GMPhotography wrote:
Yea i just tested my 24-70 at 50mm today in the other thread and the zoom is a wonderful lens at 50mm stopped down a bit. We have been so lucky by some of the latest lenses coming to market , the GMs are just outstanding and the new 50 is killer sharp. Keep them coming. Im starting to think having the new 70 -200 2.8 just to have when i need that length.
After the 24-70GM is hard to justify primes on that range for landscapes
I shot my first time with it today in a shoot. This lens is a beast (both size and performance )...Love it, I haven't used a zoom in years and this one knocked it out of the park. My biggest problem was the I would be in a specific focal length and then start walking forward and back like I do with my primes
Mark Rigsby wrote:
I shot my first time with it today in a shoot. This lens is a beast (both size and performance )...Love it, I haven't used a zoom in years and this one knocked it out of the park. My biggest problem was the I would be in a specific focal length and then start walking forward and back like I do with my primes
But that's a *good* thing to do! The bigges danger with zooms is that you just randomly choose a location and then frame by zoom, rather than working out the right perspective...
I don't think there's anything wrong with framing by zoom, you can still work perspective without moving your feet. It's all about creativity and seeing your subject from different angles. I'm sure you can do the same thing by framing with zoom. Heck, after I got used to the lens, i was seeing things differently in some situations, so it's always good to step outside your established patterns.
Mark Rigsby wrote:
I don't think there's anything wrong with framing by zoom, you can still work perspective without moving your feet. It's all about creativity and seeing your subject from different angles. I'm sure you can do the same thing by framing with zoom. Heck, after I got used to the lens, i was seeing things differently in some situations, so it's always good to step outside your established patterns.
I agree there's nothing wrong with zooming to frame after you have found the right perspective. Beats cropping to frame. Less hassle that stiching to frame. But finding the right location and thus perspective needs walking, at least me. The danger with zooms is because you can zoom to frame you may never see the perspective you would have got from another location. Of course this danger can be overcome.
Mark Rigsby wrote:
... you can still work perspective without moving your feet. It's all about creativity and seeing your subject from different angles. I'm sure you can do the same thing by framing with zoom.
Zooming does change the framing, being an optical crop. To see your subject from a different angle, geometrically speaking, you must move your feet. That, or move your subject! The latter route is unlikely for landscape, but more than common for tabletop.
DavidBM wrote:
I agree there's nothing wrong with zooming to frame after you have found the right perspective. Beats cropping to frame. Less hassle that stiching to frame. But finding the right location and thus perspective needs walking, at least me. The danger with zooms is because you can zoom to frame you may never see the perspective you would have got from another location. Of course this danger can be overcome.
For landscapes, I first decide how far I want the background to be in relation to the foreground. That's my focal length decision. Then I move around to frame the scene. So far, this can be done with primes or a zoom set to my desired focal length.
However, sometimes, moving is not possible. (Example, you are on the top a cliff. ). In cases like this, fine-tuning the chosen focal length by slightly zooming is very helpful. (Like Rico wrote, this is optical cropping).
I much prefer to frame the scene as perfectly as possible in the field than cropping in post which sometimes happen when using primes. That way all our camera megapixels are preserved in the final image.
Fred Miranda wrote:
For landscapes, I first decide how far I want the background to be in relation to the foreground. That's my focal length decision. Then I move around to frame the scene. So far, this can be done with primes or a zoom set to my desired focal length.
However, sometimes, moving is not possible. (Example, you are on the top a cliff. ). In cases like this, fine-tuning the chosen focal length by slightly zooming is very helpful. (Like Rico wrote, this is optical cropping).
I much prefer to frame the scene as perfectly as possible in the field than cropping in post which sometimes happen when using primes. That way all our camera megapixels are preserved in the final image....Show more →
Agree with all of that: my point was just about the danger of not thinking about perspective and foreground /background relationships that some (including my younger self) can succumb to using zooms. Using primes helped me me move and think. Of course I hope that's no longer necessary - and I can trust myself to use the GM zoom carefully if I get one!
p.44 #10 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
When this lens was released, I didn't pay attention. When I saw the glowing comments I shrugged, thinking "meh, I've never liked standard zooms and that is one big lens".
I made the mistake of trying it on at a camera store when they didn't have the batis 25 I was interested in trying. Holy cow this lens is fanastic. Here is the first photo I took with it in the store.
The full resolution is on flickr. I was totally floored when I opened this file in lightroom, the sharpness and "mojo" of the lens is utterly off the charts. I know I sound like Steve Huff now but wow, what a lens. You guys were right. I am now coming up with schemes and plots.
p.44 #11 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
It's funny, as primarily a portrait photographer, i found my self using two lenses 99% of the time, the 85 and 35mm. This opens up a whole new world for me...I haven't used a zoom (outside of a 70-200) in 10 years...And I don't use that much either.
This lens is amazing..and yes, i don't think I'l fall into the trap of missing perspective due to zoom since my work is all about perspective....I has to find the right one and I walk a ton...(or when I'm lazy I use my office chair with wheels
p.44 #13 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
GMPhotography wrote:
This lens has changed some very stubborn mindsets on zooms. ME
From a guy that hated zooms most of my career. I still do but this is a exception
I'm is the same boat having come from Leica's and small primes I never thought I would fall for a monster in the way I have with this lens
p.44 #15 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Honestly the zoom at 24mm is its best focal length. It's that good not sure much could compare to it. I had the 25 and it's a great lens no question but I'm not so sure the corners would be as good as the zoom. That's a strong statement from me. Zooms have never matched a prime in the past. I mean like never. Now I can eat my words from those comments in the past. Frankly happy to do so too
p.44 #16 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
Aside for the sharp corners what surprised me the most was the smooth bokeh rendering wide open and stopped down. Incredible how bokeh balls remain rounded and clean even at smaller apertures.
GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly the zoom at 24mm is its best focal length. It's that good not sure much could compare to it. I had the 25 and it's a great lens no question but I'm not so sure the corners would be as good as the zoom. That's a strong statement from me. Zooms have never matched a prime in the past. I mean like never. Now I can eat my words from those comments in the past. Frankly happy to do so too
p.44 #20 · Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Rolling Review
I just scanned through 44 pages of this thread wondering if anyone had done a side by side comparison with the Canon? Did I miss it? Thanks in advance.
P.S. Fred, did your broken 24-70 GM survive the repair shop?
