Zooms are rarely tip top at all focal lengths - probably too much to ask, but no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, it is their practicality that is their strength and other viewers will almost be guaranteed not to notice any slight optical failings.
Zooms are harder to design and are imperfect. But I never had any issue like that with the Sigma 24-70 DG DN , Tamron 28-75 G2, or 70-200 GM II. It’s the first time I have to return a lens , and twice.
After some more testing and comparisons with the Tamron 28-75 G2 (used by my wife), I decided to return the 24-70 GMII. Optically they are overall extremely close. I couldn't find one picture at any focal/aperture where the Sony was clearly better. But the tilt issue at 60-70mm + sharpness dip at 24mm, at >$2k, was hard to swallow.
About the original post "A7RV with 35/85 1.4 vs 24-70 gm ii" -> my preference is a prime combo. I own the 70-200 GMII. I'm considering now a 24mm f/2 or f/1.4 (+ maybe the new Viltrox 16mm f/1.8). And the 50 f/1.4 GM or Sigma 65mm f/2.
Hi all - sorry to pull up an old thread but I came across this when searching for more info on decentred Sony 24-70 GM2s. I'm based in the UK and the first copy had poor tilt / centering exactly as described on this thread; at the long end (between 50mm and 70mm) on the right hand side. I returned it and got a second copy which had exactly the same problem, but slightly worse. It was obvious at 50% viewing and given that I do landscapes it would be have been obvious to my eye on print.
I'm a bit spooked by this so I've returned the second copy and asked for a refund - did anyone manage to get a good copy on first purchase? I understand that perfect centering is rare, but my Sony 16-35 f/4 PZ, Sony 24-105 f/4 G and Tamron 70-300mm have all been almost perfect in test. If 'cheap' zooms can manage it, there's something amiss with the QC of the GMs.
I'm also curious to know if Sony has fixed the issue on the recent batches, or if the tilt issue is just going to be the signature of this lens.
Teluride92, do you know if the copies you tried were recently built ? sometimes there is a date next to the bar code on the sticker /box.
Unfortunately I didn't take a note of the date or serial numbers which i should have done in hindsight. What I would say though is that the GM2 is probably not a big seller here in the UK given the high prices of UK goods compared to the US (typically speaking), and that I would expect these to be early batches as I doubt suppliers would have sold all their stock.
What I can confirm though is that those of you in the US are not alone with poor copies!
I'd never give up fast prime lens. For me 1.4 is more versatile at 35mm than a 2.8 zoom lens, but it's just me.
In this case go for 24-70 or 20-70 and keep 35 1.4GM. If you shoot lot of portraits then keep booth 35 and 85 or trade them for 50 1.4GM as one fast prime.
I prefer primes which I discovered by renting. Shooting, testing alternatives. Rent some lenses and see for yourself. Maybe you need a 24/1.4 GM on the wide end and a 50-55 on the long end? Experiment and see
I currently have the 50/1.4 GM. I had before the 23/1.4 GM , and before that the 35/1.4 GM + Sigma 85 1.4 DG DN. I enjoy shooting with primes sometimes, but prefer the flexibility of a zoom in general. I don't really like switching lenses and don't use the 1.4 aperture that often (but like to have one prime for when I want to )
Reread the posts in this thread and surprised I hadn’t responded earlier. I’m a user of both primes and zooms. I don’t often use this saying but clearly different horses for different courses. While I have the holy f/2.8 GM II zooms at 16-35, 24-70, 70-200, and for longer focal lengths like 100-400 GM and 200-600 G. The 16-200 focal length I use mostly for event work with people and the 100-600 with a TC to supplement wildlife and birds in flight. My primes are used from 14 - 135 for a variety of things like astro, landscapes, architecture, macro, street work, and portraits. To me the two lens types complement each other and it’s not a simple either or, it’s both. Will often take out a zoom in a range with a prime or two. Sometimes their focal lengths cover different ranges but may often overlap where the prime can offer a wider aperture for night shooting or for portraits that offer shallow depth of field.
Right now the only “specialized” zooms I have is a 12-24/4 that I only use for landscapes and a 24-105/4 for casual walking around but admit it feels heavier now that I’m using Compact “C” bodies for travel. Might look at the new 20-70/4 as a casual lens but admit also very interested in light and small slower f/2 primes like those from Sigma for the C bodies instead of taking heavier and larger f/1.4 an f/1.2 primes.
The two focal lengths I wish Sony would bring out are 28mm and 40mm at f/1.8 or f/2 but would buy f/1.4 in a heartbeat if they were announced. Would be interested to see if Sigma adds these to ther I-Series as well.
When I was a working photographer, particularly shooting concerts and BTS EPKs, I found fast zooms to be essential. Now, I find them to be boring. I never use my 24-70, I have a V1 70-200 F4 which I will use for some landscape work when I'm traveling but it's still not a big draw for me. When I'm shooting for myself, having to cover many focal lengths is not important, I simply need a lens that matches how I see.
Update: I went with a Sony 20-70mm f.4 G over the 24-70mm f2.8 GM2 and I can tell you this; I already prefer the results I'm getting with the 20-70mm, it's bitingly sharp right from f4 (20mm has a bit of softness and needs stopped down for best results) and actually better at 50mm and 70mm than the GM2 is, particularly in the corners. It will definitely replace my 24-105mm. Really impressed with how good the 20-70mm is. One of the major upgrades over the 24-105 is the overall rendering - the 20-70mm is far more neutral than the 24-105 which has a cool, blueish tint to it. LoCA and fringing is also non-existent on the 20-70mm. A worthy upgrade!
