Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II lens review with samples
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- Here it is! One in a number of very exciting new Sony lenses gets the Ol' Frost treatment - let's take a look.
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link - thank you for your support!):
geni.us/Sony24...
All pictures taken by me on a Sony a7R III camera.
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonE...
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonE...
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma5...
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonR...
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/Marumi...
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020...
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSm...
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC...
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1...
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMin...
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons....
This has quickly became my favorite lens review channel. Love how you aren’t focused on spastic scene transitions while trying excessively hard to be quirky and adorable like every other camera/lens youtuber. Just classy, informational with a little funny line here or there. Perfect.
I just bought the Sigma 24-70 2.8. This GM II is definitely a dream lens, though.
sharpest 2470 2.8 lens ever made, sharper than those old lens maker like Canon and Nikon well done Sony.
waiting for you to review the sony GM 70-200 II Chris
If you are in the market of that lens, don't wait, buy it, it's perfect in everyway. If you are not yet ready to spend that much money, buy the Tamron 70-180.
Bought this lens about a week ago - agree with everything you said in this video, but the only thing video people should note that it is most definitely NOT par-focal. Other than that, this lens is a joy to use.
I received my copy 3 weeks ago now, but was curious to watch your review. Exactly as my experience has been. Yes, ridiculous pricing, but it’s the type of investment that will pay for itself 10 times over as I will keep it forever! I am mostly a prime shooter, but I have to say, since owning this lens, it’s always on one of my camera bodies as a permanent fixture. Sony did the same improvement with the 70-200GM mkii, so fingers crossed the 16-35mm will be next!
Doubt there will be a 16-35 at all, let alone updates. The 12-24mm GM that came out somewhat recently also, is the thing that slots in for the trinity zoom offerings, a 16-35mm makes no sense when you look at what's going on.
@@JayJayYUP I agree with you about the 12-24 as for the trinity, but it’s value as a trinity is for photography mainly. I do both, but it doesn’t serve me as a video lens as I cannot use variable ND’s. Plus, having the 35mm end of the 16-35 when rigged out for video is so useful if it saves a lens change as well. So, again, I take your initial point, but the 16-35 makes total sense for video shooters.
@@danfarmer_photo Surly we agree if I were to say likewise, a 12-85 would also suit video shooters in the same manner? Especially if it could be delivered in a weight that isn't a totally obscene?
If we do agree, then I'm also sure you get the gist of why even saying what I just said is a "Well... DUH, of course it would suit video shooters". In the same way if I were to claim "A anamorphic lens would suit video shooters".
It's simply self-evident in a vacuum, but in context with the products we're talking about, it's evident this isn't something Sony remotely cares to cater to, especially on cameras best suited for armature/semi professional video use cases in THEIR eyes (in their eyes simply meaning, if you want proper video shooting, start breaking out 5 to 6 figure checks for their cinema line workflow).
I was speaking from this latter perspective. I wasn't speaking from the nebulous perspective where virtually any lens addition to a lineup is beneficial always.
@@JayJayYUP With respect, I let it go in my initial response to you because I am not into condescension as you clearly are.... However, it has become clear that I was wrong by giving you the benefit of the doubt: (Said in my mind) "From both comments, it sounds like this guy actually thinks the 16-35 doesn't actually exist"? Um, ok?
To go back a step, I was commenting on the second version of the 24-70 and how great it is. A great step up from the first version which was already great. Additionally, I made a point about having my fingers crossed for the same thing to happen to the Sony 16-35mm f2.8. Meaning, I hope that is the next lens to get the 'mark ii' treatment. The current 16-35mm f2.8GM is Sony's highest selling wide angle zoom to date (or at least it was at Christmas this year when I was speaking with the Sony rep). It has been out for years, and with Sony updating their other two most popular GM zooms (the 24-70, and the 70-200), it makes sense that the 16-35mm GM will be next. Again, it is their highest selling wide angle lens, let alone zoom.
Now, whether it get's an update or not is purely speculation at this stage, but that isn't what we are discussing here. You said you doubt there will be one at all, like it doesn't already exist, and then proceeded to say it won't get an update? Um, it does exist...? In fact, there are three of them!! a GM f2.8 version, a Zeiss/Sony f4 version, and a newly released 'G' f4 version.
The point I was referencing regarding the 12-24, was purely related to the fact it cannot accept front variable neutral density filters as it has a bulbous front element.. In the same point, I referenced the 16-35 (because it DOES take ND filters which are imperative to working with 180degree shutter angle for video). My further point about it having the extra reach over the 12-24 whilst being rigged out is an advantage over the 12-24, but again, I can say that because I have used my copy multiple times rigged out, but you on the other hand didn't think it existed?
Your statement that Sony doesn't care to cater for it... again, HUH??? They have done for years?
To your statement of it (a 16-35mm) making no sense.... Um, again, best selling wide angle zoom for Sony? Clearly it makes sense if they are selling truck loads of them. Again though, you were making this statement off the back of your previous, as if it doesn't exist...
12-85... Now you're just being a smart ass and condescending again. Kind of funny now though when you finished your comment about a nebulous perspective. Yep! You were speaking from a nebulous perspective, I was the only one in this conversation putting forward some actual facts! lol!
Anyway, enough of that. I was purely posting a comment to support the video (and Christopher as he puts in so much effort for these videos) and to share my enthusiasm for the 24-70 whilst wishing for updates to another popular lens. I always make time to comment back and fourth with fellow camera enthusiasts, or indeed working professionals, as I enjoy it, and hopefully can learn something. Jason, I am thick-skinned and happy to take a small amount of condescension from people who clearly know what they are talking about (although most people like that are polite and let their knowledge do the talking). But for the future, maybe you can get your facts straight before becoming a contradiction to your own comments of nebulous perspectives. :)
@@danfarmer_photo I'm not condescending anything, I thought we were having a normal discussion. So I apologize if my ineptitude in communication caused great miscommunication. I actually was referencing in fact, that when I talked about a 16-35mm, it was in regards to an "update" existing/coming. I fully understood your initial post hoping for the update to that range, there was never any confusion on that front.
Now you've presented a very good point (if empirically true when you say it's a best-seller of the lineup). If in fact that is the case, then my sentiments shift completely, and you've persuaded me there is not simply a chance such update will come, but in fact is almost certain to come. I had no idea said existing lens was so commercially performant.
I'm usually in the mood to always reply to every portion of someone's post, and I'm aware I'm not responding to everything you've said EXCPLICITLY, though I'm sure you can understand there is no need since points you've made have swayed my opinion very much. If you feel I need to account for something irrespective of my position currently - please demand such, and I will directly address it due to your civility and your eagerness to engage in sensible conversation. I respect and appreciate such folks very much honestly. I'm usually greeted with witty one-liners, so it's refreshing to have someone like you give an actual reply of differing opinion in a discussion, and have it defended so well.
that is some insanely consistant price tag across the range
This lens is the reason I am finally going to make the jump to full frame. Might be the only lens I'll ever need - well, I guess I always say that, lol!
same with me
this and rv
I sold my 24-70 2.8 GM I because I was very unimpressed on the A7rII and got the 24-105 f4 G which delivered much better sharpness combined with OSS. So it really was time for Sony to improve their 24-70 GM.
Just recently I managed to get my hands on a Tamron 35-150 2.0-2.8 which is now my standard lens. I bet you would like it if you like the 24-70 GM II.
The Tamron 35-150 was reviewed favorably a month back on this channel. It's certainly larger and heavier than this redesigned GM.
Thank you so much for this review. I was waiting for it before deciding if this was worth my money or not. Great job!
I highly trust his reviews . His reviews are
Best like always
Hi Christopher, very well done as usual. Would you run a side by side comparison with the Sigma to 'see' if 1000+ in cost does make a noticeable difference ?
Very well made video, your channel is my « go to » when I’m looking for review of lenses or even just for divertissent, I wish you a good day!
I have this and love it!
Thanks for your test! I was waiting for. Need that lens!!!
Wow well done Sony. Definitely will have this in my kit one day
Go 24-105 F4. More-useful range.
@@aliendroneservices6621 owned that one for a few years and sold it. Range was good and image stabilization was nice but I needed something a little faster for low light
@@aliendroneservices6621 not always about the range, personally I prefer the faster speed
Is there still no review of sony 70-200 f/2.8? :) We're waiting :)
Now, if they could put that kind of quality into a 24-105, I’d be all over that! 👍
Would honestly justify the 2 grand price tag. As it would replace most other lenses 👀
I can't wait to get my hands on this lens! Its definitely going to be a game changer for my video making!
Hi Christopher, How would you compare this lens against the Canon 24 - 70 F2.8. This one seems a bit sharper? Would love to hear from you. Maybe its me, but are you using a new test background? This background looks way more contrasty and sharp. Greetings!
Wow, this lens is amazing 😮
Thank you very much, your videos are very useful information.
Great review! Returned my Sigma 28-70 and bought this Sony lens instead. Sure, it's triple the price, a little heavier, and a little bigger, but boy is it worth it!! I use it mostly for video and no other lens can compare. AF is blindingly fast and IBIS seems to work way better too with this native Sony lens when in "Active" mode.
If you can afford it, just get it and be done. The only other Sony lens I have is the 20G/f1.8 which is all I need for the work I do.
I was on the fence at first but figured I’d buy it eventually so I pulled the trigger. Gorgeous lens. It’s so good. I also have the 20mm f1.8. That is also about as good as a lens can get. Love that lens!
How can I test my copy to make sure it’s good?
You missed out on the big knife sculpture outside Ambassadors and Baravin. It was there for a good few weeks until yesterday.
I think it's beyond doubt this is the best standard zoom range F2.8 on Sony E mount. I'm extremely happy with my Sigma 24-70 F2.8 and would still have bought that over the new Sony on price. It's a bit hard for me to justify a lens that cost almost as much as my Sony A7IV. Sony glass is over priced but you can't argue the latest releases have not been incredible.
thank you, good review as usual, Christopher. I would love to see a new and much better small FE 70-300 (maybe a GM with f/4 or f/4.5 at the long end) and a 18mm f/1.4GM with low coma and astigmatism. 18mm would combine a hight quality universal zoom beginning at 24mm very well (the existing 20mm G is to close, the 14mm GM to extreme). A 18-300mm range would be my dream in highest quality but low weight for travel.
Suggestion for a series of videos. As you're so well known for the image sharpness tests. Find a very sharp lens that you own, use on the highest res camera you own and test UV and protection filters. Put the argument to bed once and for all if any of them have any significant or even noticeable effect on the image quality.
Great lens, wanna have someday
Since you did not mention (that I recall) if this lens is weather sealed I will pose the question. Perhaps one should assume when one is paying over $2K USD for this lens it is most definitely weather sealed but I always like to see this print before shelling out big bucks.
Dearar Christopher. Great videos. I am hoping you will review the Sony 24mm f2.8 G. Especially for apsc.
Please make a review on Fuji Fx 50-140 f 2.8.
I was super excited when I saw this lens. 24-70 is a great range and f2.8 is awesome. I have a similar Tamron lens for my Nikon setup but that one is huge and bulky.
And then I saw the price...
Holy $H1T =l
wen Sony 70-200 GM II?!??!
Will you make a comparison between all 24-70 of sony e mount?
Love the review! This is an incredible 24-70 2.8 lens for sony! If you have the sony 70-200 GM II you will want this lens as it has very similar performance (maybe not as good as the 70-200 GM II but close). It really is a stunning lens but sadly my first two copies were not good and my 3rd copy was an excellent golden copy. This is the dark side of lenses and sample variation that many do not talk about. I also have the sigma 24-70 dg dn lens and it performs clearly better than the sigma in all FL and apertures, especially wide open.
The one area the sigma has a slight edge maybe is the flare performance. Still I greatly perfer the GM II due to the amazing AF, smaller and lighter overall package. You are truly paying more for those aspects than JUST the optics alone. Is it worth the $1000+ difference in price? Only you can determine that. For most I would say probably no unless you value performance at infinity, AF, weight and size more. Then it becomes more clear that sony did an amazing job with the 24-70 GM II. The 70-200 GM II might be my absolute most favorite lens I ever used.
Hi can we compare 16-35 and 24-70
I don’t like the new Sony lens style with aputure ring in the front oft the bajonett. Everytime I change the lens I Chance the aputure unintentionally
There’s another review comparing 2470GM II and Tamron 2875G2, claiming they share the same image quality, it will be amazing if Christ do the same comparison.
He already reviewed the Tamron 28-75mm G2. The Tamron is sharper in the corner at 28mm. It is also sharper in the corner at 75mm. It does have noticeable CA when compared to the Sony.
It might have been a total lemon, but I was shocked by how badly the tamron 2875G2 performed, when I tested it in the shop. The 2470GM2 is a LOT better, especially in the AF compartment.
Pls review for fuji 90mm f2 🙏🙏
3:54 finally i can read korean exactly
I saw your comment about the scammer. Parsimonious is a far better word to describe yourself... And that's never a bad thing.
YESSSSS FINALLY
Finally 🔥
Great lens, but if I had some money to spend I would buy the Tamrom 35-150mm instead. Lose out on the wide end, but gain a lot on the narrow end. It's about €600 cheaper too in my country.
In my country, the Sony can be bought straight away. The Tamron is out of stock. I have placed an order October 2021 but I still don't receive it 9 months later.
In the beginning was the Word.
Would love to see a comparison between this and the sigma 24-70, cheers
I love you my brother but you’re killing my wallet here :)
This lens is expensive but price wise it is in line with the equivalent Canon and Nikon 24-70s and it beats them in performance and weight.
Hey Christopher! Very often i am asked to make pictures with a lot of sun flares and so on. Can you recommned or compare lenses with a lot of flaring ?
Based on your previous review of the Samyang 24-70, I don't think this lens is offering enough value to make it worth it comparatively. I had the original Sony 24-70 but it was stolen, so I've decided to get the Samyang instead now. Thanks for the reviews!
I don't want to watch. I know it's going to spoil the honeymoon period with my current gear 🤣
Do you have plans to test the slower/older Tamron 35-150mm 2.8-4?
It's great but the Tamron offering just delivers so much for less.
Wonderful video my friend. I'm your fan＋👍🔔
The same price as the A7IV; I am gonna say "overpriced" despite the staller images!
Did you test aps c mode, cheers barry.
Thanks a lot again for a fantastic review. This expensive piece of gear only can be justified by a video maker. For a photographer, the use of an standard zoom lens is usually demanded mostly by wedding and journalist photographers, and I don't think this price/quality increase is a good deal for them. Being a landscape photographer, I'm rather in the prime lens choice, and still waiting for some really good 20mm and 24mm lens, at least as good as the 35GM. Maybe the next sigmas to come...
The 24mm 1.4 GM is great.
No doubt a nice lens. Those little bits of fringing I'm sure disappear with in-camera or in-editor corrections, as usual Sony is pushing out some impressive (if a little sterile) glass.
The CA is rather insane. But everything else looks great!
Get a 100mp body out to put this on Sony, stop messing about!
what's an extra $1300 gonna be 7-10 years from now......sphh....nothing
Exactly
I got RF 24-70 f2.8, much bigger than this one.
Second
Just when I start to think that 24-70 lenses are obsolete, Sony pulls out this bad boy. However for most people much cheaper and lighter 28-75, 28-70 lenses are still better.
na, i think the 24 mm range is far too important.
I recently tested all available 24-70 and 28-7x lenses, and I found the 24-70 simply better.
I quite liked the sigma 28-70, and I was shocked at how badly the tamron 28-75G2 performed.
I probably got a lemon, but still.
Meh, I can't see how it is worth it to Tamron or Sigma.
my 1k Fuji 16--55 looks like a toy now
I own both and can confirm that the 16-55 is now being used a paperweight. 🤣
as nice as this lens looks, i don't know why it would be picked over the much more versatile tamron 35-150. espeically since most would already have an ultra wide angle, sony's 16-35 2.8 would perfectly pair the tamron and then you have a professional two lens solution for almost literally anything
The weight
@@kifley19 no true, because in a lot of instances, for what a pro would bring in their kit, you would NOT have to bring a 70-200 with you anymore. So it's less weight.
Do you read Hebrew, brother!
You mean at 07:31? That's ancient Greek. My Hebrew is pretty much useless TBH although I did study the basics for about 6 months
@@christopherfrost at least you have some basics of Hebrew, as oppose to we converts in INDIA.
I blindly trust your reviews.😊
is this lens parfocal ?
maybe my expectations are set too high, but after seeing canon put out their 28-70 f2 lens, this new Sony 2.8 lens has me a bit..... underwhelmed, I should say?