p.1 #1 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
I opted for the 20-70mm. I had a defective copy but might have been expecting too much. I currently have the Sigma 24mm f/2.0 and Sony 40mm f/2.5. The Sony is definitely a keeper with a very small/lightweight and sharp presentation. The Sigma is a bit heavy, but seems to be sharp and contrasty. The 20-50mm is only a few ounces heavier than the Sigma and does provide greater flexibility. Ignoring f/2.0 vs f/2.8, what am I giving up at 24mm if I purchase the Sony zoom. Small compact lenses are somewhat new to me and it seems that many are peripherally compromised wide open due to software lens correction.
p.1 #2 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
I have the same situation, I walk around with the a7Cii + 40/2.5 around Paris on a daily basis, I definitely need to add something wider. I was going to order the 24/2.8 G because of the weight, but changing lens while out walking seems like a hassle. 24-50/2.8 seems to be the natural choice, even if it is expensive for what it is.
The 24/2.8 G is 162 g, the 24-50/2.8 weighs 440 g. The Sony 20-70/4 weights 488.
There is no obvious answer, just a question of what compromise you want to make.
p.1 #3 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
From reviews I’ve seen IQ is good and it’s nice and compact but the thing that is putting me off purchasing is the ‘backwards’ zoom….as I understand it, you start at 50mm when the less is retracted and then zoom to 24mm? Is that really the case? I think it would really bug me if so.
p.1 #4 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
Robjwilli wrote:
From reviews I’ve seen IQ is good and it’s nice and compact but the thing that is putting me off purchasing is the ‘backwards’ zoom….as I understand it, you start at 50mm when the less is retracted and then zoom to 24mm? Is that really the case? I think it would really bug me if so.
Yes, it is true. What I don’t understand is why people have an issue with it. You twist the zoom ring and the lens moves, which direction it moves seems quite irrelevant to me. I am happy with mine so far.
p.1 #5 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
I think I will soon buy 24-50/2.8 G or 24 and 40 G, just cannot decide between the alternatives I already have a 85/1.8 to complete my light kit for A7CII. Or should I trade it to Sigma 90/2.8?
24-50 G is very closely the same size and weight as 24 GM. No problem even with a A7C series camera, but not really compact either. Very different from, say, 40 G.
The "backwards" telescoping zoom has attracted a lot of attention, but I think it is ok in practice. I have had Nikon 24-70/2.8 and a couple of 16-35m lenses with similar arrangement, and never experienced it as a real problem.
p.1 #6 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
If the 20-70 was defective maybe give another one a try? It seems to test out better in general overall than the 24-50 and seems hard to beat for a unique general zoom. I see the appeal of the 24-50 as well though. I never understood the people not really getting the point of it.
p.1 #7 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
bwcolor wrote:
I opted for the 20-70mm. I had a defective copy but might have been expecting too much. I currently have the Sigma 24mm f/2.0 and Sony 40mm f/2.5. The Sony is definitely a keeper with a very small/lightweight and sharp presentation. The Sigma is a bit heavy, but seems to be sharp and contrasty. The 20-50mm is only a few ounces heavier than the Sigma and does provide greater flexibility. Ignoring f/2.0 vs f/2.8, what am I giving up at 24mm if I purchase the Sony zoom. Small compact lenses are somewhat new to me and it seems that many are peripherally compromised wide open due to software lens correction....Show more →
I find the 24-50/2.8 to be an extremely useful lens that gives very pleasing rendering. I have had the 20-70/4, but I never liked the look of its images very much and I returned it. The 24-50/2.8 is a different story, very pleasing. I think its price relects its quality optics and design.
As for the zoom rotation, I never notice it after the first two minutes.
p.1 #8 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
I have the 24-50 and the results are very pleasing at all focal lengths. Not just good resolution etc. but I really like the pics. Where I have mixed them in with, say, the Batis 25 or the Batis 40, I cannot usually tell the difference without checking the metadata. Generally, the only reason I would take along a prime instead is either very demanding low light or a real need for very low weight.
Some people do miss the 50-70 range, but I always feel I want an 85-90 anyway in that range, so 50 is fine for me and I'll include a separate long prime if needed. It means the size of the 24-50 optic is comparable to most primes, which is a terrific achievement.
p.1 #9 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
While I own the GM II trinity at 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 that I got for my full size full frame bodies on my A7CR and A7CII I ended purchasing both the 24-50/2.8 G and 16-25/2.8 G for its small size and f/2.8 aperture. They both render very well IMHO.
I ended up with these after also buying the 24/2.8 G and 40/2.5 G used and the 50/2.5 G new. Just preferred not having to keep switching lenses when I traveled even though the are nice and small.
The fact that they both zoom on the wide side does not bother me at all. Very east to get used to.
p.1 #10 · How Does Sony 24-50mm f/2.8 Compare to Smaller Prime Lenses @f/2.8?
This post has me thinking of the perfect two lens vacation set of the 24-50/2.8 and the Sigma 90/2.8. Both very small, light, and the two cover most everything I'd shoot. Maybe bring along the 20G since it is really 19mm.
I already have a 85/1.8 to complete my light kit for A7CII. Or should I trade it to Sigma 90/2.8?