Jonathan Brady wrote:
I've only taken a few shots with it, but I'm noticing I'm adding contrast in Capture One to my 24-105 images. It's not unusual for me to add contrast, but I noticed right away that all of the images I took with it, needed more. Am I just used to what I get out of the Batis 85 and 135?
Yes, I noticed that contrast difference, going from the 24-79 GM to the 24-105 as well.
Not a big deal I don’t think but it is clear that it suffers from lower contrast.
I debated long and hard between the 24-70mm f2.8 GM and the 24-105mm f4 G... in the end I got the 24-105mm f4. I'm happy.
All I can say is that the AF to me seems super fast, accurate, and the lens is sharp. I'm sure the 24-70 is terrific as well but I can honestly say that I'm thoroughly impressed. I haven't used a zoom lens in the longest time but I don't ever remember a zoom lens in this range performing so well. When I was with Canon my most used lens was the 24-105L. I have a feeling this will be my most used/everyday/travel lens as well.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 24-105G has high resolution and global contrast but lacks micro-contrast compared to my other lenses like the Loxias or CVs.
How is the micro-contrast relative to the other Sony wa/zooms such as the 4/16-35, 16-35GM, 24-70GM?
I'm entertaining either the 4/24-105 or the yet-to-be-released Tammy 28-75/2.8 E-mount...the 4/24-105 seems to be immune to many of the issues which generally plague zooms, particularly those at >2.5x, but it sits right at the (to me) cusp of too big to comfortably/casually carry around with it's weight and extended length. Yet its zoom range is stellar, as are the samples it produces (obligatory disclaimer: "for a zoom...")
My kit would be a wa-zoom (24-105 or 28-75) and one other lens which looks like it'll be a Batis 2.8/135, fwiw. I've owned (and have loved) the Batis 2/25 so I may end up with either that or the 2.8/18 but I'm going to try to live with 2 lenses for now (insert laugh-track here.)
Well you have to decide what’s the most important features you NEED. The Tammy is going to be be smaller lighter and at 2.8 a great option but that also if your trying to build a full kit with primes than let’s say you go 18,25,28-70, 85, 135. That’s 5 lenses that covers a full range . If you went 24-105 than it gets less 18,24-105, 135 which covers the same range. Now you can add another prime like a 55 to either or not. The 24-105 is very good from 24-85. 105 is its weakest but still stopped down some a very good lens. Now for some folks it’s more about the speed and 2.8 might tick the box better for those folks. You have several options here and that was just a idea to look at as you may want only 3 lenses in your bag and not 4 or 5. The one thing we do know is the 24-105 is a great lens. So you can’t ignore that and they can give you the best marketing pitch on the Tammy but until it passes the smell test we just don’t know. I also do not like the fact there is no release date. That bugs me personally.
GMPhotography wrote:
Well you have to decide what’s the most important features you NEED. The Tammy is going to be be smaller lighter and at 2.8 a great option but that also if your trying to build a full kit with primes than let’s say you go 18,25,28-70, 85, 135. That’s 5 lenses that covers a full range . If you went 24-105 than it gets less 18,24-105, 135 which covers the same range. Now you can add another prime like a 55 to either or not. The 24-105 is very good from 24-85. 105 is its weakest but still stopped down some a very good lens. Now for some folks it’s more about the speed and 2.8 might tick the box better for those folks. You have several options here and that was just a idea to look at as you may want only 3 lenses in your bag and not 4 or 5. The one thing we do know is the 24-105 is a great lens. So you can’t ignore that and they can give you the best marketing pitch on the Tammy but until it passes the smell test we just don’t know. I also do not like the fact there is no release date. That bugs me personally. ...Show more →
1. great image quality
2. light/compact
3. versatile (may eliminate need for multiple lenses)
...pick two, right?
Thanks for the suggestions regarding approach! I'm usually a lens whore, no matter which system I'm shooting (I've been in the "better to have it and not need it..." camp with the usual Holy Trinity, etc) but this time I'd like to try to live with two (although 3 is probably more likely.) All outside factors aside, starting with just a 4/24-105G would have been smart...but I couldn't resist the Batis 2.8/135 sale so I've already got lens#2. Now I just need my mobile body-cap lens(es.) I'm optimistic about the 28-75/2.8 E-mount Tammy but I agree that a lens which has been announced to be released in "mid-May" ought to have more specifics available (such as "release date") today. I could buy the 24-105 now and simply flip it for the Tammy once it passes the FM/GM test but I may simply hold out and try to roll with the Batis for a while although 135 as my only focal option for 2 months would be strange, haha!
elicious wrote:
1. great image quality
2. light/compact
3. versatile (may eliminate need for multiple lenses)
...pick two, right?
Thanks for the suggestions regarding approach! I'm usually a lens whore, no matter which system I'm shooting (I've been in the "better to have it and not need it..." camp with the usual Holy Trinity, etc) but this time I'd like to try to live with two (although 3 is probably more likely.) All outside factors aside, starting with just a 4/24-105G would have been smart...but I couldn't resist the Batis 2.8/135 sale so I've already got lens#2. Now I just need my mobile body-cap lens(es.) I'm optimistic about the 28-75/2.8 E-mount Tammy but I agree that a lens which has been announced to be released in "mid-May" ought to have more specifics available (such as "release date") today. I could buy the 24-105 now and simply flip it for the Tammy once it passes the FM/GM test but I may simply hold out and try to roll with the Batis for a while although 135 as my only focal option for 2 months would be strange, haha! ...Show more →
Right now I have really two kits for whatever pops up but I’m a working Pro too so I have more issues filling out the kits. But for when it counts.
Laowa 15
Firin 20
CV 40 1.2
Loxia 85
Than AF for more work related
Batis 25 coming tomorrow
Sony 24-105
Batis 135
Now the Batis 135 will float in both kit
The Batis 135 was a great deal and should be in everyone’s bag at that price. It’s just so good
I’m still debating this Tammy . It does fit in the AF kit well and it’s a 2.8 so just have to see. Seriously it won’t be a bad thing if you got the 24-105 and sold it later. I think I’m guilty of that practice.
GMPhotography wrote:
Right now I have really two kits for whatever pops up but I’m a working Pro too so I have more issues filling out the kits. But for when it counts.
Laowa 15
Firin 20
CV 40 1.2
Loxia 85
Than AF for more work related
Batis 25 coming tomorrow
Sony 24-105
Batis 135
Now the Batis 135 will float in both kit
The Batis 135 was a great deal and should be in everyone’s bag at that price. It’s just so good
I’m still debating this Tammy . It does fit in the AF kit well and it’s a 2.8 so just have to see. Seriously it won’t be a bad thing if you got the 24-105 and sold it later. I think I’m guilty of that practice....Show more →
I love the 135L I have had for years and still love the rendering but the Batis is totally special as well. Excellent lens and nice and quiet.
GMPhotography wrote:
Right now I have really two kits for whatever pops up but I’m a working Pro too so I have more issues filling out the kits. But for when it counts.
Laowa 15
Firin 20
CV 40 1.2
Loxia 85
Than AF for more work related
Batis 25 coming tomorrow
Sony 24-105
Batis 135
Now the Batis 135 will float in both kit
The Batis 135 was a great deal and should be in everyone’s bag at that price. It’s just so good
I’m still debating this Tammy . It does fit in the AF kit well and it’s a 2.8 so just have to see. Seriously it won’t be a bad thing if you got the 24-105 and sold it later. I think I’m guilty of that practice....Show more →
That AF kit is right up my alley! I've owned the B25 and it is glorious but I wonder whether that B18 would suit me better? I've been hunting for a 4/24-105 for a few weeks now but there's is such a serious supply/demand issue that some sellers on eBay are actually getting $1500 for them new (and $1300+ used!) when the price on Sony's own site is $1299. I did receive a counter on GT of $1225 but I figured that since I wouldn't have the A7III until late April that another cheaper one would come along.
My guess is that the 24-105 did/does have a major production problem and the stock of the lens has suffered as a consequence. I personally wouldn't buy one until I was sure the problem has been addressed. Yea, I'm probably a little paranoid and distrustful of Sony manufacturing and QA
In the mean time I can decide if the Tamron 28-75/2.8 will fit my needs better. On paper, it appears to be a winner.
pdmphoto wrote:
My guess is that the 24-105 did/does have a major production problem and the stock of the lens has suffered as a consequence. I personally wouldn't buy one until I was sure the problem has been addressed. Yea, I'm probably a little paranoid and distrustful of Sony manufacturing and QA
In the mean time I can decide if the Tamron 28-75/2.8 will fit my needs better. On paper, it appears to be a winner.
Strangely the QC of this lens seems quite good compared to other Sony lenses according to Roger, most reviews I'm seen, and the overwhelmingly positive feedback on this and other forums (I think I've seen maybe two mentions of possible decentering). I'm sure the focus incident and subsequent recall on certain serial numbers played a role in slowing production but I also think Sony may have underestimated the demand for this lens, especially now with the pending A7III release. It is a nearly perfect solution for the vast majority of hobbyists and enthusiasts who prefer the versatility of a zoom for walking around where the size, weight, and cost of the 24-70 GM is a hindrance. The older 24-70mm f4 has long been known to be mediocre for the price where this lens extends the range and improves on all the Zony's faults. As a a nearly 100% prime shooter I even broke down and bought one after all the great feedback and couldn't be happier. It is excellent and I'm most impressed by the sharpness wide open at the long end where most lenses disappoint. I was fortunate to get one of the shipments from B&H a couple weeks ago after placing a backorder in February. Highly recommend it.
A 28-75mm of modern day Tamron quality that weighs less than a Loxia 85mm with about the same maximum aperture is going to please a lot of users. The Sony 24-105/4 is the lens that should have appeared instead of the 24-70/4.
Guy did you try 135L?
IMO, anyone considering a 135 prime should also check out L. Small, cheap, light, dream rendering at F2, and maybe equally sharp as Batis at F2.8. Best part is it works great AF wise on MC-11.
Having said all this, i ended up selling L for FE85. I think there is no comparison between the FE and L (L being much much better) but I still did it because i am ****** OCD about minimalism and size/weight, and don’t keep what I don’t use.
This 24-105, mine is very sharp and is pushing me to sell Lox 21 and buy a Laowa/CV 15 instead. Your thoughts Guy?
GMPhotography wrote:
Right now I have really two kits for whatever pops up but I’m a working Pro too so I have more issues filling out the kits. But for when it counts.
Laowa 15
Firin 20
CV 40 1.2
Loxia 85
Than AF for more work related
Batis 25 coming tomorrow
Sony 24-105
Batis 135
Now the Batis 135 will float in both kit
The Batis 135 was a great deal and should be in everyone’s bag at that price. It’s just so good
I’m still debating this Tammy . It does fit in the AF kit well and it’s a 2.8 so just have to see. Seriously it won’t be a bad thing if you got the 24-105 and sold it later. I think I’m guilty of that practice....Show more →
I was lucky enough to get the 24-105 F/4 on Greentoe for 1200$, right after it was released. I held my breath as I tested it, but it turned out perfect. I cannot believe how good the images are with this zoom. It's every bit as good as the 24-70GM for whatever reason... Highly recommended.
nandadevieast wrote:
Guy did you try 135L?
IMO, anyone considering a 135 prime should also check out L. Small, cheap, light, dream rendering at F2, and maybe equally sharp as Batis at F2.8. Best part is it works great AF wise on MC-11.
Having said all this, i ended up selling L for FE85. I think there is no comparison between the FE and L (L being much much better) but I still did it because i am ****** OCD about minimalism and size/weight, and don’t keep what I don’t use.
This 24-105, mine is very sharp and is pushing me to sell Lox 21 and buy a Laowa/CV 15 instead. Your thoughts Guy?
The 135 L was good in its day and a decent alternate but I personally think the Batis 135 is much better and no adapter and the AF is really accurate and fast. Now if you have a really nice 24-105 the Laowa 15 would be really nice to pair with it, you could also add the Firin 20 which is also a great lens, does not have the sun stars of the lox 21 but even sharper in the corners even at F4. I have both the 15,20 which equals the cost of the Lox 21. I’m still interested in the Loxia 25 but I’m waiting for it to get on the shelves first.
nandadevieast wrote:
Guy did you try 135L?
IMO, anyone considering a 135 prime should also check out L. Small, cheap, light, dream rendering at F2, and maybe equally sharp as Batis at F2.8. Best part is it works great AF wise on MC-11.
Having said all this, i ended up selling L for FE85. I think there is no comparison between the FE and L (L being much much better) but I still did it because i am ****** OCD about minimalism and size/weight, and don’t keep what I don’t use.
This 24-105, mine is very sharp and is pushing me to sell Lox 21 and buy a Laowa/CV 15 instead. Your thoughts Guy?
Agree with you about the L135. I now have both that and the Batis. The Batis is much better at eye af in lower light situations. Get more keepers, esp in afc. I tried out both the other day in a long headshot session. Shot with studio lights at F 6.3....I swear the canon lens seems quite a bit sharper...in fact, so sharp, you really have to do more retouching on some people.
echelonphoto wrote:
Agree with you about the L135. I now have both that and the Batis. The Batis is much better at eye af in lower light situations. Get more keepers, esp in afc. I tried out both the other day in a long headshot session. Shot with studio lights at F 6.3....I swear the canon lens seems quite a bit sharper...in fact, so sharp, you really have to do more retouching on some people.
The Canon 135/2L is known for being outstanding a couple stops down. At around f/4-5.6 it's great across the entire image field. At f/2.8 it's sharp at center but it does not compare to the Batis towards the edges.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Canon 135/2L is known for being outstanding a couple stops down. At around f/4-5.6 it's great across the entire image field. At f/2.8 it's sharp at center but it does not compare to the Batis towards the edges.
thanks, Fred......I agree, but for the difference in price and how little i use this focal length...I have decided to keep the canon and sell the batis.
