Before falling too deeply in love with the lens mapping method, don't forget that curvature of field (as well as sharpness, for that matter) can change *a lot* - shape and extent - depending on the tested distance. The tests you run photographing the floor can be very useful, but they are limited to the relatively close distance you focus at. Don't think they're necessarily valid for, say, landscapes at infinity.
Man, I never get tired of your channel. It's so refreshing as well as educational. I wish I still have my Sony A9. That's the last camera that I ever bought and was sold during the Pandemic. Good luck to your amazing channel. Love from Cebu City, Philippines.
Your omission of the Sigma 24-70 FE is glaring because at less than half the cost it is built as well actually performs better in some metrics than the new lens (less CA, par focal where the Sony is not, has no discernible focus breathing, etc) And it's also sharper and lighter than the original Sony version too.
Nice comparison. I think the real question is Sigma vs GM2 24-70. I like how the GM2 is more compact. The sigma 24-70 makes nice images but I do notice the weight on the front of camera. I ran the R6 with 24-70 RF and it is nice but definitely large. I didn’t see the over-a-thousand-dollar$ cost difference compared to Sony and Sigma combo. Seems the body stabilization in the Sony is enough for my uses to not care that much about the lens lacking it. On Canon R6 I got weird warping in video having the combined stabilization and didn’t recall gaining much low shutter use to justify for stills. I can see the overall light package of Sony and GM2 24-70 being very appealing.
I'm watching tons of review videos on this new GM 24-70mm V2 and Im impressed! As an event shooter who primary uses zoom lenses, this new G-Master would be perfect for my collections. Definitely picking one up. Thanks for the review Ted.
I'm wondering about stabilization. For handheld video, is it worth it go with the bigger and 200g heavier Canon RF 24-70 (with built in stabilization) over the smaller, lighter Sony 24-70 ii? I'd love to see a handheld stabilization test between Sony A7 IV + Sony 24-70 ii and Canon R5 + Canon RF 24-70.
Thank you for your video! We are switching from Canon and Fujifilm to either Sony or Nikon. When I examined DXOMARK, it appeared to me that Sony had the higher rated lenses. When we had the Canon R5 and R3, we used the RF 50mm f/1.2, RF 24-70mm f/2.8, RF 100 mm f/2.8, and a RF 70-200 f/2,.8. DXOMARK seems to be more critical of the Canon lenses or they have not tested all the Canon lenses. What are you thoughts?
Likely would stick with the sony GM II. Small and lighter is better for travel. Found the original GM to be to heavy for my trip in Italy 2020. Did the job however something lighter and small would make it much easier.
Is it really that useful to compare 24-70mm lenses from different companies? I mean, aside vom professionals, most users will use one brand. Especially when it comes to that pricy lenses. I guess the big, great, holy algorithm needs to be feed...
I think I am going to go and buy your presets. First presets I have heard of which are not like "make your photos look like mine!" I honestly dont want to look like any other photographers.... but to put a look on it.... that is based on a film... hell yes. Go make me some crazy ones like the Ilford 400. Hope others like this idea like I do and it is worth you making more! In terms of this lens.... I still go back to one of your podcasts where you talked about how modern lenses are all about sharpness and not about "a feel".... For me I recognize that most people cant really tell the difference in these lenses if you show images side by side (especially without blowing them up huge), and that if you think a more optically perfect lens is somehow going to make your photos better.... go for it.... I doubt I will buy it to replace my Sigma 24-70 (which it's biggest problem is that it zooms the wrong way).... but I can still take amazing photos with my optically terrible, scratched 24-240mm. Give me the feels, and interesting lenses any day.....
I think you will like the presets. The best thing about them is the use of Lightroom’s profile architecture. It’s the hard way, but the right way to create a preset. It essentially enables application of 3D LUTs but is not called out as such, I suppose not to step into Photoshop territory. It’s one of the best features of modern LR, enabling massive/and or subtle transforms that can’t be done with sliders. The advantage of leveraging LR profiles is that the end user still has a full range of adjustments by way of the usual sliders and color grading tools. You’ll notice that none of the sliders move as you click from profile to profile. Well done, Ted!
@@theartofphotography Can I just say.... I have had them 24 hours and I already love them. I love that you did the profiles not just the presets. Fits with my workflow better that way! Great job buddy!
First time on your channel. You must be good because everything about your vlog if top imo. Blacks, sound, background, lighting, etc... and also like that you're putting this new lens against its 3 closest competitor, physically.
Fantastic review! When I asked a friend who is a professional photographer, shooting with Nikon, what makes cameras these days different to each other, he said that non cameras are so different that you could have a disadvantage with one brand or the other. Technology has advanced to much that it comes down to very small details which camera one would prefer over the other.
Thanks for the vid. 20 elements in 15 groups. What does this mean? As compared to 15 elements in 10 groups or??? Not that I need to know but am curious. If you know or where I can watch some info on this, I would be most appreciable. Thanks for any replies.
Thank you for your review and your comparison. I actually used to own the version 1 (which I sold once I learned the Version 2 was planned) but now have access to both the Canon and Nikon and have been trying them out more so your comparison was great to see. Will probably purchase the upgrade.
Hey Ted maybe you can help me.. I recently bought the new Sony 24-70 now I need to buy a camera. I wanted to buy the a7r4 but it's getting old and lacking of new technology. I shoot mostly stills but I want to go Dipper to the video world..
I only just got the 24-105mm a few months back only because the original 24-70mm was huge and heavy. But I sort of regret the 105 now because this new lens would suit me perfect.
Sony's ad states this lens rivals prime lenses. Would you agree with that statement? Put another way, if someone were trying to decide between one or two high end prime lenses or this 24-70 GM ll, which would be the better decision?
Thanks for the field curvature illustration! How come such an important performance metric got so little attention. It's the 20+ reviews I've checked to finally find one has it covered.
Huge kudos to Sony for making it so much smaller.... the smaller/lighter bodies of mirrorless cameras are meaningless if the lenses continue getting bigger and heavier as they have been.
@@colintravellerthey’re about the same on the cameras, maybe a little more expensive on some, but canons glass is much more expensive than Sonys. People seem to forget that the bodies aren’t the only thing you have to buy. Also how’s that third party offering workin out for you canon fanboys? You will ultimately spend more money with canon in the end.
I'm definitely a little envious of the amazing G master lens line up from Sony (smaller lighter but every bit as good or better) Problem is, every time I hold a Sony camera it's a no, they are just super uncomfortable... However I for one thank Sony for kicking Canon's asses for the last 5 years because if they didn't we would not have the fantastic bodies, lenses and stellar autofocus systems/dynamic range which are now up there with Sony. Of course the Canon's have far superior ergonomics which when holding a camera for 12 hours is a big deal. Great time to be in the photography business.
I’ve been using the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II adapted via a Metabones and then an MC-11 ever since the days of the original A7R. It holds up well, even on an A7RIV. I’m going to do some soul searching now, this is the first new 24-70 I’ve seen that might offer more than the setup I have used since 2014. Mostly, I need flare resistance and contrast, as I do a *lot* of night shots, and the now old Canon is still new enough to benefit from their nano coating tech. I’m sure there will be plenty of sample shots to check out soon enough.
As a plastics engineer I am concerned with the new plastic body of the Sony GM II being a satisfied owner of the GM. I don’t know if it’s a kind of composite body or just standard reinforced plastics injection molded. Whatever one could come up with, the temperature stability of the latter must have an impact on body distortion, when it comes to temperature variations e.g shooting in harsh conditions like hot or cold environments …
Another great review! I liked how you mentioned how hard it is manufacture a 24-70 f2.8 zoom lens. As a hybrid videographer I am still looking for a 20-50 f2.8 zoom. Would you say that it would be even harder, bigger and heavier to make such focal length?
@@KgerShyang yeah your probably right. 20-60 f4 would still be a nice zoom lens though if they can make it less than 400grams. I'm finding any lens over that weight becomes cumbersome to carry as a daily on my A7C
Are you talking about the Canon RF 28-70mm f2? In that case I think the extra 4mm on the wide end is the answer. Canon does not have a 24-70mm f2 which would as far as I know be quite heavy and big.
@@Mike_M_Smith Yes, I know they have a 24-70 but that one is not f2, right? So that's why I don't think it's reasonable to expect this one to be. If you wish Sony had a 28-70 f2 then that's another question I think.
I really don't understand the lack of IS at this point. This could have been a lot better for hand held video with that included, but now Canon wins for me. I would much rather have IS than a few grams lighter weight.
I have the Canon and Nikon 24-70 and the Nikon is quite a bit sharper outside of center. Don’t know why your test doesn’t show that? Did you take off the UV filters? But I do love the canon’s IS. You can compare at the digital picture and cameraworld. Both back up what I observe.
Possible it could be copy variation - the first Nikon Lensrentals sent over was broken… second seemed okay. These were both rentals - the Sony GM II was the only one with zero mileage…
I was looking for corner to corner comparison too so I took this video as sony user trying to advertise their brand, not a serious IQ comparison video lol
I fail to see any purpose or value in such comparisons. It really doesn't matter which one is "better" as very few people can either see the difference, nor do they have the hardware (adapters) to make the purchase of one over another (which don't exist for the Nikon Z lenses).
Reasonably nice narrative for the present day lenses. However, apart from some slightly improved sharpness, these present day lenses are not as good or nearly as good compared to old lenses. The current lenses bank heavily on in body correction built into the cameras. In fact these current lenses will never stand a test on a proper optical test bench. These are mostly lousy lenses. Period.
Can you provide.a link to a comparison that justifies and grounds your assertion that older was better. It should be a zoom to zoom comparison. No primes allowed.
@@stevenwaldstein2249 ..... The best photography magazines are gone with the wind. There are no practical proper optical test bench now, literally. DXO benchmark is there, yet the outputs are so so. Simply no one talks about actual aperture, actual focal length, actual field curvature, actual resolving power in lines per millimeters etc. Sorry here dear. Thanks. On a side note, people receiving and comprehending the details are a changed lot.
This is why I love your channel. No one literally compared them like you did. Bravo 👏🏻
Before falling too deeply in love with the lens mapping method, don't forget that curvature of field (as well as sharpness, for that matter) can change *a lot* - shape and extent - depending on the tested distance. The tests you run photographing the floor can be very useful, but they are limited to the relatively close distance you focus at. Don't think they're necessarily valid for, say, landscapes at infinity.
Man, I never get tired of your channel. It's so refreshing as well as educational. I wish I still have my Sony A9. That's the last camera that I ever bought and was sold during the Pandemic. Good luck to your amazing channel. Love from Cebu City, Philippines.
Your omission of the Sigma 24-70 FE is glaring because at less than half the cost it is built as well actually performs better in some metrics than the new lens (less CA, par focal where the Sony is not, has no discernible focus breathing, etc) And it's also sharper and lighter than the original Sony version too.
What happened to the claims that a larger mount would result in smaller lenses? Sony has the smallest mount and the smallest lenses.
Nice comparison. I think the real question is Sigma vs GM2 24-70. I like how the GM2 is more compact. The sigma 24-70 makes nice images but I do notice the weight on the front of camera. I ran the R6 with 24-70 RF and it is nice but definitely large. I didn’t see the over-a-thousand-dollar$ cost difference compared to Sony and Sigma combo. Seems the body stabilization in the Sony is enough for my uses to not care that much about the lens lacking it. On Canon R6 I got weird warping in video having the combined stabilization and didn’t recall gaining much low shutter use to justify for stills. I can see the overall light package of Sony and GM2 24-70 being very appealing.
Is a really big difference in therms of sharpnees between the sony and canon 24-70?
I'm watching tons of review videos on this new GM 24-70mm V2 and Im impressed! As an event shooter who primary uses zoom lenses, this new G-Master would be perfect for my collections. Definitely picking one up. Thanks for the review Ted.
It should have been a 2.0 like the Canon.
@@Mike_M_Smith 28mm. heavy as hell. no.
@@wingcreator it’s very well balanced. Plus it’s on a mirrorless camera. It’s just a little bit heavier than a Canon 1Dxiii.
@@Mike_M_Smith Well balance ha ha
@@wingcreator do you use a 70-200/2.8?
How does the Sony 24-70mm GM II compare to their GM 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm prime lenses?
I'm wondering about stabilization. For handheld video, is it worth it go with the bigger and 200g heavier Canon RF 24-70 (with built in stabilization) over the smaller, lighter Sony 24-70 ii?
I'd love to see a handheld stabilization test between Sony A7 IV + Sony 24-70 ii and Canon R5 + Canon RF 24-70.
Thank you for your video!
We are switching from Canon and Fujifilm to either Sony or Nikon. When I examined DXOMARK, it appeared to me that Sony had the higher rated lenses. When we had the Canon R5 and R3, we used the RF 50mm f/1.2, RF 24-70mm f/2.8, RF 100 mm f/2.8, and a RF 70-200 f/2,.8. DXOMARK seems to be more critical of the Canon lenses or they have not tested all the Canon lenses.
What are you thoughts?
Excellent and informative - and educational.
Likely would stick with the sony GM II. Small and lighter is better for travel. Found the original GM to be to heavy for my trip in Italy 2020. Did the job however something lighter and small would make it much easier.
Is it really that useful to compare 24-70mm lenses from different companies? I mean, aside vom professionals, most users will use one brand. Especially when it comes to that pricy lenses. I guess the big, great, holy algorithm needs to be feed...
I think I am going to go and buy your presets. First presets I have heard of which are not like "make your photos look like mine!" I honestly dont want to look like any other photographers.... but to put a look on it.... that is based on a film... hell yes. Go make me some crazy ones like the Ilford 400. Hope others like this idea like I do and it is worth you making more! In terms of this lens.... I still go back to one of your podcasts where you talked about how modern lenses are all about sharpness and not about "a feel".... For me I recognize that most people cant really tell the difference in these lenses if you show images side by side (especially without blowing them up huge), and that if you think a more optically perfect lens is somehow going to make your photos better.... go for it.... I doubt I will buy it to replace my Sigma 24-70 (which it's biggest problem is that it zooms the wrong way).... but I can still take amazing photos with my optically terrible, scratched 24-240mm. Give me the feels, and interesting lenses any day.....
I think you will like the presets. The best thing about them is the use of Lightroom’s profile architecture. It’s the hard way, but the right way to create a preset. It essentially enables application of 3D LUTs but is not called out as such, I suppose not to step into Photoshop territory. It’s one of the best features of modern LR, enabling massive/and or subtle transforms that can’t be done with sliders. The advantage of leveraging LR profiles is that the end user still has a full range of adjustments by way of the usual sliders and color grading tools. You’ll notice that none of the sliders move as you click from profile to profile. Well done, Ted!
Glad you like them Tim!
@@theartofphotography Can I just say.... I have had them 24 hours and I already love them. I love that you did the profiles not just the presets. Fits with my workflow better that way! Great job buddy!
could you make these presets in Luminar NEO?
The best review! Thank you!
In your field curvature visualization test, what distance are you focusing the lenses to? Is it the same for each lens tested?
Does not seem like the distance is the same. Nikon seems to be focused closer.
You're probably the only youtuber that mentioned distortion. I was worried about it because of the smaller size but it's not that bad. Great video.
The slight distortion problem of v1 is fixed with v2.
Great presentation, great job... kudos!
First time on your channel. You must be good because everything about your vlog if top imo. Blacks, sound, background, lighting, etc... and also like that you're putting this new lens against its 3 closest competitor, physically.
Fantastic review! When I asked a friend who is a professional photographer, shooting with Nikon, what makes cameras these days different to each other, he said that non cameras are so different that you could have a disadvantage with one brand or the other. Technology has advanced to much that it comes down to very small details which camera one would prefer over the other.
Very enlightening lol…
Thank You! Great review!
Thanks for the vid. 20 elements in 15 groups. What does this mean? As compared to 15 elements in 10 groups or??? Not that I need to know but am curious. If you know or where I can watch some info on this, I would be most appreciable. Thanks for any replies.
Thank you for your review and your comparison. I actually used to own the version 1 (which I sold once I learned the Version 2 was planned) but now have access to both the Canon and Nikon and have been trying them out more so your comparison was great to see. Will probably purchase the upgrade.
How can I do that test of field curvature? I want to test my other lenses
It's so tempting to buy it... I have a bunch of primes that I'm tired of switching every second 😂😂😂 I couldn't agree more about this video
Awesome review, thanks!
Hey Ted maybe you can help me.. I recently bought the new Sony 24-70 now I need to buy a camera. I wanted to buy the a7r4 but it's getting old and lacking of new technology. I shoot mostly stills but I want to go Dipper to the video world..
I only just got the 24-105mm a few months back only because the original 24-70mm was huge and heavy. But I sort of regret the 105 now because this new lens would suit me perfect.
Sony's ad states this lens rivals prime lenses. Would you agree with that statement? Put another way, if someone were trying to decide between one or two high end prime lenses or this 24-70 GM ll, which would be the better decision?
That's sweet I like the film look preset.
Thanks for the field curvature illustration! How come such an important performance metric got so little attention. It's the 20+ reviews I've checked to finally find one has it covered.
Sigma should not have been left out 😬
Huge kudos to Sony for making it so much smaller.... the smaller/lighter bodies of mirrorless cameras are meaningless if the lenses continue getting bigger and heavier as they have been.
Sony Mirrorless Camera's aren't Cheap by means infact they are more expensive than Canon n Nikon
@@colintraveller it seems like you may have replied to the wrong person
@@colintravellerthey’re about the same on the cameras, maybe a little more expensive on some, but canons glass is much more expensive than Sonys. People seem to forget that the bodies aren’t the only thing you have to buy. Also how’s that third party offering workin out for you canon fanboys? You will ultimately spend more money with canon in the end.
I deeply fell into your nice blue eyes.......
this lens is really nice! I would gladly buy if I didn't have the Tamron 35-150 lens.
Hey I think there's a fraud here.
I'm definitely a little envious of the amazing G master lens line up from Sony (smaller lighter but every bit as good or better) Problem is, every time I hold a Sony camera it's a no, they are just super uncomfortable... However I for one thank Sony for kicking Canon's asses for the last 5 years because if they didn't we would not have the fantastic bodies, lenses and stellar autofocus systems/dynamic range which are now up there with Sony. Of course the Canon's have far superior ergonomics which when holding a camera for 12 hours is a big deal. Great time to be in the photography business.
100% agree.
You should test the Canon 28-70 f2 lens, I like to see how it pans out. I heard some really incredible thing about it...;)
4mm less and heavy as hell. No.
I’ve been using the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II adapted via a Metabones and then an MC-11 ever since the days of the original A7R. It holds up well, even on an A7RIV. I’m going to do some soul searching now, this is the first new 24-70 I’ve seen that might offer more than the setup I have used since 2014. Mostly, I need flare resistance and contrast, as I do a *lot* of night shots, and the now old Canon is still new enough to benefit from their nano coating tech. I’m sure there will be plenty of sample shots to check out soon enough.
Just buy 2470GM2
As a plastics engineer I am concerned with the new plastic body of the Sony GM II being a satisfied owner of the GM. I don’t know if it’s a kind of composite body or just standard reinforced plastics injection molded. Whatever one could come up with, the temperature stability of the latter must have an impact on body distortion, when it comes to temperature variations e.g shooting in harsh conditions like hot or cold environments …
It’s an expensive lens made mostly out of plastic in Thailand, that’s why it’s the lightest.
Interesting , Gerald Undone compared it to the Sigma 24-70 and found it to be better but not by much .
Fun comparison, but one correction: Nikon *does* have image stabilization on their 24-70 2.8 ED VR !
He is comparing the mirrorless version.
I came to this lens from the Zeiss 55 1.8 for professional portraits. I don't really miss that extra little bit of bokeh.
The design of the GM 2 ....quite underwhelming !?
Another great review! I liked how you mentioned how hard it is manufacture a 24-70 f2.8 zoom lens. As a hybrid videographer I am still looking for a 20-50 f2.8 zoom. Would you say that it would be even harder, bigger and heavier to make such focal length?
I think they will do this 20-60 range but wont be f2.8 because they still need to make money thru the holy trinity😂
@@KgerShyang yeah your probably right. 20-60 f4 would still be a nice zoom lens though if they can make it less than 400grams. I'm finding any lens over that weight becomes cumbersome to carry as a daily on my A7C
I think 20-45 f/2.8 or perhaps f/2 will be nice 😁
i really hope we will also get a 24-105 f4 II from sony, it needs an update. sony, please. i would prefer a GM version instead of a G.
Is the full set of braces for $59 the number of braces
Esos colores verdosos 🟩 de Sony....
I think their 85gm was the first GM they made.
This lens reminds me Fuji 16-80mm in case of design and aparture ring
Why wasn’t the lens a 2.0 like the Canon!
Are you talking about the Canon RF 28-70mm f2? In that case I think the extra 4mm on the wide end is the answer. Canon does not have a 24-70mm f2 which would as far as I know be quite heavy and big.
@@bjorn7100 Canon already has a 24-70. Sony still needs a 28-70/2.0 to be competitive.
@@Mike_M_Smith Yes, I know they have a 24-70 but that one is not f2, right? So that's why I don't think it's reasonable to expect this one to be. If you wish Sony had a 28-70 f2 then that's another question I think.
@@bjorn7100 that’s the reason for my comment. Sony’s lens strategy needs to be more competitive.
1430g RF 28-70 L IS vs 695g SEL2470GM2.
I really don't understand the lack of IS at this point. This could have been a lot better for hand held video with that included, but now Canon wins for me. I would much rather have IS than a few grams lighter weight.
I have the Canon and Nikon 24-70 and the Nikon is quite a bit sharper outside of center. Don’t know why your test doesn’t show that? Did you take off the UV filters? But I do love the canon’s IS. You can compare at the digital picture and cameraworld. Both back up what I observe.
Possible it could be copy variation - the first Nikon Lensrentals sent over was broken… second seemed okay. These were both rentals - the Sony GM II was the only one with zero mileage…
@@theartofphotography ahh I see. Thanks for the info. Don’t think hand picked lens from Sony vs lens rental beaters is fair lol
I was looking for corner to corner comparison too so I took this video as sony user trying to advertise their brand, not a serious IQ comparison video lol
My FX3 has in camera lens correction for wide lenses. I wonder how that would effect the test. It does help my 14mm prime’s distortion.
The Sigma is the best deal. Very close image quality to the GMll at half the price. If you don't mind it weighing more.
How about canon f 2.0 ?
1430g RF 28-70 L IS vs 695g SEL2470GM2.
I don’t like barrel zooms. Sure wish there was internal zoom and focus.
Is there a 24-70/2.8 zoom that is not a barrel zoom?
I fail to see any purpose or value in such comparisons. It really doesn't matter which one is "better" as very few people can either see the difference, nor do they have the hardware (adapters) to make the purchase of one over another (which don't exist for the Nikon Z lenses).
They are helpful for people deciding which system to buy into
As Mikel indicated. You might as well calm down and lurk some more.
Reasonably nice narrative for the present day lenses.
However, apart from some slightly improved sharpness, these present day lenses are not as good or nearly as good compared to old lenses.
The current lenses bank heavily on in body correction built into the cameras. In fact these current lenses will never stand a test on a proper optical test bench. These are mostly lousy lenses. Period.
Can you provide.a link to a comparison that justifies and grounds your assertion that older was better. It should be a zoom to zoom comparison. No primes allowed.
@@stevenwaldstein2249 .....
The best photography magazines are gone with the wind.
There are no practical proper optical test bench now, literally.
DXO benchmark is there, yet the outputs are so so.
Simply no one talks about actual aperture, actual focal length, actual field curvature, actual resolving power in lines per millimeters etc. Sorry here dear. Thanks.
On a side note, people receiving and comprehending the details are a changed lot.
I'll just stick with my 28-70 f2.0
every other YTer, 'oh the corners aren't sharp'
Sony lens engineers - damn mouth breathers are at it again
AOF. lets explain field curvature, again.
Only failure with this lens is that you must use sony cameras with it.
Sony is a zeiz
Just another gear video, yawn.
You chose to watch it.
The man has to get paid and it will get the clicks. Beside that, not all gear videos are equal and I appreciate his point of view.