Reading mode: Light Dark

Cannot afford Sony G and GM FE lenses? Cheap & Good Alternatives

Go to last post
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
Philnw2 said:
sportyaccordy said:
1 lens to go for is the Tamron 24-70 2.8 G1. It's pretty much on par with the GM for 1/4 the price and it works brilliantly with the cheapo $100 Fotodiox adapter on gen II PDAF bodies. ~$650 for a 2.8 zoom is pretty effing good.

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
Click to expand...
There's also the new Tamron 28-70 f2.8 which is supposed to be pretty good. Compact and light weight too. Probably costs more though but might make a better travel lens.

--
Phil B
Click to expand...
some complained about this lens, soft at f2.8, maybe should wait for the NEW Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 even though it will be fairly expensive.

a good alternative if you manage to find a good copy, my copy is excellent Canon 24-85mm EF lens quite old and very cheap on Ebay, about $150. my copy is extremely sharp wide open.
Click to expand...
your are funny, what about the corners of the image?
Click to expand...
The corners are sharp too like most lenses has some distortions, CA and vignetting at the wider end. Some users reported their copies are not so sharp, if you go to Youtube there is a review of this lens that is why I bought this lens. If you happen to get it your copy may not be up to your expectations, my copy is very good, I paid US$80 for mine second hand that's not funny.
danm_cool said:
--
My photos: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/danm_cool/
Click to expand...
 
danm_cool said:
sportyaccordy said:
Yea 28mm on the wide end is a deal breaker for me. I'd rather have a 24-70/4, I have primes for the fast stuff.

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
Click to expand...
The Sony 24-105 f4 is a much better choice ;)

--
My photos: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/danm_cool/
Click to expand...
Than the Sony 24-70/4, yes. Than something like the Canon 24-70 F/4L or a theoretical third party 24-70/4, not necessarily. I would gladly trade 25mm on the long end for a ~200g weight reduction

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
 
Last edited:
ttan98 said:
Over the last few years I had been using many models of Sony camera bodies starting with Nex 3C,5N,A6000 and lately A7RII. The gradual and then dramatic improvements in image quality can be observed from the above list.
Those who would to transcend to better image quality to the "ultimate"(i.e. using state of the art technologies) the latest Sony models, esp. 2nd hands purchase you can get them at reasonable prices are A7II and A7RII. The latter model will improve the image quality dramatically and worthwhile buying. I pulled the trigger recently by buying a 2nd hand one paid US$1,700 for it(latest V4 firmware I updated).
Let us go straight to the point of getting non-Sony native lenses from Canon and Sigma EF and EF-S lenses and compatible adapters from Techart III, Vitrox II and Sigma MCII. I bought many Canon and Sigma lenses over the years and here is what I found for these lenses do work really well with my A7RII. The models you should consider buying is listed here and their associated approx. prices(2nd hand), you can find them very affordable, automatic focus, light weight and more importantly the image quality to be very good as well obviously cannot match with far more expensive lenses from Sony's G and GM range if you can afford them.

Canon EF range(FF)
==============
24-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose lens, very sharp and good color renditions lens
20-35mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose wide angle lens
35mm f2.0 USM - $250-$300, motor is a little noisy
40mm f2.8 STM - $150
50mm f2.8 STM - $120
85mm f1.8 USM - $300-$350, still very good for portraits

Canon EF-S range(APSC)
================
24mm f2.8 STM - $200
15-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $250 general purpose travel lens good quality, a little heavy

Sigma EF-S range(APSC)
================
17-50mm f2.8 - $250 capable of giving VERY sharp images
17-70mm f2.8-3.5,- $250 general purpose lens, good quality

I was able to get good and accurate focusing speed via AFS & AFC mode in any of these adapters listed above, I can also use in eye focus mode with Techart III adapter only but the focus accuracy is not 100% reliable and functional.
My intention is to use these lenses till I am sufficiently competent to migrate to more expensive lenses in the G and GM range. Basically I am learning how to use this camera and photography before committing more money to buying more Sony expensive lenses. Having said that there are some Sony lenses that are well priced now and I think you know that, I am now currently aimed at those listed below that will give high quality images at the same time well priced.

28mm f2.0
35mm f2.8
55mm f1.8 Zeiss
16-35mm f4
and many more.

My expectations are, in the next few years there will be more 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma in FE mount that will give us high quality images that are comparable to those from G and GM range at a far better prices e.g Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 and 15-30mm f2.8. In the meantime I am using those above.

Hope you find my exposition here helpful.
Click to expand...
I'm in the very fortunate position of now owning nearly all of the Sony GM's.

My take - they're generally one to two stops faster glass and they are certainly better built BUT they are not significantly sharper than Sony's cheaper offerings. Especially after you publish your work (eg. compression losses etc..)

Simply faster in most cases (meaning you can create better subject isolation).

But in practice you can get just as good results >95% time with the cheaper lenses and they're usually a darned sight lighter to carry around.

Buying the cheaper lenses shouldn't hold you back artistically and it might even help if you need to hike anywhere with your camera.
 
aSevenArr said:
ttan98 said:
Over the last few years I had been using many models of Sony camera bodies starting with Nex 3C,5N,A6000 and lately A7RII. The gradual and then dramatic improvements in image quality can be observed from the above list.
Those who would to transcend to better image quality to the "ultimate"(i.e. using state of the art technologies) the latest Sony models, esp. 2nd hands purchase you can get them at reasonable prices are A7II and A7RII. The latter model will improve the image quality dramatically and worthwhile buying. I pulled the trigger recently by buying a 2nd hand one paid US$1,700 for it(latest V4 firmware I updated).
Let us go straight to the point of getting non-Sony native lenses from Canon and Sigma EF and EF-S lenses and compatible adapters from Techart III, Vitrox II and Sigma MCII. I bought many Canon and Sigma lenses over the years and here is what I found for these lenses do work really well with my A7RII. The models you should consider buying is listed here and their associated approx. prices(2nd hand), you can find them very affordable, automatic focus, light weight and more importantly the image quality to be very good as well obviously cannot match with far more expensive lenses from Sony's G and GM range if you can afford them.

Canon EF range(FF)
==============
24-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose lens, very sharp and good color renditions lens
20-35mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose wide angle lens
35mm f2.0 USM - $250-$300, motor is a little noisy
40mm f2.8 STM - $150
50mm f2.8 STM - $120
85mm f1.8 USM - $300-$350, still very good for portraits

Canon EF-S range(APSC)
================
24mm f2.8 STM - $200
15-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $250 general purpose travel lens good quality, a little heavy

Sigma EF-S range(APSC)
================
17-50mm f2.8 - $250 capable of giving VERY sharp images
17-70mm f2.8-3.5,- $250 general purpose lens, good quality

I was able to get good and accurate focusing speed via AFS & AFC mode in any of these adapters listed above, I can also use in eye focus mode with Techart III adapter only but the focus accuracy is not 100% reliable and functional.
My intention is to use these lenses till I am sufficiently competent to migrate to more expensive lenses in the G and GM range. Basically I am learning how to use this camera and photography before committing more money to buying more Sony expensive lenses. Having said that there are some Sony lenses that are well priced now and I think you know that, I am now currently aimed at those listed below that will give high quality images at the same time well priced.

28mm f2.0
35mm f2.8
55mm f1.8 Zeiss
16-35mm f4
and many more.

My expectations are, in the next few years there will be more 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma in FE mount that will give us high quality images that are comparable to those from G and GM range at a far better prices e.g Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 and 15-30mm f2.8. In the meantime I am using those above.

Hope you find my exposition here helpful.
Click to expand...
I'm in the very fortunate position of now owning nearly all of the Sony GM's.

My take - they're generally one to two stops faster glass and they are certainly better built BUT they are not significantly sharper than Sony's cheaper offerings. Especially after you publish your work (eg. compression losses etc..)

Simply faster in most cases (meaning you can create better subject isolation).

But in practice you can get just as good results >95% time with the cheaper lenses and they're usually a darned sight lighter to carry around.

Buying the cheaper lenses shouldn't hold you back artistically and it might even help if you need to hike anywhere with your camera.
Click to expand...
Very well put, I am still learning about photography and there is no point in buying expensive and excellent sharp Sony lenses. I am happy with my collection and their total value will NOT even exceed the price of a single GM 16-35mm f2.8 lens.

More importantly I am quite happy with my images I am getting. I tested MANY lenses I know what sharp images are.
 
ttan98 said:
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
some complained about this lens, soft at f2.8, maybe should wait for the NEW Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 even though it will be fairly expensive.

a good alternative if you manage to find a good copy, my copy is excellent Canon 24-85mm EF lens quite old and very cheap on Ebay, about $150. my copy is extremely sharp wide open.
Click to expand...
your are funny, what about the corners of the image?
Click to expand...
The corners are sharp too like most lenses has some distortions, CA and vignetting at the wider end. Some users reported their copies are not so sharp, if you go to Youtube there is a review of this lens that is why I bought this lens. If you happen to get it your copy may not be up to your expectations, my copy is very good, I paid US$80 for mine second hand that's not funny.
Click to expand...
 
txsizzler said:
ttan98 said:
Canon EF range(FF)
==============
24-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose lens, very sharp and good color renditions lens
20-35mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose wide angle lens
35mm f2.0 USM - $250-$300, motor is a little noisy
40mm f2.8 STM - $150
50mm f2.8 STM - $120
85mm f1.8 USM - $300-$350, still very good for portraits

Canon EF-S range(APSC)
================
24mm f2.8 STM - $200
15-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $250 general purpose travel lens good quality, a little heavy

Sigma EF-S range(APSC)
================
17-50mm f2.8 - $250 capable of giving VERY sharp images
17-70mm f2.8-3.5,- $250 general purpose lens, good quality

My expectations are, in the next few years there will be more 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma in FE mount that will give us high quality images that are comparable to those from G and GM range at a far better prices e.g Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 and 15-30mm f2.8. In the meantime I am using those above.

Hope you find my exposition here helpful.
Click to expand...
Great thread, ttan98! I have an Sony A7 (original) that I used adapted lenses with, but the contrast detection AF is miserably slow with my Canon Metabones IV T, and Sigma MC-11.. so slow, that I am going to upgrade to either the A7RII or A7III (not to mention being able to use the IBIS features of either camera body on my legacy glass).

Curious about how you feel about adapting EF-S lenses on the FF... given the vignetting and distortion. I have largely stayed away from doing that (although I do own some EF-S glass, from older Canon APS-C bodies that have come and gone). What has been your experience with the Sigma APS-C line?

One other question I have, is how really good the AF is with the LA-EA4 adapter, and Minolta AF lenses (on bodies like the A7II, A7RII, and if anyone has experience with the A7RIII and A9)? In particular, bodies with Eye AF... does that work at all with this adapter?
Click to expand...
About the LA-EA4: it works the same on all body generations. Since it contains a dedicated PDAF system and doesn't rely on any sensor based AF technology, it works similar across all body generations, except maybe for some software improvements. I didn't notice a change in functionality when going from the A7 to A7II. It certainly doesn't allow Eye-AF.

Usually, it focuses well in AF-S with Minolta lenses. However, the nature of the system is that it is basically an old APS-C AF system with only 15 points in a centered pattern with 3 cross type sensors in the center. Don't expect miracles in AF-C with Minolta screw drive lenses. The best current AF system for Minolta lenses resides in the A77II/A99II with many more (cross-type) AF points with greater sensitivity.

However, that said, I happily use my Minolta 100mm macro and 70-210 f4 with LA-EA4. It is better than no AF but it is by no means comparable to gen 2/3 on sensor PDAF.
 
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
some complained about this lens, soft at f2.8, maybe should wait for the NEW Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 even though it will be fairly expensive.

a good alternative if you manage to find a good copy, my copy is excellent Canon 24-85mm EF lens quite old and very cheap on Ebay, about $150. my copy is extremely sharp wide open.
Click to expand...
your are funny, what about the corners of the image?
Click to expand...
The corners are sharp too like most lenses has some distortions, CA and vignetting at the wider end. Some users reported their copies are not so sharp, if you go to Youtube there is a review of this lens that is why I bought this lens. If you happen to get it your copy may not be up to your expectations, my copy is very good, I paid US$80 for mine second hand that's not funny.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
No, the next equivalent lens is the ~$400 24-105 STM. My copy of the 24-85 was also very bad. Very flat with bad corners. Can't be bothered to go through multiple copies to find a good one. My 24-105 STM is good to go.
 
ttan98 said:
ttan98 wrote:
Click to expand...
ttan98 said:
I am not sure you own a copy(24-85mm) or your copy is not good enough, as far my copy(*) is concern it is quite sharp wide open esp. in the centre and at the edges may not be up to your high std., for US$80 lens for I believe this lens is clearly superior to Sony std zoom 28-70mm. I am happy with mine. The next superior equivalent lens will have to Sony 24-70mm f4 costing $1000 or more and its performance varies from copy to copy which I am not willing to experiment with. Further my images are not for sale and hence not justified to buy the best quality lenses costing $1000's. If you are willing to do that please proceed no want stops you.

24-85mm is quite compact and light and the 28-135mm is not.

* there is a review of this lens on Youtube I got similar results to his copy.
Click to expand...
the sony 28-70 is way better than the canon 24-85... even in the center wide open (second hand it is about 200$)

for cheap lenses you can look also to 24-240mm sony lens which is again better that the 24-85 canon in center and much better in the corners (second hand you can get it at 500$)
 
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
I am not sure you own a copy(24-85mm) or your copy is not good enough, as far my copy(*) is concern it is quite sharp wide open esp. in the centre and at the edges may not be up to your high std., for US$80 lens for I believe this lens is clearly superior to Sony std zoom 28-70mm. I am happy with mine. The next superior equivalent lens will have to Sony 24-70mm f4 costing $1000 or more and its performance varies from copy to copy which I am not willing to experiment with. Further my images are not for sale and hence not justified to buy the best quality lenses costing $1000's. If you are willing to do that please proceed no want stops you.

24-85mm is quite compact and light and the 28-135mm is not.

* there is a review of this lens on Youtube I got similar results to his copy.
Click to expand...
the sony 28-70 is way better than the canon 24-85... even in the center wide open (second hand it is about 200$)

for cheap lenses you can look also to 24-240mm sony lens which is again better that the 24-85 canon in center and much better in the corners (second hand you can get it at 500$)
Click to expand...
 
Seeky said:
txsizzler said:
ttan98 said:
Canon EF range(FF)
==============
24-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose lens, very sharp and good color renditions lens
20-35mm f3.5-4.5 - $150, general purpose wide angle lens
35mm f2.0 USM - $250-$300, motor is a little noisy
40mm f2.8 STM - $150
50mm f2.8 STM - $120
85mm f1.8 USM - $300-$350, still very good for portraits

Canon EF-S range(APSC)
================
24mm f2.8 STM - $200
15-85mm f3.5-4.5 - $250 general purpose travel lens good quality, a little heavy

Sigma EF-S range(APSC)
================
17-50mm f2.8 - $250 capable of giving VERY sharp images
17-70mm f2.8-3.5,- $250 general purpose lens, good quality

My expectations are, in the next few years there will be more 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma in FE mount that will give us high quality images that are comparable to those from G and GM range at a far better prices e.g Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 and 15-30mm f2.8. In the meantime I am using those above.

Hope you find my exposition here helpful.
Click to expand...
Great thread, ttan98! I have an Sony A7 (original) that I used adapted lenses with, but the contrast detection AF is miserably slow with my Canon Metabones IV T, and Sigma MC-11.. so slow, that I am going to upgrade to either the A7RII or A7III (not to mention being able to use the IBIS features of either camera body on my legacy glass).

Curious about how you feel about adapting EF-S lenses on the FF... given the vignetting and distortion. I have largely stayed away from doing that (although I do own some EF-S glass, from older Canon APS-C bodies that have come and gone). What has been your experience with the Sigma APS-C line?

One other question I have, is how really good the AF is with the LA-EA4 adapter, and Minolta AF lenses (on bodies like the A7II, A7RII, and if anyone has experience with the A7RIII and A9)? In particular, bodies with Eye AF... does that work at all with this adapter?
Click to expand...
About the LA-EA4: it works the same on all body generations. Since it contains a dedicated PDAF system and doesn't rely on any sensor based AF technology, it works similar across all body generations, except maybe for some software improvements. I didn't notice a change in functionality when going from the A7 to A7II. It certainly doesn't allow Eye-AF.

Usually, it focuses well in AF-S with Minolta lenses. However, the nature of the system is that it is basically an old APS-C AF system with only 15 points in a centered pattern with 3 cross type sensors in the center. Don't expect miracles in AF-C with Minolta screw drive lenses. The best current AF system for Minolta lenses resides in the A77II/A99II with many more (cross-type) AF points with greater sensitivity.

However, that said, I happily use my Minolta 100mm macro and 70-210 f4 with LA-EA4. It is better than no AF but it is by no means comparable to gen 2/3 on sensor PDAF.
Click to expand...
 
ttan98 said:
danm_cool said:
ttan98 said:
I am not sure you own a copy(24-85mm) or your copy is not good enough, as far my copy(*) is concern it is quite sharp wide open esp. in the centre and at the edges may not be up to your high std., for US$80 lens for I believe this lens is clearly superior to Sony std zoom 28-70mm. I am happy with mine. The next superior equivalent lens will have to Sony 24-70mm f4 costing $1000 or more and its performance varies from copy to copy which I am not willing to experiment with. Further my images are not for sale and hence not justified to buy the best quality lenses costing $1000's. If you are willing to do that please proceed no want stops you.

24-85mm is quite compact and light and the 28-135mm is not.

* there is a review of this lens on Youtube I got similar results to his copy.
Click to expand...
the sony 28-70 is way better than the canon 24-85... even in the center wide open (second hand it is about 200$)

for cheap lenses you can look also to 24-240mm sony lens which is again better that the 24-85 canon in center and much better in the corners (second hand you can get it at 500$)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
sportyaccordy said:
Yea I think the 24-85 works if you can get a good version. Very light and focuses perfectly with a cheapo Fotodiox. But the QC was less than great on those old non-L lenses. I feel like that was their first 24-xx zoom and it kinda showed. I wish they'd make a modern version... 24-105 STM is good but I do miss the smallness of the 24-85. Even a 24-70 3.5-5.6 would be OK for me, I have fast primes.

--
Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/
Click to expand...
it happens that a "good" copy does not exist, beacause this lens has been designed for APS-H by canon, why don't you check your own image at 24mm f/5.6 in the corners!!!

https://flic.kr/p/XFqoWp

--
My photos: http://www.flickriver.com/photos/danm_cool/
 
Last edited:
danm_cool said:
sportyaccordy said:
Yea I think the 24-85 works if you can get a good version. Very light and focuses perfectly with a cheapo Fotodiox. But the QC was less than great on those old non-L lenses. I feel like that was their first 24-xx zoom and it kinda showed. I wish they'd make a modern version... 24-105 STM is good but I do miss the smallness of the 24-85. Even a 24-70 3.5-5.6 would be OK for me, I have fast primes.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
ttan98 said:
sportyaccordy said:
Rmcp20 said:
sportyaccordy said:
The 24-85 is not a good lens. Plus side is it works great with my Fotodiox- AFs like a modern USM/STM lens. But it is just garbage optically, particularly at 24 which is where I primarily use 24-xx lenses. It doesn't get better stopped down either. I haven't used it yet, but the 24-105 STM looks to be a much better alternative. It will generate photos you will actually want to keep.
Click to expand...
Actually there are many versions of the 24-85 lens if i am not mistaken (just like the 28-105 USM). The difference in optical quality is considerable.

For the 28-105USM, i remember having two copies, the second was the one with the "macro" word (not the flower symbol) and "Made in Japan". Much better than my first copy.

Same goes for 24-85 from what i remember, just don't remember which versions are better.
Click to expand...
That's a lot to sift through. I'd rather just get the 24-105 STM and be done.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top