p.1 #1 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
I've always only used point-n-shoot before, total beginner for interchangeable lenses. I just bought A7 IV for its all-around ability - I'd use photos more than videos. Now comes the daunting lens choices. Would really appreciate any input!
My thinking is that as a total beginner, I'd rather not spend too much on lenses yet and later regret. I don't like selling stuff on eBay either. So I'd rather buy budget lenses, try it out, then upgrade as I get better. Here are my use cases and thoughts on lenses:
Travel: This is the biggest use case for photos. I'll consider city and open sceneries, and occasionally I assume I need to zoom in quite a bit - taking videos indoors in a concert/performance could be a use case too. So I'm thinking Tamron 28-200mm Di III VXD would be a great lens. Tamron 28-75 might be better for everyday/low light but might require another zoom lens, which is more cost and weight.
Portrait: This is also important and I think Sony 85mm F/1.8 seems highly recommended.
Everyday lens: For just needing to do some casual photography, lightweight might be important, the inexpensive Sony 50mm F1.8 seems fitting well.
Macro lens: My kids like to take photos of insects, flowers and nature in general in detail. Sony FE 90mm F2.8 a bit expensive, Sigma 70mm F2.8 Art DG Macro was said to be not that great with AF so better for the static flower. Is there a cheap but good macro lens for insects?
Two things are less important but intriguing - I know my kids would love to do them: telephoto for birds and astro photos. But they're more expensive lenses so maybe only need to be taken into consideration as expansion for the current lens set.
So to sum up, my current thinking is, for my use cases, I'd like to buy Tamron 28-200mm Di III VXD (everyday+zoom) + Sony FE 85mm F1.8 for portrait (edited from 90mm F2.8, which was an expensive macro) + Sony FE 50mm F1.8 (lightweight everyday). What do you think? Should I throw in a wide angle one like Tamron 17-28mm (might be useful taking photo of parties)? Or maybe get the Tamron 50-400mm + 28-75mm for both telephoto and better everyday lens (maybe not buy the Sony FE 50mm then)? But if I keep use the 28-200mm, I can later do Tamron 150-500mm for telephoto or Sony's 200-600mm for telephoto.
p.1 #2 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
The Tamron 17-28 or Sony 20mm f/1.8 G and the Tamron 28-200 will make a good travel kit. I would consider the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN (i-series) which also pairs nicely with the similar Sigma 65mm f/2 DG DN. Alternatively, consider the Samyang tiny series 35mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8.
For macro, the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 is a good alternative to the Sony and would round out your kit. You don't need to buy all at once, so consider starting with the 28-200.
p.1 #3 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Welcome to the forum!!
I came from point and shoot to full frame a few years ago. My prior point and shoot were a Canon S95 then a Canon G7X. The G7X was a 1" sensor and the s95 was even smaller. One of the major changes with full frame was the limited depth of field compared to point and shoot. A few years later I still struggle with this at times. So my first tip is if you are not getting what you want in the image try stopping down a bit.
As far as a good general purpose everyday lens the Tamron 28-200 or sony 24-105 f/4 would be a good choice. I haven't used the 28-200, so I can't comment too much on it. The 28-75 G2 is also a very high performing lens, optically it is better than the 24-105, fast focus, and of course f/2.8. It would be a fine everyday lens as well. My point and shoot was 24-105, so it made sense for me to get the same focal range to start.
I tried a Canon 50 f/1.8 and wasn't real impressed with image quality. I haven't tried the cheap Sony 50mm. I have heard a lot of people recommend good glass as a priority vs a high end body. The Tamron zooms you are looking at are a good match for your body. The new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG DN might be a good first prime. It will have optics that exceed the zooms (near GM level image quality), fast focus and for what it is a lower than GM price tag.
Many of the zooms will give good "macro" photos of flowers and bugs. Look at the reproduction ratio of the lenses you are looking at. A true macro giving a 1x magnification might be more than you need when getting started. I have a bunch of lenses, but still haven't gotten a true macro yet. You could also look for a used or vintage macro as you don't need fast AF.
The buy sell forum here is a good place to buy and sell used lenses.
p.1 #4 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
jrscls wrote:
The Tamron 17-28 or Sony 20mm f/1.8 G and the Tamron 28-200 will make a good travel kit. I would consider the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN (i-series) which also pairs nicely with the similar Sigma 65mm f/2 DG DN. Alternatively, consider the Samyang tiny series 35mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8.
For macro, the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 is a good alternative to the Sony and would round out your kit. You don't need to buy all at once, so consider starting with the 28-200.
Thanks for the suggestions! Sony 20mm wasn't mentioned much in online reviews or videos but the reviews of this lens on Amazon have some fantastic photos! Sigma 105 might be a good macro in the future. I'm not sure the Sigma 35/65 or Samyang 35/75mm primes are for? Everyday use?
p.1 #5 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Welcome to the forum!
I have both the 28-200 and FE85 you are considering. The former is just great for travel. I love it paired with the Sony 20G, and in this pairing, the 20G only comes out very rarely, and mainly for indoor architecture shots. When the 28-200 isn't wide enough outside, I tend to do multi-shot panoramas with the 28-200 and stitch in post.
I don't do a lot of portraits, but enjoy the FE85 when I do. I brought it with me on my last trip and frankly I just did the majority of the family photos with the 28-200 around 60-80mm wide open. It was fine as I wanted some context in the background as opposed to totally blowing it out. I like the FE85 a lot for shooting in the mountains and frequently pack it in my snowboard pack. It is great in those situations because you can capture a lot of the scenery that catches your attention and backing up to add more to the frame is usually pretty easy.
I would hold off on buying a fast prime until you really know what focal length you prefer. You may already know that from shooting your P&S, but I personally would shoot for several months with the 28-200 and then see what focal length you seem to gravitate towards. Some of us are "35mm" folks and some are "50mm" folks and others are "telephoto folks". I think of that classification as just your strongest preference of course, since many of us own all of those types of lenses and shoot them all regularly.
For astro - and I assume you mean Milky Way astro and not deep space astro - the Sony 20G is great.
For birding - the Sony 200-600G is wonderful if you are an occasional birder and are on a budget that involves spending less than $10000 for your long telephoto.
p.1 #6 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
tschopp wrote:
Welcome to the forum!!
I came from point and shoot to full frame a few years ago. My prior point and shoot were a Canon S95 then a Canon G7X. The G7X was a 1" sensor and the s95 was even smaller. One of the major changes with full frame was the limited depth of field compared to point and shoot. A few years later I still struggle with this at times. So my first tip is if you are not getting what you want in the image try stopping down a bit.
As far as a good general purpose everyday lens the Tamron 28-200 or sony 24-105 f/4 would be a good choice. I haven't used the 28-200, so I can't comment too much on it. The 28-75 G2 is also a very high performing lens, optically it is better than the 24-105, fast focus, and of course f/2.8. It would be a fine everyday lens as well. My point and shoot was 24-105, so it made sense for me to get the same focal range to start.
I tried a Canon 50 f/1.8 and wasn't real impressed with image quality. I haven't tried the cheap Sony 50mm. I have heard a lot of people recommend good glass as a priority vs a high end body. The Tamron zooms you are looking at are a good match for your body. The new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG DN might be a good first prime. It will have optics that exceed the zooms (near GM level image quality), fast focus and for what it is a lower than GM price tag.
Many of the zooms will give good "macro" photos of flowers and bugs. Look at the reproduction ratio of the lenses you are looking at. A true macro giving a 1x magnification might be more than you need when getting started. I have a bunch of lenses, but still haven't gotten a true macro yet. You could also look for a used or vintage macro as you don't need fast AF.
The buy sell forum here is a good place to buy and sell used lenses....Show more →
Thanks for your input! Sounds like Tamron 28-200 will be my first lens then. Probably Sony 85mm for portrait still. I'll consider the wide angle or telephoto later.
p.1 #7 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Newenglandrocks wrote:
Welcome to the forum!
I have both the 28-200 and FE85 you are considering. The former is just great for travel. I love it paired with the Sony 20G, and in this pairing, the 20G only comes out very rarely, and mainly for indoor architecture shots. When the 28-200 isn't wide enough outside, I tend to do multi-shot panoramas with the 28-200 and stitch in post.
I don't do a lot of portraits, but enjoy the FE85 when I do. I brought it with me on my last trip and frankly I just did the majority of the family photos with the 28-200 around 60-80mm wide open. It was fine as I wanted some context in the background as opposed to totally blowing it out. I like the FE85 a lot for shooting in the mountains and frequently pack it in my snowboard pack. It is great in those situations because you can capture a lot of the scenery that catches your attention and backing up to add more to the frame is usually pretty easy.
I would hold off on buying a fast prime until you really know what focal length you prefer. You may already know that from shooting your P&S, but I personally would shoot for several months with the 28-200 and then see what focal length you seem to gravitate towards. Some of us are "35mm" folks and some are "50mm" folks and others are "telephoto folks". I think of that classification as just your strongest preference of course, since many of us own all of those types of lenses and shoot them all regularly.
For astro - and I assume you mean Milky Way astro and not deep space astro - the Sony 20G is great.
For birding - the Sony 200-600G is wonderful if you are an occasional birder and are on a budget that involves spending less than $10000 for your long telephoto. ...Show more →
Thanks a lot for the details on the lenses I was considering! Indeed I'll consider the 20G and 200-600G (still a bit expensive - I'll see how much I want more zoom) in the future. One more question though: If I would want to do portraits like the professionals in portrait studio, I assume the 85mm would be better than the 28-200mm, thus worth getting?
p.1 #8 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
beginner2023 wrote:
Thanks a lot for the details on the lenses I was considering! Indeed I'll consider the 20G and 200-600G (still a bit expensive - I'll see how much I want more zoom) in the future. One more question though: If I would want to do portraits like the professionals in portrait studio, I assume the 85mm would be better than the 28-200mm, thus worth getting?
The guy who does our headshots at work takes them with a 70-200 stopped down to f/5.6. This is typical for corporate work. If you want that narrow depth of field, though, the FE85 is a good way to go.
p.1 #9 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
To me 24-105/4 is a better walk around, travel lens, but 28-200 is convenient too, depending on one's shooting style. In European/Asian cities something wider is needed, maybe 16-35 or 17-28. The new 20-70/4 seems good for city but you might want another lens to cover 70+ range (70-180?).
Tamron 20-40/2.8 is probably a great everyday lens. I don't have it but I'm a big fan of 40mm (I have 40/1.2)
Portrait: You can consider Sigma 85/1.4 Art too (DG DN, not the older, bigger design)
telephoto for birds and astro photos
100-400 (maybe with 1.4x tc) or 200-600. 100-400 is more portable, which is important for air travel (which might not be a consideration for everyone)
Astro photos.... for milky way maybe Sigma 20/1.4. Personally I used Laowa 15/2. Manual focus lens, or lens with mechanical manual focus function are preferred. I hate focus-by-wire lens in this situation.
If you really mean telephoto for astro.... you probably need to google for equatorial mount too. (I have an Astrotrac... hopefully I will use it more in the future). For lens, something like 135/1.8 or 200/2.8 is good for beginner like me
Macro: I have never heard of optically poor macro lens (real specialized macro lens, not just a crappy zoom with a Macro function).
For insects I think manual focus is better, I'm not sure animal eye AF works with butterfly or ants... Back in my university days I have photographed fast moving ants, small spiders (with 60mm macro and films camera) for a project and I think flash light is just really really important (not just about noise/hi-iso, freezing movement but also things like darken the background etc). Focus is done by moving the camera back and forth (i was actually crouching on the floor tracing ants). I'm quite sure the Sigma 70mm is good, but if you want to go cheap you can buy used SLR mount macro lens and the quality are still amazing.
p.1 #10 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Welcome to the forum! This is a great place with a LOT of knowledgeable members.
You will get many opinions and they will all differ.
I’m not sure I agree with your idea of starting inexpensive and then upgrading as you get better. I’ve bought and sold several dozen lenses over the last 40 years and I wish I would have purchased quality to begin with. You say you don’t like selling on eBay? Well, from my experience that’s just where you’ll be if you start with lenses that won’t grow with you.
My suggestion is to start with ONE really good lens that covers most of what you want to shoot. That lens would be a good 24-70/2.8. Either the Sigma dg dn for $750-800 used or the expensive Sony 24-70/2.8GM II for $1900 used. The Sigma is fantastic for its price and blows the Tamron 28-200 out of the water in every category except focal length. I’ve owned both and the Sigma images had a sparkle that the Tamron never achieves at any focal length. The Tamron is a decent to good lens, the 24-70/2.8 lenses are truly excellent - and f2.8 at all focal lengths. A 24-70/2.8 gives you landscapes, portraits, architecture, concerts, events, reportage, etc. All at high quality. The Tamron 28-200 gives you a lot of focal length flexibility, but goes to f5.6 maximum aperture pretty fast. Shooting at f5.6 gets old really fast. At least for me. 🙂
That’s where I’d spend my money starting out. Then once you figure out your favorite focal lengths, get a fast GM prime or two - the 35GM and 50GM’s are incredible (and Sony just came out with a new 50/1.4GM that is much less than the f1.2 version).
p.1 #11 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Newenglandrocks wrote:
The guy who does our headshots at work takes them with a 70-200 stopped down to f/5.6. This is typical for corporate work. If you want that narrow depth of field, though, the FE85 is a good way to go.
I see, thanks! I'll hold off on the 85mm, only getting the 28-200mm for now. Might put in a low offer for the 20G on greentoe just in case I get it. The photos on Amazon reviews for that lens were just amazing, compared to other lenses - wonder if only pros were doing reviews for that lens
p.1 #12 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
ytwong wrote:
To me 24-105/4 is a better walk around, travel lens, but 28-200 is convenient too, depending on one's shooting style. In European/Asian cities something wider is needed, maybe 16-35 or 17-28. The new 20-70/4 seems good for city but you might want another lens to cover 70+ range (70-180?).
Tamron 20-40/2.8 is probably a great everyday lens. I don't have it but I'm a big fan of 40mm (I have 40/1.2)
Portrait: You can consider Sigma 85/1.4 Art too (DG DN, not the older, bigger design)
telephoto for birds and astro photos
100-400 (maybe with 1.4x tc) or 200-600. 100-400 is more portable, which is important for air travel (which might not be a consideration for everyone)
Astro photos.... for milky way maybe Sigma 20/1.4. Personally I used Laowa 15/2. Manual focus lens, or lens with mechanical manual focus function are preferred. I hate focus-by-wire lens in this situation.
If you really mean telephoto for astro.... you probably need to google for equatorial mount too. (I have an Astrotrac... hopefully I will use it more in the future). For lens, something like 135/1.8 or 200/2.8 is good for beginner like me
Macro: I have never heard of optically poor macro lens (real specialized macro lens, not just a crappy zoom with a Macro function).
For insects I think manual focus is better, I'm not sure animal eye AF works with butterfly or ants... Back in my university days I have photographed fast moving ants, small spiders (with 60mm macro and films camera) for a project and I think flash light is just really really important (not just about noise/hi-iso, freezing movement but also things like darken the background etc). Focus is done by moving the camera back and forth (i was actually crouching on the floor tracing ants). I'm quite sure the Sigma 70mm is good, but if you want to go cheap you can buy used SLR mount macro lens and the quality are still amazing.
Thanks, that's a lot of info that will take a while for me to process! I'll definitely look to get a wide angle lens, wondering do I do 20G or the Tamron 17-28mm, seems more people lean to the latter but those 20G photos are just too good!
p.1 #13 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
mudlake wrote:
Welcome to the forum! This is a great place with a LOT of knowledgeable members.
You will get many opinions and they will all differ.
I’m not sure I agree with your idea of starting inexpensive and then upgrading as you get better. I’ve bought and sold several dozen lenses over the last 40 years and I wish I would have purchased quality to begin with. You say you don’t like selling on eBay? Well, from my experience that’s just where you’ll be if you start with lenses that won’t grow with you.
My suggestion is to start with ONE really good lens that covers most of what you want to shoot. That lens would be a good 24-70/2.8. Either the Sigma dg dn for $750-800 used or the expensive Sony 24-70/2.8GM II for $1900 used. The Sigma is fantastic for its price and blows the Tamron 28-200 out of the water in every category except focal length. I’ve owned both and the Sigma images had a sparkle that the Tamron never achieves at any focal length. The Tamron is a decent to good lens, the 24-70/2.8 lenses are truly excellent - and f2.8 at all focal lengths. A 24-70/2.8 gives you landscapes, portraits, architecture, concerts, events, reportage, etc. All at high quality. The Tamron 28-200 gives you a lot of focal length flexibility, but goes to f5.6 maximum aperture pretty fast. Shooting at f5.6 gets old really fast. At least for me. 🙂
That’s where I’d spend my money starting out. Then once you figure out your favorite focal lengths, get a fast GM prime or two - the 35GM and 50GM’s are incredible (and Sony just came out with a new 50/1.4GM that is much less than the f1.2 version). ...Show more →
Starting with quality does make sense too - just that I worry about getting an expensive lens that I don't like. Getting a feel with a cheaper all-arounder could help me focus on the lens with features that I would like to upgrade for.
So you think Sigma 24-70 is clearly better than Tamron 28-75mm too? I saw reviews on both and probably lean slightly towards Sigma as edging out Tamron in performance but it's more expensive and heavier. Or maybe you're specifically talking about the Sigma 24-70 vs Tamron 28-200mm which is probably not a fair comparison due to the big price difference and focal lengths?
p.1 #14 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
beginner2023 wrote:
Starting with quality does make sense too - just that I worry about getting an expensive lens that I don't like. Getting a feel with a cheaper all-arounder could help me focus on the lens with features that I would like to upgrade for.
So you think Sigma 24-70 is clearly better than Tamron 28-75mm too? I saw reviews on both and probably lean slightly towards Sigma as edging out Tamron in performance but it's more expensive and heavier. Or maybe you're specifically talking about the Sigma 24-70 vs Tamron 28-200mm which is probably not a fair comparison due to the big price difference and focal lengths?
My comparison was with the 28-200. The Tamron 28-75 is a terrific lens by all accounts (I’ve never owned it) and on par with the Sigma 24-70/2.8. It’s one flaw is that it starts at 28mm. 24mm is substantially wider than 28mm which is why a 24-70 can be a one lens solution for 90% of the subjects you want to shoot.
The 28-200 can certainly do a lot of things. But if I were to have one lens to start, it would not be a variable aperture lens. I shot a lot of pics with the 28-200 while I owned it and while I got some good images, the 24-70/2.8 lenses are discernibly better. I have the Sony 24-70GM II now and it’s top notch. The Sigma was 90% as good (which is very good) but was heavier.
p.1 #15 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
mudlake wrote:
My comparison was with the 28-200. The Tamron 28-75 is a terrific lens by all accounts (I’ve never owned it) and on par with the Sigma 24-70/2.8. It’s one flaw is that it starts at 28mm. 24mm is substantially wider than 28mm which is why a 24-70 can be a one lens solution for 90% of the subjects you want to shoot.
The 28-200 can certainly do a lot of things. But if I were to have one lens to start, it would not be a variable aperture lens. I shot a lot of pics with the 28-200 while I owned it and while I got some good images, the 24-70/2.8 lenses are discernibly better. I have the Sony 24-70GM II now and it’s top notch. The Sigma was 90% as good (which is very good) but was heavier.
Thanks again for sharing your experience! Unfortunately I already had my offer accepted on Greentoe for the Tamron 28-200 before I saw your suggestions. I'll give it some thought whether it's still worth it to buy the Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 24-70, after I get to use the Tamron. Maybe I could just buy a good wide angle and a couple primes instead - if I find myself mostly using those focal lengths.
p.1 #16 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
I had the Tamron 28-200 (sold it when I got the hefty but excellent Tamron 35-150 a lens that really covers it all except for the wide end) and it is indeed a great lens for outdoor use but indoors is pretty limited except at 28mm. I would also get the 50/1.8 at the same time so you have more flexibility
p.1 #19 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
Someone else has already suggested picking up a 50 f/1.8 to go with your 28-200, and I would definitely recommend doing that if you can. The 28-200 will let you try out a wide range of focal lengths, and a 50 f/1.8 would let you experience what a much wider aperture can do (as well as being easy to take with you as an extra lens in your bag). I reckon that would be a good place to start.
p.1 #20 · Total beginner, just bought A7 IV, can you recommend lens combination?
mudlake wrote:
My comparison was with the 28-200. The Tamron 28-75 is a terrific lens by all accounts (I’ve never owned it) and on par with the Sigma 24-70/2.8. It’s one flaw is that it starts at 28mm. 24mm is substantially wider than 28mm which is why a 24-70 can be a one lens solution for 90% of the subjects you want to shoot.
The 28-200 can certainly do a lot of things. But if I were to have one lens to start, it would not be a variable aperture lens. I shot a lot of pics with the 28-200 while I owned it and while I got some good images, the 24-70/2.8 lenses are discernibly better. I have the Sony 24-70GM II now and it’s top notch. The Sigma was 90% as good (which is very good) but was heavier.
My view differs (as predicted by @mudlake), since TRAVEL is one of your key use cases. My first kit when I went to Sony included the G1 Tamron 28-75 and the Sony 70-300. I would have preferred the 70-200GM v1 at the time, but it was too big and exceeded my starting budget.
I first replaced the 28-75G1 with the Sigma 24-70 DG DN and loved the improvement in the wider FOV and especially the rendering. I did not like the weight / size, but was happy to make that compromise.
Then I added the 28-200. What a revelation for travel. I come back with so many photos at the long end that I can't take with the Sigma. I also usually pack the 20G for interior shots. To complete the kit, I often add in a single 1.4 prime - the 35GM is my favorite but I like the 24GM a lot. I feel the rendering of those two lenses is far better than the Sigma and I love shooting primes, so the Sigma stays at home. A lot. I've spent three and a half weeks this year in Europe traveling, and I'm out visiting Utah for the remainder of the winter, and I haven't missed the Sigma.
And I purchased the 70-200GMii to replace the 70-300G at the same time I bought the Tamron. At the long end at the same aperture mounted on a tripod, the Tamron is pretty darn close on a low MP body. Shocking! In real life, when shooting ultimate frisbee, the Tamron stays at home. I also chose to take the Sony over the Tamron last fall when shooting foliage in Vermont. I was going to be doing a lot of handheld shooting at dawn and dusk, so the Sony was the obvious choice. But in most situations where I am shooting up to 200mm, I'll reach for the Tamron.
Anyway, good luck in your decision. I think this is more of a sequencing issue than either / or. The 28-200 is a fantastic lens, but you'll probably want to own an f/2.8 standard zoom at some point. I haven't sold the Sigma for this reason. On that note - here's a shot I took with the Sigma a few years ago while traveling in Maine. You couldn't take this shot with the Tamron, BTW. (Sorry to make your decision harder)
