I own the 24-105, but owned the 28-70 from tamron and always got frustrated by the lack of reach for landscape photography. The 2.8 and the 70mm was all I needed for people photography, but I don't like this focal lengh for nature. So, 24-105 still is for me the better choice, perhaps alongside a 24 1.4 or a 25 f2.
@@florianbarras - That's the Zeiss F/4 right? Is your body full frame or APS-C? I'm trying to decide on the best lens for dental photography.. thinking of the 24-70 F/2.8 G to get the 105mm I'm looking for with my A6500.
@@florianbarras - Baller. I'm going to rent the 24-70 G since with the crop I'll get my 105mm.. I just don't know if I should go macro or not. Is your 24-105 G on a full frame?
For a lanscape person, 105 f4 can make a great bokeh for portrait and also versatile and sharp for lanscape. morover; for a portrat person, if you need 24-70 2.8 for portrait, you should got other prime lens instead.
I've owned the 24 105 since its release and considered selling it for the sigma but your feet don't make up for the 105 reach when there's a obstacle in front of you. Such a tough call and still don't know what to do
I have the sony one rn and i want the sigma but i can't imagine selling the sony, it's too good of an everyday package, not too big, great quality, normally f4 is enough and the extra reach is amazing. For events and night the sigma would be great! But don't want to carry it all day
I have 24-105, and I love it. I am considering getting a 2.8 because of the low light capability. Have you decided yet? I want to hear your opinion on it.
I have Sony A7M4 and for my amateur videos I better use lenses with optical stabilization, because only such lenses can provide more or less acceptable stabilization, despite the included matrix and active stabilization on lenses without optical stabilization.
yes but ... there is no 24-70mm with build in stabilisation for Sony or 24-105 with f2.8 aperture. a7IV's IBIS is more than good enough to compensate though
Great video. I am a beginnier and just got an a7rii mainly for photos not video and these are the 2 lenses I am deciding between. With the extra reach of the 105 I feel like I could get better local wildlife shots without switching lenses but the aperture of the sigma draws me. Glad to see your video but will still be a tough decision for me!
@@xBabsXDx I know it doesn't help you but I actually went with Sony 20mm f1.8. I missed having a wide angle too much and like (attempting) astro as well. So far so amazing. While far from optical perfection, I already had the kit lens to cover standard range and am very happy to now have a quality, versatile wide angle that can render some good bokeh when called upon. Good luck on your decision!
@@audiophizile13 Ah, cheers very much for the response anyway. Good to hear your happy with your choice! I'm going for the Sigma - probably the best quality mid range zoom you can go for. Hoping to get the Sigma 16-24 eventually to cover that wide angle sweet spot but just really wanted to upgrade my kit lens!
@@audiophizile13 such a coincidence! I’m just trying to decide on a list of lenses to buy in one hit as I move into Sony. I prefer primes, but was considering swapping out the 20mm f1.8 on my list from my list for one of these two… only to find your comment! I’m getting to the point with photography now where although I shoot in a variety of circumstances, I usually know what focal lengths I’m going to need before I get there. I also figure that the 20mm is a perfect lens to slip in with the 200-600 to get contextual shots alongside the wildlife and outdoors work that I do, and is so much lighter and sharper than any zoom! So thanks for sharing, you’ve galvanised me in my decisions 🙌
People bitch about Sony R&D when they spend all of their time supporting third party manufacturers. 24-70 2.8 used to be used on a second body for sports and photojournalism in conjunction with a 70-200 2.8 and was never meant to be used as a stand alone. With high iso performance f2.8 and f4 and OSS are virtually the same and if it's to dark pull out your thrifty fifty. 24-105 constant f4 is far more versatile and useful as a quality all-in-one travel companion. If you could always zoom with your feet then we would always be shooting primes, but you CAN'T always do that.
I think you should compare the Sony 24-70 f2.8 GM2 against the Sigma 24-70 Art . That would be an apples to apples comparison. The Sony is much more expensive. The lock switch on the Sigma is to prevent lense creeping when walking with your camera.
Great video! Awesome sample footage, great explanations! What's your opinion on how much the OSS on the Sony is a benefit over the Sigma in terms of shaky video footage?
Hey man ! Really good to see a review comparing the two lenses and see your advices on them. I would have love to see some side by side comparison of what you meant by the difference in separation, that would have made it even more thourough ! Cheers and keep up the good work :)
I own Both. FACT : Sigma 24-70 More Sharper than Sony 24-105. For Photo (group/family/wedding) I prefer Sigma, for run & gun photo video (jourmalism/documetary) i prefer sony. Both Great paired with A7III.
@@PavSZ I have 16mm Sigma, and 14-24 Sigma. Which are spectacular :)) Yes I believe this one is great quality too because I have seen the results on canon mount. I read that this Sony mount is even better, but I already have that focal length in 24-105 Sony. So, I will wait for some new different focal length from Sigma.
Great video, awesome comparison. I'm happy I took the time and enjoyed your review as I am considering the A7 IV + the 24-105 now only £824 new (coming back around to full frame *Canon->Fujifilm->Sony).
Thank you for this video. I have been doing my head in trying to figure out which one to go for as my 1st lens for the Sony A7iii and finally decided to go for the Sigma.
I own both the Sony 24-105mm f4, bought when it first came out. And I have added the excellent Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN for that f2.8 aperture when I need it. I love both lenses, equally sharp. I would not part with either lens. Cheers and thanks for this video.
@@Youcantphazeme24 24-105 vs 24-70 which one do you think is closer to prime like image quality? I am a fashion photographer. I want to save some bucks and want a all in one lens for now. But don't want to compromise image quality that much.
@@tamal0167 the 24-70 is super sharp for it being a zoom lens. 24-105 is a f4 while the 24-70 is a f2.8. I use the 24-70 for street, landscape and portrait. It’s an amazing lens for it being a zoom lens. Def a lens to have in your bag.
These are amazing shots with the sigma omg i thought i was going-to buy an xt4 but if it gets in stock before the fuji releases i might stick with sony
Very good review, clear explanation. Thanks God I recently buy the Sigma 24-70mm art , waiting to arrive. The only 2 lens I have are Sigma 35mm art 1.4 (I love it) and Canon 85mm 1.8. . . I buy Sigma 24-70mm art for Travel. The next lens is the Tamron 17-28mm because Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 is extremely expensive for a Hobby photographer. Thanks for you review. Next time make the price convertion to USA $ Dollars is a more standard Currency, give us a better idea about price. Thanks for your review.
Fajne porównanie, dobrze się ogląda. Ja mimo wszystko dalej się zastanawiam, bo obecnie jestem jeszcze na etapie a6300, gdzie nie mam stabilizacji. Przyszłościowo będzie a7iii, ale a6300 zostanie, jako zapas. Tylko faktycznie, tak jak mówisz te f2.8 może mieć to coś, co sprawia, że fotografia ma w sobie to coś. Ale przy video ta stabilizacja by się przydała... No i dalej nie wiem 😅
depends on what you shoot. I use a lot of lenses on cameras without IBIS for photography and I can make it work, even for video, you just use gimbal or a tripod more
I'm thinking of getting the 24-70 cos I got the tamron 70-180, and sigma 85 1.4 for portraits......OR....ditche the 24-70 and get the sigma 35 1.4 ? Hmmm
You can’t walk forward if your walking into a lake or off a bridge!! I’m a prime shooter too when I do street and doc work. But for landscape I’m looking at zooms.
Great timing. Given the choice, which I have to make. Which is the sharpest. I've heard the Sigma compared to the Sony GM. Your thoughts, say if I were to use pixel shift ? It is said only the bests lenses will cope with the High MP. I'm using an A7Riii. Thanks
Maybe - the fact is that to see a photo in full you will never be looking at it at pixel magnification. I thinks it is a lot of BS that only the best (and most expensive) lenses are good enough for high megapixel sensors.
what about subject separation , rendering and pop effect. I have Sony 24-105 and I don't like how it renders the image and I'm considering selling it to get Sigma instead
Sony 24-105 has got an amazing bokeh and subject to background separation. You get more "blur" with wider aperture of Sigma but only marginally as it all evens out with longer zoom of Sony and more zoom compression that it creates
Thanks for your useful video. I bought a sony alpha a iii and want to buy lens. Now I am thinking what lens should I buy. Sony 24105 f4 or Sigma 24 70 f2,8 because of that I watched your video. And let me add, that I take photo only not video. Your answer at last was sigma, is it for sony alpha a7 mark iii too? Thanks and best regards I like your video and subscribe your channel.
I have a question. Does sigma art lens correct a lot of dust on the lens because I saw a review said that it does correct a dust on the front lens. Thanks
Hi Pav, I have 2 of the 24-105 as we used to shoot a lot of weddings but recently I've started to shoot more video and found that both of these lenses are a bit sticky and jerky when it comes to zooming slowly in and out, have you had anything similar? in comparison when i zoom with my 16-35 it is sooooo smooth it really shows the 24-105 a clean pair of heels - thanks, Nick
yep - this lens (like most of them) wasn't designed to get perfectly smooth zooms in video. 16-35 has got totally different build that's why feels smoother - different mechanism
What about using a 2x extender? Can you do that with these 2 lenses? I like what you said about the Sigma but I need a longer reach in sports photography. I have a Sony A7R4 with a Sony 70-200 2.8 GM but damn that thing is heavy!
Preordered this sigma lens about 2 months ago from my camera store here in town. Any clue how long sigma will take to get this lens to me, I mean with the whole Coronavirus and all??
I own the 24-105 and it's definitely a good all around lens but I've been contemplating on getting the sigma 24-70 for the events I shoot. There's need to have both, so I think I'm going to trade it in for the Sigma. Thanks for the review.
Hello, Tks for the good Review and your efforts but I think you must have clicked same pics with both the lenses so it was easy to compare. Secondly, on Sigma 70mm focal length I am getting vignetting on both the corners and I think its becoz of the lens hood....have you noticed it ? Pls advise me your take on this....
@@PavSZ A7SiII low light is so good so not having 2.8 doesnt worry me. II think i rether have lighet and smaller lens with more range so decided for sony. Bokah in the sony is better too like... more creamy like some people say lol anyway thank you so much for your time
I have the A7siii and the 24-105mm F4. I just purchased the Sigma 24-70 F2.8. Killing my wallet but the Sigma picture quality seems to stand out. I'll be comparing both on the camera when the Sigma arrives. What profile are you shooting on the A7siii? I've been shooting in slog3. ISO 128,000 is something special.
@@caesarstake you got both for the A7SIII! Wow i would love to know what you think. I can tell you all the bad things i heard about sigma lens. videos complaining about it. Which is why i decided on the sony. Issues with sigma i hear: 1- Auto focus hunting 2- bokeh is distorted and sometimes you get the onion rings (circle with in a circle) 3- lots of chromatic aberration.
a7III has got 5-axis in body stabilisation. It helps to get sharper photos hand held at lower shutter speeds - it reduces natural hand shake. I don't think you can switch in body stabilisation off - I keep my switched on the lens at all times apart from the times when I put the camera on the tripod
![[Limbus Company - PV] Chapter.7 - Oblivion](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VUpkXPkvoxU/mqdefault.jpg)
Have you used both of these lenses on your Sony camera? Which one do you prefer?
Using both and except the issue I have mentioned, both are equally good with their own benefits...
I own the 24-105, but owned the 28-70 from tamron and always got frustrated by the lack of reach for landscape photography. The 2.8 and the 70mm was all I needed for people photography, but I don't like this focal lengh for nature. So, 24-105 still is for me the better choice, perhaps alongside a 24 1.4 or a 25 f2.
@@florianbarras - That's the Zeiss F/4 right? Is your body full frame or APS-C? I'm trying to decide on the best lens for dental photography.. thinking of the 24-70 F/2.8 G to get the 105mm I'm looking for with my A6500.
@@CG-cw3ps Hi, the 24-105 is the Sony 24-105 F4 G (not Zeiss).
@@florianbarras - Baller. I'm going to rent the 24-70 G since with the crop I'll get my 105mm.. I just don't know if I should go macro or not. Is your 24-105 G on a full frame?
For a lanscape person, 105 f4 can make a great bokeh for portrait and also versatile and sharp for lanscape. morover; for a portrat person, if you need 24-70 2.8 for portrait, you should got other prime lens instead.
I've owned the 24 105 since its release and considered selling it for the sigma but your feet don't make up for the 105 reach when there's a obstacle in front of you. Such a tough call and still don't know what to do
I have the sony one rn and i want the sigma but i can't imagine selling the sony, it's too good of an everyday package, not too big, great quality, normally f4 is enough and the extra reach is amazing. For events and night the sigma would be great! But don't want to carry it all day
I have Tamron 28-200 for everyday package. It's cheaper, lighter and not much slower than 24-105.
I've been trying out both to decide which one to keep and I just can't make a decision, both are amazing, it's a really hard decision
I have 24-105, and I love it. I am considering getting a 2.8 because of the low light capability. Have you decided yet? I want to hear your opinion on it.
Same, honestly hardest decision ever 😰
You've got a very good, charming screen presence, my man. Nice work.
Thank you kindly!
I have Sony A7M4 and for my amateur videos I better use lenses with optical stabilization, because only such lenses can provide more or less acceptable stabilization, despite the included matrix and active stabilization on lenses without optical stabilization.
yes but ... there is no 24-70mm with build in stabilisation for Sony or 24-105 with f2.8 aperture.
a7IV's IBIS is more than good enough to compensate though
Great video. I am a beginnier and just got an a7rii mainly for photos not video and these are the 2 lenses I am deciding between. With the extra reach of the 105 I feel like I could get better local wildlife shots without switching lenses but the aperture of the sigma draws me. Glad to see your video but will still be a tough decision for me!
TheeRealist did you ever decide? I’m stuck w the same decision!
@@xBabsXDx I know it doesn't help you but I actually went with Sony 20mm f1.8. I missed having a wide angle too much and like (attempting) astro as well. So far so amazing. While far from optical perfection, I already had the kit lens to cover standard range and am very happy to now have a quality, versatile wide angle that can render some good bokeh when called upon. Good luck on your decision!
@@audiophizile13 Ah, cheers very much for the response anyway. Good to hear your happy with your choice! I'm going for the Sigma - probably the best quality mid range zoom you can go for. Hoping to get the Sigma 16-24 eventually to cover that wide angle sweet spot but just really wanted to upgrade my kit lens!
@@audiophizile13 such a coincidence! I’m just trying to decide on a list of lenses to buy in one hit as I move into Sony. I prefer primes, but was considering swapping out the 20mm f1.8 on my list from my list for one of these two… only to find your comment! I’m getting to the point with photography now where although I shoot in a variety of circumstances, I usually know what focal lengths I’m going to need before I get there. I also figure that the 20mm is a perfect lens to slip in with the 200-600 to get contextual shots alongside the wildlife and outdoors work that I do, and is so much lighter and sharper than any zoom!
So thanks for sharing, you’ve galvanised me in my decisions 🙌
People bitch about Sony R&D when they spend all of their time supporting third party manufacturers. 24-70 2.8 used to be used on a second body for sports and photojournalism in conjunction with a 70-200 2.8 and was never meant to be used as a stand alone. With high iso performance f2.8 and f4 and OSS are virtually the same and if it's to dark pull out your thrifty fifty. 24-105 constant f4 is far more versatile and useful as a quality all-in-one travel companion. If you could always zoom with your feet then we would always be shooting primes, but you CAN'T always do that.
well said!
great video! you actually helped me decide... in the majority of the cases you can go closer to the subject, but you can't change f4 to f2.8...
I think you should compare the Sony 24-70 f2.8 GM2 against the Sigma 24-70 Art . That would be an apples to apples comparison. The Sony is much more expensive. The lock switch on the Sigma is to prevent lense creeping when walking with your camera.
maybe one day
The reason for the lock switch is that it does not extend if you have the cam at yout neck walking around...
Great video! Awesome sample footage, great explanations! What's your opinion on how much the OSS on the Sony is a benefit over the Sigma in terms of shaky video footage?
it will depend on the camera.
Using Sigma on a7III or a7IV with internal IBIS is fine - it does the job very well
Hey man ! Really good to see a review comparing the two lenses and see your advices on them. I would have love to see some side by side comparison of what you meant by the difference in separation, that would have made it even more thourough ! Cheers and keep up the good work :)
thank you!
I own Both. FACT : Sigma 24-70 More Sharper than Sony 24-105. For Photo (group/family/wedding) I prefer Sigma, for run & gun photo video (jourmalism/documetary) i prefer sony. Both Great paired with A7III.
I own both and they both serve totally different purpose
yes indeed. i couldn't decide. i kept them both
Many owners of the sigma 24-70 F 2,8 have big issues with dust behind the front lens
Yes reason why in sold mine aha
Nice review. I already have the 24-105. I am waiting for something more special and exceptional from Sigma.
Have you actually tried this Sigma yet??? I didn't want to believe it but it is actually spectacular quality ;) #justsaying
@@PavSZ
I have 16mm Sigma, and 14-24 Sigma. Which are spectacular :))
Yes I believe this one is great quality too because I have seen the results on canon mount. I read that this Sony mount is even better, but I already have that focal length in 24-105 Sony. So, I will wait for some new different focal length from Sigma.
@@KetansaCreatesArt Fair enough!
Great video, awesome comparison. I'm happy I took the time and enjoyed your review as I am considering the A7 IV + the 24-105 now only £824 new (coming back around to full frame *Canon->Fujifilm->Sony).
Why left fuji ?
I've just used 24-105 on my a7IV after a long break away from it. Great combo
@tamal0167 I like Fuji cameras but they are not everyone.
Thank you for this video. I have been doing my head in trying to figure out which one to go for as my 1st lens for the Sony A7iii and finally decided to go for the Sigma.
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching!
Happy with it?
@@J1233459 very. Lens is sharp and versatile, I love it!
@@wrx202 good to know. Was afraid to sacrifice the f2.8 for the reach of the 105. Guess I’ll add a longer lens down the line.
What was the reason you choose sigma
I own both the Sony 24-105mm f4, bought when it first came out. And I have added the excellent Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN for that f2.8 aperture when I need it. I love both lenses, equally sharp. I would not part with either lens. Cheers and thanks for this video.
Hi! Which one do you think would be better for videos?
If you could only take one on travel and vacations then which would you choose?
@@MotoMatt418 I also own both 24-70 and 24-105. I also own an 85mm prime. I would take the the 85 and 24-70 for travel. Your answer a year later.
@@Youcantphazeme24 24-105 vs 24-70 which one do you think is closer to prime like image quality? I am a fashion photographer. I want to save some bucks and want a all in one lens for now. But don't want to compromise image quality that much.
@@tamal0167 the 24-70 is super sharp for it being a zoom lens. 24-105 is a f4 while the 24-70 is a f2.8. I use the 24-70 for street, landscape and portrait. It’s an amazing lens for it being a zoom lens. Def a lens to have in your bag.
The Sony 24-105 and sigma 16-24 art would be a killer combo.
very heavy killer combo
Hi Pav, which lens makes better more pleasing photos and video. Which renders nicer colors? Thank you!
both!
These are amazing shots with the sigma omg i thought i was going-to buy an xt4 but if it gets in stock before the fuji releases i might stick with sony
It is a very good lens! I'll be reviewing XT-4 as soon as I can get one here in UK
I gave thumbs up just for the bloopers. The review was good too.
Yay, thank you!
Very good review, clear explanation. Thanks God I recently buy the Sigma 24-70mm art , waiting to arrive. The only 2 lens I have are Sigma 35mm art 1.4 (I love it) and Canon 85mm 1.8. . . I buy Sigma 24-70mm art for Travel. The next lens is the Tamron 17-28mm because Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 is extremely expensive for a Hobby photographer. Thanks for you review. Next time make the price convertion to USA $ Dollars is a more standard Currency, give us a better idea about price. Thanks for your review.
Glad it was helpful!
I mention the price in pound and dollar on all current reviews. Thanks for watching!
Fajne porównanie, dobrze się ogląda. Ja mimo wszystko dalej się zastanawiam, bo obecnie jestem jeszcze na etapie a6300, gdzie nie mam stabilizacji. Przyszłościowo będzie a7iii, ale a6300 zostanie, jako zapas. Tylko faktycznie, tak jak mówisz te f2.8 może mieć to coś, co sprawia, że fotografia ma w sobie to coś. Ale przy video ta stabilizacja by się przydała... No i dalej nie wiem 😅
Dzieki!
Tylko Ty możesz zdecydować który jest dla Ciebie odpowiedni ;)
@@PavSZczesc mam Sony 24-105 i wlasnie mysle czy nie zamienic na nowa Sigme 24-70 II gen.
Easy to follow review. Well done!
Much appreciated! Thanks for watching!
Thank you. Two word that are simple to say but not said enough.
Thank you very much!
To me the 105 from 70 is not really worth lose 1 stop aperture. If it is a 24 -120 f4 I might consider.
Thank you much needed information!!
Glad it was helpful! Thanks for watching!
if im still using the old a7 body without IBIS , is it still worth to buy sigma? since 24-105mm have OSS, thank you.
depends on what you shoot. I use a lot of lenses on cameras without IBIS for photography and I can make it work, even for video, you just use gimbal or a tripod more
@@PavSZ thank you for your answer. i will have a think about it
I'm thinking of getting the 24-70 cos I got the tamron 70-180, and sigma 85 1.4 for portraits......OR....ditche the 24-70 and get the sigma 35 1.4 ? Hmmm
only you can decide
You can’t walk forward if your walking into a lake or off a bridge!! I’m a prime shooter too when I do street and doc work. But for landscape I’m looking at zooms.
for sure
You should compared it with 24-70 GM since they both have the same focal lengths and minimum apertures.
but the GM is almost twice the price. I'll do side by side comparison in a month or so
@@PavSZ No worry sir I get it. Sony lenses are always overpriced lol.
@@PavSZ This was the exact review I was looking for.
Great timing. Given the choice, which I have to make. Which is the sharpest. I've heard the Sigma compared to the Sony GM. Your thoughts, say if I were to use pixel shift ? It is said only the bests lenses will cope with the High MP. I'm using an A7Riii. Thanks
Maybe - the fact is that to see a photo in full you will never be looking at it at pixel magnification. I thinks it is a lot of BS that only the best (and most expensive) lenses are good enough for high megapixel sensors.
@@PavSZ Thank you, nice work.
Świetne filmy Paweł! Brawo! A ten myślę bardzo pomoże mi w wyborze obiektywu...Pozdrawiam :)
Dzieki!
what about subject separation , rendering and pop effect. I have Sony 24-105 and I don't like how it renders the image and I'm considering selling it to get Sigma instead
Sony 24-105 has got an amazing bokeh and subject to background separation. You get more "blur" with wider aperture of Sigma but only marginally as it all evens out with longer zoom of Sony and more zoom compression that it creates
Def need that 2.8 though!
Thanks, you were great my friend, I liked you video. 😊🌹
Thank you! Cheers!
Which do you think is a better value lens after using it for a while now?
Thanks for your useful video.
I bought a sony alpha a iii and want to buy lens. Now I am thinking what lens should I buy. Sony 24105 f4 or Sigma 24 70 f2,8 because of that I watched your video. And let me add, that I take photo only not video. Your answer at last was sigma, is it for sony alpha a7 mark iii too?
Thanks and best regards
I like your video and subscribe your channel.
Thanks for watching! Most of my samples in my video were shot with a7III
I have a question. Does sigma art lens correct a lot of dust on the lens because I saw a review said that it does correct a dust on the front lens. Thanks
I've heard that some early copies were getting the dust inside.
When shooting video using a hot shoe mounted mic did it pickup any motor noise?
no - zero
Oh man are you switching to the sigma now?!
I want to but I can't buy one yet!!! there is still stock shortage!
Hi Pav, I have 2 of the 24-105 as we used to shoot a lot of weddings but recently I've started to shoot more video and found that both of these lenses are a bit sticky and jerky when it comes to zooming slowly in and out, have you had anything similar? in comparison when i zoom with my 16-35 it is sooooo smooth it really shows the 24-105 a clean pair of heels - thanks, Nick
yep - this lens (like most of them) wasn't designed to get perfectly smooth zooms in video.
16-35 has got totally different build that's why feels smoother - different mechanism
What about using a 2x extender? Can you do that with these 2 lenses? I like what you said about the Sigma but I need a longer reach in sports photography. I have a Sony A7R4 with a Sony 70-200 2.8 GM but damn that thing is heavy!
I don't know. I have never used teleconverters
Hi may I know if the sigma can work with Ronin SC?
it worked great on my a7sII and a7III on Zhiyun Crane 2, so I can't see why not
and you cant´t go 105mm with the sigma....
nope! 😉📷
In Germany the Sony 24-105 is 200€ cheaper than the Sigma 24-70. Should i buy Sigma or Sony?
tricky question - it depends what you shoot and what your needs are. Only you can decide 😉
@@PavSZ from the sharpness same level?
How about focus breathing?
lovely conclusion !!
thank you!
Preordered this sigma lens about 2 months ago from my camera store here in town. Any clue how long sigma will take to get this lens to me, I mean with the whole Coronavirus and all??
Thank you for your honesty. May Allah bless you
thank you
If there is a cliff don’t walk forward
do but get someone to film it
Facts of life: Sigma lenses will always be sharper wide open, Sony lenses will always have better af performance (especially with video).
I'm not sure how Sigma's AF with video could be any better or faster. In my tests it was just outstanding every single time
Have you had problems with dust inclusions in the Sigma lens until now?
not that I've noticed. Ive heard a lot of people complaining about it. I hope that this is an issue only with the early copies of this lens
This issue still persists and no solution from Sigma yet!
I own the 24-105 and it's definitely a good all around lens but I've been contemplating on getting the sigma 24-70 for the events I shoot. There's need to have both, so I think I'm going to trade it in for the Sigma. Thanks for the review.
I really believe that Sigma is better quality overall. I'd love to have both
Definition Sigma. 2.8 is more important tan the 105mm focal length.
sometimes it is
cool review
thank you so much!
Okay I'll get the Sigma then
Hello, Tks for the good Review and your efforts but I think you must have clicked same pics with both the lenses so it was easy to compare. Secondly, on Sigma 70mm focal length I am getting vignetting on both the corners and I think its becoz of the lens hood....have you noticed it ? Pls advise me your take on this....
I didn't notice any vignetting from this copy of Sigma 24-70.
Pav SZ Ok tks so much Sir...
I gave him the subscribe after the bloopers HAHA
he said: "thanks"
Cant decide between this two for video?... i will use them on a A7SIII
Very hard to choose one. For me Sigma is a tiny bit more versatile because of the f2.8 but Sony has got more zoom ...
@@PavSZ A7SiII low light is so good so not having 2.8 doesnt worry me. II think i rether have lighet and smaller lens with more range so decided for sony. Bokah in the sony is better too like... more creamy like some people say lol anyway thank you so much for your time
I have the A7siii and the 24-105mm F4. I just purchased the Sigma 24-70 F2.8. Killing my wallet but the Sigma picture quality seems to stand out. I'll be comparing both on the camera when the Sigma arrives. What profile are you shooting on the A7siii? I've been shooting in slog3. ISO 128,000 is something special.
@@caesarstake you got both for the A7SIII! Wow i would love to know what you think. I can tell you all the bad things i heard about sigma lens. videos complaining about it. Which is why i decided on the sony.
Issues with sigma i hear:
1- Auto focus hunting 2- bokeh is distorted and sometimes you get the onion rings (circle with in a circle) 3- lots of chromatic aberration.
@@caesarstake id be shooting with HGL2 mostly maybe... and SLog3 if the f4 can handle the lens with ISO
Sigma reverse zoom ring rev. very sucks
Amazing!
Thanks!
does the sony a7iii have in body image stabilisation? does it work for photos or is it a video that? should i just leave it on all the time?
a7III has got 5-axis in body stabilisation. It helps to get sharper photos hand held at lower shutter speeds - it reduces natural hand shake. I don't think you can switch in body stabilisation off - I keep my switched on the lens at all times apart from the times when I put the camera on the tripod
@@PavSZ alright, thanks man 🙂
Lens stabilization helps us in video
If you're shooting handheld video, I would recommend getting a lens with stabilization as well.
@@DuncanSkiles does the in camera stabilisation not cover for a lens without it? kinda like a focus motor?
How about comparing the 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 OSS G lens to the 12-24mm f/4 G lens?
ok, I'l do that next
The difference is not the reach its the PRICE lol.
not if you shop around or consider second hand