Any 24-70mm 2.8 seems notoriously bad for getting a copy thats bang on. I know other lens's have their moments but in my experience of working through all the brands, the 24-70 2.8's have always been a consistent issue. Its a complex design to get perfect.
I own a Sigma 24-70mm DG DN personally and I had the ability to try a few of those before I settled on one. I think I went through 3 or 4 of these?! I had one that was sensational from 24-50mm and just plain awful at 70mm, another where the reverse was true. The one I settled on was consistent throughout but may not have the absolute edge of the very best at its given focal length but is right up there. Bit of a nightmare really.
The Sony GM Im trialling is the first I have had. There is no lens tilt etc and nothing seriously adrift with it. In isolation you would probably be happy with it. Ive further compared it this morning to the DGDN and I would easily give the 24/35 to the Sigma. The GM at 50mm and 70mm. This seems in line with others pro's I have spoken to and read.
In saying this, apart from the 24mm which is reasonably obvious, its pixel peeping to establish differences.
I guess it depends on what focal length you value more and how much you appreciate the form factor (which is very nice). Ill be sticking with the Sigma for now and spend my money on the gorgeous primes instead :-)
smpetty wrote:
I had the same experience, exactly, with my first copy. Received the replacement but haven't yet tested it...
Kenneth Lee wrote:
Does anyone know what happens when you send a lens back to somewhere like B&H ? Does some other forum member get it next, or is it returned to Sony ?
I would like to hope they don’t resell them as new, but I have a feeling they do.
I seen many comments on forums over the years about it took someone 2,3, maybe even 4 tries to find a “good” copy. I don’t think the retailer sends everyone of those lenses back to the manufacturer. Or sells them as open box.
Especially if the lens isn’t defective. Just not as good as another copy. As long as the packaging is pristine, I think they sell many of those returned lenses as new.
Of course, I have absolutely no proof of this. This is only a guess.
photomadnz wrote:
The Sony GM Im trialling is the first I have had. There is no lens tilt etc and nothing seriously adrift with it. In isolation you would probably be happy with it. Ive further compared it this morning to the DGDN and I would easily give the 24/35 to the Sigma. The GM at 50mm and 70mm. This seems in line with others pro's I have spoken to and read.
In saying this, apart from the 24mm which is reasonably obvious, its pixel peeping to establish differences.
Is the Sigma better at f/2.8 only or also f/4 and f/8 ? and center only or across the frame ?
I had the Sigma and my copy was also strong at 24/35mm (from f/2.8), and a bit weaker at > 50mm. Still very good results.
I tested wide open out of general interest also but the main test was @f11. I wanted to know how good they could comparatively be taking DOF and field curvature out of the equation as much as possible.
Fboss wrote:
Is the Sigma better at f/2.8 only or also f/4 and f/8 ? and center only or across the frame ?
I had the Sigma and my copy was also strong at 24/35mm (from f/2.8), and a bit weaker at > 50mm. Still very good results.
robert614 wrote:
I would like to hope they don’t resell them as new, but I have a feeling they do.
I seen many comments on forums over the years about it took someone 2,3, maybe even 4 tries to find a “good” copy. I don’t think the retailer sends everyone of those lenses back to the manufacturer. Or sells them as open box.
Especially if the lens isn’t defective. Just not as good as another copy. As long as the packaging is pristine, I think they sell many of those returned lenses as new.
Of course, I have absolutely no proof of this. This is only a guess....Show more →
I've always wondered about this, too. I've never bought anything, lens or camera, from B&H that did not have packaging (including all packaging inside the box) that did not look factory sealed, so my guess is that either B&H has a "factory sealing" department, or it goes back to Sony to be repackaged and sold as new again. Maybe Sony tests before repackaging, but I suspect not if B&H tells them the return was not due to a specific defect.
All speculation, of course, and I do recall someone from B&H (Henry perhaps) once mentioning that they never resell returns, but they would say that, wouldn't they, so who really knows?!
Kind of makes you gun shy, doesn't it? I use a 24-70 GM1 for 80% of my work. I have some very nice primes in that range but I don't use them much because I don't like changing lenses in the outdoors while I'm working, and encouraging a dirty sensor. At least 50% of my work is at 24mm, about 30% at 35mm and the rest at 70%, all of them potentially troublesome depending on the particular copy and it's weaknesses. I haven't read anything about the GM2 that makes me want to upgrade - sorry, reduced size is meaningless to me. I had hoped to read about improved microcontrast and I haven't read a word. Think I'll wait for a year or so and see if Sony tightens up the acceptable manufacturing tolerances. Why don't they make a "Blue Ring" version like Phase One? Same lens, tougher quality control inspection, higher rejection rate and price to match. I'd go for it. This is a premium priced lens and it shouldn't be sold with half assed quality control.
Kenneth Lee wrote:
Does anyone know what happens when you send a lens back to somewhere like B&H ? Does some other forum member get it next, or is it returned to Sony ?
Sony does not take equipment back, so retailers have little choice except to sell them as "open box", "demo", or used.
wordfool wrote:
I've never bought anything, lens or camera, from B&H that did not have packaging (including all packaging inside the box) that did not look factory sealed
Same here. Everything I’ve bought from B&H has always appeared to be brand spanking new.
I definitely check too as I’m opening the item. You can definitely tell if the plastic bags around a lens or body has been folded once as it is at the factory. Or if it’s been taken out and folded up again.
But so far, everything I’ve bought from them, and Adorama for that matter, all look factory fresh.
That being said, I still do wonder what happens to all these returned lenses.
Neither Sony or the retailers are going to suffer financial losses because "lens testers" (otherwise known as dentists, lawyers, and sales reps) have decided that they have received a "bad copy".
I don't know how it is managed but those lenses will be resold as new; no ifs, ands, or buts.
My telltale sign of previously sold equipment:
The small cardboard tab to secure the boxtop will be creased.
I don't reflexly send those items back. I carefully check them and if they seem OK I simply go with it.
If Sony wasn't OK with current protocols they would provide packaging that insures the item is factory-fresh.
They used to do that. Small plastic tab that you needed to cut to open.
DaveFP wrote:
Neither Sony or the retailers are going to suffer financial losses because "lens testers" (otherwise known as dentists, lawyers, and sales reps) have decided that they have received a "bad copy".
I don't know how it is managed but those lenses will be resold as new; no ifs, ands, or buts.
My telltale sign of previously sold equipment:
The small cardboard tab to secure the boxtop will be creased.
I don't reflexly send those items back. I carefully check them and if they seem OK I simply go with it.
If Sony wasn't OK with current protocols they would provide packaging that insures the item is factory-fresh.
They used to do that. Small plastic tab that you needed to cut to open.
In addition to the crease on the tab. Another telltale sign a box has been opened…a fingernail mark where the person used their fingernail to pry the tab open! 😀
I believe in some countries. Sony still puts a factory seal on the tab. So you can tell if it’s been opened.
I've tried 2 copies of this lens, both looks pretty OK to me, but I don't pick lens for my daily shooting stuff, but about 6 years back(still a Canon shooter back then) I have the job to shoot a important performance and tested 9 copies of Canon 70-200 2.8 L II, out of the 9 lenses only 2 are perfectly centered.
robert614 wrote:
I would like to hope they don’t resell them as new, but I have a feeling they do.
I seen many comments on forums over the years about it took someone 2,3, maybe even 4 tries to find a “good” copy. I don’t think the retailer sends everyone of those lenses back to the manufacturer. Or sells them as open box.
Especially if the lens isn’t defective. Just not as good as another copy. As long as the packaging is pristine, I think they sell many of those returned lenses as new.
Of course, I have absolutely no proof of this. This is only a guess....Show more →
I think most people return a lens because they decided they didn't really want it for the money it cost. People on FM may well be an exception to this since testing lenses and gear is a main focus here. But one of the sharpest lenses that I have--a Batis 18-- was sold as an open box returned copy.
I am sure the end product falls within their tolerance levels, which are then not good enough for professionals?
I returned the 24-70 GM ii after 1 week.
I took a handful of photos with it, and while they turned out good, I didn't think it's worth more than $1500.
Fboss wrote:
Is the Sigma better at f/2.8 only or also f/4 and f/8 ? and center only or across the frame ?
I had the Sigma and my copy was also strong at 24/35mm (from f/2.8), and a bit weaker at > 50mm. Still very good results.
Variation with fast standard zooms is such that, unless Roger Cicala goes back to testing 10+ copies, it’s not going to be easy to make judgements like this. One Sigma/GM pair will have Sigma ahead at the short end but not long, and another pair will have Sony ahead at the short end but not long. And that may even be true for symmetrical copies.
I don’t think this lens looks to any worse in variation than other fast normal zooms. One reason I don’t have a fast standard zoom is the hassle of testing and return (return being less easy where I live). Though if I end up spending a couple of months overseas next year, I might bite the bullet and do it. My sense from equillibrating over reviews and controlling for review quality, is that if you want a standard zoom, this one is exceptional - the kind of lens that if you want that genre, is a reason for choosing systems. But if you are very picky, be prepared for effort.
