Umm there is a very low level high pitched whine when you go to autofocus on the 24-70 f2.8 G Master. Unless your high frequency hearing is diminished it's there. It is so faint as to be NO big deal, but if you're in a dead quiet room you can indeed barely detect it (once again assuming you still have good high frequency hearing). I don't consider this any deal at all frankly.
No but I think I have my Batis 85 test, see if I can find it and load the raws up for folks to look at. Looking back at those efforts of testing all this glass it seems it was a good idea now. Believe me I want to share them and one reason I do it.
In all honesty the weak spot on the 24-70 is 70mm you need to get to F4 on center. The Batis 85 is killer wide open on center
For that range the Batis would be the better choice. The zoom is awesome in the wide end and 50 is damn good. I might try 60mm though as it maybe good there as well.
I just re-tested FE 24-70/2.8GM @28mm VS. FE 28/2 and the zoom beats the prime noticeably in the corners. They look comparable in the center though.
Only at f/8, the prime seems to catch up but even at this aperture, the zoom shows more detail and contrast on the very edges. I'm so impressed with this zoom.
p.27 #10 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I just re-tested FE 24-70/2.8GM @28mm VS. FE 28/2 and the zoom beats the prime noticeably in the corners. They look comparable in the center though.
Only at f/8, the prime seems to catch up but even at this aperture, the zoom shows more detail and contrast on the very edges. I'm so impressed with this zoom.
Never in my 40 years could I possibly agree with you on a 24-70 zoom until this lens. Never, it's simply amazing and it renders so nice to boot. Jackpot
p.27 #11 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Never in my 40 years could I possibly agree with you on a 24-70 zoom until this lens. Never, it's simply amazing and it renders so nice to boot. Jackpot
Aside from the size, I can't complain. It performs the job of 5 primes and it does it well.
p.27 #12 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Never in my 40 years could I possibly agree with you on a 24-70 zoom until this lens. Never, it's simply amazing and it renders so nice to boot. Jackpot
I'm so amazed by the corner and edge sharpness and rendering of this GM zoom. I've shot with the Canon 24 Tilt-Shift II and 24-70 f/2.8L II on a 5D3 and 1DX and I believe this GM zoom is as good or slightly better than both of those lenses. I thought at the time that those Canon lenses were some of the sharpest and best rendering lenses I had ever used. I really hope we see a 14-24 f/2.8 GM or 16-35 f/2.8 GM in the near future.
p.27 #14 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
TheEyesHaveIt wrote:
Thoughts on the 16-35 + 55 + Batis 85 instead of this behemoth (less about weight in bag, though that matters, but weight on the camera)?
That's an excellent set-up, except that the 24-70GM performs better from 24-35mm, especially towards the corners.
An alternative is:
CV 15/4.5III, 24-70/2.8GM and Batis 85/1.8, but it all depends on your needs.
p.27 #15 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's an excellent set-up, except that the 24-70GM performs better from 24-35mm, especially towards the corners.
An alternative is:
CV 15/4.5III, 24-70/2.8GM and Batis 85/1.8, but it all depends on your needs.
Thanks Fred. The thing I don't like about the CV 15 is the unremovable hood - I use filters a ton for landscape. To get better at the long range of the 16-35 I was contemplating the Loxia or Sony 35. The 24-70/2.8 just seems so big and heavy, though I suppose if you do the price and weight comparison below, doesn't seem so bad:
24-70/2.8 - $2198, 886g
vs
Batis 25 / 2 - $1299, 335g
Sony FE 35 / 2.8 - $698, 120g
Sony FE 55 / 1.8 - $898, 281g
Batis 85 / 1.8 - $1,199, 475g (the closest thing to 70 available that is higher than the 55)
-------------------------------------
Total: $4094, 1211g
(Without the Batis 85 though): $2895, 736g
p.27 #16 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
TheEyesHaveIt wrote:
Thanks Fred. The thing I don't like about the CV 15 is the unremovable hood - I use filters a ton for landscape. To get better at the long range of the 16-35 I was contemplating the Loxia or Sony 35. The 24-70/2.8 just seems so big and heavy.
The thing is, a good copy of the 16-35/4 looks 'ok' from 28-35mm as long as you stop down to f/8-f/11. (The Loxia 35/2 or FE 35/2.8 won't be any better). If you don't want to new GM zoom, just keep your current gear until Zeiss releases a Batis 35/2.
p.27 #17 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
TheEyesHaveIt wrote:
Thanks Fred. The thing I don't like about the CV 15 is the unremovable hood - I use filters a ton for landscape. To get better at the long range of the 16-35 I was contemplating the Loxia or Sony 35. The 24-70/2.8 just seems so big and heavy, though I suppose if you do the price and weight comparison below, doesn't seem so bad:
24-70/2.8 - $2198, 886g
vs
Batis 25 / 2 - $1299, 335g
Sony FE 35 / 2.8 - $698, 120g
Sony FE 55 / 1.8 - $898, 281g
Batis 85 / 1.8 - $1,199, 475g (the closest thing to 70 available that is higher than the 55)
-------------------------------------
Total: $4094, 1211g
(Without the Batis 85 though): $2895, 736g...Show more →
Lol hood is removable just send it to me and my Dremel . I'll take good care of that hood. Lol
I cut mine off. Love that I did too . I can use anything above 58mm filters with a simple step up ring. Currently have it at 67mm step up with empty 67mm filter ring for my hood. Just screw it off and I can use 67 mm filters . If I want 2 filters than you need to go to 72mm size.
I can sell you mine because I want my Loxia 50 back and I can wait for the E mount and cut its hood off too. The 15 is not a primary lens for me.
