foto16 wrote:
I think it's fantastic. If I were doing portrait seriously I would get it immediately. With due respect, it's unrealistic to expect 24mm for this weight. Even 28mm is already magic from Sony.
It’s going to be too expensive for me, but otherwise is of great interest. I’m transitioning from shooting mainly landscapes (I use film for that now) to doing animal/pet/people portraits, so I don’t have a ton invested in lenses for the latter use. I’ve been using f/1.8 primes for this, but for the animal stuff it would be super useful to have all those focal lengths available and lose only 1/3rd stop. Plus, my normal zoom is a Tamron 28-75, so I likely wouldn’t feel as limited by this Sony as some others. I was thinking about buying the 35-150, or a nice 50 f/1.4, then thinking about the Sigma 28-45….but this would be a really tempting alternative.
I don’t know, maybe I could save a bit on Greentoe, or wait for a used copy - how long do you guys think it would before I could get a Greentoe discount? I’m thinking going grey market for such an expensive lens, that I’d be using for paid gigs, would be too risky.
Jimi3 wrote:
It’s going to be too expensive for me, but otherwise is of great interest. I’m transitioning from shooting mainly landscapes (I use film for that now) to doing animal/pet/people portraits, so I don’t have a ton invested in lenses for the latter use. I’ve been using f/1.8 primes for this, but for the animal stuff it would be super useful to have all those focal lengths available and lose only 1/3rd stop. Plus, my normal zoom is a Tamron 28-75, so I likely wouldn’t feel as limited by this Sony as some others. I was thinking about buying the 35-150, or a nice 50 f/1.4, then thinking about the Sigma 28-45….but this would be a really tempting alternative.
I don’t know, maybe I could save a bit on Greentoe, or wait for a used copy - how long do you guys think it would before I could get a Greentoe discount? I’m thinking going grey market for such an expensive lens, that I’d be using for paid gigs, would be too risky.
I think within a few months this lens will be available here on our forum by one of two specific sellers who offer discounts on brand new USA gear, for $2500-$2600 (assuming it releases at $3000 retail). For example, after a few months of the new 300/2.8 releasing these sellers have that $6k lens for $5200.
Thanks, I’ll keep an eye on the buy and sell. Hmmm…maybe I could unload some stuff and make it work. My Tammy 28-75 isn’t an expensive lens, but if the 28-70 f/2 is really only 900g, I’d have no use for the slower lens… Ross Martin wrote:
I think within a few months this lens will be available here on our forum by one of two specific sellers who offer discounts on brand new USA gear, for $2500-$2600 (assuming it releases at $3000 retail). For example, after a few months of the new 300/2.8 releasing these sellers have that $6k lens for $5200.
Surprisingly, this seems to be the first Sony zoom that looses some sharpness (due to spherical aberrations?) at MFD (at least I can't recall any other):
?t=497
Ross Martin wrote:
If my wife would give me the ok, I would acquire, assuming initial tests showed a beautiful look at f/2. The weight is less than the Nikon 24-70/2.8 I carried everywhere up until 2-3 years ago so have no concerns about that, and I own lighter lenses for when that is crucial.
In 2023 I followed my niece around DisneyWorld for her Make-A-Wish trip (brain cancer patient) and having a full stop faster aperture would have been put to good use for better bokeh and lower light capability. I love my 50/1.2 for making images of Abigail, but the 28-70mm range on a zoom is even better for me due to her energetic activity - one moment I’m in close quarters and need wide, and the next instant she has an adorable expression or has burst into a run and I need to isolate with short tele.
I’ve also considered the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 for such purposes. I’ll be fine with the 24-70/2.8 GMII next time, but I’d prefer the new f/2 lens if budget allowed. For me this would be a luxury item. Not a need, but a desire for a type of shooting I’m very passionate about.
Before I switched to Sony from Nikon I was also considering Canon, and the folks in that forum told me their 28-70/2 was very special with lots of magic. It will be interesting to see the look in people images from the new Sony....Show more →
Thank you for sharing your story and beautiful images of your niece, I pray for peace and more magical moments, God willing, for her and your family.
You make lots of good points about the positioning of the 28-70/2 GM - how it is in a similar weight bracket to the 28-70s and 24-70s of the SLR days and the fact that the Tamron 35-150 (and indeed its Samyang clone) was and still is an incredible feat of optical engineering and an enabler of magical photography.
The 28-70/2 GM and Tamron/Samyang 35-150 is a very relevant and interesting comparison because there is a shared use case: a normal to tele zoom lens that provides more flexibility than a fast prime (or a set of fast primes) whilst delivering equivalent (if not better) IQ and to the primes and better subject separation than a 2.8 zoom. The 35-150 is unique and incredibly useful in being not only the first full frame zoom that goes brighter than F/2.8 - more importantly it extends beyond a "normal zoom" range to cover medium-long telephoto in a single lens. Compared to the 28-70/2, it offers 70-150mm at F/2.8 thereby negating the need for carrying or a lens change to 70-200/2.8 for many photographers. OTOH, the 28-70/2 gives you the versatility in the wide end and gives you 2/3 more F-stops at 70mm - where the 35-150 is F/2.5 max - for indoor situations or group shots such at events, the 28mm will be much more useful but you'll still need to carry a telezoom (which may not even give you F/2.8 if you want to keep your weight down). Some would argue that if you wanted to go wider than 35mm, often 28mm isn't really wide enough either. IME the 35-150 is a fantastic lens for outdoor use - like you I frequently shoot fast moving kids - but indoors, not so hot.
Then there's the Sigma 28-45/1.8, which I own and admire but only in anticipation of the 28-70/2 GM (had been hoping it'd be a 24-70/2 in vain!). I genuinely believe it will be relegated to a "poor man's 28-70" given the Sony's longer range but incredibly also lighter weight. For practical purposes F/1.8 and F/2 make little difference, certainly less than the difference between 45mm and 70mm. And as exceptional the Sigma's IQ as, I have no reason to believe that the Sony will also be anything other than exceptional.
As soon as the Sony 28-70/2 hits the shelves, my order will be in and the Sigma going on sale shortly afterwards - but before that, looking forward to some three-way tests of the Sony, Sigma, and Samyang 35-150. The real challenge for me (aside from the hole in my wallet!) will be deciding whether to bring both the Sony AND Samyang to a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Japan next year, or compromise with a lighter, slower telezoom as the Sony will be a given.
I will be waiting to see how well this lens does with edge to edge sharpness and vignetting. But on paper, this is a very tempting lens for me. I am sure many photographers will be enjoying this lens.
The 86mm filter threads combined with the higher cost make it a pass for me right now, especially given how happy I am with the 28-45. The f/1.8 primes aren't the highest bar to clear to begin with, in terms of sharpness. I suspect the Sigma will resolve more in the corners at some FLs, especially at 28mm.
So I'm sure it will be very popular, and not taking anything away from it. It's a very useful range (even without 24mm). Just for my shooting I don't think it's worth the added cost. Not saying it doesn't make sense for others though.
It's a niche purchase just like the Canon lens. Looks very nice if you really think you need it. Great for pro wedding/event shooters, but a realistic assessment of the difference in real life shooting between f2 and f2.8 is needed.
ryanli wrote:
Thank you for sharing your story and beautiful images of your niece, I pray for peace and more magical moments, God willing, for her and your family.
You make lots of good points about the positioning of the 28-70/2 GM - how it is in a similar weight bracket to the 28-70s and 24-70s of the SLR days and the fact that the Tamron 35-150 (and indeed its Samyang clone) was and still is an incredible feat of optical engineering and an enabler of magical photography.
The 28-70/2 GM and Tamron/Samyang 35-150 is a very relevant and interesting comparison because there is a shared use case: a normal to tele zoom lens that provides more flexibility than a fast prime (or a set of fast primes) whilst delivering equivalent (if not better) IQ and to the primes and better subject separation than a 2.8 zoom. The 35-150 is unique and incredibly useful in being not only the first full frame zoom that goes brighter than F/2.8 - more importantly it extends beyond a "normal zoom" range to cover medium-long telephoto in a single lens. Compared to the 28-70/2, it offers 70-150mm at F/2.8 thereby negating the need for carrying or a lens change to 70-200/2.8 for many photographers. OTOH, the 28-70/2 gives you the versatility in the wide end and gives you 2/3 more F-stops at 70mm - where the 35-150 is F/2.5 max - for indoor situations or group shots such at events, the 28mm will be much more useful but you'll still need to carry a telezoom (which may not even give you F/2.8 if you want to keep your weight down). Some would argue that if you wanted to go wider than 35mm, often 28mm isn't really wide enough either. IME the 35-150 is a fantastic lens for outdoor use - like you I frequently shoot fast moving kids - but indoors, not so hot.
Then there's the Sigma 28-45/1.8, which I own and admire but only in anticipation of the 28-70/2 GM (had been hoping it'd be a 24-70/2 in vain!). I genuinely believe it will be relegated to a "poor man's 28-70" given the Sony's longer range but incredibly also lighter weight. For practical purposes F/1.8 and F/2 make little difference, certainly less than the difference between 45mm and 70mm. And as exceptional the Sigma's IQ as, I have no reason to believe that the Sony will also be anything other than exceptional.
As soon as the Sony 28-70/2 hits the shelves, my order will be in and the Sigma going on sale shortly afterwards - but before that, looking forward to some three-way tests of the Sony, Sigma, and Samyang 35-150. The real challenge for me (aside from the hole in my wallet!) will be deciding whether to bring both the Sony AND Samyang to a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Japan next year, or compromise with a lighter, slower telezoom as the Sony will be a given.
You have summed up the lens considerations well. I’ve been intrigued by the 35-150 for some time, and may eventually snag one to try. A few years ago when I was still shooting the Nikon D850 I had the Tamron 35-150 f/2.8-4.0 and enjoyed the range.
Looking at some of the Lenstip samples (taken with the A1 ii no less) make me think this was the second time today I was saved from shelling out with a substantial amount of money.
The LaCA may be easy (or not) no get rid of in post. The outer bright rim in background bokeh balls are harder. Kind of "nervous" bokeh in some samples.
.