p.3 #1 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
So why do we need this? It is a limited range lens in 2.8, but does the increased bokeh and extra light gathering capability justify the range limit and the price, which seems high to me.
No one has mentioned the Tamron 17-50 f4 as a great option for travel. Yes, it is a tad longer, but it doesn't weigh much and internally zooms and is relatively inexpensive and the extra zoom range on the wide end is great . Gosh there are lots of options now.
p.3 #2 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
I've read, and responded to a FB post by SAR by those that "wish it were f2". "Why couldn't they make it 20-50 f2.8". The list goes on and on from the naysayers.
Listen. There is a lens for everyone out there. And there are lenses out there that are not for everyone. The main thing here is we have choices. This would be a nice travel lens imho.
p.3 #3 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
Well as an old A7R guy that got it day one , I do laugh at the whining as we really had almost nothing when it came to lenses on that release to mirrorless. I ignore these comments F2 or F2.8 really does not matter much in zooms . Bokeh always sucked with zooms at least for the most part and digital has expanded our ISO levels so high now it is comical we were pretty much ISO 400 limited in color at least. Us old dogs have struggled for years with limitations and effective speed in our systems. I always ran into speed issues and such. Today is a fresh breath of air. Im glad I lived in those times as I do now. Photography for me has been a lifetime and it's nice to see the industry grow and watch it get to these levels. I ignore all that crap as it does not enrich our lives at all
p.3 #4 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
Indeed it is great to have more choice but for me I found the Tamron 35-150 a really innovative lens with it's f2 at 35mm aperture and a 28-50 f2 zoom would be my ideal lens. Yesterday I shot a whole event (funeral for a well known professor and wanted a more intimate feel) with the A1 and Batis 25 all at f2 switching from FF to apsc crop as needed and was really happy with the results
p.3 #5 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
GMPhotography wrote:
Well as an old A7R guy that got it day one , I do laugh at the whining as we really had almost nothing when it came to lenses on that release to mirrorless. I ignore these comments F2 or F2.8 really does not matter much in zooms . Bokeh always sucked with zooms at least for the most part and digital has expanded our ISO levels so high now it is comical we were pretty much ISO 400 limited in color at least. Us old dogs have struggled for years with limitations and effective speed in our systems. I always ran into speed issues and such. Today is a fresh breath of air. Im glad I lived in those times as I do now. Photography for me has been a lifetime and it's nice to see the industry grow and watch it get to these levels. I ignore all that crap as it does not enrich our lives at all...Show more →
Yes, once upon a time when you wanted to shoot in dim light, you might push Tri-X to 800 and get a fast 50mm 1.4 or even 1.2 lens and shoot at 1/30th second. But that was pretty much it. Today you can shoot at 3200 or 6400 while hand-holding a stabilized camera at 1/5th second and get a very fine quality image.
p.3 #6 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
chiron wrote:
Yes, once upon a time when you wanted to shoot in dim light, you might push Tri-X to 800 and get a fast 50mm 1.4 or even 1.2 lens and shoot at 1/30th second. But that was pretty much it. Today you can shoot at 3200 or 6400 while hand-holding a stabilized camera at 1/5th second and get a very fine quality image.
Indeed but you can't shoot an event at 1/5th of a second. If I'm shooting an event and the people are moving a fair bit I want to keep shutter speed as high as I can with 1/125 or even 1/250 being ideal. I actually ceiling my iso at 12800 as I don't mind a bit of 'grain' in an image and never use flash. In many ways this new lens would be ideal being small, light and high IQ but I could just see myself reaching for the even slightly faster primes.
Anyway you never knows as Hugh's review nearly convinces me!
p.3 #7 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
I put in a pre order and will in all likelihood get this lens rather than cancel it. For most people the 20-70 makes more sense than this lens but for me shooting in a lot of low light and replacing my sigma 24-70 I think I'm going to like this lens a lot. I can also take it on a backpacking trip which was never going to happen with the Sigma.
p.3 #8 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
Viramati wrote:
Indeed but you can't shoot an event at 1/5th of a second. If I'm shooting an event and the people are moving a fair bit I want to keep shutter speed as high as I can with 1/125 or even 1/250 being ideal. I actually ceiling my iso at 12800 as I don't mind a bit of 'grain' in an image and never use flash. In many ways this new lens would be ideal being small, light and high IQ but I could just see myself reaching for the even slightly faster primes.
Anyway you never know
Yes, if someone is actually moving then 1/5 sec is too slow. If they are actually moving, then you really need 1/125 or faster, which puts you in a very different shooting situation as far as lighting goes. But at events and even with young children, I have always been able to find abundant good moments when there is a pause in movement that permits even 1/5 second. It is a question of timing. Everyone is still sometimes or often.
p.3 #9 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
grahamgibson wrote:
For some reason I really like this lens, but I think for most uses I would rather have my 35GM. The high-res sensors really make primes more appealing to me when a ~2x crop is no problem. I could see this as a nice event lens when paired with an 85/1.4 though.
Yes, that makes sense. If you bring that 85mm f/1.4 anyway it's easy to sacrifice 51-70mm, and gain some weight savings for the walk around range.
grahamgibson wrote:
We certainly have a lot of standard zoom flavors to choose from now though.
It's almost too hard to make a choice.
I like 28-60mm + Tamron 35-150mm + 85mm f/1.4 DN. The Tamron is heavy, but it does a bit of a 70-200mm f/2.8, a bit of a 35mm prime, it also does 50mm @ f/2.2, while at the same time you don't have the weight on your camera as long as there's enough light to shoot the 28-60mm stopped down around f/7.1. That's huge. The DN is two stops brighter than the Tamron, and it's not that heavy, so worth it as well.
p.3 #10 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
chiron wrote:
Yes, if someone is actually moving then 1/5 sec is too slow. If they are actually moving, then you really need 1/125 or faster, which puts you in a very different shooting situation as far as lighting goes. But at events and even with young children, I have always been able to find abundant good moments when there is a pause in movement that permits even 1/5 second. It is a question of timing. Everyone is still sometimes or often. True though much of my shooting style is catching people interacting in conversations etc where the action doesn't stop. Anyway I may actually be tempted to try this lens out
p.3 #11 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
brettgoulder wrote:
It's not really talked about anywhere, but this lens has two "specifically optimized" Linear Motors, not the XD Linear motors. That said, I haven't ever seen AF side-by-side between the two types of linear motors. They do say this is compatible for the A9 III at 120fps, so I'm a bit confused. Does "specifically optimized" mean better than XD or worse?
https://www.sony.com/en-tn/electronics/alpha-lens-technology
The XD (extreme dynamic) Linear Motor has been developed to deliver higher thrust and efficiency than previous types in order to make the most of the rapidly evolving speed performance of current and future camera bodies. Linear motor design and component layout have been thoroughly revised to achieve significantly higher thrust.
Basically XD just means moving more massive focusing groups. So XD is not applicable for relatively small lenses unless Sony wants to water down the term to be mostly meaningless--which they might do eventually. It seems like some of their press communication for the compact G primes mentioned XD motors, since several reviews mentioned the term, but I haven't found it listed on any Sony public documents for those lenses.
p.3 #12 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
So back to focal lengths. I rarely go to 70 with like a 24-70 anyway and than usually jump to 85/135when I’m doing events. So having a 24-50 2.8 is actually a nice option for doing event work. I still need wider like even a 16 but most event type stuff falls into this focal length anyway.
p.3 #13 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
In my opinion event shooting with constantly moving subjects is not a place to use a camera with stabilization at 1/5 of a second. Let’s be real, one slower lens does not replace one faster lens even if it’s cheaper or can cover a wider range of field of view. There are so many different lenses because there are so many different shooting situations. Each of us has has different needs and this new lens will fill the needs of size/weight. , field of view, and cost for some but not for all. If you like it share why, if not share why as well but don’t criticize why someone wants the lens. Some will choose primes, some will choose the new 24-50/2.8, some will choose the 20-70/4, some will choose the bigger 24-70/2.8, or a even bigger 35-150/2-2.8, and if your in Canon the new 24-105/2.8. Pick your lens, learn how to use it properly and enjoy.
p.3 #16 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
PaulMoorePhoto wrote:
Sony has clearly taken notice of the requests for smaller/lighter gear.
Except in the telephoto range... the new 300mm f2.8 GM looks great for sports or zoo photography, but where are Sony's answers to the Nikon 400mm f4.5/600mm f6.3/800mm f6.3 lenses?
p.3 #17 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
Nice little lens, I just wish it were internally zooming. Or at least not awkwardly inverted (zoom out to 24mm).
I might pick one up in a year or so. At the current price, it is simply not very attractive. The 20-40mm Tamron is half the price, and even the Sony 20-70mm is significantly cheaper over here.
p.3 #19 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
molson wrote:
Except in the telephoto range... the new 300mm f2.8 GM looks great for sports or zoo photography, but where are Sony's answers to the Nikon 400mm f4.5/600mm f6.3/800mm f6.3 lenses?
Yes, I agree. Obviously they have to prioritize and they cannot do everything at once. I suspect we will see more compact telephotos in the future. They already did a good job with the mark 2 versions of both 70-200 lenses. I’m sure these sell more than tele primes. I’d like to see an updated and smaller version of the 70-300 also.
p.3 #20 · Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens Sony E $1098
keepcoding wrote:
Nice little lens, I just wish it were internally zooming. Or at least not awkwardly inverted (zoom out to 24mm).
I might pick one up in a year or so. At the current price, it is simply not very attractive. The 20-40mm Tamron is half the price, and even the Sony 20-70mm is significantly cheaper over here.
Internally zooming lenses in that range are nonexistent.
, it all seriousness the difference between 24 and 50 spans a difference in focal length uses where as the 50-70 doesn't but I like the math.