PhotoRec TV actually Tamron is also coming with 28 75 f2.8... So we need to consider that too. I think sigma lenses and very crisp but also little big in size... That's been Said I AM still watch ur video....
For Sony, it does look like an excellent option. I do wish they had started at 24 - that extra bit of wide just makes the lens a bit more versatile but still overall a great option and I can't wait to review.
I have the Sigma 24-70mm Art, for the weight of the lens and what I use the lens for, IS is a plus. Especially with firmware updates available makes this lens a good lens to have. I also noticed with the updated firmware on the mc-11 makes this a very good lens to use on the a7 series cameras. Again the draw back is the weight. I personally did not purchase the Tamron because of past experience but with all the great reviews of the new lenses I placed a pre-order on the 28-75mm f2.8 for the Sony. I will test the Tamron to see if the focal distance on the telephoto end is true, I know Tamron has come up short on the telephoto end with the 70-200mm f2.8 G2.
Toby thanks for a rational 'non-hyped' discussion of these lenses. I was especially glad to hear about the weight factor. I'm officially a little old lady (75) and this matters to me when I'm in the field.
I own the sigma 24-70mm f2.8 and I don't see the slow af you talk about on a canon 1dx it's not as fast as canon 24-70mm f2.8 but I shoot events and concerts with it no problem :) i prefer the look on sigma over the look of canon :)
I own the Tamron G2, its an incredible lens. I would choose anyday of the week for the sigma. A little lighter and very good Image stabilizer. Only complaint I've heard is that you might need a Tap in console to adjust the focus to be optimized for your specific camera model. But on my 6D it is tack sharp without adjustments. Almost every picture can be zoomed in to the pixels before it gets blurry.
I love my Tamrom 24-70 G2 and I thought IT was heavy. It is a lot to carry around already, I can't imagine the Sigma... I've also been able to shoot pretty consistantly down to 1/10th second reliably on both the tamron 35 and 24-70. The 24-70 is quickly replacing my other lenses when I travel since it meets 80% of my needs. BH had/may still have a special going to include a free dock with it.
I agree, for me it feels like I dont need my primes anymore. The primes I own are not super sharp below aperture 2.8 anyway. No more switching lens all the time which is very convenient.
I want to get the sigma 24-70mm ART lens, i have a nikon d700 and will be getting the sone a7s II but i want a lens with the same quality but a better autofocus for recording sporting events. Which lens would you recommend thats close to the 24-70mm ART
I would love to buy this lens, my only question is how does it perform in video? If it does well, I would rather have it then the 24-70 G-Master or the GM II also… Videos don’t need to be super sharp and the OS w/ IBIS on new systems would be insane….
There's an old Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which is way cheaper and has a reputation of a sharp one. Quite an option for those who want to try-before-buy the focal range.
Hmm, I was shortly thinking about replacing my Sigma 24-105 with this one... mainly for the 2.8. But I dont think I will do this. I love the Art (zoom) lenses. The only issue I have with it is actually the weight. And in this regard the 24-70 is even a bit heavier than the 24.105. (sure f 2.8). So yes, I would like the 2.8 but not if it means even more weight. Just to put the last lingering doubt to rest: How is the balance of the 24-70?? The 24-105 is rather front heavy which makes it feel even heavier then it actually is... having to grip the camera firmer etc.
I bought the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art about 8 months ago and so far I’ve enjoyed it. It is heavy, but as a landscape photographer I like that as it helps keep the tripod stable with the added weight in wind. I compared it to the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L II and found that the image stabilization was very effective at slower shutter speeds and in lower light, where the Canon was blurry at similar shots due to the lack of IS. Otherwise they’re very equivalent. But the build quality is awesome and my version is tack sharp. So I’m happy with my decision.
Will this lens work for a Sony a7sII? I heard this is only for A mount cameras. Also, with the IS built into the camera, does it matter if the lens has IS? Thanks for the video! It was super helpful! I just subscribed! :)
Nice video! Do you think is is a good idea if I sale my canon 16-35 f4 and buy the sigma 24-70 f2.8? I'm also thinking to buy the new sigma 14mm f1.8 for my landscape photography. Thanks for your help Thanks
Nicely done. I had done a comparison of the Sigma, Tamron G2, and the sigma 24-105 when I was looking to "refresh". I found the Tamron to be razor sharp across the frame (better at F4 than 2.8 of course), and it was especially superior when you view the sharpness as you view forward, off the focal plane. The tamron just seems to stay sharper longer in the foreground. All great lenses in the center. I ended up going with the tamron G2 and I'm glad I did.
Hi! Great review! thank you for sharing your knowledge. I wanted to know your opinion about this lens on an a6300 body. Will the image stabilization be an issue?
For Sony, it does look like an excellent option. I do wish they had started at 24 - that extra bit of wide just makes the lens a bit more versatile but still overall a great option and I can't wait to review.
24-70 is far more complex/bigger to design than 28-75. That´s why Tamron is so lightweight and cheap. And tbh i´ve been running years with my 24-105mmL on my 7D ... and used 11-18 like 1-2 / year. Nowdays its 7d/30mmF1.4 all the time, so a7III will be 55mm1.8 and maybe the Tamron zoom, but more likely MC11+24-105L.
I actually think 28mm is perfect, I shoot a lot of people and 24mm is too wide and hardly ever use it on my Canon. I stick around 30-35mm. Looks like the quality and AF on the Tamron is quite stellar and you cannot beat the price. For 400$ more, The Canon 24-70 LII is much much better. Love what Sigma is putting out, but I would pass on this one.
Well dont think Canon actully beats it (on Sony anyway), check out KROLOP & GERST - German and he just compared the Tamron to G-Master & super expensive Zeiss ... and agree Tokina 11-18F2.8 on crop is around 18-28mm ... It´s very wide for me and i didnt use it very often (tho ive been happy to have it when i needed it)
Thanks for the review! I'm a photographer and have a Nikon D850 with 2 Sigma lenses, 24-70 f/2.8 Art and 70-200 f/2.8 Sport. This combo is a monster! Heavy, yes, but being a photographer is not about weight. It's about quality and professionalism. And Sigma gives me both. Actually, I lift weights 3x a week, so... 😂😅
Hi, do you think that sigma value 200 euros more than the 28-75 2.8 Tamron? I mean is the Sigma so god to spend 200 euros more than if I buy the Tamron?
Hi there , I was planning on buying myself a Canon 77d .As a beginner am a bit confused on the lenses I should consider. Should I go for : Set 1 Canon EF s 18-135mm Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro Canon 50mm f1.8 atm Or Set 2 Canon EF s 18-55mm Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro Canon 50mm f1.8 atm Or Set 3 Canon EF s 18-135mm Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro Or Set 4 Canon EF s 18-55mm Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro
Any of those sets provide great opportunities for photography. I can't make a recommendation on what you should buy until you tell me what type of photography you are excited about - I am guessing at least some macro since you have the 100mm macro in every set. Watch this for more about 18-55 vs 18-135 ruclips.net/video/Hr3EOCdj25Y/видео.html .
PhotoRec TV Well thanks for the quick reply.I have some product photos to be taken that's why the macro is a must.Rest just for finding my style of photography.
Hello there, I saw you at horseshoe bend! I'm the Brazilian guy with the "nice setup" as you said :D love you channel, great content! my first camera I bought after seeing one of yours reviews, thank you!
Do you know whether the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC G2 comes with their version of the Sigma Dock to do AF fine-tuning and firmware updates? That may not be worth the savings of $100.
I went for the Canon 24-70 F4 L which does have IS, and the trade off in price was insane. Love the lens, and the macro function can also be fun, though I don’t use it for macro shots.
David Ribeiro i have the 24-70 f4 and its just to limited compared to 2.8 .. although i only shot on my 5d mark 3 because i dont have an adapter for my a7r3 yet
I was first thinking about the 25-105 f4 canon for the longer zoom range, but the smaller aperture was too big of a trade off for me. I went for the tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 and its a very good lens
One thing to think about is if the Canon's better sharpness is worth the tradeoff of stabilization. Unless if you have impeccable camera holding technique, or only shoot on a tripod, there's likely to be some blur induced by shaking even at 1/200s. So, you may be able to get sharper results with Sigma's OS (or Tamron's VC), over Canon's lack of IS. However, many people seem to get very good results even without the IS. I seem to do well enough with Nikon's 24-70 without VR. I will admit though that I've tossed out a few "winning moments" captured because of camera shake.
This is giving me a bit of something to think about. I have a Sony a7III and am very close to buying the Sony FE 24-70mm 2.8 GM and Samyang 14mm F2.8 as my next lens purchases. However, I could buy this Sigma (which comes with the MC-11) and something like the Irix 15mm 2.8 Blackstone (which also requires an adapter like an MC-11) for almost $200 less than the Sony lens alone. Toby, the thing that I keep thinking about is how good the Sony lens is. Do you have any thoughts on the going with the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM and the Samyang (which would just be used for astro) compared to the other two?
I see your dilemma - The Sony 24-70 GM is pricey which makes me struggle to recommend it to everyone when there are alternatives that cost 1/2 the price BUT the focus speed and full weather sealing of the Sony are serious benefits and for shooting the stars the Sony is great and the Rokinon is great too. So I am leaning toward the Sony & Rokinon for you - but we can chat about it some more. bhpho.to/2ro3RLV
The price of the Sony certainly isn't something to take lightly, but I really do want one high quality lens in my bag, and then build out from there with other good, yet more cost conscious options. Thank you, I really appreciate that you take time to respond to questions from all of us, and even more so your honesty. I hope that you're in town this weekend to enjoy the amazing weather we're supposed to have in the Seattle area.
Robert Forehand if you would consider getting the Sony second hand it might be worth waiting to see if the price dips a bit when the new Tamron comes out. Just a thought :)
Hi, thank u for review the sigma 24-70mm in sony body, I've been wondering, does the autofocus in video mode work on that adapter? Coz I wanna buy this sigma and use it with A6300 and viltrox speedbooster. But I dont know the autofocus will work with that adapter. When Im using canon lens 50mm f1.8, the autofocus work on video. Thank you
I have had the generation 1 Taunton 24-70 f2.8 for years now. Strangely 24-70 is my less favorite zoom... I either use 24-105f4 (I own the first gen canon, the sigma art and the new released Sony, that tells you how much I love this focal length) or just go prime
I bit the bullet a year or more ago and got the Sony G-Master 24-70mm. It is big, heavy with great image quality and fast, accurate autofocus; pretty solid all around lens. I am excited to see the new Tamron announced and considered selling my Sony and save a bunch of money and weight by getting the Tamron but I am concerned that that extra 4mm taken off the wide end would take away from the versatility of a general zoom lens. I am siding towards sticking with the IQ and standard 24-70mm focal length with the trade off of size, weight, and price. This might change as real world reviews come out.
Canon is now $1,599 on B&H. I don't know why but they recently dropped the price of their 24-70 f2.8L ii, the 50mm f1.2L and also the 5D4... I bought these three in the last four months just before they dropped the price... I'm guessing are they releasing a different mount system for full frame mirrorless so they want to clear the stock, or is it just their sell number is getting bad?
I have a question for you about Zeiss 55mm 1.8. Should anyone spend lots of money for that 1.8? I like the way that lens look (ahh) it's sharp, compact, almost 50mm but 1.8 and expensive....😅
I would say it's up to you - trading weight for price for sharpness. Yes the Sigma 50mm is big but is faster, very sharp too just happens to be big. But if you really need a lightweight 50 - you can't beat that Zeiss.
I would really like to get the Tamron G2, but I had a bad experience with the Tamron 70-200 G2 lens and will never buy another Tamron lens. So, the Sigma model is the one for me.
I understand - I had a bad experience many years ago with a Tamron 24-70 but have tried many of their newer lenses and they are excellent and very good values.
I have the Nikon VR 24-70 and it has been very reliable and focuses fast. There was some discussion around its sharpness when it came out but for me it has been ultra sharp even at 1:1 on a D850. In my experience it performs very well against the Sigma 50 and 85 in terms of center sharpness. The image stabilization really helps especially for landscape work, mostly hiking without a tripod. Its almost always on my camera while hiking and travelling. It's pretty big and heavy, though I don't mind it as much because at least it does fit in my photosport 200 AW alongside the 14-24.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm without the VR (which people claim to be sharper than the VR version) and I will say that the Sigma 50mm Art blows it away in sharpness in the center, no contest. I find it odd that you haven't seen the difference. But, as a hiker too, the Sigma 50mm was a bit too heavy for me to warrant keeping it in my bag. I too agree that the Nikon 24-70 is a bit heavy.
No you misunderstand me the Sigma 50 or 85 are sharper I only bring those up to point out that I do know what sharpness looks like and I’d say that the 24-70 is darned close even in the center. The corners are excellent and I get much better results with VR than without for landscapes when I don’t have time to set up a tripod. Check out Roger Cillia’s review at Lensrentals that was much more comprehensive and in keeping with my experience than the DXOmark review.
I owe this lens and I really enjoy it! It was a step up from my old Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (original). Based purely on the sample photos I've seen, I do prefer the current Tamron G2 version a little bit more, BUT I already had the Sigma Mc-11 and so I thought it would be smarter to go with the Sigma version and use it on both my canons and my sonys
I have a tamron. Sent it in twice, second time with a body so they could adjust it properly. I shoot with 1Ds series cameras. If you are looking for no problem, get canon.
Isn't the answer obvious? The Canon 24-70MM f/2.8LII is known to be the sharpest 24/70 on the market. Since all the recent A7/A9 bodies already have image stabilization built it in, all that's needed is the metabones V (which works better than the sigma converter on canon lenses) and you're all set.
For Sony Shooters I wish there was a more affordable 24-70 option out there that does not have IS. I could not care less about a lens having IS and especially not a 24-70 focal length. Let alone, most Sony bodies have IBIS, as mine does. I am one who jumped from Canon so much of my glass is..well Canon. I purchased the Sigma MC-11 like you have which is a great adapter and sigma has great glass. It is just very frustrating that Sigma does not offer this in a more affordable non IS because none of the Canon lenses support all af modes and the Sony lenses are just WAY over priced and honestly not worth the price. .
I am getting really (literally) tired with these "tank like" lenses. LOL We just came back from Brussels where I carried around my 5D mark IV/Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 combo with an extra Sigma 24-105 f/4 and the combined weight of those two lenses was ridicules. While more expensive, the lighter Canon L lenses feel like a breath of fresh air after lugging around any recent Tamron or Sigma.
I was leaning towards the Sigma over Canon and Tamron....but slow focus is not an Option when doing a wedding. I like the idea of IS for sure and of course Canon does not offer it. What in the heck is Canon waiting for!!!..I'll hang tight for now until a better option comes along...
I like the Tamron except the zoom and focus rings turn the opposite direction as my Canon Lenses. I am not sure if that will be annoying. It's a shame also that both Tamron and Sigma have the focus and zoom rings reversed with the focus ring now closest to the body.
Hey Toby, Thanks for the review! Have you tried this in the non-adapted form? I'll bet it focuses faster native on Canon or Nikon, or when they finally get a Sony version out.
I did try it on a Canon 5D Mark IV and found the focus to be about the same. I am always careful when I review to not judge or comment on focus if I have only used adapted - that can really change some lenses performance. Thanks! I suspect with the native sony mount it might be a tiny bit faster. We will have to wait and see :)
I have the Sony A-mount Zeiss 2470 F2.8 Mk 1 and the LA-EA3 adaptor. I don’t think these Sigma or new Tamron lenses would be any better than that on my Sony A9. Do you agree?
No it isn't. It's existence was dictated by the 70-200/2.8 and the 14-24/2.8 lenses. So what was left? The 24-70/2.8...duhhh. As a standard lens it's too wide for it's tele end. A 28-105/2.8 would be a much better everyday lens (it has been done by Tamron in the late film days). I have used it and can report that this focal range is magical for everyday shooting. But that would dictate a change in the holy Trinity line up: a 14-28/2.8 (perfect 2X) and a 100-300/2.8 (Sigma makes an excellent 120-300/2.8) and you have everything from 14 to 300 @ 2.8 plus having in the middle a perfect standard lens. It just needs a manufacturer to change the status quo.
The new L version of this is much lighter...1.84 lbs...the zoom and focus rings no longer butt each other...and it’s either AF or MF. Redesigned for Sigma’s fp, apparently.
yeah exactly, they are close but i read that Sigma isn't fully weather sealed on 24-70 though it is on the new 14-24, plus is a touch less sharp ,compared to Tamron
Yeah but the Sigma has a better bokeh and color rendering than the Tamron: that's where the choice is hard to do. The Tamron is better at low focale range, the Sigma better at low focale range... Tamron is slightly better at F2.8 but the Sigma is better at F4 and they are on par at F5,6
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
The Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 OS HSM ART - bhpho.to/2K5WYWD
Do you need image stabilization in your 24-70 range?
Which 24-70 would you pick and why?
PhotoRec TV actually Tamron is also coming with 28 75 f2.8... So we need to consider that too. I think sigma lenses and very crisp but also little big in size... That's been Said I AM still watch ur video....
For Sony, it does look like an excellent option. I do wish they had started at 24 - that extra bit of wide just makes the lens a bit more versatile but still overall a great option and I can't wait to review.
PhotoRec TV yeah and also Price is OK for that lens... Is 24mm on full frame sufficient for vlogging?
I have the Sigma 24-70mm Art, for the weight of the lens and what I use the lens for, IS is a plus. Especially with firmware updates available makes this lens a good lens to have. I also noticed with the updated firmware on the mc-11 makes this a very good lens to use on the a7 series cameras. Again the draw back is the weight. I personally did not purchase the Tamron because of past experience but with all the great reviews of the new lenses I placed a pre-order on the 28-75mm f2.8 for the Sony. I will test the Tamron to see if the focal distance on the telephoto end is true, I know Tamron has come up short on the telephoto end with the 70-200mm f2.8 G2.
Yes it is.
Toby thanks for a rational 'non-hyped' discussion of these lenses. I was especially glad to hear about the weight factor. I'm officially a little old lady (75) and this matters to me when I'm in the field.
Are you testing the focus through the canon to Sony adapter?
I own the sigma 24-70mm f2.8 and I don't see the slow af you talk about on a canon 1dx it's not as fast as canon 24-70mm f2.8 but I shoot events and concerts with it no problem :) i prefer the look on sigma over the look of canon :)
I own the Tamron G2, its an incredible lens. I would choose anyday of the week for the sigma. A little lighter and very good Image stabilizer. Only complaint I've heard is that you might need a Tap in console to adjust the focus to be optimized for your specific camera model. But on my 6D it is tack sharp without adjustments. Almost every picture can be zoomed in to the pixels before it gets blurry.
Thanks for the review! Amazing shots. Left me drooling.
I love my Tamrom 24-70 G2 and I thought IT was heavy. It is a lot to carry around already, I can't imagine the Sigma... I've also been able to shoot pretty consistantly down to 1/10th second reliably on both the tamron 35 and 24-70. The 24-70 is quickly replacing my other lenses when I travel since it meets 80% of my needs. BH had/may still have a special going to include a free dock with it.
I agree, for me it feels like I dont need my primes anymore. The primes I own are not super sharp below aperture 2.8 anyway. No more switching lens all the time which is very convenient.
I want to get the sigma 24-70mm ART lens, i have a nikon d700 and will be getting the sone a7s II but i want a lens with the same quality but a better autofocus for recording sporting events. Which lens would you recommend thats close to the 24-70mm ART
Tried it out and the zoom speed and build quality, compared to the Tamron G2, just made me go with the Tamron. That lens is just a beast.
Thanks for sharing!
Is there a 24-70 that does not extend out when you zoom? That never changes size? Thanks
How is the low light performance of the sigma over the tamron?
I would love to buy this lens, my only question is how does it perform in video? If it does well, I would rather have it then the 24-70 G-Master or the GM II also… Videos don’t need to be super sharp and the OS w/ IBIS on new systems would be insane….
There's an old Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 which is way cheaper and has a reputation of a sharp one. Quite an option for those who want to try-before-buy the focal range.
You know - I wish I had mentioned that lens - for many years it was my go-to lens and offers an excellent value. Thanks Paul!
Beast of a lens!!
Hmm, I was shortly thinking about replacing my Sigma 24-105 with this one... mainly for the 2.8. But I dont think I will do this. I love the Art (zoom) lenses. The only issue I have with it is actually the weight. And in this regard the 24-70 is even a bit heavier than the 24.105. (sure f 2.8).
So yes, I would like the 2.8 but not if it means even more weight.
Just to put the last lingering doubt to rest: How is the balance of the 24-70?? The 24-105 is rather front heavy which makes it feel even heavier then it actually is... having to grip the camera firmer etc.
The balance is very nice on the Sigma 24-70 - the weight is all right in the middle and feels like a lovely brick in the hand :)
I bought the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art about 8 months ago and so far I’ve enjoyed it. It is heavy, but as a landscape photographer I like that as it helps keep the tripod stable with the added weight in wind. I compared it to the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L II and found that the image stabilization was very effective at slower shutter speeds and in lower light, where the Canon was blurry at similar shots due to the lack of IS. Otherwise they’re very equivalent. But the build quality is awesome and my version is tack sharp. So I’m happy with my decision.
Will this lens work for a Sony a7sII? I heard this is only for A mount cameras. Also, with the IS built into the camera, does it matter if the lens has IS?
Thanks for the video! It was super helpful! I just subscribed! :)
With a larger diameter on this lens, would there be any issues mounting this on a Sony a7sii with use on a tripod?
Nice video!
Do you think is is a good idea if I sale my canon 16-35 f4 and buy the sigma 24-70 f2.8? I'm also thinking to buy the new sigma 14mm f1.8 for my landscape photography.
Thanks for your help
Thanks
Nicely done. I had done a comparison of the Sigma, Tamron G2, and the sigma 24-105 when I was looking to "refresh". I found the Tamron to be razor sharp across the frame (better at F4 than 2.8 of course), and it was especially superior when you view the sharpness as you view forward, off the focal plane. The tamron just seems to stay sharper longer in the foreground. All great lenses in the center. I ended up going with the tamron G2 and I'm glad I did.
I am thinking to buy canon 24-70 f4 since I only shoot Landscape on tripod. Is it good idea?
Hi! Great review! thank you for sharing your knowledge. I wanted to know your opinion about this lens on an a6300 body. Will the image stabilization be an issue?
Seems like the new Tamron is a much better deal if you can deal with 28mm. The reviews are pretty dang good. Plus it is native E mount for the Sony.
Yeah prefect AF and 800USD ... And. Native E-Mount.
For Sony, it does look like an excellent option. I do wish they had started at 24 - that extra bit of wide just makes the lens a bit more versatile but still overall a great option and I can't wait to review.
24-70 is far more complex/bigger to design than 28-75. That´s why Tamron is so lightweight and cheap. And tbh i´ve been running years with my 24-105mmL on my 7D ... and used 11-18 like 1-2 / year. Nowdays its 7d/30mmF1.4 all the time, so a7III will be 55mm1.8 and maybe the Tamron zoom, but more likely MC11+24-105L.
I actually think 28mm is perfect, I shoot a lot of people and 24mm is too wide and hardly ever use it on my Canon. I stick around 30-35mm. Looks like the quality and AF on the Tamron is quite stellar and you cannot beat the price. For 400$ more, The Canon 24-70 LII is much much better. Love what Sigma is putting out, but I would pass on this one.
Well dont think Canon actully beats it (on Sony anyway), check out KROLOP & GERST - German and he just compared the Tamron to G-Master & super expensive Zeiss ... and agree Tokina 11-18F2.8 on crop is around 18-28mm ... It´s very wide for me and i didnt use it very often (tho ive been happy to have it when i needed it)
Can you use the lens stabilisation together with the in-body stabilisation on the sony?
Thanks for the review! I'm a photographer and have a Nikon D850 with 2 Sigma lenses, 24-70 f/2.8 Art and 70-200 f/2.8 Sport. This combo is a monster! Heavy, yes, but being a photographer is not about weight. It's about quality and professionalism. And Sigma gives me both. Actually, I lift weights 3x a week, so... 😂😅
Hi, do you think that sigma value 200 euros more than the 28-75 2.8 Tamron? I mean is the Sigma so god to spend 200 euros more than if I buy the Tamron?
Hi there ,
I was planning on buying myself a Canon 77d .As a beginner am a bit confused on the lenses I should consider.
Should I go for :
Set 1
Canon EF s 18-135mm
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro
Canon 50mm f1.8 atm
Or
Set 2
Canon EF s 18-55mm
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro
Canon 50mm f1.8 atm
Or
Set 3
Canon EF s 18-135mm
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro
Or
Set 4
Canon EF s 18-55mm
Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L macro
Any of those sets provide great opportunities for photography. I can't make a recommendation on what you should buy until you tell me what type of photography you are excited about - I am guessing at least some macro since you have the 100mm macro in every set. Watch this for more about 18-55 vs 18-135 ruclips.net/video/Hr3EOCdj25Y/видео.html .
PhotoRec TV
Well thanks for the quick reply.I have some product photos to be taken that's why the macro is a must.Rest just for finding my style of photography.
Hello there, I saw you at horseshoe bend! I'm the Brazilian guy with the "nice setup" as you said :D
love you channel, great content! my first camera I bought after seeing one of yours reviews, thank you!
Do you know whether the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC G2 comes with their version of the Sigma Dock to do AF fine-tuning and firmware updates? That may not be worth the savings of $100.
Right now the Sigma is on sale $100 off AND comes with the USB dock. That's a hard deal to pass up bhpho.to/2KbEaFe
Will this system (Sony+ Sigma 24-70 art) Good for wedding Work. Will the slow auto focus will be an issue?
I went for the Canon 24-70 F4 L which does have IS, and the trade off in price was insane. Love the lens, and the macro function can also be fun, though I don’t use it for macro shots.
David Ribeiro i have the 24-70 f4 and its just to limited compared to 2.8 .. although i only shot on my 5d mark 3 because i dont have an adapter for my a7r3 yet
I was first thinking about the 25-105 f4 canon for the longer zoom range, but the smaller aperture was too big of a trade off for me. I went for the tamron 24-70 2.8 G2 and its a very good lens
One thing to think about is if the Canon's better sharpness is worth the tradeoff of stabilization. Unless if you have impeccable camera holding technique, or only shoot on a tripod, there's likely to be some blur induced by shaking even at 1/200s. So, you may be able to get sharper results with Sigma's OS (or Tamron's VC), over Canon's lack of IS. However, many people seem to get very good results even without the IS. I seem to do well enough with Nikon's 24-70 without VR. I will admit though that I've tossed out a few "winning moments" captured because of camera shake.
This is giving me a bit of something to think about. I have a Sony a7III and am very close to buying the Sony FE 24-70mm 2.8 GM and Samyang 14mm F2.8 as my next lens purchases. However, I could buy this Sigma (which comes with the MC-11) and something like the Irix 15mm 2.8 Blackstone (which also requires an adapter like an MC-11) for almost $200 less than the Sony lens alone.
Toby, the thing that I keep thinking about is how good the Sony lens is. Do you have any thoughts on the going with the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM and the Samyang (which would just be used for astro) compared to the other two?
I see your dilemma - The Sony 24-70 GM is pricey which makes me struggle to recommend it to everyone when there are alternatives that cost 1/2 the price BUT the focus speed and full weather sealing of the Sony are serious benefits and for shooting the stars the Sony is great and the Rokinon is great too. So I am leaning toward the Sony & Rokinon for you - but we can chat about it some more. bhpho.to/2ro3RLV
The price of the Sony certainly isn't something to take lightly, but I really do want one high quality lens in my bag, and then build out from there with other good, yet more cost conscious options.
Thank you, I really appreciate that you take time to respond to questions from all of us, and even more so your honesty. I hope that you're in town this weekend to enjoy the amazing weather we're supposed to have in the Seattle area.
Robert Forehand if you would consider getting the Sony second hand it might be worth waiting to see if the price dips a bit when the new Tamron comes out. Just a thought :)
That's actually a pretty good thought, Nick. I'm certainly no stranger to buying gear from the used market.
You in Seattle Robert? You might be interested in my upcoming workshops here in Seattle - photorec.tv/shop/
Helpful review with no hype. Thanks. I'm going to rent one to compare to the Tamron G2 I rented
Hi, thank u for review the sigma 24-70mm in sony body, I've been wondering, does the autofocus in video mode work on that adapter?
Coz I wanna buy this sigma and use it with A6300 and viltrox speedbooster. But I dont know the autofocus will work with that adapter. When Im using canon lens 50mm f1.8, the autofocus work on video.
Thank you
I have had the generation 1 Taunton 24-70 f2.8 for years now. Strangely 24-70 is my less favorite zoom... I either use 24-105f4 (I own the first gen canon, the sigma art and the new released Sony, that tells you how much I love this focal length) or just go prime
Sigma Rocks !
What adapter do you use?
Hi have you tried it on the A7rii as I would like that as its cheaper than the Sony lens :-) Thanks
Only on the a7RIII and it worked well. With a Sigma MC-11 Adapter updated to latest firmware it should work well.
I bit the bullet a year or more ago and got the Sony G-Master 24-70mm. It is big, heavy with great image quality and fast, accurate autofocus; pretty solid all around lens.
I am excited to see the new Tamron announced and considered selling my Sony and save a bunch of money and weight by getting the Tamron but I am concerned that that extra 4mm taken off the wide end would take away from the versatility of a general zoom lens. I am siding towards sticking with the IQ and standard 24-70mm focal length with the trade off of size, weight, and price. This might change as real world reviews come out.
I hear you Nick - I hope to have a review soon but also worry about those 4mm for my own personal shooting.
What is the adapter for sigma art 24-70 of nikon to work in sony a7riii?
Sigma MC-11
Canon is now $1,599 on B&H. I don't know why but they recently dropped the price of their 24-70 f2.8L ii, the 50mm f1.2L and also the 5D4... I bought these three in the last four months just before they dropped the price... I'm guessing are they releasing a different mount system for full frame mirrorless so they want to clear the stock, or is it just their sell number is getting bad?
Are you comparing the Sigma to the original Canon 24-70 or the MKII?
The Mark II
Nice sample shots!
how about for nikon?
How are these lens compared to the 24-70 f/2.8 GM?
Not as good but the difference is smaller than you might think.
I have a question for you about Zeiss 55mm 1.8.
Should anyone spend lots of money for that 1.8?
I like the way that lens look (ahh) it's sharp, compact, almost 50mm but 1.8 and expensive....😅
It's hard to not love that lens after you've used it for a little while.
Wes Perry but you are getting sigma 50mm 1.4 almost at same price....🤐🤔 but sigma is too big..🙄
What are your thoughts?
I would say it's up to you - trading weight for price for sharpness. Yes the Sigma 50mm is big but is faster, very sharp too just happens to be big. But if you really need a lightweight 50 - you can't beat that Zeiss.
My thoughts are indeed that the sigma is just too big 😉 (and that the Zeiss is a lovely lens)
I would really like to get the Tamron G2, but I had a bad experience with the Tamron 70-200 G2 lens and will never buy another Tamron lens. So, the Sigma model is the one for me.
I understand - I had a bad experience many years ago with a Tamron 24-70 but have tried many of their newer lenses and they are excellent and very good values.
What was the bad experience? Bad focus?
ar7 m2 witch best lens 24-70-f2.8 sigma or tamron plz tel me sir
Tamron 28-75 ruclips.net/video/ex5nKVFU70U/видео.html
I have the Nikon VR 24-70 and it has been very reliable and focuses fast. There was some discussion around its sharpness when it came out but for me it has been ultra sharp even at 1:1 on a D850. In my experience it performs very well against the Sigma 50 and 85 in terms of center sharpness. The image stabilization really helps especially for landscape work, mostly hiking without a tripod. Its almost always on my camera while hiking and travelling. It's pretty big and heavy, though I don't mind it as much because at least it does fit in my photosport 200 AW alongside the 14-24.
I have the Nikon 24-70mm without the VR (which people claim to be sharper than the VR version) and I will say that the Sigma 50mm Art blows it away in sharpness in the center, no contest. I find it odd that you haven't seen the difference. But, as a hiker too, the Sigma 50mm was a bit too heavy for me to warrant keeping it in my bag. I too agree that the Nikon 24-70 is a bit heavy.
No you misunderstand me the Sigma 50 or 85 are sharper I only bring those up to point out that I do know what sharpness looks like and I’d say that the 24-70 is darned close even in the center. The corners are excellent and I get much better results with VR than without for landscapes when I don’t have time to set up a tripod. Check out Roger Cillia’s review at Lensrentals that was much more comprehensive and in keeping with my experience than the DXOmark review.
I owe this lens and I really enjoy it! It was a step up from my old Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 (original). Based purely on the sample photos I've seen, I do prefer the current Tamron G2 version a little bit more, BUT I already had the Sigma Mc-11 and so I thought it would be smarter to go with the Sigma version and use it on both my canons and my sonys
Tried the Tamron but found it to not be acceptably sharp. So I went with the Canon. I am VERY happy with the Canon. Absolutely worth the extra $$.
I have a tamron. Sent it in twice, second time with a body so they could adjust it properly. I shoot with 1Ds series cameras. If you are looking for no problem, get canon.
just picked up a used mint 24-70 dg os, for 900
Yes. This video has amazing audio. I love the levels!! He has figured it out!! A great review. I love it.
when is the giveaway result
It was announced in the comments on the WD Digital. Thanks for asking and stay tuned - there are more giveaways planned!
oh sorry if i have been mean to you. I didnt see it. And thanks for the reply
Isn't the answer obvious? The Canon 24-70MM f/2.8LII is known to be the sharpest 24/70 on the market. Since all the recent A7/A9 bodies already have image stabilization built it in, all that's needed is the metabones V (which works better than the sigma converter on canon lenses) and you're all set.
이렌즈는 a7!!! body 손떨림방지가 지원되지 않을까요?....ㅠㅜ..
For Sony Shooters I wish there was a more affordable 24-70 option out there that does not have IS. I could not care less about a lens having IS and especially not a 24-70 focal length. Let alone, most Sony bodies have IBIS, as mine does. I am one who jumped from Canon so much of my glass is..well Canon. I purchased the Sigma MC-11 like you have which is a great adapter and sigma has great glass. It is just very frustrating that Sigma does not offer this in a more affordable non IS because none of the Canon lenses support all af modes and the Sony lenses are just WAY over priced and honestly not worth the price. .
I am getting really (literally) tired with these "tank like" lenses. LOL We just came back from Brussels where I carried around my 5D mark IV/Tamron 15-30 f/2.8 combo with an extra Sigma 24-105 f/4 and the combined weight of those two lenses was ridicules. While more expensive, the lighter Canon L lenses feel like a breath of fresh air after lugging around any recent Tamron or Sigma.
I hear ya man! That's why my favorite combo right now is the a7RIII and Sony 85mm f/1.8 - it is such a lightweight setup!
Maybe you should go to the gym if you find it hard to carry around two lenses.
The lenses plus the camera means he is already lifting weights.
Maybe you should put miss in front of your name
Fcking have it with ppl complaining abt 1 kg things bunch of girls
I was leaning towards the Sigma over Canon and Tamron....but slow focus is not an Option when doing a wedding. I like the idea of IS for sure and of course Canon does not offer it. What in the heck is Canon waiting for!!!..I'll hang tight for now until a better option comes along...
The Tamron G2 is VERY good. I don't think we are going to see a Canon option anytime soon.
I like the Tamron except the zoom and focus rings turn the opposite direction as my Canon Lenses. I am not sure if that will be annoying. It's a shame also that both Tamron and Sigma have the focus and zoom rings reversed with the focus ring now closest to the body.
I use mine on my Nikon DX and FX bodies.Great value, and top quality...
Sigma is a more versatile lens than the Canon version. Same 2.8 and OS. And you can adjust focus speed with the Sigma dock. So it's a no brainer.
Hey Toby, Thanks for the review!
Have you tried this in the non-adapted form? I'll bet it focuses faster native on Canon or Nikon, or when they finally get a Sony version out.
I did try it on a Canon 5D Mark IV and found the focus to be about the same. I am always careful when I review to not judge or comment on focus if I have only used adapted - that can really change some lenses performance. Thanks! I suspect with the native sony mount it might be a tiny bit faster. We will have to wait and see :)
I have the Sony A-mount Zeiss 2470 F2.8 Mk 1 and the LA-EA3 adaptor. I don’t think these Sigma or new Tamron lenses would be any better than that on my Sony A9. Do you agree?
No it isn't. It's existence was dictated by the 70-200/2.8 and the 14-24/2.8 lenses. So what was left? The 24-70/2.8...duhhh. As a standard lens it's too wide for it's tele end. A 28-105/2.8 would be a much better everyday lens (it has been done by Tamron in the late film days). I have used it and can report that this focal range is magical for everyday shooting. But that would dictate a change in the holy Trinity line up: a 14-28/2.8 (perfect 2X) and a 100-300/2.8 (Sigma makes an excellent 120-300/2.8) and you have everything from 14 to 300 @ 2.8 plus having in the middle a perfect standard lens. It just needs a manufacturer to change the status quo.
The new L version of this is much lighter...1.84 lbs...the zoom and focus rings no longer butt each other...and it’s either AF or MF.
Redesigned for Sigma’s fp, apparently.
24-70 from canon is the best to cover an event.. The focus on sigma is to slow and we might miss the moment.. U get what u pay for..
Tamron is Sharper and fully weather sealed... not to say sigma is a bad lens but it just is
How about "not as good"
yeah exactly, they are close but i read that Sigma isn't fully weather sealed on 24-70 though it is on the new 14-24, plus is a touch less sharp ,compared to Tamron
Yeah but the Sigma has a better bokeh and color rendering than the Tamron: that's where the choice is hard to do. The Tamron is better at low focale range, the Sigma better at low focale range... Tamron is slightly better at F2.8 but the Sigma is better at F4 and they are on par at F5,6
Another review ruined by music. Shall not be returning sorry