SAR says the rumored 24-70 f/2 will actually be a 28-70 to keep size down. I know that extra wide end matters to a lot of shooters, but I’m thinking if they can indeed keep the size well below Canon’s equivalent, it may be an ok trade off. I’ve been doing a lot of dog portraits, and I’d love to have a fast zoom like this for shallow depth of field and flexibility to capture fleeting poses and expressions. For people portraits, I’m fine with primes. This would be a niche use for me, and honestly, I won’t be able to afford this until it hopefully becomes available used.
Will event shooters be turning this down due to the narrower wide end?
I owned the Canon 28-70 f/2. Phenomenal piece of glass for weddings/events, and also nice when I was running 30min portrait sessions. If/when I needed to go wide, most event shooters will have a wide prime or a 16-35mm type lens. I can absolutely see how the flexibility would serve well with dog portraits. That range and f/2 can do just about everything a traditional 24-70 can do, and more.
The huge downside was the size, no pun intended. An 8 or 12hr event day with that lens hanging off the end of the camera does become exhausting. It was also just a tad too big to truly function as a walk-around lens, no matter how hard I tried.
I'm curious how compared to Sigma 28-45. It's an outstanding prime performance zoom llens, not just prime but almost GM prime quality with high resolution, low CA. If they manage to keep up with Sigma's IQ at same size it's perhaps a win. Perhaps because the massive price difference.
The release with A1 suggests it's a high resolution lens (50MP), but not as high as Sigma (60MP) but as native lens it has AF and fps speed advantage.
I’m really hoping Sony makes a 24-70/2, but maybe physics dictates a 28-70. Sony has pulled a lot of magic the past few years with size and weight, so I’m still crossing my fingers for 24mm on the wide end.
Thinking of one lens that could pull off a 24/2, 28/2, 35/2, 43/2 (Leica Q3 43), 50/2, and 70/2 with the option to get to 105/2.8 in crop mode gets me excited. Keep the weight around 950g and I’ll definitely purchase.
Lukacs wrote:
I'm curious how compared to Sigma 28-45. It's an outstanding prime performance zoom llens, not just prime but almost GM prime quality with high resolution, low CA. If they manage to keep up with Sigma's IQ at same size it's perhaps a win. Perhaps because the massive price difference.
The release with A1 suggests it's a high resolution lens (50MP), but not as high as Sigma (60MP) but as native lens it has AF and fps speed advantage.
Yeah , I’m thinking about picking up the Sigma, as it’s relatively affordable, to tide me over til maybe I can afford this 28-70. At the projected price, it had better be spectacular.
Just checked on the Canon; and it’s almost 1.5kg! Yeah I’d be drooling over this Sony if it’s under 1000g, even at 28-70mm.
mudlake wrote:
I’m really hoping Sony makes a 24-70/2, but maybe physics dictates a 28-70. Sony has pulled a lot of magic the past few years with size and weight, so I’m still crossing my fingers for 24mm on the wide end.
Thinking of one lens that could pull off a 24/2, 28/2, 35/2, 43/2 (Leica Q3 43), 50/2, and 70/2 with the option to get to 105/2.8 in crop mode gets me excited. Keep the weight around 950g and I’ll definitely purchase.
I’m sure whether it’s a 28-70/2 or a 24-70/2 it will be an impressive lens. That said I’m re-energized to break out my small set of Sigma I-series primes that are f/2 at 20mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 65mm. Now if they can give us 90/2 instead of the 90/2.8 that would complete the series.
Of course I jest but it will be interesting to see how big and heavy the f/2 zoom they come up will be.
Lukacs wrote:
I'm curious how compared to Sigma 28-45. It's an outstanding prime performance zoom llens, not just prime but almost GM prime quality with high resolution, low CA. If they manage to keep up with Sigma's IQ at same size it's perhaps a win. Perhaps because the massive price difference.
The release with A1 suggests it's a high resolution lens (50MP), but not as high as Sigma (60MP) but as native lens it has AF and fps speed advantage.
I agree that the Sigma is outstanding. If Sony are able to bring the 28-70 down to 900g that would make it even lighter than the Sigma and yet you impressively *gain* the 45-70mm focal range (of course at a cost to the max aperture and your wallet), which would be an instant win for the Sony. I think we can safely assume that IQ wise, Sony is not going to release anything other than top notch optics.
ryanli wrote:
I agree that the Sigma is outstanding. If Sony is able to bring the 28-70 down to 900g that would make it even lighter than the Sigma and yet you impressively *gain* the 45-70mm focal range (of course at a cost to the max aperture and your wallet), which would be an instant win for the Sony. I think we can safely assume that IQ wise, Sony is not going to release anything other than top notch optics.
I find the 28-45 to be phenomenal, and prevailing thought by many is that having a smaller zoom range helped make that happen. If Sony can pull off a lens of similar optical quality with a range of 28-70 (albeit a hair slower), it truly will be amazing. The Sigma is nearly APO and doesn't have a huge amount of optical distortion. Will be interesting to see if Sony can match, or even better that.
In any case, I hope it turns out to be a killer lens.
28mm at the wide end and a price expected to be around $3K make it a non-starter for me, but it sounds like it'll be a phenomenal piece of glass for those who need the speed. I'll just have to make do with ye olde f2.8
From SAR...
86mm filter size (Canon is 95mm and Sony 2470GMII is 82mm)
Weight is around 900g (Canon is 1430g and 2470GMII is 695g)
IQ and AF performance superior to the Canon
Price around $3000 (to be confirmed)
To me (and I know this is a very personal opinion ) this lens really looses a lot of its attractiveness due to that missing 24mm on the wide end...
If it truly was 24-70/2 I'd consider buying it even at $3000 (as I believe 24mm gives you that different look compared to standard range, so it's useful to have it in a standard zoom), but as it stands, I just don't see it worth the extra $$$ over 28-45/1.8 or 35-150/2-2.8 ...
) this lens really looses a lot of its attractiveness due to that missing 24mm on the wide end...