I too have been following the various threads on a travel camera, and I'm planning a Sony purchase. My current travel setup is a Canon 5Div, 16-35 F4, 40 F2.8, and a Nikkor 105 F2.5 AIS. The camera is big, but the real problem is to fit camera gear and everything else into a single backpack (for flights, trains, etc).
When I hear people loving the zooms, I'm cautious. I don't like the (Canon) 24-104 F4 v1 (kind of hate it really) even though it's a great range. Many people really like this lens. I like the 16-35 F4 optics but don't use the 16-21 range much.
So, the 20-70 sounds like a perfect range and people like it. I'm just curious if anyone can compare it to the above zooms. If it's just "ok" (like the 24-105) I think I'd probably lean towards primes
Sony 20 F1.8 (373g)
Sigma 35 F2 (325g)
Sony 85 1.8 (371g) or Sigma 65 F2(405g)
I like everything about the 24-50 except that it extends at 24mm. Another option. Thanks.
If changing lenses is ok for you, then 24-50 G should be fine when having 20 G in the wide end and 85mm as the longer lens. In this context 20-70 G is halfway towards one lens solution.
Personally I have (and like) 20 G, but when doing travel or street type of photography, I never need anything that wide. 24mm is fine, and 20mm is better left for carefully shot landscapes etc.
Sony 85/1.8 on the other hand is a stellar lens. A real sleeper in Sony lens line up.
jay w wrote:
I too have been following the various threads on a travel camera, and I'm planning a Sony purchase. My current travel setup is a Canon 5Div, 16-35 F4, 40 F2.8, and a Nikkor 105 F2.5 AIS. The camera is big, but the real problem is to fit camera gear and everything else into a single backpack (for flights, trains, etc).
When I hear people loving the zooms, I'm cautious. I don't like the (Canon) 24-104 F4 v1 (kind of hate it really) even though it's a great range. Many people really like this lens. I like the 16-35 F4 optics but don't use the 16-21 range much.
So, the 20-70 sounds like a perfect range and people like it. I'm just curious if anyone can compare it to the above zooms. If it's just "ok" (like the 24-105) I think I'd probably lean towards primes
Sony 20 F1.8 (373g)
Sigma 35 F2 (325g)
Sony 85 1.8 (371g) or Sigma 65 F2(405g)
I like everything about the 24-50 except that it extends at 24mm. Another option. Thanks....Show more →
I just tried out my 20-70… now while it took evaluating 5 copies at three retailers to get what I would call a well centered copy that had all four edges consistent, its edge to edge sharpness at 20mm wide open is actually better than my CV 21 Color-Skopar at f/4. I guess lens performance continues to just get better and better. This lens is amazing for its price. And while I thought I might miss the subject isolation of faster primes, f/4 at 70 with a close subject like a flower or person, provides plenty of background blur. This is going to be a great travel companion.
Craig Gillette wrote:
I looked some at the 16-70/4 over the years but never went for one. I find the 18-135 or 28-200 do well for me. If I were spending a lot of time in more dense or old urban settings, I might add a wide to mid-range zoom to reduce lens swaps some.
I'm going to go out of my comfort zone this weekend and use just a 24/1.8 on my A6700 (but my ff kit is going, too, just in case).
Well, I did it. Can't say I was always fine with it. Need to download and look at them. It was certainly light and handy, though. Kind of takes me back to the "good old days" (?) where many folks only had a single lens camera of some sort. My dad was quite happy when he moved from a rudimentary Kodak roll film camera to an Instamatic 126 with square images (Kodachrome of some sort).
