p.4 #1 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Yeah, though I have had both, I didn’t have both at the same time. I remember the 24-70 gm ii definitely didn’t feel light in the same way that the 20-70 felt light and easy. So i sold the gm and kept my bright primes for deliberate work and the G lens for convenience/hiking/travel. And when I re-bought the 24-105 recently for video. I was pleasantly surprised at how it wasn’t actually all that much heavier than the 20-70. You still might want to feel them in person to get a sense of the weight distribution and stuff. The 82mm filler thread at the end of the gm males the whole lens feel a bit larger, even if the rest of its size is more like the G lens
I think since you already know you want 24 at the wide weeks, you could do a little test. Walk around with the 35-150, pretending you’re traveling, and limit yourself to 70 at the long end. See how it goes for you. Then do a test limiting yourself to f/4 but allowing yourself to zoom to 105. See which trade-off you prefer. With 33mpx you have some ability to crop in after the fact, but less so than on a high mpx camera. I’d you find that you only occasionally want the 71-105mm range, and nothing beyond it, the gm lens can be cropped to a similar field of view with a similar depth of field (though not the same compression as a true 105).
zeitlos wrote:
Thanks again to everyone who contributed. Very insightful and helpful answers!
@StoneCrop@@: Thank you too! Great post. It pretty much sums up and structures what's been going through my mind (albeit somewhat disorganized) these past few days.
I think a lot of what you wrote reflects my own convictions, even if I haven't quite accepted them for myself yet .
There are only three things left that speak against the 24-105 for me (the 20-70mm is also partly affected by this).
1. I'm also one of those people who enjoys going out with a 2.8 zoom more. This is definitely irrational, but it matters to me whether I'm excited about my lens and its capabilities from the outset. Sounds silly, but it's true. One shouldn't be inspired by the hardware, otherwise one really is a materialist Do this is the most irrational reason.
2. More pragmatically: How does F4 perform in low light? I can simulate that with my 35-150 Tamron and stop down. I'm used to automatically always shooting wide open in low light, in churches, pubs, and on night streets.
3. What StoneCrop wrote is all very well summarized. Only one statement was incorrect, and that's the one that's been on my mind the most. The 24-70 2.8 GM (II) isn't actually bigger/heavier than the 24-105 F4. In principle, they're both the same size and weight. That's my biggest dilemma.
I'd like to try them all out on my camera at a local dealer soon to get a better feel for the size and weight. There has to be a good balance.
P.S. The 20-70mm is out because I'm not a wide-angle photographer. My pictures always end up meaningless. They say that when you shoot wide-angle, you have to pay attention to the foreground. I still need to learn that. ...Show more →
p.4 #2 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
I have the 20-70 F4 and I realy like the lens. I have absolutely no complains, it's a fantastic lens, even performs very well on the wide end.
When I got it I was considering the 24-105 for it's extra reach which is appealing but besides the 20-24 mm range that matters for me also the weight and size were very important deciding factors.
The 24-105 weight 663 grams vs 488 grams for the 20-70, that is a 175 gram or 35% difference which I find significant! For me the 20-70 mm is borderline to the weight/size that I want to carry as a general purpose / walkaround lens. Any bigger/havier and it would start to bother me big time. I want to keep my gear as small/compact as possible without compromising on image quality.
Your choise can also depend on which other lenses you plan to pair it with. In my case, mainly landscape, my plan is to pair it with the FE 70-200 F4 GII Macro. I like that both the 20-70 F4 and 70-200 F4 share the same 72mm filter thread and complement eachother with no overlap. It means I can have a as small and light as possible kit and use same filters. With the 20-70 mm I have no real need for a 16-35 zoom, I can just add a 14 mm or 16mm prime to cover all my landscape needs.
If I would pair with FE 100-400 the 24-105 would arguably make a better fit but would leave a bit of a gap on the wide end.
p.4 #3 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Yep there is no right answer here. A lot depends on the photographic situation.
As for the weight, for me, it comes down to how I carry the camera. I have an Osprey bike hydration pack I use for hiking and general walking around. I added two Peak Design clips on short paracord attached to the shoulder strap cross chest strap attachments. It keeps the camera close and convenient for moving around without the camera swinging around a lot.
With that setup the weight difference between the 20-70 and 24-105 is not significant as the weight is evenly distributed to both shoulders. I used to use the PD camera capture clip, but it puts the weight on one shoulder. Although it can be strung between both similarly, but with two clips the camera is more stable - one clip on bottom and another on the opposite side of the spider hand strap. The two points of attachment to the camera is more stable than the single capture clip.
Carrying the 70-200 gm requires another method. For that I have a black rapid connected to the lens tripod mount so it hangs horizontal, and a neck strap on the camera. Still working with that setup. I hate changing lenses in the field.
When I first used the 20-70mm and hiking, I was surprised how much I used the 20mm end. Now, after a number of hikes, I find I miss the 105 end. If I had to choose, I'd probably keep the 20-70 and find another longer lens to pair with it. If I did not already own the 70-200 gm I'd go for the 70-200/f4. If you find you are at the 105 end, you probably already want even longer.
p.4 #4 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
i agree that carrying setup makes a huge difference to perceived weight. i use an l-bracket with a peak design clutch, but instead of using the peak design anchors i unstitched the quick connect clip (where the anchor clips in) and sewed the loose end directly onto the L-bracket. in my experience this adds significantly improved fit and i can carry up to a 1kg lens for hours because i am not actually holding it most of the time. it is just snuggly hanging from my hand and i am not actually gripping it almost at all. combined with capture clips (peak design, pgytech, ulanzi) you can hold your camera very little and rest your hand 90% of the time.
for heavier lenses like a 100-400/70-200/50-150 i rely heavily on the QD (quick disconnects) built into my L-bracket and tripod feet (RRS, leofoto, kirk). i can rig up a neck strap with a QD clip and i have a QD clip sewn onto the shoulder strap of my hiking bag that hangs from a nylon strap about waist level. with these i can quickly throw my camera/lens on there and let it hang. a light hand on it prevents swinging around during my active hiking.
most recently i have favored a hip pack (a glorified fanny pack) with a proper hiking hip belt to carry my camera and up to 2 lenses at the ready. it is so much faster and easier than a backpack if you can limit yourself to two lenses and so much more capable than a sling bag. i can have the pack on my butt for extended hiking with no weight on my shoulders. i can grab the bag and swing it around in front and comfortably access my camera and two lenses for shooting and lens swaps. i recently moved away from 3 lens to 2 lens kit and it is the only way this works for me. i am using shimoda's top loader (large and medium sizes). they are designed to be used this way with shimoda's own hip belts, but since i don't have a shimoda backpack i use a lowepro protactic utility belt. a few pieces of adhesive velcro added and they fit together perfectly and securely.
it didn't work for my setup but if you use really small lenses i like the look of thinktank's speedtop crossbody. it is also designed as a sling bag that can also be used as a hip bag with a belt threaded through it. if it fit my lenses i would cut off the neck strap completely and thread a belt (like think tank's own speedbelt... there's no velcro so a few carabiners can attach the bag to the belt) and rock it permanently as a hip bag with a quick access magnetic lid. these fanny pack solutions work so well if you actually swap lenses because it literally gives you a stable lens change station right in front of you. i can fit a 50-150 with hood on in shooting position and attached to the camera (just barely) in the large shimoda top loader. a 70-200 or 100-400 would work without lens hood (or i reversed position). any normal midrange or wide angle lens fits easily with miles of room to spare).
p.4 #5 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Luballs wrote:
i agree that carrying setup makes a huge difference to perceived weight. i use an l-bracket with a peak design clutch, but instead of using the peak design anchors i unstitched the quick connect clip (where the anchor clips in) and sewed the loose end directly onto the L-bracket. in my experience this adds significantly improved fit and i can carry up to a 1kg lens for hours because i am not actually holding it most of the time. it is just snuggly hanging from my hand and i am not actually gripping it almost at all. combined with capture clips (peak design, pgytech, ulanzi) you can hold your camera very little and rest your hand 90% of the time.
for heavier lenses like a 100-400/70-200/50-150 i rely heavily on the QD (quick disconnects) built into my L-bracket and tripod feet (RRS, leofoto, kirk). i can rig up a neck strap with a QD clip and i have a QD clip sewn onto the shoulder strap of my hiking bag that hangs from a nylon strap about waist level. with these i can quickly throw my camera/lens on there and let it hang. a light hand on it prevents swinging around during my active hiking.
Here are some photos to illustrate what I wrote previously. I devised a another method that puts weight on both shoulders using my Osprey Hydration bike pack and PD clips on the camera. See below.
Also to carry a telephoto I use a black rapid strap connected to the bottom of the lens shoe.
p.4 #6 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
wzok wrote:
Here are some photos to illustrate what I wrote previously. I devised a another method that puts weight on both shoulders using my Osprey Hydration bike pack and PD clips on the camera. See below.
Also to carry a telephoto I use a black rapid strap connected to the bottom of the lens shoe.
i love diy gear mods. what is the hardware on your eyelet that you attached the clutch to?
i am LOVING my fanny pack lately and would likely stop using a backpack at most times. i can carry a camera, two lenses, and even hang a travel sized tripod off the side hanging back in an unobtrusive way. it whips from front to back depending on if i am going to be shooting for a while or changing lenses. game changer for me
p.4 #7 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Luballs wrote:
i love diy gear mods. what is the hardware on your eyelet that you attached the clutch to?
I had a spiderPro hand strap plus a Peak Design capture clip plate on the bottom. The SpiderPro hand strap bottom plastic attachment kept interfering with the PD capture clip. But I liked the SpiderPro mounting hardware on the camera lug. I let the SpiderPro hand grip go when I gave away my A7Riii. Then I ordered #294 service parts ($6.50) from spiderholster.com to use with a Peak Design hand grip, with capture clip plate on the bottom.
"294: Service Kit - Mounting Hardware for SpiderPro Hand Strap v2"
PS - the spider mounting HW makes accessing the top buttons easier.
p.4 #9 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
wzok wrote:
I had a spiderPro hand strap plus a Peak Design capture clip plate on the bottom. The SpiderPro hand strap bottom plastic attachment kept interfering with the PD capture clip. But I liked the SpiderPro mounting hardware on the camera lug. I let the SpiderPro hand grip go when I gave away my A7Riii. Then I ordered #294 service parts ($6.50) from spiderholster.com to use with a Peak Design hand grip, with capture clip plate on the bottom.
"294: Service Kit - Mounting Hardware for SpiderPro Hand Strap v2"
PS - the spider mounting HW makes accessing the top buttons easier.
most excellent. thanks. i switched the split triangle ring to a larger circle ring but this looks most excellent
p.4 #10 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
We will travel through Canada (initially the US was planned) in summer 2026. So finally I need to make up my mind which standard zoom lens I will buy. Still open for opinions.
p.4 #11 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
The 24-105mm was my standard "walk-around" lens for many years on my A7rII & V. When I got a Cr I switched to a 20-70mm for a much smaller package when hiking and haven't looked back. After sitting in a closet for a couple years I finally sold the 24-105mm. Yes, I do miss the longer reach at times, but I also bring the 70-200mm f4 II when I really need it.
p.4 #12 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
zeitlos wrote:
We will travel through Canada (initially the US was planned) in summer 2026. So finally I need to make up my mind which standard zoom lens I will buy. Still open for opinions.
Personally, I'd suck it up on the size and weight and go with the GMII. For me, it is a trusted single lens companion that has never disappointed. I'm not all that impressed with the 20-70/4. I can see how it would please people who felt limited by the 24-70 range, but that's never been a problem for me. I also greatly prefer the higher resolution throughout the range of the GMII over the G's sharp but shallow draw (it does the big details very well, but misses the oomph the GMII provides) and I find the bokeh to be a big improvement.
p.4 #13 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
I have the 24-105 f/4 and it is a good lens - at least the copy I own. Having said that, I hardly use it these days because I find it kind of boring to use and I get good enough results in the range with my cellphone. My preferred kit these days is the 16-35 f4 and Tamron 50-300 and Sigma 45 f/2.8. Most of my other lenses aren't getting used.
Personally the only lens I'm interested in the standard zoom range is the Sony 28-70 f/2 - because it's f/2 and has fantastic image quality.
p.4 #14 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
zeitlos wrote:
We will travel through Canada (initially the US was planned) in summer 2026. So finally I need to make up my mind which standard zoom lens I will buy. Still open for opinions.
If you're going to shoot at f/5.6 and higher, I don't think it makes a difference. Focus well, use a tripod when needed, and sharpen appropriately when you're done with your trip. I would pick whatever weighs less and consolidates multiple lenses into one so you can be comfortable when shooting (and packing). Even a superzoom would probably serve you well.
p.4 #15 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Personally, I think it's a tough choice between the 24-105mm f4 and the 20-70mm f4.
Generally, If I wanted to travel overseas with just one lens, I would probably prefer the 24-105mm focal range.
However, I've been happy travelling with the Tamron two lens combo (17-28 f2.8 & 28-200 f2.8-5.6).
p.4 #16 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Your initial post mentions that shooting on the wide end hasn't been a priority for you. I'd assume a lack of reach might feel more like a hinderance. So if the weight difference between the 20-70 and 24-105 isn't a worry I'd get the 24-105. I have the 24-105 and it works well on my a7Cr. I don't think the 24-105 is out of date regarding achievable results. The GM II should be great no matter what but I have no experince with it. The only knock on the GM II is the lack of reach compared to the 24-105.
I only managed a couple of shots at a Pow Wow before damaging the lens but here's an example with the 24-105. (I did get the lens repaired)
p.4 #17 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Any thoughts on 24-105 vs Tamron 25-200? I’ve never been a huge fan of the 24-105. Kind of reminds me of a minivan, it gets the job done, but no excitement. I guess I have similar thoughts about 23-70/2.8, but at least they have 2.8 going for them. I enjoy the results from primes, but like the versatility of a zoom for travel. When I’ve used the 24-105 for travel, I really don’t have any complaints other that they seem to lack magic vs a prime. Not sure if the Tamron would be different or more of the same?
p.4 #18 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
Thank you all very much for contributing! It helps me to sort things out and put them into perspective.
Yes, normally I'm not really a "wide angle guy". So I'm inclined to prefer the 105mm at the long and more than the 20mm at the short. However, if I go with a lens starting at 24 mm I would also take my Batis 18mm (which always delivers) with me. I also have the Voigtlaender 15mm 4.5.
araudan wrote:
Where youre traveling in Canada can also affect what lens might be most felixible. I hope you enjoy the country
Thank you for the lovely picture. Pictures always tell a lot. I'm still in the process of making up my mind. Front runners change daily at the moment.
We will arrive at Montreal first, then drive from there to Ottawa followed by Toronto. From there we will fly to Calgary and stay at the Banff National park for two and a half days. From Calgary we will fly to Quebec City for a one day stay and finally arrive at Montreal again to fly back home. So quite a mixture, right? Does this make one of these lenses more reasonable?
May 12, 2026 at 05:15 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #19 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
zeitlos wrote:
Thank you all very much for contributing! It helps me to sort things out and put them into perspective.
Yes, normally I'm not really a "wide angle guy". So I'm inclined to prefer the 105mm at the long and more than the 20mm at the short. However, if I go with a lens starting at 24 mm I would also take my Batis 18mm (which always delivers) with me. I also have the Voigtlaender 15mm 4.5.
Thank you for the lovely picture. Pictures always tell a lot. I'm still in the process of making up my mind. Front runners change daily at the moment.
We will arrive at Montreal first, then drive from there to Ottawa followed by Toronto. From there we will fly to Calgary and stay at the Banff National park for two and a half days. From Calgary we will fly to Quebec City for a one day stay and finally arrive at Montreal again to fly back home. So quite a mixture, right? Does this make one of these lenses more reasonable? ...Show more →
Do you want to shoot architecture in the cities? Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, and Quebec City all have some very interesting architecture if you want to capture that. For that I would want a wider lens and although the Batis 18 is a very good lens I might like a bit more compositional flexibility. The Sony 16-25 f/2.8 might be a decent travel friendly option. All four cities have wonderful parks and interesting street life if you are into that sort of thing. If you want recommendations of where you might visit, particularly in Toronto where I lived for over a decade and still visit half a dozen times a year, send me a PM.
Banff is beautiful and a lovely choice to visit. To capture the mountains, personally I would want a longer lens. Unfortunately Sony does not make that light of a longer lens, so your best bet is probably the 70-300 G, but you might consider adapting a lighter lens.
Those plus the 24-105 and perhaps a fast prime if you want to capture night life in the cities and you can stomach schlepping that much around ought to serve you well.
p.4 #20 · Sony 24-105 still a (really) good choice in 2025 (soon 2026)?
zeitlos wrote:
Thank you all very much for contributing! It helps me to sort things out and put them into perspective.
Yes, normally I'm not really a "wide angle guy". So I'm inclined to prefer the 105mm at the long and more than the 20mm at the short. However, if I go with a lens starting at 24 mm I would also take my Batis 18mm (which always delivers) with me. I also have the Voigtlaender 15mm 4.5.
Thank you for the lovely picture. Pictures always tell a lot. I'm still in the process of making up my mind. Front runners change daily at the moment.
We will arrive at Montreal first, then drive from there to Ottawa followed by Toronto. From there we will fly to Calgary and stay at the Banff National park for two and a half days. From Calgary we will fly to Quebec City for a one day stay and finally arrive at Montreal again to fly back home. So quite a mixture, right? Does this make one of these lenses more reasonable? ...Show more →
For me the Batis 18mm and 24-105 would work well in those environments. The 18mm gives flexibility in the urban areas while the 24-105 could cover most everything else. It a tough thing to truly answer for someone else between photographic style/preference and travel limitations.
I like to use my 20mm G and 40mm G when out normally. My plan for a Switzerland/Germany/Austria trip this fall is to use the 24-50mm G and ZA 55mm f/1.8 on an a7Cr. I prefer to travel light and may not have much control over time to linger for photographs.
.
