@@rodd1000 I agree that it is better value in the USA (although bear in mind you'll have to pay state sales tax over there, whereas the UK price is VAT inclusive)
Very interesting! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens too. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!
@@SebastianWorldwide Mine makes a little noise when I press my ear to the lens. Otherwise, it is inaudible. BTW, the PZ 16-35 is absolutely silent. Since I mainly shoot stills, any noise is not going to bother me.
Looks like this one will be a home run for Sony. For their hybrid shooting core audience this is a great all arounder. Fast enough, 20mm wide end, not gigantic/heavy, good build quality, and lots of features. Being G-series the price is where I'd expect it given the cost of their 24-105 F4 G and their 24-70 F2.8 GM II. I know people will say it's too high for an F4 but it makes sense, especially if one can get it on sale which I'm sure people will be able to do down the road. A lot of people will criticize things like critical corner sharpness and distortion but for the vast majority of user they simple don't care about those things.
Sony continues to impress me with its lense line up, not to mention their decision open it up to competition. I don't find it that expensive, even though I don't have the budget for it
I really enjoy the comeback of the aperture ring on a lot of new lenses :) For me it is just so much easier to set the aperture on the lens, instead of the camera. Great review as always. Thank You!
Me too. I use aperture rings since the 80's. It's a different haptic experience, more direct. Different, than just rotating a plastic dial on your camera. ;)
Very good. I‘ll probably purchase this versatile compact zoom to replace between 2 and 4 of my existing lenses. When you see what it can do and at which level of image quality throughout, the price is certainly justified.
I have been comparing your review of this lens the FE 20-70mm 'G' and the Carl Zeiss Sony 24-70mm. I like your no chat, no subjective view, just showing what each lens can do on the test bed. It has helped me make my mind up. I'm a fan of Carl Zeiss but with your review I can see the Zeiss is not as good as I hoped compared to the 'G' lens. Thanks! 👍
Honestly looks like a perfect single lens for many people and if Sony priced it at $899 it would absolutely obliterate other lens sales. I really don’t understand why Sony never prices anything competitively 🤷🏻♂️
I would love to know which lens competes with this one and how much it costs... I've noticed that if Sony's lenses actually cost more than the competition (which they basically never do) that it is because it has extra features or image quality to justify it.
@@JohnDennery Worse image quality in every metric, no aperture ring or buttons, worse weather sealing, worse auto focus motors, only goes to 40mm not 70mm... doesn't exactly sound comparable. I think that lens is more comparable to the 5+ ~16-35mm lenses that are available.
@@evrythingis1 it just comes down to what you want it for. I want a small and light lens for hiking and travel so the tamron with f/2.8 aperture is much more appealing to me. Sounds like you’ll be much happier with the Sony!
Damn, this is one impressive lens! I don't think I have really a usecase for it at the moment and that will certainly be beneficial for my wallet, but this surely looks like a great all in one travel and landscape lens. Thanks for your quality review as always!
I agree with you, but unfortunately for my wallet, I bought it. This lens is perfect in my trekking session. Just one light lens for photography and vlogging. All I need.
Very interesting! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!
The 24-105 and 24-120 focal length has been around for decades. It's nothing out of the ordinary to make one to be sharp and well priced. The 20-70mm f/4 is an innovation never achieved before, comparing it with the 24-120 is totally absurd.
Never achieved before because lens designers used to care about insane distortion and vignette. But now it seems like corrections are allowed to be handled by software instead of design.
Nice pro-level lens or for someone who can justify the price. In a couple of years it might come down in price new and used. Nice work as always Chris.
I have a feeling the timing of reviews of this lens suggests the release of the Panasonic S5ii arrived a bit sooner than Sony might have expected - they've had a 20-60 kit lens for years, and with PDAF in the new body a change of system could have been a realistic consideration for some!
20-60 is a decent lens but it's rather slow and only really good for day use. S5II opens up huge range of access to EF lenses I own the Sigma adapter, would be cool to test the many strange EF lenses instead.
Your lense and camera reviews are allways definitly one of the 3 best ones on the internet in any aspect from the technical and practical view regarding the lenses itself but as well from the aspect of very nice entertainment with your lovely british humor and accent, I like so much as I lived in London and Bath a couple of years ago for a short period of time! There are only Gordon Laing's reviews and DPReview on the same great level, these 3 channels are all I need to know about a new lense!
Feels like this is Sony's direct answer to the very popular 20-60 f3.5-5.6 that was bundled with the Panasonic S5. Sony just took and "fixed" all what was lacking with the panasonic one. Would have been nice to see OSS in it as well.
The Panasonic lens is substantially cheaper. It's also weather sealed, quite sharp and solid, but the build design is simple (less buttons and no aperture ring). However, its size, weight and filter diameter match the other Lumix S lenses, so it's a nice option for video and saving a lot of money if you use circular filters. Given that the 20-60 is much, much cheaper and faster at 20mm, I wouldn't even consider this 20-70mm.
@@HarryPowerColt give it time; the Sony was just released. It will more than likely drop a bit in price. Furthermore, this is a G-lens, where's the 20-60 is considered a kit lens. The main appeal here is for vloggers If guess. Photographers will must likely stock to the 24-70 f2.8
@@Wistbacka The 20-60 is considered "kit lens" just because it comes bundled with camera bodies, but it's still a quality lens. At least, as good as any other Lumix S lens. It is clear you never had one in your hands, unfortunately. The 20-60 has also dropped to 399 USD/EUR on sale. That's unbeatable.
As always, wonderful job! Thanks you. I am not a fan of Sony, however the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 and this one are getting my attention towards Sony. Hope Fuji and Nikon will follow up with something similar
More compromises compared to 24-105/120 F4 lenses. Most people probably better off by adding the excellent 20mm Sony G lens to their set. Some people have very specific use cases that can only be fulfilled by a 20-70mm so for them, now you have an available option
The 24-105 f/4 is pretty soft compared to this though. I would take this over the old 24-105 and throw in a fast prime for a nice travel or even video kit.
Christopher, i am trying to deicide for an upcoming trip to Portugal, if I should downsize my A7R III with my 20-70, which I do love, and get a Sony a6600 with the other Sigma you reviewed, the 18-50mm f2.8, and bring that along with the Sony 10-18mm f4. I'd really like to hear what you would do since you have my set up and have tested both. Thanks so much! Absolutely LOVE your channel!!!
I got it a week ago, sell my 24-105 and my rarely used RX100Va for it and be happy with my decision. Unfortunately it's very expensive in Europe. For me it's the ideal combination of focal range, weight and compactness in comparison to my 24-105. It's about 180gr less weight and the slightly more compact size makes it ideal in handling, optical it's better than my 24-105, and it fit's my needs with more wide-angle. I also can recommend it for people wich were more on the wider angles.
@@pentagramyt417 None! Both we're Fullframe lenses, for the A6400 (APS-C Sensor, not fullframe!) I would recommend the Sony 16-50/2.8 (optical very good zoom) or If you need an allround lens that has not be too fast the Sony 18-135. It depends on for what you need it. The Sigma primes 30/1.4 and 56/1.4 (the best portrait lens for sony APS-C, and one of the sharpest you can get) were also highly recommended!
@@pentagramyt417 For APS-C, if you want sharpness there's only the Sony 16-55 f/2.8. If you're ok with a bit of compromise, Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 (this has OSS) and Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 are great options. As for wide lenses, the new Sony 11, 15, and 10-20mm lenses are really good. Tamron 11-20mm f/2.8 is also a good alternative but not as sharp as Sony's lenses.
Only got notifications from my other channels, but figured Id check if you also ut out a video on this lens - and yes you have + its super helpful and very well made, as always :D Thats why you are always my first and most reliable lens review source, when a new lens comes out :)
The performance of the in camera corrections is certainly great when using lenses that have some very visible optical drawbacks, but I really hope this doesn't become a sort of crutch to lean on in the future where manufacturers would rather correct things digitally instead of making optically superior lenses for the consumer market.
I think there's another side to this though - having it optically corrected may involve more (larger/heavier) glass and creating a more expensive, larger, heavier lens. Leave that to the 2.8 GM zooms, and have more compact options like this...
@@bassderek I agree, though the distortion shown here is quite extreme and I'd rather have them try to find a physical solution than leave it all up to post processing. As more expensive solutions become more common they'll slowly but surely also reach the lower regions of the market and fall in price. And I personally tend to take sharper pictures with heavy equipment, though this is obviously different from person to person.
@@helgeschneider4417 the only way they can get the lens to be this small is to allow for large amounts of distortion and also allowing for lots of mechanical vignetting. If those were to be corrected for it would be substantially larger.
I'm thinking about getting this lens for my A7III, I mostly shoot outdoors so F4 isn't a big problem for me, and the lighter weight and samller size are a plus. The lens goes for around $900US in my country, fortunately.
Great review as always! You are indeed my favorite! Sounds like a great lens, but for my purposes, I prefer a faster lens. Really enjoying my Sigma 16-28 f/2.8 lens. Very sharp and great for landscapes.
I really prefer they made this a 25-50mm/2.8. It'll be roughly the size of the 20-70/4. It'll likely be optically a tad better being 2x Zoom. When it comes to a walkabout lens I am not really looking to go very wide or crop really close. I do want it small and I do want a wide enough aperture.
Really odd that you want to take away the utility of this lens and make it a less useful version of literally 5 other lenses that already exist for the system...
@@evrythingis1 I don't think there is a small 2x zoom in the line up. The thing is that I don;t really use 20mm or 70mm. Having a compact 25-50 that has the DOF capability of the fast 24-70s is more useful to me than the additional zoom range.
@@dwightlooi Tamron 20-40mm F2.8? Sigma 28-70mm F2.8? Tamron 28-75mm F2.8? They are all roughly the same size as this zoom lens.... Maybe you should keep your uninformed opinions to yourself.
@@evrythingis1 20-40 is the closest but a little too wide. the 28-70s are 2.5x zooms and too big. All I want is a 25mm and a 50mm in a single barrel with a size as close to a 1.7~1.8 50 prime as I can get it. -- Think of it this way... I already have a 100mm portrait lens, I already have a 21mm prime. What I need is a walkabout lens with a 2.8 aperture that is as small as possible. I'll even take a 28-50/3.3.
Superb review It’s a good lens and that’s it no OS is not the best option for video just have no desire to loose my 24-105 and 16-35 and see this as too much of a compromise rather than replacement Price is ridiculous
My god, this lens.. Huh... I own the 70-200mm F4, and now I am really thinking of getting this one even I would like to use it for concert photography. 20mm and amazing quality... I think I would be good with this lens ( higher ISO on the a7 IV) than i would be with the sigma 24-70mm or tamron 28-75mm...
I don’t really understand the pricing issue. It’s $200 cheaper than the aging 24-105 G that doesn’t have an aperture ring or fancy new XD focus motors.
But that lens is optically stabilized and is technically a larger focal range between the wide and telephoto. It also doesn't have the insane amount of distortion or mechanical vignetting that this lens does.
The ergonomics with all the iris ring additions and decent quality really surprised me here. Shame it's f4, that is the only spanner in the works here.
Looks like another good lens from Sony abeit quite expensive in UK for £1399- horses for courses; for lens to buy and mount on Sony FF ( And Nikon Z via Adaptor ). - Option 1) 24-70 F2.8 2) 24-105 F4 3) This Lens 4mm wider 20mm - 4) 3rd Party Equiv.
Been a lot of reports (anecdotally) about weird field curvature and decentering necessitating repair. It’s an interesting range but the iq doesn’t seem better than the tame on 28-200 which offers a lot more reach but misses the wide. I’d probably use one if I had it, but I don’t think I’ll be paying £1k for one.
Is that decentering or field curvature problems that have actually been deemed real issues and thus fixed by a Sony service provider? I'm asking because the normal course of action afaik is to return a decentered lens to the reseller, since you reasonably test it for defects as soon as you receive it. I like the look of this lens because of its relatively good close up iq and repro ratio. Those are nice qualities in a standard zoom, at least for me.
Pretty nice lens for landscape photography I guess or video work. I just hope they will release an 85mm 1.2 soon, jealous of Canon shooters bc of this.
It's really valuable information and good reviews. Good reviews . Im new in vlogging fields and planning to buy camera and lens. I have questions which lens is good for video vlogging like city , village etc as sony APS-C Camera 11mm, 15mm, 10-20mm lens. Usually i do traveling vlogging Also I would like to know about 17- 50mm lens of Tamron. I'm doing vlogging with action camera coz I'm moto ridder too. Most of my vlogging as video shoots only can say roughly 95%. So which lens best for me for video shooting . Thanks
Have to disagree, I don’t think the US asking price is high given the specs; weight, size, linear autofocus motors, aperture ring. The UK asking price on the other hand……..
I don’t expect sky high image quality for zoom lens(would pick my 50 1.2 if razor sharp photo needed), zoom lens is all about practical use, 20mm is definitely a selling point, I think I can get this lens around $700 a few months later, quite reasonable.
Hello Christopher, I am stuck. This lens or Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art? The new version of Sigma is dust protected. I have Samyang 14 f2.8 mm for real estate, Samyang 35 f1.4 for street and product, Sony 85 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180 f2.8 for portraits, sport. Camera a7riii. Which one would make more sense to you? Thank you, also for your perfect work
Sony heavily relies on electronic corrections for the corners as the throat diameter is much too small for FF. So in the corners the pixels are getting pushed and brightened, expect mushy results there
Chris, Olympus has an F/4 constant lens from 12-100mm (24-200mm) WITH Image Stabilization. Have you have a chance to work with this lens? Any opinions on it?
Hello, Can i have your opinion between this and the tamron 20-40 (in this focal range)? In general sharpness and in the midframe of 40mm f/2.8.Thank you!!
Without digital lens correction, it's ridiculous as Canon's.(and if it's from Canon, people will go crazy to bash it) However it does well after processing. It's a worthy competition for Z 24-70 f4 and RF 24-105L.
Looks amazing! But as a real estate photographer, that 20mm distortion and vignetting looks absolutely disgusting. Is that a permanent thing? Or will there be some sort of software or lens update that will fix that?
I dont get the complaints about the price... all the first party F/4 zooms cost 4 figures.... the original 24-70 F/4 cost $1100 like 10 years ago, which is probably $1200-1300 in today's money, and was awful + didn't cover this range. This lens is a home run. FF is expensive
Uhm, Sigma offers excellent 24-70mm f2.8 and 28-70mm f2.8 for less money. Stop being a blind fanboy, its a good lens but only professionals and doctors can afford to blow 1000+ euros on a lens LOL
@@future62 I am not sure how a lens thats similar priced to a 24-70mm F2.8, 17-28mm F2.8 or 24-105mm F4 can be considered "well priced" when delivering inferior distortion performance and a F4 ontop while just having a 4mm wider advantage.
Sony Lenses are getting expensive, basic 35mm f1.8 is like 700USD. Lenses are good no doubt but Sigma-Smayang-Tamron-Viltrox are almost or even better then sony. Costing half
Hmmm, should I replace my 24-105 f4 G with this? I’ve got the long end covered with a 70-200 but the lack of OSS on the 20-70 is my hangup. Tough call because it looks like a good optic to have as a primary zoom.
I don't understand why Sony released this when they already have the excellent 24-105mm F4 (which includes Optical Steady Shot). If you need wider than 24mm you have the superb 16-35mm F4 PZ or the 20mm f1.8.
I sold my 24-105 when I purchased this lens. The 20mm is nice but really enjoying the overall smaller size, it's lighter, sharper and focuses faster as well. Since it's lighter I have no issue going without the image stabilization when the ibis on my A7CR is good for 7 stops. This is a perfect, lightweight all around lens for every day use and travel.
I would be really interested in a comparison between different wide angle lenses distortion. With and without camera corrections, I feel that Sony have cut many corners with this lens, that they correct digitally instead.
Mentioning how this would be good for your general video work makes me wonder. What exactly do you shoot these reviews with? I can't remember what I _think_ you said you used before.
I think, it was more of a general statement. Neither the A5100 nor the A7Riii are particularly good video cameras. And considering that Chris likes Canon and has an R5 as well as an R7, I'd much assume that he uses those for video. But his revues are mostly comprised of still shots anyways - so A7Riii it is.
@@hendrickziegler8487 Bit odd how you said he probably shoots these reviews with an R5 or R7 and then immediately said he shoots them with the a7RIII that you just (rightfully) said isn't good for video. Unless I'm misunderstanding because half your comment has nothing to do with the question I asked and what you meant is that the reviews don't need any particular video features that the a7RIII doesn't have.
@Christopher Frost Would this be a good lens to adapt to Nikon Z or would you recommend choosing the native 24-120 f/4 which was one of your favorite lenses from last year?
24-120 f4 is reason to shoot Z mount, it is that good as a 5x zoom lens with the best compromise in close focus and image quality. Also when you adapt, you lose weather sealing. However, If you need wider, than you need wider. I have 24-120 f4 on my Z7II but I also use adapted 35mm GM and both Voightlander macro APO-lanthars. My suggestion: Go for a two lens combo with 24-120 f4 and adapt 20mm G Sony lens which is very high performing (or Nikon 20mm Z but G lens is probably cheaper and optically better for my use cases)
@@nat-lj8kt Thank you. I wouldn't shoot wider than 24mm that much, maybe around 1-2% of total shots (so 10-20 frames over 1000) on a regular basis, plus the occasional once in a decade trip to Iceland or the Norwegian fjords. My main idea was 24-120mm for everyday/normal travel + Tamron 17-35 for those occasions (a good compromise of price/shots taken per year). This looked like an alternative in just one lens, so that's why I asked. A prime lens is also not out of the question
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
Lens priced at US$1,099.
£1399 U.K. price. Robbery for an F4.
This is really cheap, compared to 1600€ in Europe. 1300€ would have been fine.
@@smodjo it’s crazy
Rip off in the UK.
£1399 or $1735. Absolute rip off.
@@rodd1000 I agree that it is better value in the USA (although bear in mind you'll have to pay state sales tax over there, whereas the UK price is VAT inclusive)
Dear god, the perfect 1 and done landscape lens. Sony hats off to you mad lot!
I had a sony 24-70 GM II and sold it and now have this one. I am happy with my decision
Any updates? I have the a7rV and the Sony 24-70gm ii but was thinking about getting this lens
Very interesting!
I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens too.
However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus).
By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small.
I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly.
Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!
@@SebastianWorldwide No it is completely without noise in my copy.
@@SebastianWorldwide Mine makes a little noise when I press my ear to the lens. Otherwise, it is inaudible. BTW, the PZ 16-35 is absolutely silent. Since I mainly shoot stills, any noise is not going to bother me.
@@bondgabebond4907 Thank you so much ☺️
Please never stop making videos. Nr.1 channel to look up when im looking to buy a lense!!!!
Looks like this one will be a home run for Sony. For their hybrid shooting core audience this is a great all arounder. Fast enough, 20mm wide end, not gigantic/heavy, good build quality, and lots of features.
Being G-series the price is where I'd expect it given the cost of their 24-105 F4 G and their 24-70 F2.8 GM II. I know people will say it's too high for an F4 but it makes sense, especially if one can get it on sale which I'm sure people will be able to do down the road.
A lot of people will criticize things like critical corner sharpness and distortion but for the vast majority of user they simple don't care about those things.
Agreed! Plus in modern Cameras it is not all about f2.8.
Sony continues to impress me with its lense line up, not to mention their decision open it up to competition.
I don't find it that expensive, even though I don't have the budget for it
I really enjoy the comeback of the aperture ring on a lot of new lenses :) For me it is just so much easier to set the aperture on the lens, instead of the camera. Great review as always. Thank You!
Me too. I use aperture rings since the 80's. It's a different haptic experience, more direct. Different, than just rotating a plastic dial on your camera. ;)
glad i held out on the 20mm 1.8 buy
A 20/1.8 lens is a completely different instrument
That is some spectacular distortion correction going on, the most extreme I think I have seen quite impressive software for sure
Very good. I‘ll probably purchase this versatile compact zoom to replace between 2 and 4 of my existing lenses. When you see what it can do and at which level of image quality throughout, the price is certainly justified.
I have been comparing your review of this lens the FE 20-70mm 'G' and the Carl Zeiss Sony 24-70mm. I like your no chat, no subjective view, just showing what each lens can do on the test bed. It has helped me make my mind up. I'm a fan of Carl Zeiss but with your review I can see the Zeiss is not as good as I hoped compared to the 'G' lens. Thanks! 👍
Many of the older Zeiss E-mount lenses are pretty soft by 2023 standards.
Thanks for all the amazing reviews! Would love to see a comparison between this and the 24-105 G and the 24-70 GM if you have a gap in the schedule.
Oh yes! I agree with this
Now an f2.8 of this lens would be a dream (Sony FE 20-70mm f2.8 GM III)
Honestly looks like a perfect single lens for many people and if Sony priced it at $899 it would absolutely obliterate other lens sales. I really don’t understand why Sony never prices anything competitively 🤷🏻♂️
I would love to know which lens competes with this one and how much it costs... I've noticed that if Sony's lenses actually cost more than the competition (which they basically never do) that it is because it has extra features or image quality to justify it.
@@evrythingis1 the tamron 20-40 2.8 is smaller, lighter, has a wider aperture and costs $699
@@JohnDennery Worse image quality in every metric, no aperture ring or buttons, worse weather sealing, worse auto focus motors, only goes to 40mm not 70mm... doesn't exactly sound comparable. I think that lens is more comparable to the 5+ ~16-35mm lenses that are available.
@@evrythingis1 it just comes down to what you want it for. I want a small and light lens for hiking and travel so the tamron with f/2.8 aperture is much more appealing to me. Sounds like you’ll be much happier with the Sony!
@@JohnDennery Nah, I don't need any of the features that the Sony has, but I understand why they charge more for them.
Damn, this is one impressive lens! I don't think I have really a usecase for it at the moment and that will certainly be beneficial for my wallet, but this surely looks like a great all in one travel and landscape lens. Thanks for your quality review as always!
I agree with you, but unfortunately for my wallet, I bought it. This lens is perfect in my trekking session. Just one light lens for photography and vlogging. All I need.
God this lens looks like a great purchase. I’m between this and the Sony 16-35 pz. The 20-35mm range is really what I’m interested in on both lenses.
Sounds like the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 is perfect for you
Very interesting!
I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens.
However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus).
By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small.
I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly.
Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!
The Nikon version is 24-70 F4. Which is a pro lens but 4mm different and only £300 used as people always get rid of them 🤷♂️
An excellent review of a high quality lens. Great news for those whose requirements it suits but I'm not one. Thanks.
The 24-105 and 24-120 focal length has been around for decades. It's nothing out of the ordinary to make one to be sharp and well priced. The 20-70mm f/4 is an innovation never achieved before, comparing it with the 24-120 is totally absurd.
Never achieved before because lens designers used to care about insane distortion and vignette. But now it seems like corrections are allowed to be handled by software instead of design.
Nice pro-level lens or for someone who can justify the price. In a couple of years it might come down in price new and used. Nice work as always Chris.
I hope Sigma makes one!
This is a great lens for travel. Add a fast 35mm or 50mm, and you're set.
This.
I have a feeling the timing of reviews of this lens suggests the release of the Panasonic S5ii arrived a bit sooner than Sony might have expected - they've had a 20-60 kit lens for years, and with PDAF in the new body a change of system could have been a realistic consideration for some!
20-60 is a decent lens but it's rather slow and only really good for day use.
S5II opens up huge range of access to EF lenses I own the Sigma adapter, would be cool to test the many strange EF lenses instead.
@@SMGJohn faster than this one at 20mm :P
@@Laundry_Hamper
LOL but slower at 24mm
Your lense and camera reviews are allways definitly one of the 3 best ones on the internet in any aspect from the technical and practical view regarding the lenses itself but as well from the aspect of very nice entertainment with your lovely british humor and accent, I like so much as I lived in London and Bath a couple of years ago for a short period of time! There are only Gordon Laing's reviews and DPReview on the same great level, these 3 channels are all I need to know about a new lense!
I was dreaming for a lens like this for hiking and traveling :D
Feels like this is Sony's direct answer to the very popular 20-60 f3.5-5.6 that was bundled with the Panasonic S5.
Sony just took and "fixed" all what was lacking with the panasonic one. Would have been nice to see OSS in it as well.
The Panasonic lens is substantially cheaper. It's also weather sealed, quite sharp and solid, but the build design is simple (less buttons and no aperture ring). However, its size, weight and filter diameter match the other Lumix S lenses, so it's a nice option for video and saving a lot of money if you use circular filters.
Given that the 20-60 is much, much cheaper and faster at 20mm, I wouldn't even consider this 20-70mm.
@@HarryPowerColt give it time; the Sony was just released. It will more than likely drop a bit in price.
Furthermore, this is a G-lens, where's the 20-60 is considered a kit lens.
The main appeal here is for vloggers If guess. Photographers will must likely stock to the 24-70 f2.8
@@Wistbacka The 20-60 is considered "kit lens" just because it comes bundled with camera bodies, but it's still a quality lens. At least, as good as any other Lumix S lens. It is clear you never had one in your hands, unfortunately.
The 20-60 has also dropped to 399 USD/EUR on sale. That's unbeatable.
This is impressive.. I wouldnt use it on 61mp but on say, the next A7C, it would be a great travel lens
Why is that?
As always, wonderful job! Thanks you. I am not a fan of Sony, however the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 and this one are getting my attention towards Sony. Hope Fuji and Nikon will follow up with something similar
Something like this would be awesome on a Fuji!
More compromises compared to 24-105/120 F4 lenses. Most people probably better off by adding the excellent 20mm Sony G lens to their set. Some people have very specific use cases that can only be fulfilled by a 20-70mm so for them, now you have an available option
The 24-105 f/4 is pretty soft compared to this though. I would take this over the old 24-105 and throw in a fast prime for a nice travel or even video kit.
Christopher, i am trying to deicide for an upcoming trip to Portugal, if I should downsize my A7R III with my 20-70, which I do love, and get a Sony a6600 with the other Sigma you reviewed, the 18-50mm f2.8, and bring that along with the Sony 10-18mm f4. I'd really like to hear what you would do since you have my set up and have tested both. Thanks so much! Absolutely LOVE your channel!!!
I got it a week ago, sell my 24-105 and my rarely used RX100Va for it and be happy with my decision. Unfortunately it's very expensive in Europe. For me it's the ideal combination of focal range, weight and compactness in comparison to my 24-105. It's about 180gr less weight and the slightly more compact size makes it ideal in handling, optical it's better than my 24-105, and it fit's my needs with more wide-angle. I also can recommend it for people wich were more on the wider angles.
which of these two, would you recommend to a6400 when it comes to image sharpness? :)
@@pentagramyt417 None! Both we're Fullframe lenses, for the A6400 (APS-C Sensor, not fullframe!) I would recommend the Sony 16-50/2.8 (optical very good zoom) or If you need an allround lens that has not be too fast the Sony 18-135. It depends on for what you need it. The Sigma primes 30/1.4 and 56/1.4 (the best portrait lens for sony APS-C, and one of the sharpest you can get) were also highly recommended!
@@pentagramyt417 For APS-C, if you want sharpness there's only the Sony 16-55 f/2.8. If you're ok with a bit of compromise, Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 (this has OSS) and Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 are great options. As for wide lenses, the new Sony 11, 15, and 10-20mm lenses are really good. Tamron 11-20mm f/2.8 is also a good alternative but not as sharp as Sony's lenses.
Very useful review. I'm surprised about the price you give. I've heard of 1500 $ or 1700 €.
Only got notifications from my other channels, but figured Id check if you also ut out a video on this lens - and yes you have + its super helpful and very well made, as always :D
Thats why you are always my first and most reliable lens review source, when a new lens comes out :)
The performance of the in camera corrections is certainly great when using lenses that have some very visible optical drawbacks, but I really hope this doesn't become a sort of crutch to lean on in the future where manufacturers would rather correct things digitally instead of making optically superior lenses for the consumer market.
It seems like it's becoming more and more common.
I think there's another side to this though - having it optically corrected may involve more (larger/heavier) glass and creating a more expensive, larger, heavier lens. Leave that to the 2.8 GM zooms, and have more compact options like this...
@@bassderek I agree, though the distortion shown here is quite extreme and I'd rather have them try to find a physical solution than leave it all up to post processing. As more expensive solutions become more common they'll slowly but surely also reach the lower regions of the market and fall in price.
And I personally tend to take sharper pictures with heavy equipment, though this is obviously different from person to person.
@@helgeschneider4417 the only way they can get the lens to be this small is to allow for large amounts of distortion and also allowing for lots of mechanical vignetting. If those were to be corrected for it would be substantially larger.
It's already been the norm for quite a while
That’s a fab review and fab lens. I will be buying one as soon as it’s available! Nothing else to say!
I'm thinking about getting this lens for my A7III, I mostly shoot outdoors so F4 isn't a big problem for me, and the lighter weight and samller size are a plus.
The lens goes for around $900US in my country, fortunately.
Thank you for your reasonable help in lens choosing
Great review as always! You are indeed my favorite! Sounds like a great lens, but for my purposes, I prefer a faster lens. Really enjoying my Sigma 16-28 f/2.8 lens. Very sharp and great for landscapes.
Can't wait to pick one up! Thanks for the review!
I really prefer they made this a 25-50mm/2.8. It'll be roughly the size of the 20-70/4. It'll likely be optically a tad better being 2x Zoom. When it comes to a walkabout lens I am not really looking to go very wide or crop really close. I do want it small and I do want a wide enough aperture.
Really odd that you want to take away the utility of this lens and make it a less useful version of literally 5 other lenses that already exist for the system...
@@evrythingis1 I don't think there is a small 2x zoom in the line up. The thing is that I don;t really use 20mm or 70mm. Having a compact 25-50 that has the DOF capability of the fast 24-70s is more useful to me than the additional zoom range.
@@dwightlooi Tamron 20-40mm F2.8? Sigma 28-70mm F2.8? Tamron 28-75mm F2.8? They are all roughly the same size as this zoom lens.... Maybe you should keep your uninformed opinions to yourself.
@@evrythingis1 20-40 is the closest but a little too wide. the 28-70s are 2.5x zooms and too big. All I want is a 25mm and a 50mm in a single barrel with a size as close to a 1.7~1.8 50 prime as I can get it.
--
Think of it this way... I already have a 100mm portrait lens, I already have a 21mm prime. What I need is a walkabout lens with a 2.8 aperture that is as small as possible. I'll even take a 28-50/3.3.
@@dwightlooi Cool story bro, just keep moving those goal posts and you'll always have a reason to keep talking.
Superb review
It’s a good lens and that’s it
no OS is not the best option for video
just have no desire to loose my 24-105 and 16-35 and see this as too much of a compromise rather than replacement
Price is ridiculous
My god, this lens.. Huh... I own the 70-200mm F4, and now I am really thinking of getting this one even I would like to use it for concert photography. 20mm and amazing quality... I think I would be good with this lens ( higher ISO on the a7 IV) than i would be with the sigma 24-70mm or tamron 28-75mm...
Any updates? I can’t decide between this or the tamron f2.8
Great that they finally did it - a standard zoom with 20mm ! Well done Sony !
The 175 grams lighter than the 24-105mm f/4 is what sealed the deal for me.
But without OSS and 35mm less zoom.
24-105 is a superb lens
im still using the zeiss 24-70, but this 20-70 seems compact.
I don’t really understand the pricing issue. It’s $200 cheaper than the aging 24-105 G that doesn’t have an aperture ring or fancy new XD focus motors.
But that lens is optically stabilized and is technically a larger focal range between the wide and telephoto.
It also doesn't have the insane amount of distortion or mechanical vignetting that this lens does.
The should to the 85mm 1.2 GM finally 😢
The ergonomics with all the iris ring additions and decent quality really surprised me here. Shame it's f4, that is the only spanner in the works here.
Pretty good IQ considering the zoom range. Price is high though, considering the f4 aperture.
Looks like another good lens from Sony abeit quite expensive in UK for £1399- horses for courses; for lens to buy and mount on Sony FF ( And Nikon Z via Adaptor ). - Option 1) 24-70 F2.8 2) 24-105 F4 3) This Lens 4mm wider 20mm - 4) 3rd Party Equiv.
First one to release on RUclips...and SAR site is down
Been a lot of reports (anecdotally) about weird field curvature and decentering necessitating repair. It’s an interesting range but the iq doesn’t seem better than the tame on 28-200 which offers a lot more reach but misses the wide. I’d probably use one if I had it, but I don’t think I’ll be paying £1k for one.
Is that decentering or field curvature problems that have actually been deemed real issues and thus fixed by a Sony service provider? I'm asking because the normal course of action afaik is to return a decentered lens to the reseller, since you reasonably test it for defects as soon as you receive it.
I like the look of this lens because of its relatively good close up iq and repro ratio. Those are nice qualities in a standard zoom, at least for me.
@@Vantrakter yes. The fred Miranda forums have some info on it.
Judging by the image quality analysis it seems that it's the other way around: it's a standard zoom lens with 20mm extra wide being the cherry on top.
“Slightly revolutionary” hahaha. What a fitting summary!
This lens is parafocal ❤
On my to buy list.
It's been a while since I've seen chris this excited for a lens 😂😂
great information! Are you planing to do a video on Tamron 50-400 mm?
love your work! amazing reviews!
Dream lens for me, a little expensive at 1,100$ sadly
Pretty nice lens for landscape photography I guess or video work. I just hope they will release an 85mm 1.2 soon, jealous of Canon shooters bc of this.
It's really valuable information and good reviews. Good reviews . Im new in vlogging fields and planning to buy camera and lens. I have questions which lens is good for video vlogging like city , village etc as sony APS-C Camera 11mm, 15mm, 10-20mm lens. Usually i do traveling vlogging Also I would like to know about 17- 50mm lens of Tamron. I'm doing vlogging with action camera coz I'm moto ridder too. Most of my vlogging as video shoots only can say roughly 95%. So which lens best for me for video shooting . Thanks
Have to disagree, I don’t think the US asking price is high given the specs; weight, size, linear autofocus motors, aperture ring. The UK asking price on the other hand……..
I don’t expect sky high image quality for zoom lens(would pick my 50 1.2 if razor sharp photo needed), zoom lens is all about practical use, 20mm is definitely a selling point, I think I can get this lens around $700 a few months later, quite reasonable.
i feel like sony should have just spent their time updating the 24-105. i feel like that’s more useful since it has oss
Hello Christopher, I am stuck. This lens or Sigma 24-70 f2.8 Art? The new version of Sigma is dust protected. I have Samyang 14 f2.8 mm for real estate, Samyang 35 f1.4 for street and product, Sony 85 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180 f2.8 for portraits, sport. Camera a7riii. Which one would make more sense to you? Thank you, also for your perfect work
Which version is dust protected? could you send me a link?
@@pentagramyt417 each with a serial number later than 5504xxxx . If you buy new one, there is no worry
Thank for your great Videos. I wish you a nice weekend from Germany
Sony heavily relies on electronic corrections for the corners as the throat diameter is much too small for FF.
So in the corners the pixels are getting pushed and brightened, expect mushy results there
It works
Canon has a much larger mount, but on their more budget lenses they have black (not dark, black) corners.
Would like to see you test the Nikon 300mm f/4 E PF VR
Thank you for detailed review! Many helpful
Chris, Olympus has an F/4 constant lens from 12-100mm (24-200mm) WITH Image Stabilization. Have you have a chance to work with this lens? Any opinions on it?
Hi what about sigma 28-70 2.8 and this one? Thanks a lot..i suppose sigma is a little better. For image quality. Weight. And price. How do you think?
Thanks 👍
Maybe Sony should make a PZ version of that lens for video-shooters
Hello, Can i have your opinion between this and the tamron 20-40 (in this focal range)? In general sharpness and in the midframe of 40mm f/2.8.Thank you!!
Just thrashing out the vids today. My bank acc wont take it....
Without digital lens correction, it's ridiculous as Canon's.(and if it's from Canon, people will go crazy to bash it)
However it does well after processing. It's a worthy competition for Z 24-70 f4 and RF 24-105L.
Looks amazing! But as a real estate photographer, that 20mm distortion and vignetting looks absolutely disgusting. Is that a permanent thing? Or will there be some sort of software or lens update that will fix that?
That was with corrections off. With corrections on, the problems disappear.
I dont get the complaints about the price... all the first party F/4 zooms cost 4 figures.... the original 24-70 F/4 cost $1100 like 10 years ago, which is probably $1200-1300 in today's money, and was awful + didn't cover this range. This lens is a home run. FF is expensive
Uhm, Sigma offers excellent 24-70mm f2.8 and 28-70mm f2.8 for less money.
Stop being a blind fanboy, its a good lens but only professionals and doctors can afford to blow 1000+ euros on a lens LOL
@@SMGJohn you not being able to afford this doesn't make it badly priced. Most of my lenses are 3rd party so I'm no Sony fanboy.
@@future62
I am not sure how a lens thats similar priced to a 24-70mm F2.8, 17-28mm F2.8 or 24-105mm F4 can be considered "well priced" when delivering inferior distortion performance and a F4 ontop while just having a 4mm wider advantage.
can you make some tests of GFX lenses, hope @FujifilmUKandIE can borrow you the lenses and the camera.
Sony Lenses are getting expensive, basic 35mm f1.8 is like 700USD. Lenses are good no doubt but Sigma-Smayang-Tamron-Viltrox are almost or even better then sony. Costing half
Hmmm, should I replace my 24-105 f4 G with this? I’ve got the long end covered with a 70-200 but the lack of OSS on the 20-70 is my hangup. Tough call because it looks like a good optic to have as a primary zoom.
No. the 24-105 is a great lens ! Plus you could buy a Sony 20mm prime for $850 IF you need 20mm once a year.
Can you turn the in-camera correction on for 20-70, I heard a lot it is disabled on some cam, what do you think? That will be big help for me.
I had this lens before and yes, in-camera corrections worked for this lens.
This or Sigma 28-70 f2,8?
getting on a flight to the US soon to get it cheaper than the €1599 in europe
How does this compare to Sony's compact G trio?
I still prefer the older 24-105mm G OSS. This one seems less attractive in its zoom range and lack of OSS
I prefer this focal range and don’t need OSS🤷♂️
24-105mm is less sharper than this at all focal lengths
This is almost the dream hiking lens if it wasn't for the lack of internal focusing system, that's guaranteed dust in your sensor.
It is internal focusing though. Perhaps you mean internal zoom? If that's the case dust would enter the lens, not the sensor.
I don't understand why Sony released this when they already have the excellent 24-105mm F4 (which includes Optical Steady Shot). If you need wider than 24mm you have the superb 16-35mm F4 PZ or the 20mm f1.8.
24-105 needs an update. This lens is much sharper all the way through.
24-105 needs an update. This lens is much sharper all the way through.
I sold my 24-105 when I purchased this lens. The 20mm is nice but really enjoying the overall smaller size, it's lighter, sharper and focuses faster as well. Since it's lighter I have no issue going without the image stabilization when the ibis on my A7CR is good for 7 stops. This is a perfect, lightweight all around lens for every day use and travel.
I would be really interested in a comparison between different wide angle lenses distortion.
With and without camera corrections, I feel that Sony have cut many corners with this lens, that they correct digitally instead.
Hi Cristopher, I am thinking to sell my Sony 24-70 2.8 GM (MKT 1) and buy this lens. I don't like de 24-70 at 70mm. What do you think about that?
A weather sealed G lens that breaks the "standard" mold a bit?? 😳
Is this real?
Mentioning how this would be good for your general video work makes me wonder. What exactly do you shoot these reviews with? I can't remember what I _think_ you said you used before.
I think, it was more of a general statement. Neither the A5100 nor the A7Riii are particularly good video cameras. And considering that Chris likes Canon and has an R5 as well as an R7, I'd much assume that he uses those for video. But his revues are mostly comprised of still shots anyways - so A7Riii it is.
@@hendrickziegler8487 Bit odd how you said he probably shoots these reviews with an R5 or R7 and then immediately said he shoots them with the a7RIII that you just (rightfully) said isn't good for video.
Unless I'm misunderstanding because half your comment has nothing to do with the question I asked and what you meant is that the reviews don't need any particular video features that the a7RIII doesn't have.
This lens or the Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8?
@Christopher Frost Would this be a good lens to adapt to Nikon Z or would you recommend choosing the native 24-120 f/4 which was one of your favorite lenses from last year?
24-120 f4 is reason to shoot Z mount, it is that good as a 5x zoom lens with the best compromise in close focus and image quality. Also when you adapt, you lose weather sealing. However, If you need wider, than you need wider. I have 24-120 f4 on my Z7II but I also use adapted 35mm GM and both Voightlander macro APO-lanthars. My suggestion: Go for a two lens combo with 24-120 f4 and adapt 20mm G Sony lens which is very high performing (or Nikon 20mm Z but G lens is probably cheaper and optically better for my use cases)
@@nat-lj8kt Thank you. I wouldn't shoot wider than 24mm that much, maybe around 1-2% of total shots (so 10-20 frames over 1000) on a regular basis, plus the occasional once in a decade trip to Iceland or the Norwegian fjords. My main idea was 24-120mm for everyday/normal travel + Tamron 17-35 for those occasions (a good compromise of price/shots taken per year).
This looked like an alternative in just one lens, so that's why I asked. A prime lens is also not out of the question
Cris said it's Ridiculously sharp, Razor sharp, Perfect images, so what are we waiting for?
That price for an f4 zoom? Seems a bit mad to me to be honest. Does the extra 4mm really matter that much?
Optical design-for-test: Sharp centre, sharp corners, midway sharpness can be sacrificed.
You can gauge the midway sharpness based on the tests done with the aps-c body, can you not?
@@saifaldin_ Yes indeed. And this video seems to show that aps-c corners are no better than full-frame corners, if not worse?
I wonder how it compares to the 20mm G lens in terms of sharpness
Actually surprisingly close
Imagine this lens at f2.8?