I'm glad you actually made a review about this lens. I actually bought this lens before leaving Alaska and move to South Korea. With the camera capability nowadays, F4 is like the sweet spot now even in low light.
eh, sweet spot, idk. depends on how high you are willing to crank up your ISO. Even in a modestly lit room, I have to go to ISO 2500 at f/2.8, at f/4 that would be 5000. Is 5000 unusable? No, of course not. Would I rather shoot no higher than 3200 (1600 if I'm being completely honest with myself), yeah. I think is plus a fast prime at your prefered focal length is all anyone needs for most photographic needs. I was thinking about getting a 24-70 f/2.8 but I think the extra 35mm reach at the tele lens makes this a better all arounder.
No matter what camera or brand I seen to be shooting with, I ALWAYS have to have a 24-105mm type lens. I travel a lot too and this is the ONE lens I won't leave home without. Great video Jake! Not many put this much effort into their videos. So cool!
As a new photographer i had bought the 18 to 105 not realizing it was a crop lens. It really restricted my shooting on my a7iv because of this. I am planning to grab this lens as it is very diverse and of course, full frame. Great review!
@@fredfred9758 the issue is it's always crop. So I lose basically half my resolution immediately. So if I ever want to crop, I lose that ability to really get detail. It wasnt flexible for my shooting
One of the first lenses I bought when I switched from Nikon to Sony a few years ago. Love that lens...Fantastic bargain. I considered the 70-200 F/2.8 but went with this instead and don't regret it,
For my current A1, A7RV, A9III, I currently have 13 fullframe E-mount lenses covering 10mm to 600mm from Sony (GM and G), Sigma Art, Tamron, Viltrox, Laowa. My Sony 24-105mm f4 G OSS is my most used lens of all of them for subjects I photograph around the world. It is sharp, with silent and fast autofocus, great OSS, super versatile. It is also Sony's biggest selling fullframe lens in the world, for good reasons. . Cheers
same here and the reason I put this video together when I looked back through the work and photos I've taken since I bought this lens. It really is an incredible performer
Videos like this truly shows that you can judge a lens on paper but in reality its the results that you can achieve that judge it and from the photos you have taken they look excellent.
I use this one for about 90% of the time. It's focal range is a big plus, but the auto focus can be a bit hit or miss. And fringing. But it really is a great Jack of all trades
yeah I didn't really touch on the fringing and the auto focus for me has been solid except in -20 or colder when the motors seem to freeze up a bit lol
As of 091624 switched from A-mount DSLR to E-Mount. Also purchased LA-EA5 adapter so I could use my 70-400mm G2. Just bought this lens 24-105 F4 11262024. My first E-mount lens. So far I'm very impressed.
I love the thought of the lens. My 28-135mm PZ recently went out on me. I am trying to get it fixed for a reasonable price, but if not, I will look at this lens. I will compliment my 16-35 f4 zeiss. I really never need f2.8 because of the fx3.
Nice video. I lived in the Yukon Territory for almost fifty years and I remember the Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau almost forty years ago. We hiked right up to the terminus of the glacier and then beyond by following the high ground adjacent to the ice. I even remember getting between the glacier and the rock walls that constrained it. In those days, it looked much bigger than it appears in your video. I imagine that it has retreated quite a ways since then. The thing that stuck with me the most, though, was how a hot summer day could become instantly freezing cold when you went into one of those caves or spaces where the glacier met the rock walls of the valley. As for camera gear, I shoot with Olympus and Canon, but I've been questioning my choice of gear on the Canon side especially. I'm really disappointed with the lack of support for third-party lenses on the RF mount. The obvious full-frame alternative is Sony due to its much more open lens mount ecosystem. It's also good to know that Sony has a native 24-105mm available. I have the 24-105mm f/4.0L for my EOS camera, and it is definitely the highpoint of the Canon system. An excellent lens! I can't help but wonder how the two compare. Anyway, thanks for a great video.
Thank you so much and yes the glacier has changed a lot in the last few decades. I think for the most part the canon and Sony 24-105 are very comparable in performance
Great video Jake, yes I have this lens and you’ve given me reasons to take it on my Solo motorbike trip from the UK down to Cappadocia, Turkey and back. A document my trip but I just don’t have the skills you have, well done.
I have this lens and LOVE IT! I totally agree with all you said. I purchased it used a few years ago and it sits on one of cameras 90% of the time! Bring on Version 2!!!
I use a 24-105 on my DSLR, love it. This G lens looks good but as someone who hasn't jumped to mirrorless, the Nikon 24-120/4 is one thing that's drawing me towards that system m
I had the Sony 20-70mm f4 for about 2 months and went on an adventurous campervan trip with it. While I appreciated the 20mm wide angle, I wished it had OSS because I experienced shakes even at f4 in a slightly dimmed condition. I also wished it had a longer focal length because at 70mm, it just wasn't long enough to get that mountain peak closer in the picture. I sold the Sony 20-70mm after the trip and now thinking of getting this 24-105mm OSS eventhough it is an old lens.
yes but it lacks the OSS in the lens which helps a LOT with handheld shots on sony bodies without dynamic active stabilization or active stabilization. That said I did test the 20-70 quite a bit (you can see a video on my channel about it) and I really like it. fantastic lens and I hope some of it carries over to the next gen 24-105
I've been thinking for a long time about which lens to choose for ff. And then I looked at my 14-year-old photo archive - the most commonly used focal lengths on my crop camera are 18 mm and 70 mm (28 and 105 in full frame). This lens + fix will cover all my needs. Thanks a lot for the video!
you're welcome also check out some of the Tamron offerings like the 18-300mm which is excellent if you are shooting apsc: ruclips.net/video/2dk55irRpZ0/видео.htmlsi=kt4DLcQefztHGtS-
Thank you. One of my favorite lenses that I bought twice, V1 & V2 for Canon and now bought the Sony G once I added the system. Would love to see them create a G II version but still happy with original. Love your shots in Alaska. Take care.
I do really like the look of this lens for hiking and landscapes, I currently have a tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 which is a great lens for weddings and events, but I hate its weight and size when I’m hiking. Currently saving up for the Sony 24-105 f4 but I’m hoping that they release a version 2 soon before I do pull trigger on it
I really hope Sony updates this lens really soon, perhaps to a 24-120mm. I've been eyeing this lens for the longest time but ended up getting the Tamron 28-200 which is a great all-in-one lens for hiking/backpacking. Unless of course Tamron updates that 28-200 with VC. After all the Tamron aps-c 18-300 has VC.
I've owned this lens for a few years. It is amazingly sharp. Too photos in poor light of my son with the A7R3, wide open. The detail is perfect. Skin and eyebrows/eyelashes are perfectly sharp. And his eye is a perfect marble, entirely in focus. I was shocked as I shot it at a slow speed. The OSS and IBIS really did its job. A new version, smaller and lighter with aperture ring, along with OSS, should be on Sony's roster. It is as good as you say.
Interesting observation... 24-105G and 24-70GMii has approximately the same size and weight, but in hands 24-70GMii feels lighter and more balanced. In my opinion 24-70GMii has perfect balance. It looks like 24-105 has more weight in the front of a lens, so it feels frontheavy and less comfortable. So i wish Sony someday will make second version of 24-105 and it will be just a tiny bit smaller/lighter and less front heavy
@@ilovecapitalism1776the 24-105 is heavy, but feels good to me. I love the lens for its versatility. Wish it was a little wider though. With active stabilization it’s a little tight at 24mm for my taste.
@@ilovecapitalism1776 have considered the 20-70, but prefer the extra reach of the 24-105. Haven’t used Sigma in years, prefer to use Sony, but Sigma is making some great lenses.
I had the 24-105. I loved the lens, it does everything pretty well. Then I bought the Tamron 28-200. It does MORE pretty well - for a still photographer. The 28-200 range is super useful, and the f/2.8 is useful for the wide focal lengths while I don’t really miss the 24-28 range. The Tamron has a bit more color fringing in the wider focal ranges (28-35), but I rarely shoot less than F8 for landscape. I currently use, primarily, the 14 GM, 20-70 G and 70-200 Macro G II combination, or the 28-200 if I am carrying a single lens. I gave the 24-105 to my daughter and to reiterate my first sentence, I loved it and miss it occasionally. It just does not fit my current stable. I am hoping Sony replaces their mediocre 24-240 with a 24-200 F4 (or F2.8-5.6) so I can replace the Tamron. I would also consider buying a good, light weight, sharp 20-105 F4 G, with stabilization, in a heartbeat. It would be the perfect pair with the 100-400 GM for my needs.
I love my Sony 24-105mm. Impressive sharpness throughout the focal range and has exceptional diffraction control even up to f/16. My 24-105mm is actually sharper corner to corner than my 24mm 1.4 GM at f/4.
I love this lens, I’ve had it for years and has gone everywhere with me. Recently I’ve been debating to get the 70-200 with the teleconverter for the reach but haven’t decided it is worth it over the 24-105. Any opinions on the two side by side?
I have the 24-105mm G and the original 24-70mm GM. Sorry, but the GM is sharper. I've also tested a second copy of the 24-105mm and it was identical to the first copy. When I say testing, I'm using MTP mapper to produce my own charts. The one caveat to all of this is distance to subject. The test chart is close. I'm using both of these lenses for close subjects, not landscapes. For subjects at moderate to great distance...the results could be very different.
it better be, it was 2x the price and it's Sony's GM line (top shelf) not the G line, I would hope it would be sharper. Also this is not a comparison video, just a video showcasing what the 24-105 is capable of. Are you using them for macro stuff or just very close subjects (portraits etc) Thanks for watching!
@@JakeSloan I'm using the 24-105 for close subjects for which 70mm is just not long enough. The GM is not great at 70mm anyway...but the G is worse, but maybe I'm being too demanding. I just got the 70-200mm GM II. That lens kicks some serious butt, but it's better with a bit of distance, not real close. Probably the new 70-200mm Macro would work the best close up, but I also want the 70-200mm to do more than just closeups, and I have the teleconverters to use with it. I have more than one camera and I use remotes for closeups. So, I will continue to use the 24-105mm and the new 70-200mm with remotes...and the 70-200mm without remotes.
It's is part of the glacier but after carefully looking at the ice structures around it and the structure of the ceiling I felt confident it was safe enough to enter. There were some other ones that were a hard pass due to the cracks I could see around them
@@JakeSloan Wild. I enjoy the multiple different sides to your videos. Your topics, your creativity and skill at capturing stunning stuff and your adventure…. those 3 things are solid!
This is my "go-to" lens. Now that Lightroom and ACR and bunch of other applications are great at noise reduction and background blur, you don't really need to spend the money on F/2.8 lenses. Love my 24-104 Sony lens on my A7RIII. On a different subject: Aren't you just bear and wolf food when you're alone in place like this?
Agreed, such a great lens for almost everything. What I would like to see is a lens hood that fits over my VND filter. It sucks that I can't use a lens hood especially when filming in all sorts of weather. It forces me to ditch the VND and having to constantly changing my filters while it's raining, snowing, sunny as you know what they say in the mountains about weather...."wait five minutes."
@@JakeSloan You can also do it at home :) Maybe with another object instead of ice. Because when zooming out, it looked like the focus shifted to the background, so there is no certainty that the lens has parfocal-like properties.
quick question, how does this compared to the tamron's 28-200, in terms of image quality? i watched your tamron vid, and the quality here just looks a lot better, despite many on YT claiming the tamron to be sharper (for some reason, i have a hard time believing that).
@@JakeSloan nice! thank you! i personally think the 24-105 is pretty fantastic. still, i may get that tamron if i feel like i'm going to need telephoto, but also some wide shots.
Probably my most underutilized lens because I have coverage over its entire range with multiple GM lenses. I just got back from Safari and I regret not taking it. I had to make weight choices and I opted for the 14 and 16-35 GM. For several of the scenarios, I wish I had had this lens with me instead of the 16-35.
@@JakeSloanI took it to Scotland and Europe last year because I didn’t have the big teles but I had to make weight choices for Africa. Going back to Europe this year and Patagonia in the fall and I’ll definitely take it.
great video! i wasn't too blown away by the 18-105 for aps-c lenses, but this seems to be a lot better, especially since full frame makes f/4 way better in low light. much sharper images too!
This is a beast of a lens, first one I bought. It taught me to not fear ISO! I think pairing it with a 20mm 1.8, or the new 16-25 2.8 coming out would be perfect for landscape!
Hi Jake. Great review and locations. Not much snow down here in Oz, except for the high(ish) country in winter. I have the 28-135 PZ for my FX6 and love the flexibility and rocker zoom control. I have other lenses too, 16-35, 100-400 etc, but am considering the 24-105 as a go-to for my A7 M4.
TRaymond Understood, for your hike and shoot world. The majority of my documentary work is very different to yours. Last week, I had the FX6 with PZ 16-35 set up on an RS3 gimbal, with the Steadimate attachment to my Steadicam vest and arm. Filming walk and talk on a beach, sending video to the director with a Hollyland 4K transmitter. Also using the Inspire 2 for aerials, but looking to the Mavic 3 Pro Cine in case we have to walk in to a shoot (My old Mavic Pro V1, is only used for flight training assistants). (Can’t seem to attach Pics to these comments)
@@JakeSloan Yeah, I want to have less gear. So, each lens should have maximal flexibility. The 24-70 is a beautiful lens (Sony or Sigma) but I feel that the extra 35mm at the tele-end outweighs the benefit of a 24-70 (unless you really do shoot in low light very often). The 50 has me covered when I want to scratch my bokeh itch.
Hi Jake, great video once again, i literally just traded my 16-55 G APS-C lens in for this about an hour ago with MPB, i intend to pair it with my A7iv, i look forward to receiving it 👍🏻
Good video thanks. I have the 24-70 GM mark 1 and do get a bit frustrated with the amount of distortion it has at the long end, is this lens as bad? Also, how does the sharpness compare?
My 24-70 GM is sharper than my 24-105mm G lens. But that's for close subjects. Haven't actually compared for landscape distances...or anything over 10' from the camera, so can't answer for that. And yes, a one lens comparison is not statistically valid.
Thanks for the video, I have a sony Alpha 7 iii and a sony 85mm 1.8 for portraits, I would like to add a lens for travel. And I'm hesitating between the SONY 24-105mm G OSS and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2. I'm afraid that f4 will be limited at night, after which I still have my 85mm 1.8, but I'll be limited on the focal length. Any advice on which one to choose? Thanks :)
Hi Jake ! Great video 🔥 I have been hearing that OSS doesn’t pair well with active stabilisation in the a7siii with lens distortions etc.. could you confirm if this has been an issue for you on the A1 ? Thanks.
Amazing Nature! I love my 24-105! Amazing how the Osmo Pocket 3 helps here in your one man band production. Thank you for doing all this efforts for us!
I purchased the Sony 24-105mm F4 and completely disappointed with the zoom ring. It's horrible. Way to stiff when zooming shooting a video. Others have shared the same concerns. You'd think Sony would make a zoom ring that's smooth instead of jerky for videographers.
dude I'm still at a loss of whether you have a camera on follow mode or if you have a very silent cameraman somewhere lol. Anyways, I'm not sure about getting this lens for my a7cii because it's almost as big as the RF24-70.
I had this 24-105 before, and now i have 24-70 GMii. And to be honest sometimes i think it would be better to stay with the 24-105. I'm a prime lens guy and i have a lot of primes, and in my opinion zoom lens should be versatile. It will never give you the same fast aperture as primes, but it will give you versatility. So to me it looks like 24-70 is not as versatile as 24-105, but because of F2.8 it is also not as beautiful as F1.4 primes. So in my opinion 24-105 has this perfect balance of versatility and good image quality. But i'm mostly make photos with people. If your main focus is landscapes so 24-105 is even more attractive
I don't do video, so I can't compare there, but for photos, I'll take my Tamron 28-200 over the Sony 24-105 all day long. It actually has a wider aperture than the Sony from 28-53mm (f2.8-3.5). It is equal (f4) to the Sony from 54mm-77mm. And it's only a half stop slower (f4.5) from 78-105mm. And THEN, you get 106-200mm of additional zoom, running from f4.5-5.6. Incredibly versatile, great IQ, and yet it's lighter and $500 cheaper ($600 cheaper right now, as Tamron is running a $100 off sale). Yes, I sacrifice the wide end 24-27mm focal length that the Sony has, but I prefer the significantly longer zoom at the telephoto end. The Tamron 28-200, like the Sony 24-105, is truly underrated. It's a terrific, single-lens travel option, and an easy, versatile, all-day carry.
agreed the 28-200 is a TERRIFIC lens especially if you are more photo focused. where I think the 24-105 beats the 28-200 is handheld video purely because of the extra stabilization you get from the lens.
@@JakeSloan I went ahead an ordered one from eBay. There's another parfocal test that I found as well. Thank you Jake! ruclips.net/video/uSu-kGxgl7Q/видео.htmlsi=oeBiwxh8Rd_xasDH
I'm a beginner and taking my family to Hawaii in late July. Is this the lens you would recommend for preserving photo and video memories of the kids (portrait), the kids in action at the beach/zipline, and landscapes? Thanks. Fantastic review. This lens is in my cart, but I'll wait for your response. Thanks again!
I've had 5 copies of this lens and I can't agree: it's the opposite. This lens is overpriced for its package. 1) CAs are really bad. 2) Zoom ring is stuttering a lot every few millimeters. Not smooth at all. 3) Focus ring is so smooth that you don't really have any precise control. 4) The rubber gasket is a bad joke. It is very thin and barely visible. Every Tamron lens does give you a lot more confidence concerning its weather sealing on the mount. I don't understand why people always flex about their G and GM lenses in terms of build. Build is not an aestetic value, but a functional aspect. 5) IQ is okay, not more. 6) OSS is nice, but not the best you have ever seen. It is a lot more attractive on paper than in reality. If this was a 700-800€ lens nowadays, no complaints. But at 1000+, I don't see for what. Even Tamron's superzoom, the 28-200, is better in terms of optics (sharpness, CAs) and does have a faster aperture over most of the comparable zoom range; plus, it's 400€ less and double the range. I don't know what the G stands for if I compare this to cheaper options. Always thought it would be a label of higher quality, but couldn't find that.
I'm glad you actually made a review about this lens. I actually bought this lens before leaving Alaska and move to South Korea. With the camera capability nowadays, F4 is like the sweet spot now even in low light.
absolutely it's fantastic in all but complete darkness lol.
eh, sweet spot, idk. depends on how high you are willing to crank up your ISO. Even in a modestly lit room, I have to go to ISO 2500 at f/2.8, at f/4 that would be 5000. Is 5000 unusable? No, of course not. Would I rather shoot no higher than 3200 (1600 if I'm being completely honest with myself), yeah. I think is plus a fast prime at your prefered focal length is all anyone needs for most photographic needs. I was thinking about getting a 24-70 f/2.8 but I think the extra 35mm reach at the tele lens makes this a better all arounder.
No matter what camera or brand I seen to be shooting with, I ALWAYS have to have a 24-105mm type lens. I travel a lot too and this is the ONE lens I won't leave home without. Great video Jake! Not many put this much effort into their videos. So cool!
Thank you so much and I absolutely agree! This is the one lens I never leave home without
As a new photographer i had bought the 18 to 105 not realizing it was a crop lens. It really restricted my shooting on my a7iv because of this. I am planning to grab this lens as it is very diverse and of course, full frame. Great review!
NICE! and thank you.
27mm in crop mode is wide enough in general 😂😂😂
@@fredfred9758 the issue is it's always crop. So I lose basically half my resolution immediately. So if I ever want to crop, I lose that ability to really get detail. It wasnt flexible for my shooting
Couldn't you return the lens?
@@dogblessamerica I was outside the return window. I ended up selling it
One of the first lenses I bought when I switched from Nikon to Sony a few years ago. Love that lens...Fantastic bargain. I considered the 70-200 F/2.8 but went with this instead and don't regret it,
glad to hear it!
Probably the coolest location I've ever seen for a lens review^^
I agree!!
For my current A1, A7RV, A9III, I currently have 13 fullframe E-mount lenses covering 10mm to 600mm from Sony (GM and G), Sigma Art, Tamron, Viltrox, Laowa. My Sony 24-105mm f4 G OSS is my most used lens of all of them for subjects I photograph around the world. It is sharp, with silent and fast autofocus, great OSS, super versatile. It is also Sony's biggest selling fullframe lens in the world, for good reasons. . Cheers
same here and the reason I put this video together when I looked back through the work and photos I've taken since I bought this lens. It really is an incredible performer
@@JakeSloan so true. Cheers
Wow! Daddy Warbucks.
@@ggivensjr no, I am not rich,. 50 years of hard work as a photojournalist allows me to afford the gear I need to have. Cheers
Videos like this truly shows that you can judge a lens on paper but in reality its the results that you can achieve that judge it and from the photos you have taken they look excellent.
Agreed!!! This is why I focus on real world reviews and testing
I use this one for about 90% of the time. It's focal range is a big plus, but the auto focus can be a bit hit or miss. And fringing. But it really is a great Jack of all trades
yeah I didn't really touch on the fringing and the auto focus for me has been solid except in -20 or colder when the motors seem to freeze up a bit lol
@@JakeSloan regarding AF: is it because u r using the a7iii ? I use the a7ii and expect to have same experience as @ClaudioAFC
As of 091624 switched from A-mount DSLR to E-Mount. Also purchased LA-EA5 adapter so I could use my 70-400mm G2. Just bought this lens 24-105 F4 11262024. My first E-mount lens. So far I'm very impressed.
NICE
I love the thought of the lens. My 28-135mm PZ recently went out on me. I am trying to get it fixed for a reasonable price, but if not, I will look at this lens. I will compliment my 16-35 f4 zeiss. I really never need f2.8 because of the fx3.
oh dang I am sorry to hear that, but yes this would make a good replacement if you can't get your 28-135 fixed
Nice video. I lived in the Yukon Territory for almost fifty years and I remember the Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau almost forty years ago. We hiked right up to the terminus of the glacier and then beyond by following the high ground adjacent to the ice. I even remember getting between the glacier and the rock walls that constrained it. In those days, it looked much bigger than it appears in your video. I imagine that it has retreated quite a ways since then. The thing that stuck with me the most, though, was how a hot summer day could become instantly freezing cold when you went into one of those caves or spaces where the glacier met the rock walls of the valley.
As for camera gear, I shoot with Olympus and Canon, but I've been questioning my choice of gear on the Canon side especially. I'm really disappointed with the lack of support for third-party lenses on the RF mount. The obvious full-frame alternative is Sony due to its much more open lens mount ecosystem. It's also good to know that Sony has a native 24-105mm available. I have the 24-105mm f/4.0L for my EOS camera, and it is definitely the highpoint of the Canon system. An excellent lens! I can't help but wonder how the two compare. Anyway, thanks for a great video.
Thank you so much and yes the glacier has changed a lot in the last few decades. I think for the most part the canon and Sony 24-105 are very comparable in performance
I came here for the lens review (thanks), but I was blown away by those caves. Absolutely stunning!
Thanks so much!
Great video Jake, yes I have this lens and you’ve given me reasons to take it on my Solo motorbike trip from the UK down to Cappadocia, Turkey and back. A document my trip but I just don’t have the skills you have, well done.
Awesome, that sounds like a great trip to take this lens on!
I’ve not seen a video of yours before. Instantly subbed. Buying this lens to go with my new A7Cii. Love the content!
Awesome! Thank you and welcome!
Very informative video Jake! I own this lens and still I learned a lot about its capabilities.
Thanks Jim! It really is fantastic, I'm glad to hear you already have it
I have this lens and LOVE IT! I totally agree with all you said. I purchased it used a few years ago and it sits on one of cameras 90% of the time! Bring on Version 2!!!
awesome!
I use a 24-105 on my DSLR, love it. This G lens looks good but as someone who hasn't jumped to mirrorless, the Nikon 24-120/4 is one thing that's drawing me towards that system m
agreed!
I had the Sony 20-70mm f4 for about 2 months and went on an adventurous campervan trip with it. While I appreciated the 20mm wide angle, I wished it had OSS because I experienced shakes even at f4 in a slightly dimmed condition. I also wished it had a longer focal length because at 70mm, it just wasn't long enough to get that mountain peak closer in the picture. I sold the Sony 20-70mm after the trip and now thinking of getting this 24-105mm OSS eventhough it is an old lens.
yeah I went back and forth with the 20-70 as well and ultimately decided to stay with this lens for almost every reason you state
I’d go with the 20-70. If you crop in at 70, to a 105 FOV it’s still shaper then the 24-105 (see Toneh’s review). It’s a more modern design too.
yes but it lacks the OSS in the lens which helps a LOT with handheld shots on sony bodies without dynamic active stabilization or active stabilization. That said I did test the 20-70 quite a bit (you can see a video on my channel about it) and I really like it. fantastic lens and I hope some of it carries over to the next gen 24-105
I've been thinking for a long time about which lens to choose for ff. And then I looked at my 14-year-old photo archive - the most commonly used focal lengths on my crop camera are 18 mm and 70 mm (28 and 105 in full frame).
This lens + fix will cover all my needs. Thanks a lot for the video!
you're welcome also check out some of the Tamron offerings like the 18-300mm which is excellent if you are shooting apsc: ruclips.net/video/2dk55irRpZ0/видео.htmlsi=kt4DLcQefztHGtS-
@@JakeSloan thanks =)
When i first got my A74...i got the 20mm G and this 24-105mm. And it is amazing. Glad i got it!
Good choice!
My 24-105mm is almost bolted on my A9ii, agreed perfect holiday lense.
nice!
Thank you. One of my favorite lenses that I bought twice, V1 & V2 for Canon and now bought the Sony G once I added the system. Would love to see them create a G II version but still happy with original. Love your shots in Alaska. Take care.
thanks and I agree!
Now that Lr has background blur I love my 24-105.
agreed!!
I do really like the look of this lens for hiking and landscapes, I currently have a tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 which is a great lens for weddings and events, but I hate its weight and size when I’m hiking. Currently saving up for the Sony 24-105 f4 but I’m hoping that they release a version 2 soon before I do pull trigger on it
I hope they do too because it really is a fantastic lens for hiking
Let’s also give a try to the Tamron 28-200 f2.8-5, another underrated beast lens !
I agree and did review that lens a few years back!
Good for low light? With a6700
I wouldn't use this lens on an A6700 as it's meant for full frame. I would look at the Tamron 17-70
Love my 24-105G.
Sharp image, practical focal length.
And thanks for the OSS, I can handheld night photography without the need of a tripod.
agreed!
I really hope Sony updates this lens really soon, perhaps to a 24-120mm. I've been eyeing this lens for the longest time but ended up getting the Tamron 28-200 which is a great all-in-one lens for hiking/backpacking. Unless of course Tamron updates that 28-200 with VC. After all the Tamron aps-c 18-300 has VC.
MEEEEE tooo!!! The tamron 28-200 is a super solid lens choice though
I've owned this lens for a few years. It is amazingly sharp. Too photos in poor light of my son with the A7R3, wide open. The detail is perfect. Skin and eyebrows/eyelashes are perfectly sharp. And his eye is a perfect marble, entirely in focus. I was shocked as I shot it at a slow speed. The OSS and IBIS really did its job. A new version, smaller and lighter with aperture ring, along with OSS, should be on Sony's roster. It is as good as you say.
I could not agree more! It's such a fantastic lens!!
Interesting observation... 24-105G and 24-70GMii has approximately the same size and weight, but in hands 24-70GMii feels lighter and more balanced. In my opinion 24-70GMii has perfect balance. It looks like 24-105 has more weight in the front of a lens, so it feels frontheavy and less comfortable. So i wish Sony someday will make second version of 24-105 and it will be just a tiny bit smaller/lighter and less front heavy
agreed!!
One of my overall favorite lenses. Love using it on my a7cii.
Good choice!
I also got the 7c II this week. I’ve choose the 24-50 G 2.8 but I’m not happy with it. How is the size of the 24-105 on the 7C? Good handling?
@@ilovecapitalism1776the 24-105 is heavy, but feels good to me. I love the lens for its versatility. Wish it was a little wider though. With active stabilization it’s a little tight at 24mm for my taste.
@@miguelcruzonlinethere’s is also the Sony 20-70 F4 and Sigma 28-70 F2.8 witch are smaller but no 105mm hard decision
@@ilovecapitalism1776 have considered the 20-70, but prefer the extra reach of the 24-105. Haven’t used Sigma in years, prefer to use Sony, but Sigma is making some great lenses.
I had the 24-105. I loved the lens, it does everything pretty well. Then I bought the Tamron 28-200. It does MORE pretty well - for a still photographer. The 28-200 range is super useful, and the f/2.8 is useful for the wide focal lengths while I don’t really miss the 24-28 range. The Tamron has a bit more color fringing in the wider focal ranges (28-35), but I rarely shoot less than F8 for landscape. I currently use, primarily, the 14 GM, 20-70 G and 70-200 Macro G II combination, or the 28-200 if I am carrying a single lens. I gave the 24-105 to my daughter and to reiterate my first sentence, I loved it and miss it occasionally. It just does not fit my current stable. I am hoping Sony replaces their mediocre 24-240 with a 24-200 F4 (or F2.8-5.6) so I can replace the Tamron. I would also consider buying a good, light weight, sharp 20-105 F4 G, with stabilization, in a heartbeat. It would be the perfect pair with the 100-400 GM for my needs.
great points and I agree with you on the next gen 24-105. I have used the tamron 28-200 and it's fantastic as well
I love my Sony 24-105mm. Impressive sharpness throughout the focal range and has exceptional diffraction control even up to f/16. My 24-105mm is actually sharper corner to corner than my 24mm 1.4 GM at f/4.
It’s a beast of a lens
I love this lens, I’ve had it for years and has gone everywhere with me. Recently I’ve been debating to get the 70-200 with the teleconverter for the reach but haven’t decided it is worth it over the 24-105. Any opinions on the two side by side?
If you plan to do any wildlife then the 70-200 and tele will be worth it 100%
I used to have this lens and traded for the 24-70 GMii and to be honest have regretted ever since, missing that range to 105mm
dang, the 24-70g,II is a great lens but I feel like in run and gun stuff this one still wins out
Thanks for this, I honestly wouldn't have given this lens a chance without this video.
cool!
I have the 24-105mm G and the original 24-70mm GM. Sorry, but the GM is sharper. I've also tested a second copy of the 24-105mm and it was identical to the first copy. When I say testing, I'm using MTP mapper to produce my own charts. The one caveat to all of this is distance to subject. The test chart is close. I'm using both of these lenses for close subjects, not landscapes. For subjects at moderate to great distance...the results could be very different.
it better be, it was 2x the price and it's Sony's GM line (top shelf) not the G line, I would hope it would be sharper. Also this is not a comparison video, just a video showcasing what the 24-105 is capable of. Are you using them for macro stuff or just very close subjects (portraits etc) Thanks for watching!
@@JakeSloan I'm using the 24-105 for close subjects for which 70mm is just not long enough. The GM is not great at 70mm anyway...but the G is worse, but maybe I'm being too demanding. I just got the 70-200mm GM II. That lens kicks some serious butt, but it's better with a bit of distance, not real close. Probably the new 70-200mm Macro would work the best close up, but I also want the 70-200mm to do more than just closeups, and I have the teleconverters to use with it.
I have more than one camera and I use remotes for closeups. So, I will continue to use the 24-105mm and the new 70-200mm with remotes...and the 70-200mm without remotes.
I really hope we see mark II this year. Although since I got my 20-70 f4 I don’t want to miss the wider side anymore. It’s such a game changer for me
nice I have thought about purchasing that lens but I would miss the OSS too much
I really liked the colors of the video. Please tell us your process.
for this I shot most in D-Log M on a DJI Pocket 3 and used the DJI technical LUT then adjusted exposure as needed
Thanks for the review. We used this lens 90% of all the time
nice!
Wow! That cave. Is that cave part of the glacier and if so, isn’t that really dangerous?
It's is part of the glacier but after carefully looking at the ice structures around it and the structure of the ceiling I felt confident it was safe enough to enter. There were some other ones that were a hard pass due to the cracks I could see around them
@@JakeSloan Wild. I enjoy the multiple different sides to your videos. Your topics, your creativity and skill at capturing stunning stuff and your adventure…. those 3 things are solid!
Thanks so much Scott! That means a LOT coming from someone like you
I'm just waiting for a version 2 to buy one. Need that updated Sony sharpness and AF performance.
agreed!
This is my "go-to" lens. Now that Lightroom and ACR and bunch of other applications are great at noise reduction and background blur, you don't really need to spend the money on F/2.8 lenses. Love my 24-104 Sony lens on my A7RIII. On a different subject: Aren't you just bear and wolf food when you're alone in place like this?
Oh I have ways of dealing with them if they decide to mess with me.
Stunning images, Jake. That's a nice lens.
Many thanks!
What backpack and tripod did you use for this video?
Peak design travel tripod and a Thinktank Mindshift 26L
@@JakeSloan Thank you.
Excellent video. Great Review and lovely interesting scenery
Glad you enjoyed it
Agreed, such a great lens for almost everything. What I would like to see is a lens hood that fits over my VND filter. It sucks that I can't use a lens hood especially when filming in all sorts of weather. It forces me to ditch the VND and having to constantly changing my filters while it's raining, snowing, sunny as you know what they say in the mountains about weather...."wait five minutes."
agreed, I have wanted a VND filter for a long time that would fit inside a lens hood...
Would like to see a better parfocal test...
next time I hike out there I'll make sure and do one...🙄
@@JakeSloan You can also do it at home :) Maybe with another object instead of ice. Because when zooming out, it looked like the focus shifted to the background, so there is no certainty that the lens has parfocal-like properties.
quick question, how does this compared to the tamron's 28-200, in terms of image quality? i watched your tamron vid, and the quality here just looks a lot better, despite many on YT claiming the tamron to be sharper (for some reason, i have a hard time believing that).
They are neck and neck the tamron is a bit sharper overall but this does better handheld and with focus breathing
@@JakeSloan nice! thank you! i personally think the 24-105 is pretty fantastic. still, i may get that tamron if i feel like i'm going to need telephoto, but also some wide shots.
Probably my most underutilized lens because I have coverage over its entire range with multiple GM lenses. I just got back from Safari and I regret not taking it. I had to make weight choices and I opted for the 14 and 16-35 GM. For several of the scenarios, I wish I had had this lens with me instead of the 16-35.
Oh dang, yeah I almost always opt for this lens when going places I haven't been before because I know 90% of my shots will be covered by it.
@@JakeSloanI took it to Scotland and Europe last year because I didn’t have the big teles but I had to make weight choices for Africa. Going back to Europe this year and Patagonia in the fall and I’ll definitely take it.
I also own fe 24-105g oss， I love it now. I only have two lens, another is 35gm. I feel good about them!
Very nice combo!
great video! i wasn't too blown away by the 18-105 for aps-c lenses, but this seems to be a lot better, especially since full frame makes f/4 way better in low light. much sharper images too!
Totally agree!
Great review - super useful to get thoughts from someone thats used the lens heavily in some tough scenarios
Glad it was helpful!
This is a beast of a lens, first one I bought. It taught me to not fear ISO! I think pairing it with a 20mm 1.8, or the new 16-25 2.8 coming out would be perfect for landscape!
definitely I pair mine with the 20 1.8 a lot a love the combo!
Hi Jake. Great review and locations. Not much snow down here in Oz, except for the high(ish) country in winter. I have the 28-135 PZ for my FX6 and love the flexibility and rocker zoom control. I have other lenses too, 16-35, 100-400 etc, but am considering the 24-105 as a go-to for my A7 M4.
Nice! I would love to add a 28-135 for my FX6 but so far the 24-105 has filled the need I have.
TRaymond Understood, for your hike and shoot world. The majority of my documentary work is very different to yours. Last week, I had the FX6 with PZ 16-35 set up on an RS3 gimbal, with the Steadimate attachment to my Steadicam vest and arm. Filming walk and talk on a beach, sending video to the director with a Hollyland 4K transmitter. Also using the Inspire 2 for aerials, but looking to the Mavic 3 Pro Cine in case we have to walk in to a shoot (My old Mavic Pro V1, is only used for flight training assistants). (Can’t seem to attach Pics to these comments)
whats that tripod? I like that!
Peak Design travel tripod
You've convinced me. This is a great walkaround. Combine this with my 50mm f/1.4 and I'm read for all situations.
thats a great combo
@@JakeSloan Yeah, I want to have less gear. So, each lens should have maximal flexibility. The 24-70 is a beautiful lens (Sony or Sigma) but I feel that the extra 35mm at the tele-end outweighs the benefit of a 24-70 (unless you really do shoot in low light very often). The 50 has me covered when I want to scratch my bokeh itch.
Hi Jake, great video once again, i literally just traded my 16-55 G APS-C lens in for this about an hour ago with MPB, i intend to pair it with my A7iv, i look forward to receiving it 👍🏻
NICE
Mr. Sloan, this was a phenomenal review on every level. You are a talented fellow.
thank you very much
whats your tripod?
I use the Peak Design travel tripod
Great underrated lens. I've owned it a couple times. And I might even buy it again for travel.
Totally agree!
Also, my all to go lens, together with 100-400mm and 20mm.
Nice! very similar to me lol
This lens lives on my camera unless I absolutely need the 2.8 for something like a sit-down interview. Great with the fx3, great with the a7iv.
100% agree!
CAN you link that red color uv filter what u used ?
It’s the freewell gear variable ND.
Great Lens, I usually pair it with the 16-35mm f/4 G PZ. They are a great combo
That's a fantastic combo!
Good video thanks. I have the 24-70 GM mark 1 and do get a bit frustrated with the amount of distortion it has at the long end, is this lens as bad? Also, how does the sharpness compare?
My 24-70 GM is sharper than my 24-105mm G lens. But that's for close subjects. Haven't actually compared for landscape distances...or anything over 10' from the camera, so can't answer for that. And yes, a one lens comparison is not statistically valid.
The 24-70 will be sharper for sure, but this lens has better distortion control overall
Agreed, Can't wait for mark II version of 24-105
100%
Extraordinary location, really loved it❤
Thanks a ton
Thanks for the video, I have a sony Alpha 7 iii and a sony 85mm 1.8 for portraits, I would like to add a lens for travel. And I'm hesitating between the SONY 24-105mm G OSS and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2.
I'm afraid that f4 will be limited at night, after which I still have my 85mm 1.8, but I'll be limited on the focal length. Any advice on which one to choose? Thanks :)
See my answer to your other question
@@JakeSloan Thanks
I am using that lens. Happy to havet it. ❤
Good choice!
Hi Jake ! Great video 🔥 I have been hearing that OSS doesn’t pair well with active stabilisation in the a7siii with lens distortions etc.. could you confirm if this has been an issue for you on the A1 ? Thanks.
This has not been an issue at all for me, I have gotten really great results with the A7sIII and the A1 and this lens
Amazing Nature! I love my 24-105! Amazing how the Osmo Pocket 3 helps here in your one man band production. Thank you for doing all this efforts for us!
Thank you!
I pretty much have the Sony APSC version and is very good for video.
NICE, I've not tested that one but if I ran apsc cameras I would definitely give it a try
I purchased the Sony 24-105mm F4 and completely disappointed with the zoom ring. It's horrible. Way to stiff when zooming shooting a video. Others have shared the same concerns. You'd think Sony would make a zoom ring that's smooth instead of jerky for videographers.
mine is stiff but it isnt that stiff. sorry to hear you are disappointed
dude I'm still at a loss of whether you have a camera on follow mode or if you have a very silent cameraman somewhere lol. Anyways, I'm not sure about getting this lens for my a7cii because it's almost as big as the RF24-70.
I used the DJI pocket 3 with tracking lol
I had this 24-105 before, and now i have 24-70 GMii. And to be honest sometimes i think it would be better to stay with the 24-105. I'm a prime lens guy and i have a lot of primes, and in my opinion zoom lens should be versatile. It will never give you the same fast aperture as primes, but it will give you versatility. So to me it looks like 24-70 is not as versatile as 24-105, but because of F2.8 it is also not as beautiful as F1.4 primes. So in my opinion 24-105 has this perfect balance of versatility and good image quality.
But i'm mostly make photos with people. If your main focus is landscapes so 24-105 is even more attractive
true
I have this lense(SEL24105G) and use it with my a7iv. Its great for taking pictures but NOT good for videos, the videos don't come out sharp.
strange because mine produces great sharp video
@@JakeSloan This is the only lens that it does not give me sharp videos :(
I got this lens for $550 used. It's amazing.
amazing!
That F4 won't work in low light, though. OSS won't help that.
OSS does help with that for photos, you can use a lower shutter speed in lower light on a lens with OSS vs a lens that doesn't have OSS
This lens isn't sexy, but it's a lens every Sony photographer should own. For anyone new to Sony, this should be one of your first lens purchases.
I could not agree more!
I don't do video, so I can't compare there, but for photos, I'll take my Tamron 28-200 over the Sony 24-105 all day long. It actually has a wider aperture than the Sony from 28-53mm (f2.8-3.5). It is equal (f4) to the Sony from 54mm-77mm. And it's only a half stop slower (f4.5) from 78-105mm. And THEN, you get 106-200mm of additional zoom, running from f4.5-5.6. Incredibly versatile, great IQ, and yet it's lighter and $500 cheaper ($600 cheaper right now, as Tamron is running a $100 off sale). Yes, I sacrifice the wide end 24-27mm focal length that the Sony has, but I prefer the significantly longer zoom at the telephoto end. The Tamron 28-200, like the Sony 24-105, is truly underrated. It's a terrific, single-lens travel option, and an easy, versatile, all-day carry.
agreed the 28-200 is a TERRIFIC lens especially if you are more photo focused. where I think the 24-105 beats the 28-200 is handheld video purely because of the extra stabilization you get from the lens.
@@JakeSloan also in IQ (definition)
I love this lens, such a solid lens!!
agreed!
Mi 90% of time lens since 2018.
100%
Absolutely AWESOME video, ive been on the fence between this and a sigma , but i think im going with the sony
Good choice!
I did go with the Sony !!!
Awesome lens ❤❤❤
Definitely totaly underrated Jake 👍 i love my 24-105 mm 😅 and uploaded a video too but „auf deutsch“ 😂
Nice work!
@@JakeSloan thanks 🙏
Used this lens until I got my hands on the Tamron 35-150, it spoiled mee too much and made the F4 feel awful to return to.
That lens is brilliant!
Other reviews say this lens is NOT parfocal, but you’re saying it is. Which is it? lol
I demonstrated it in the video. Mine is parfocal
@@JakeSloan I went ahead an ordered one from eBay. There's another parfocal test that I found as well. Thank you Jake!
ruclips.net/video/uSu-kGxgl7Q/видео.htmlsi=oeBiwxh8Rd_xasDH
I'm a beginner and taking my family to Hawaii in late July. Is this the lens you would recommend for preserving photo and video memories of the kids (portrait), the kids in action at the beach/zipline, and landscapes? Thanks. Fantastic review. This lens is in my cart, but I'll wait for your response. Thanks again!
The would work great!
just picked up a use one for $560
awesome!
Your adventures are gorgeous & amazing, especially solo filming in those conditions! Sure hope a version 2 comes out. Which phone app are you using?
the phone app for this was just the old sony imaging edge app to control my A1 remotely.
I've had 5 copies of this lens and I can't agree: it's the opposite. This lens is overpriced for its package.
1) CAs are really bad.
2) Zoom ring is stuttering a lot every few millimeters. Not smooth at all.
3) Focus ring is so smooth that you don't really have any precise control.
4) The rubber gasket is a bad joke. It is very thin and barely visible. Every Tamron lens does give you a lot more confidence concerning its weather sealing on the mount. I don't understand why people always flex about their G and GM lenses in terms of build. Build is not an aestetic value, but a functional aspect.
5) IQ is okay, not more.
6) OSS is nice, but not the best you have ever seen.
It is a lot more attractive on paper than in reality. If this was a 700-800€ lens nowadays, no complaints. But at 1000+, I don't see for what. Even Tamron's superzoom, the 28-200, is better in terms of optics (sharpness, CAs) and does have a faster aperture over most of the comparable zoom range; plus, it's 400€ less and double the range. I don't know what the G stands for if I compare this to cheaper options. Always thought it would be a label of higher quality, but couldn't find that.
interesting, it's definitely not a perfect lens but I have been happy with mine BUT I do hope sony puts out a version II soon
Tamron 20 to 40😊
that's a great lens as well
When Sony will produce a 24-100 f2.8 will talk
man if they did that it would be incredible if they can keep the price under 2,000
Internal zoom
That would be AMAZING and definitely on my list so long as it doesn't make it larger or heavier
get teh tamron 34 to 150!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yesssssss that’s a great lens too. Just way bigger and heavier
🔥
ty
Never had or ever missed a 24-105. F4 is the Dealbreaker for me, i'm a prime lens guy.
I do like primes but for me for most the work I do this is a great lens, until I get into low light then it's 20-24-35 primes for me!