this is a better lens, but that doesn't mean it's right for your use case. But since we don't know your use case, it's impossible to answer.
… in terms of sharpness it’s a nearly equal performance. the 24-70 FM II has a significant better close image quality and a higher magnification ratio, but the 28-70 is not bad at all.
if you need or want the f2 go with the new lens and get also the f1.8 20G or the f2.8 16-25 G for shooting wide angle pictures - or if you have the money: get the f2.8 12-24 GM. 😏
Da questo video test posso dire che il Canon rimane il migliore
Does anyone even make 86mm filters or adapters??
… yes, of cause.
Nice, but Sony 24-70 @ f2.8 is still pretty fast, has wider range, & is a lot less expensive
But does he like it?
Great review.
Next Nikon has to produce their own version.
Nikon has a 28 70 f2.8 which is very sharp
@@AlanJose86 it's not f2 though
For half the price and 300g more there is the 35-150 tamron f2
70mm didn’t seem as sharp in center as 28 or 45mm but corners were sharper for nice even sharpness. Nice performance overall for this lens. Not a surprise since Sony rarely misses.
I would like to see him refocus on corners because otherwise he simply only tests if the lens has the focus on a flat plane
@@hardywoodaway9912does it really matter? If a lens has such a curved focus plane that the corners are soft then it doesn’t really matter. Not like anyone is going to focus their photos for the corner and ignore the soft center.
@@StymyParsleyYes it matters because in real world those corners might be perfectly sharp, but maybe 20cm closer which isn't something you'd notice. You really need to look up how this works.
@@fotografalexandernikolis yes I know how this works lol, my point is if you’re shooting wide open then it doesn’t matter, it can be sharp but if it’s out of focus then it’ll look soft. If the corners can be sharp if you focus on them it doesn’t matter wide open, but it would matter stopped down like when taking a landscape, which Chris showed. I know this very well because I have a lens (Mitakon 35mm f/0.95) that’s actually sharp in the center but has both corner softness wide open but also extreme field curvature. So extreme that even at f/11 it smears like a transition zone between in and out of focus but isn’t soft.
@@StymyParsley If the field curvature is mild then the corners will only be soft if you shoot a flat surface. If you shoot a landscape for example the corners will be sharp, but at a slightly different distance. I'm just saying that's why it's not as bad as actually soft corners.
24-70 and 35 1,4 or 50 1,4 would fit better
If only this would have something like FE 28mm F2's MFD (25cm) i would sell everything i have to buy it. The one lens which replaces 3 primes and weights just 0.9kg... Simply throw lightweight tripod and the camera into backpack and you are ready to go ANYWHERE capturing ANYTHING.
OOOUCCHHH how much?????
Crazy how people consider think lens chonky and heavy. After using the RF version and testing this lens, it was peanuts.
Good for you, I'm sure your MUSKLES are big and strong. Your parents are proud
Woobewized! Love it!
I am sorry lens manufacturers stopped putting optical stabilization into their lenses
Apparently your wife is a businesswoman, a gift would be really great)
Does your lens make a noise while zooming in and out? Like plastic is rubbing
… no, it’s silent.
Looks like a total Honey.
I think I’ll wait for the 12-800 f1.2 pancake lens coming in 2029
Not a lens for me even if I had a Sony camera. Too big and heavy, with a limited zoom range. However it feels like this is what we’ve come to expect from Sony, and they did not disappoint.
Nikon, time to show them what you can do!
Un ottica Sony GM andrebbe verificata con un sensore più moderno tipo Sony A7R IV o A7R V, ormai la Sony A7R III è un bel pò vecchiotta. Sensore e file RAW obsoleti. Buone feste.
28 is too tight tbh. I would rather have something like 18-55, for example
The weight is impressive compared to the canon one but it has a cost: the bokeh... It is not nice on the sony one. It is hard/vibrant. And the bokeh balls that are cut 😆
…and it costs $2,900 US dollars. Next
Very weird seeing you in aber
sell one camera body for a lens. you do not have to carry two cameras with two lens again.
I still think 24-70 and 35-150 are a little more wedding-y zooms. In this Sony production, the longitudinal aberration and close-up images actually look terrible 😬
❤ English Humor
If Sony could make such a lens with the small APSC E-mount, I am sure that Nikon would be capable of producing a 28-70mm f/1.4 S and a 24-105mm f/2 with the same size and weight on their massive Z mount.
imagine the prices...
Imagine how heavy that’d be lol. And would cost at least $5000
… hopefully they won’t forget to implement the autofocus - like they did in the useless, heavy and expensive bestseller lens - the 58 mm f0.95. 😂😂😂
Out of curiosity, I just re-watched CF review of the 6 years old RF 28-70 f2. Let me tell you, this new Sony lens DID NOT catch up, it got blown out the water in most IQ metrics, except focus breathing(but still noticeable). What a shame, Sony had SIX years and still fell short, especially in the corners at ALL focal lengths. Here re-watch it again if you don’t believe, go ahead, don’t be scared 😱
th-cam.com/video/xuBq_Z_wuDs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=aO0rAeL5hEmgaDd0
Did you watch the special test video I made of how it performs on a 45mp camera, instead of the EOS R's 30mp sensor?
Honey, why is my sock 1.4kg...😢
i wanted Sony 28-70 f2.0 not Canon's 😌😭😭😭
In Germany, it's priced at 3699€ :DDDDD
Holy 💩
@Bibyyb Well you know you live in Germany every time you recognize you pay 19% on top of everything because of your taxes ("Mehrwertsteuer") 😂
Crazy price 😂. The wedding photographers need to work their asses like crazy for these
@@Greatbylook I suppose they're just fine with the 10+ year old equipment, as most customers are looking at images on their mobile phone screens anyway.
@@mcchicken9342 true tho. Hahahha but really this lens really amazing, now we only need this for apsc haha
No 3D POP🥲
Yeez, so all the esoteric photographers will switch brand then…
Canon 28-70/2 gives sharper image to my eye
I'd hate to have your eyes
… if you compare it with the images of the R5 and R8 here on CF channel: not on any tested focal length. The Sony and it newer lens design has a massive advantage over the six years old Canon.
Looking at this review objectively for the price, I think Chris has exposed a relatively poor performer in this lens despite his high recommendation comment at the end.
… what? 😂 …