For me, Sony 24 GM 1.4 is a very special lens for it's color rendering and special pop! Love this lens. It is indeed a tough one for you I know Mr. Patrick Murphy!
Yes, I can understand your dilemma. I just purchased my GM ll 24-70 2.8mm less than two years ago. I struggle buying it because I own the 135, 24mm 1.4, 90 macro, 50mm 1.2, 35mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8, and the 70-200 GM ll. Then they came out with this lens at f/2 😢. My heart hurts
"It's here because I bought it"...that made me laugh. I can relate to his line-up. 24mm 1.4 GM, 35mm 1.4 GM, 50mm 1.2GM, Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN, Sigma 105 1.4 HSM, Samyang 135mm 1.8. I want to upgrade my 85mm option but I'm really waiting on a 1.2 - Viltrox vs mystery Chinese company vs possible Sony. Sony 28-70 f2 seems super appealing. I think I'll just have to enjoy my primes a bit longer before possibly selling, or buying the 28-70. I'm a member of GAS community.
Here are some random thoughts... Firstly, it's arguably preferable to keep as much distance between each lens as possible. This can apply to zooms as well as to primes. E.g. you don't need a 28, and a 35, and a 40, and a 50, and a 75. Not in your bag, anyway. So for you, maybe use the 28-70/2, the 20mm and the 85mm. Another fact to consider: Leica's best SL lenses are all f/2. They might make more f/1.4 lenses for the SL system eventually, to cater to the people who will pay that premium. But their f/2 lenses are pretty much to best primes you can buy. They make a 50/1.4 SL but that thing is a monster. f/1.4 might have been necessary in the past, due to sensor and film limitations. But not today. And shallow focus becomes obnoxious after a certain point IMHO. Some people who shoot with the Leica M system will tell you that the best aperture setting for the 50mm f/2 is f/4. You are still using selective focus at f/4, but you're providing a more pleasing focus transition.
The 35gm is my favorite glass of all time... that stays in my bag even if I had the 28-70gm. I suppose my lineup would be 85gm ii/35gm/20g/28-72gm. I own all of that kit except for the new f2. I was kinda curious if you would think about using it for your sports work. I'm primarily using my 85/35 primes for event/wedding work - so I've not really considered using the new f2... but I'd love to see what you create with it at a basketball game for sure!
A Zoom lens is great for variable changes in a composition without losing precious seconds swapping multiple prime lenses. Prime lenses are a good backup and great for specific shooting scenarios addressing issues zoom lens can't. So, keep them all because that one lens might place you in a situation where you might need it.
I’d just use the 50 since it’s smaller and much lighter than the 24-70 since you can just crop or punch in. How often do you use the wider end of the 24-70 for basketball? For me a 50-100 would be perfect for under the basket.
Love this dilemma. That is why I own both the 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, both 50/1.4 & 50/1.2, 85mm, and 135mm as well as a 16-35mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm lenses ( plus others ). If you can afford it it just a great mix and match that allows you to change it up. Of course if you shooting sports there will be trinities and quad combos you will get really used to as long as you have the same spot on the field or court. Don’t know yet if I want the 28-70/2 or the 28-105/2.8 though. Thank you and take care.
I'd go with the 20 over the 24. The difference from the 28-70 to the 24 would be to small for me to justify keeping it. For me the 20 is about shooting in tight places or landscapes and both require the FoV but not the speed. And for your sports, where you need speed, I'd argue both are too wide. It's a nice problem to have, but I know the struggle all to well. 100% with you on keeping the 35 1.8. Bought and sold mine 3 times. I know this will stay for good, even though the 35 GM is always on my "want" list.
Always re-evaluating the lenses when Sony releases something so appealing like the 28 -70… For basketball, I use the 85 1.4, 24-70 II, 70-200 II, 135 (which I love). Have the 300 but usually use 70-200 for versatility. But sometimes think too much overlap. Have two wider options but they seem to stay home!
I've been thinking about this quite a lot lately, especially for basketball. Currently I generally use the 50f/1.2 and the 85f/1.4 (and then the 135f/1.8 once in a while). The thing holding me back on the 28-70f/2 is that the 24-49 range (of the 24-70) is pretty useless for basketball. Then, I still need the 85mm. So if I bought this I would be gaining the ability to zoom between 50-70 and I would lose over one stop of light at 50mm. And then still be swapping lenses for the 85. The 28-70f/2 looks absolitely beautiful, but I'm having a hard time getting there for basketball.
I got rid of my old 85GM a long time ago as it could never shoot at 20 or 30 fps on a9 or a1. Once they did the II version, it shoots up to 120fps now!!!!
I'm surprised the 70-200mm f/2.8 doesn't get mentioned in the video or even in the comments here. Isn't that usually glued to one of the bodies of most basketball shooters? Are people avoiding it because it's such a "standard" look, or is it so obvious that you should use it that it doesn't even need to be mentioned? I know you're losing some light vs. the primes, but the versatility more than makes up for it, no?
yes, and no. It all depends on where you get to sit and if you have a 300mm f/2.8 or not. if you have a 300GM, then you can shoot downcourt and even to mid court without problem, then you have the 28-70 to pick up everything on the close side.
The 28-70 f.2 is very appealing. I find myself stopping down to f2 on my primes for the same reason to keep the eyes in focus. The size seems like it would be uncomfortable to use for a long shoot. You know your workflow very well and most professionals so I am sure you will find the perfect for for it! I only with it was 24-70 so a person would not have to carry either another wide zoom or prime. Thanks for the video!
For me basketball is shooting with at least a 200mm. That Canon 100-300/2.8 looks very appealing. But I rarely shot indoor sports. So my mind is having a short lens on one camera then a super telephoto as my main lens.
I've been struggling hard-core with a totally different scenario. I can’t decide between the 16-25 g or the 16-35 gm ii but these are definitely good struggles to have! I like the 28-70, 85, 35 1.8 combo you had at the end I think that’s probably more than enough. or just swap out the 35 1.8 for the 35 1.4 because that different I don’t think is that much bigger
eu tenho 20mm sigma f1.4 para eventos, mas distorce muito, quero voltar para uma 24mm. uma 135mm f1.8 samyang como lente preferida, e um 50mm f1.8 YN( qualidade de imagem de zeiss 55mm por menos) para quando não tiver espaço. não gosto das angulares, mas são necessárias. e por diversão tenho a olho de peixe 16mm f3.5 af da 28mm fe e uma tanrom 70-300 e-mount. uma 28-70 f2 me atrai muito e sobraria somente a 135mm. mais seu valor me faz pensar as f1.4 de grande porte.
For me, Sony 24 GM 1.4 is a very special lens for it's color rendering and special pop! Love this lens. It is indeed a tough one for you I know Mr. Patrick Murphy!
Yes, I can understand your dilemma. I just purchased my GM ll 24-70 2.8mm less than two years ago. I struggle buying it because I own the 135, 24mm 1.4, 90 macro, 50mm 1.2, 35mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8, and the 70-200 GM ll. Then they came out with this lens at f/2 😢. My heart hurts
"It's here because I bought it"...that made me laugh.
I can relate to his line-up. 24mm 1.4 GM, 35mm 1.4 GM, 50mm 1.2GM, Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN, Sigma 105 1.4 HSM, Samyang 135mm 1.8. I want to upgrade my 85mm option but I'm really waiting on a 1.2 - Viltrox vs mystery Chinese company vs possible Sony. Sony 28-70 f2 seems super appealing. I think I'll just have to enjoy my primes a bit longer before possibly selling, or buying the 28-70.
I'm a member of GAS community.
lol
Here are some random thoughts... Firstly, it's arguably preferable to keep as much distance between each lens as possible. This can apply to zooms as well as to primes. E.g. you don't need a 28, and a 35, and a 40, and a 50, and a 75. Not in your bag, anyway. So for you, maybe use the 28-70/2, the 20mm and the 85mm.
Another fact to consider: Leica's best SL lenses are all f/2. They might make more f/1.4 lenses for the SL system eventually, to cater to the people who will pay that premium. But their f/2 lenses are pretty much to best primes you can buy. They make a 50/1.4 SL but that thing is a monster.
f/1.4 might have been necessary in the past, due to sensor and film limitations. But not today. And shallow focus becomes obnoxious after a certain point IMHO.
Some people who shoot with the Leica M system will tell you that the best aperture setting for the 50mm f/2 is f/4. You are still using selective focus at f/4, but you're providing a more pleasing focus transition.
The 35gm is my favorite glass of all time... that stays in my bag even if I had the 28-70gm. I suppose my lineup would be 85gm ii/35gm/20g/28-72gm. I own all of that kit except for the new f2. I was kinda curious if you would think about using it for your sports work. I'm primarily using my 85/35 primes for event/wedding work - so I've not really considered using the new f2... but I'd love to see what you create with it at a basketball game for sure!
I'll be shooting in at two games this Friday night so you won't have to wait long to see my results from the new lens :)
A Zoom lens is great for variable changes in a composition without losing precious seconds swapping multiple prime lenses. Prime lenses are a good backup and great for specific shooting scenarios addressing issues zoom lens can't. So, keep them all because that one lens might place you in a situation where you might need it.
I like your style, Derrick!
I’d just use the 50 since it’s smaller and much lighter than the 24-70 since you can just crop or punch in. How often do you use the wider end of the 24-70 for basketball? For me a 50-100 would be perfect for under the basket.
I think your trio should be the 2870/2, 24/1.4, 135/1.8
that could really make sense :)
Love this dilemma. That is why I own both the 14mm, 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, both 50/1.4 & 50/1.2, 85mm, and 135mm as well as a 16-35mm, 24-70mm, and 70-200mm lenses ( plus others ). If you can afford it it just a great mix and match that allows you to change it up. Of course if you shooting sports there will be trinities and quad combos you will get really used to as long as you have the same spot on the field or court. Don’t know yet if I want the 28-70/2 or the 28-105/2.8 though. Thank you and take care.
I'd go with the 20 over the 24. The difference from the 28-70 to the 24 would be to small for me to justify keeping it. For me the 20 is about shooting in tight places or landscapes and both require the FoV but not the speed. And for your sports, where you need speed, I'd argue both are too wide.
It's a nice problem to have, but I know the struggle all to well.
100% with you on keeping the 35 1.8. Bought and sold mine 3 times. I know this will stay for good, even though the 35 GM is always on my "want" list.
I'd ditched the 85 also. Go 28-70 crop mode gets you to 105, the 135 and the 300! Hoping Sony releases an 18 or 21 GM at 1.4 some day.
Always re-evaluating the lenses when Sony releases something so appealing like the 28 -70… For basketball, I use the 85 1.4, 24-70 II, 70-200 II, 135 (which I love). Have the 300 but usually use 70-200 for versatility. But sometimes think too much overlap. Have two wider options but they seem to stay home!
I've been thinking about this quite a lot lately, especially for basketball. Currently I generally use the 50f/1.2 and the 85f/1.4 (and then the 135f/1.8 once in a while). The thing holding me back on the 28-70f/2 is that the 24-49 range (of the 24-70) is pretty useless for basketball. Then, I still need the 85mm. So if I bought this I would be gaining the ability to zoom between 50-70 and I would lose over one stop of light at 50mm. And then still be swapping lenses for the 85.
The 28-70f/2 looks absolitely beautiful, but I'm having a hard time getting there for basketball.
I'll be shooting some games this weekend and will report how it went with the new lens...
Did you trade in the old 85mm for the new one? If so do you see a big difference between the two?
I got rid of my old 85GM a long time ago as it could never shoot at 20 or 30 fps on a9 or a1. Once they did the II version, it shoots up to 120fps now!!!!
I'm surprised the 70-200mm f/2.8 doesn't get mentioned in the video or even in the comments here. Isn't that usually glued to one of the bodies of most basketball shooters? Are people avoiding it because it's such a "standard" look, or is it so obvious that you should use it that it doesn't even need to be mentioned? I know you're losing some light vs. the primes, but the versatility more than makes up for it, no?
yes, and no. It all depends on where you get to sit and if you have a 300mm f/2.8 or not. if you have a 300GM, then you can shoot downcourt and even to mid court without problem, then you have the 28-70 to pick up everything on the close side.
The 28-70 f.2 is very appealing. I find myself stopping down to f2 on my primes for the same reason to keep the eyes in focus. The size seems like it would be uncomfortable to use for a long shoot. You know your workflow very well and most professionals so I am sure you will find the perfect for for it! I only with it was 24-70 so a person would not have to carry either another wide zoom or prime. Thanks for the video!
For me basketball is shooting with at least a 200mm. That Canon 100-300/2.8 looks very appealing. But I rarely shot indoor sports. So my mind is having a short lens on one camera then a super telephoto as my main lens.
I've been struggling hard-core with a totally different scenario. I can’t decide between the 16-25 g or the 16-35 gm ii but these are definitely good struggles to have! I like the 28-70, 85, 35 1.8 combo you had at the end I think that’s probably more than enough. or just swap out the 35 1.8 for the 35 1.4 because that different I don’t think is that much bigger
Bonjour, je doute que la qualité des photos soit meilleure qu'avec une focale fixe de la série GM. Le zoom reste un compromis.
I know you’re a Sony Artisan but maybe instead of the 24mm 1.4 GM, give the Sigma 24mm f2 Contemporary a try?
just bring out 28-70MM & 85mm enough
champagne troubles.
eu tenho 20mm sigma f1.4 para eventos, mas distorce muito, quero voltar para uma 24mm. uma 135mm f1.8 samyang como lente preferida, e um 50mm f1.8 YN( qualidade de imagem de zeiss 55mm por menos) para quando não tiver espaço. não gosto das angulares, mas são necessárias. e por diversão tenho a olho de peixe 16mm f3.5 af da 28mm fe e uma tanrom 70-300 e-mount. uma 28-70 f2 me atrai muito e sobraria somente a 135mm. mais seu valor me faz pensar as f1.4 de grande porte.