but WHY?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 жов 2024
- GET 10% OFF your next Squarespace website: www.squarespac...
MY COLOR GRADING PRESETS: www.manuelortiz...
CHECK OUT HOW I RETOUCH MY PORTRAITS: geni.us/Retouc...
THE MANNY ORTIZ BEAUTY DISH: geni.us/Whiteb...
FILMED ON DJI POCKET 3: bhpho.to/3TfmTkX
MY FAVORITE LIGHTING GEAR
WESTCOTT LIGHTS: bhpho.to/2SdQRsR
BEAUTY DISH: geni.us/Whiteb...
STRIP BOXES: bhpho.to/3wSwZvN
ZEPPELIN: bhpho.to/38nVrwE
EYELIGHTER 3: amzn.to/3hiHuVm
Flash trigger: bhpho.to/3lI3x4p
GVM LED lights: amzn.to/3BtoH0h
UA-cam SETUP
SONY FX3: bhpho.to/3t0iZ1V
20MM 1.8: bhpho.to/39UOhAt
SENNHEISER MIC: bhpho.to/3NCtD6K
MIC ARM: bhpho.to/3a2Z0IY
APUTURE 120D: bhpho.to/3GEXuJH
APUTURE LIGHT DOME: amzn.to/3MTgQwP
PAVOTUBES: bhpho.to/3D6DG09
CAMERA SLIDER: bhpho.to/3zhmunx
I can't agree with you. This looks like a great lens for somebody who doesn't have a lot of lenses already or is about to buy his first good quality Sony lens. You're talking from the point of view as a person who has all god damned lenses lol of course it's not exciting for you.
If it was a 20-50 f2.8, i would have immediately ditched my tamron and gone with sony even with that price.
You can crop in at the long end but theres nothing you can do if a lens is not wide enough
Yes the Tampon 20-40mm f2,8 already beats this
I agree. I think this lens could have been a number one seller if it was 20-50 ! Great honest thoughts Manny
Feels like this lens is geared entirely toward videographers. Great gimbal lens. I'll stick with my 24-70 2.8 GMII for photo.
Sony is lost. They have no direction. They just throw out boring new products constantly and cannibalize their sales on what should be a great product line. They’ve announced like 8 video focused cameras in the last 5 years. And you’re right, no one was asking for this lens. It’s boring.
No one will give up their 24-70 for this lens. Only way if the lens is F2
I actually find this an appealing lense, unfortunately I shoot Canon. It's nice to have a first-party lense. The 24 -70 2.8 is twice the price. The 24-105 f4 is the same price but it's f4 and not 2.8. I like the lower light performance, I shoot my kids indoor. That's just my view though.
sony never sending him anything again 😂😂😂😂
It's good to have honest reviews those days.
This is a Street Photographers lens. It's small & compact that basically made for the A7C/Cii/CR. I would use this every day if I can get my hands on it.
It is massive...
This lens is made for pure raw documentary photography.
This is just manufacturers admitting that we've reached peak innovation when it comes to photography. So now it's time for gimmicks.
Ja
No. It makes perfect sense for those who wants a light travel zoom.
@@HSNG10 if you want to call a 24-50 a zoom...i use a 14-140 (28-280 in full frame terms) as travel zoom..i could ro nothing with a 24-50 and my lense is as small as this one.
@@castielvargastv7931the longer the focus range, the less quality it is.😅
@@HSNG10it would make perfect sense if it was a 20-50mm. 24 isn’t wide enough in lots of situations
I love the idea for street. Would never go out without a 50mm, always need to have at least a 35mm, too. Don't need more than 50 for street, and don't need very fast aperture. So, this lens covers 24mm, 35mm and 50mm
Considering the weight I think its a great lens 24-50 is perfect, not everyone is a blogger and needs video. ;)
On a high res body you can set the lenses button to apsc mode and you have a solid 24-75 2.8 reportage tool for half the price and way lower size and weight compared to 24-70 GM. 20mm 1.8 G on the second body as always.
Literally what we’ve been telling Sony… 😢
Sony has been doing this for awhile now in my opinion, except for a great lens here or there, it seems to me they're not very innovative. Especially when you look at other brands like Nikon, who has been killing it as far as innovation is concerned. For instance their 400mm and 600mm lenses have built in 1.4x teleconverter's, their 800mm is lighter and sharper than the Canon and it's 1/3rd the price of the Canon. Then they have the 400mm f/4.5 S, the 600mm f/6.3 S, the 135mm f/1.8 "Plena," and more. Canon has been somewhat innovative with some recent releases like the RF 24-105mm f/2.8 L, and 10-20mm L, but at the same time they've been the opposite of innovative, with their super-tele lenses. All they have done was use the same older lens but with an EF-RF adapter built in and or just doubling an existing prime lens' focal length by adding a 2x TC to the end of it. Almost like they just glued on an adapter and or TC, which they already made many years ago? I get Sony has been in the mirrorless space the longest and they have such a big line-up, so maybe they are running out of ideas or inspiration? For instance Sony hasn't released any new super-tele zooms or primes lately. Although their 400mm f/2.8 Gm and 600mm f/4 GM and even the 200-600mm are great lenses, they seem to have just stopped caring about that segment of the market? Which is strange when they're also at the same time releasing the A9 III? You'd think wildlife, sports and journalism together would make up a large enough market that Sony would release some new and innovative super-tele-photo lenses! So I'm not surprised they released this boring and weird 24-50mm!
Most top brands stop innovating. That is why I didn't wish the death of Nikon. Less competition makes companies lazy. Nikon, being number 3 they literally have nothing to lose at this point. Sony is more saying, what do we have to gain. The global shutter, though, is great Innovation.
@@blubravery Agree! You’re right about the A9 III, it’s innovative for sure, I just meant lens wise…they seem content. Or stagnant as far as leaving out people like myself, who use super-tele lenses as their main or one of their main lenses. According to my Lightroom catalog, I use my super-tele prime more than any other lens. The truth is all three of the big brands have excellent quality big primes, but you pay an incredible price for them.
However great they are though, the Sony 400mm f/2.8 and 600mm f/4 have been around. Sure they’re both lightweight and very sharp as well, but so are the other brand’s lenses in the same category. Yet Nikon seems to be the most innovative in that space and it’s paid off. Nikon got a few of their customers back from Sony and or Canon, and they’ve kept existing users happy! Having a built in 1.4x TC is alone a game changer for people like myself. I love my 1.4x TC, it’s great and all, but it sucks having to put it on and take it off in the field! Anyways, hopefully Sony will start to come out with new innovative lenses, like they used to. I admit even Canon has me jealous with that new 24-105mm f/2.8L! For me that’s the perfect or a dream lens and focal range as a secondary lens to my 400mm f/2.8! If they came out with an R1 or other higher megapixel camera…that lens will be something else! Being able to crop in with a focal length range like that, would be awesome!
I’d love to have a 24-105mm f/2.8, a 120-300mm f/2.8 and a 500mm f/4 with built in 1.4x TC. However the only way to do that would be to shoot Canon and Nikon and Nikon has technically yet to release the 500mm f/4 with 1.4x TC! So at the end of the day, all three brands are certainly good for the market and competition is good for the consumer as well! Anyhow, it just seems like Sony hasn’t released a lens I actually want to buy in-awhile. So this is another why lens for me as well!
This is actually a GOOD DEAL. This lens has the same specs as the 3 compact G lenses they released in 2021 24m/40m/50m. Now you get all 3 focal lengths in 1 lens at the same f/2.8 and keep the compact size. It makes sense for hybrid creators who lean more toward video. If I didn't get the 20-70 F/4 last year, I would consider this an option. I have the 24m f/2.8 compact and am tempted to swap it for this (if I don't sell it instead) if I can find an excellent compact gimbal that can support the ZV-E1 and this lens weighs.
Finally, someone gets it. This is a perfect content creation and travel lens. Not for vlogging.
At same price sigma 24-70 f2.8. can be used along with one body. If you need a portrait lens for headshot you need 70 or 85.
I just tried it out on my A7Cii today at my local camera store. On camera, it felt virtually identical to the 20-70 which I currently own. I'll gladly give up the f2.8 for the extra 4mm on the wide end and 20mm on the long end. Not sure what I expected, but was disappointed by it overall for it's price.
Hello
Just want to mention that 24-50 mm is not an unusual zoom lens
I have a 24-50 F4 MD made 1978 and there are several other Minolta 24 -50 mm lenses
Not everyone is using Video and therefore a small 24-50mm is a handy focal lengths at last for photography
Regards
These camera companies are wasting their time and money on these lenses... If one shoot photos frequently and long enough, you know that you mostly just use 1 or 2 lenses that are most versatile for your type of shoot. I can shoot an entire event or family portrait session with the Tamron 30 - 150mm f/2.8. Why don't they make something more useful like a 14mm-50mm or 24mm-150mm and 70mm - 350mm, so you don't have to carry a heavy bag full of lenses to a shoot.
Had this been a 20-50 then it would be unique and special. 24-50 for that price i'm pretty sure everyone would just get a used 24-70 GM or a third party version
Its a weird combo. It eas shpposed to be released woth the 16-24 f2.8 G lens, but that got delayed. Appare tly Somy is having manufacturing issues and all lenses are behind schedule.
The Sony 20-70 f4 is Sonys most innovative lens of recent years.
A 16-50 f4 would he great as well
I agree with you but glad I waited to finish the video and I think you nailed it. This is clutch for the a7cii and cr. I have the rv and I got the cii for more everyday and travel. 24-50 and 85 is a sick combo for travel. This is the answer to carrying the 2.5 primes 24,40 and 50 with not a bad trade off. That being said, 20-50 2.8 g would’ve shut the industry down but I bet Sony thinks it would’ve bit into their gmaster sales.
I own the gmii but it’s slightly too big for the cii and r. Not terrible but wouldn’t be my travel combo. 24-50 is better for travel I think.
20-50 vs 24-50 in f/2.8 would be large and heavy, I bet. This is already a bit heavier/bigger than I was hoping (under 400g, 6-7cm shorter).
@@rlclark50 i don’t doubt it would be slightly bigger but I don’t think it has to be as big as the gmaster. I’m no expert. I’m with manny with them missing a huge opportunity.
DJI pocket 3 has improved convenience, but has dramatically dropped image quality on UA-cam. So sad :(
this was a popular focal length among reporters about 30-35 years ago. it gives you a normal lens and enough reach to do a headshot and quasi telephoto if needed. and yes, you're right about the weight. you didn't want to run about with a 5lb lens all the time. For today's shooters, I'm not sure it makes sense.
Lol I could get a used 24-70 gm for the price of this lens.
I think he’s touched the Fuji and the whole game is changed for him. Peace bro 😎
24-50mm f/2.8 is less than half the price of 24-70mm f/2.8…. How is it not the obvious reason why it was released? Especially given all the things said in this very video about how a lack of 70mm reach can be somewhat compensated with either APS-C crop, clear image zoom, cropping in post, etc. but nothing can be done digitally to make a lens wider. This lens makes a lot of sense, one just needs to draw the right conclusion from their own lengthy blabbering.
24-105 f2.8 and I would sell my 24-70GMII
If this was a cheap walkaround/travel lens packaged with the A7C II, it's perfect. Yes we'd like it to be wider but it's not, and they'll probably release a wider version to cover a different range... Because that's what Sony do! They don't 'quite' give you everything you want/need in a single product, to force you to buy several bodies/lenses to get the job done as a professional.
24, 35, and 50 are my most used focal lengths. This one lens replaces all three of my primes. Perfect for traveling street photography.
Yeah the 20-40mm 2.8 is a more useful small affordable travel lens
Good review. You notice he didn’t mention image quality. That’s because your photos won’t look any better. 😮
Clear image zoom and super 35 wont shot the particular characteristics of tje focal range its imitiating. Like compression, distortion, dof etf. Is just a digital zoom 😂
In the end, its pretty easy. The economy in pretty many places in the world is busted to a complete shitshow. This is a cheaper variant of the 24-70/2.8 which costs waaay more.
Also, going from a 24 to 20 isnt something "you just do". Its pretty damn complex. Its absurdly complex tbh which would make the price fly up again.
No one asked for this lense.
No one wants to zoom out to 24mm
No one wants to pay the same price as a third party lense and get much less.
The cons outweigh the pros 🤷. But hey. This might be the most resold lens on marketplace.
ehh I get it, but I do think that while we are talking about gear and how innovative, or who is this camera for, lens for.. whatever. Is that the lens is there as an option. Who cares what it's for or who uses it lol. y'all aint getting paid to read Sony's mind haha yolo, let this lens live and people will buy it or not.
Tamron's 35-150 F/2-2.8 is insane. Those third party lenses are definitely taking chances and definitely on the curve of innovation.
I don't blame your caution and concerns of what happen in Europe and self recording in public
Ι would love a 24-50 f1,8 or F2.0.
Completely agree!
i doubt many people would buy it at 7 lbs and $3.5k
Size, weight, price. Not viable.
THE SPONSERS NOT GONNA LIKE THIS ONE
I would get this lens cause most of my shots are below 50mm… problem is the optical performance is not fantastic
If you want to get rid of your cameras for the Pocket 3 then you can send me all your gear, I would be happy to use them. :D
I would prefer it as 24-50mm f2.0 or 20-50mm f2.0. It would be a reason for me to buy it.
Behold, an honest UA-cam "review"
so it's time to wait on tamron's zooms with f2 ...
Many people are giving gripes to this lens. I have a Zeiss 18mm and the Zeiss 25mm I can sell both, buy this and have money to spare. This lens is not for the people that have a 24-70
what we need is a very small full frame 15-60 at 1.4 throughout
lol. why not 12-200 1.2?
@@Booyamakashihaha
or a super small 10-600mm f1@akashi
That's physically impossible
This is a classic photo journalism focal length. I used to shoot with the Nikkor 24-50mm for many years with the F3 and eventually the F4. It was the lens I used most often. In today’s world, however it’s less relevant among the sea of great lenses like Sony’s own 20-70mm f4. It seems that the appeal of the 24-50mm will be somewhat limited.
I want a 35-85 F1.8. That would be the golden ticket lens.
Of course you are. You're from Chicago. We're all the same 😳 looking front back left side right side.. and never wear a big a.. view and sound blocking hoodie. 😬
I think a good 'unconventional' range would be 35 (or 40) to 105. Great for events coverage where you don't want that wider look from something closer to 24, you still want a good range of focal lengths, but you don't necessarily need the 200 of a 70-200. Of course it would have to be f2.8
The most realistic average consumer review. Thank you Manny
You definitely love the OSMO pocket 3 😊
Man, those orbiting shots of the body and lens are beautiful, the sharpness and lighting were captivating. And your message was clear, love your input on the industry and its products.
If it was 20-50 f2.8 it would be a no brainer. Granted, I could buy this lens, and the Sigma 85mm f1.4, and still save $1K on buying the 24-70 GMii.
Hey Manny thanks for the videos. I 100% have learned. Can you suggest a good portable power source / battery for remote shooting? Thanks
Canon comes out with a 24mm-105mm F2.8 Sony makes 24mm-50mm F2.8 go figure
Should have been a f/2.0 at least! That would be something different!
Shout out to you from Washington state! Xplrnw
I choose tamrin 20-40 or 28-75g2
I’m keeping my Sony 20-70 f/4 G, much more versatile.
Cause they can.
"Lens reviews nowadays are not very exciting." Bro, you could have said no when Sony reached out. I don't understand this notion of complaining like you didn't have a choice.
This is a travel lens that you can actually use indoors. I had the Canon RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 on a trip and it was fine outside but a total flop once I stepped into a museum or church. Modern cameras have plenty of resolution to crop for reach.
its funny that this lens cost less than the APS-C E16-55mm 2.8
market segmentation --- especially for low light landscaping
Did you pick the a7cr because of the lens size, or is the camera growing on you?
they've should have made a 28-50 F2
Agreed, just like the big deal people made over the release of the fixed-lens Fuji x100iv… why?
Imagine that some people like something you don’t like.
@@mavfan1 agreed, but that can be said about everything. I’m sure it’s a nice camera, but I was merely talking about the unreasonable fervor for that thing. That was some grade-A psy ops by Fuji’s marketing department! The head of marketing probably used to work for Pfizer.
Glad to see you back.. Thanks for the honest review..
I keep waiting for the 85mm f/1.2 GMaster.
You never reviewed the Tamron 35-150 sony e mount
I'd have much preferred a 28-55mm f2
He is the greatest
I just dream of a 14-50 f2 and a 50- 135mm f2 … dream lenses for sure …so if this at least would have been a 20-50 f2 , I’d have considered . The fact that you get a 16-35mm and punch into super 35 . Means this focal length somehow already exists , not as wide . With some cropping at the end .. but hey , it’s all about selling …
F2 on a zoom lense means it would be very big and heavy
@@castielvargastv7931 I currently own a vintage canon 20-35mm 2.8 that’s small and light to carry around. This is an old lens , yet it’s small and light compared to all the new offerings … o think they do have the knowledge to make them small and light at f2 but won’t , because they keep you confused , in this way you always feel you need the other . Just remember how they took away focal length, we used to have full frame 28-135mm at a decent size . With near macro abilities … just saying , it can be done .
75% of the 24-70 for 50% of the price seems fair to me
16 or 17 - 50 its great
Great Video
You are correct
Love my 20-40
You liking that Pocket 3? I thought about one but decided I wanted an X100VI more so now I wait 😂
So true....why?
First 💪
this can be the perfect kit lens, if the price was under $1K.
This beats a kit lens... cuz of the 2.8.. its a pro lens but no practical use
This is why I don't get the fanbase of SONY shooters. I got the Canon R5,R8 and Sony A7CR and lenses for them. Even in the Canon R8 there is no significant crop when shooting video. You can use (and I am) a 24-240mm all day runner and film gorgeous videos with amazing colours only with lens stabe and it looks amazing. The 24-240mm as well as 24-105mm non L lenses cost a fraction of what sony is asking for these non G Master lenses and the quality is amazing.
I didn't get to see any decreas in performance in low light with the Canon whilst with the SONY colors are weird and I can barely grade correctly. Besides that, almost any SONY camera that isn't $4000 has a huge crop in 4K 60fps which is really a shame. I love the format of the SONY cameras and lenes but I wish they would offer more competitive prices.
For photo and for video I have found the SONY 20-70mm F4 to be an amazing lens. Paired with the A7CR is absolutely crushing it if you are not shooting in low light too much. Why didn't SONY fallowed up on that recipe ? That is an amazing irrefutable competitive lens and if they would make it in f2.8 format that would absolutely crush anything in the competition.
Agreed Manny! Great points
If sony wants to start making useless lens they need to make them cheap.🤷🏾♂️
I watched so many other UA-cam influencers praise this lens, but finally, it's refreshing to hear Manny speaking facts about this new lens being nothing special.
Fully agree. Pointless lens for me. If it was a 1.8, maybe. 20-50, possibly. I’d love for them to put out a new 85 bokeh beast. One can only hope. LFG Sony!
I think it's for people who (1) have the money to (2) purchase smalller lenses to pair with the compact "c" series and (3) want the absolute best performance and native support. Most others will go for the Tamron or the like.
20-50mm would be ideal or even 20-40mm like the Tamron
I do like the idea of them making a 24-50 though because it's smaller and lighter. As a run and gun shooter, I am all about light weight.
The only Zoom I use a lot is my 'catch all' 28-200mm. While not optically great it captures so much and again its light.
It could be excusable if this lens was $499-699, maybe. but neither the price point or the focal length are worth it.
Come on manny man up the whole world is watching you. You got this baby. I love your 36 inch beauty dish
First
Facts this video..
Manny the GOAT!
Well said Manny💪🏿💪🏿❤️
Firstly🎉