Which lens would you get to start on a Sony A7iii?

I am leaning towards 24-105. I am not financially constrained. I use my camera for travel primarily, so I value the zoom range and I like light weight (which I know the 24-105 is not)

Open to cheerful suggestions. .
Your experience with DX and full-frame Nikon lenses will of course inform your opinion, but I'd suggest that you just get to know your new Sony while using a simple prime lens. Yes, I know the new Sigma isn't particularly fast*, but the samples of the new lens (which should be available in about 2 weeks) make the bokeh look good if not overwhelming; it's small, it seems to be of high quality, and it's light--and it might be better (perhaps at focusing, at least) than the faster but similarly-new Samyang competitor.

If you're committed to a zoom (and I say this as someone who lugged a Nikon 2.8/24-70 around for years--and who will no longer do so) you might consider how much you're willing to carry while traveling, and how many lenses you'll be willing to carry--given that you said that you "like light weight". Several attractive zoom options have been suggested, but you may (sooner or later) want to or feel that you need to supplement the suggested zooms, including the nice and relatively light Tamron 28-75 (would you want both a wider and a longer lens?); the Sony 24-105 (do you need a faster midrange lens--or would an f/4 zoom suffice for your needs while traveling?); the excellent but heavier Sony 24-70 (would you want a longer lens?), etc. Etc.

You might find that a wide zoom might plus a normal lens might suit you better than a general-purpose zoom while traveling, but in any case a smallish walk-around lens might be useful.

For the present, you might try adapting some of your Nikon lenses to the Sony. (I know, I know.)

*Your A7III is a high-ISO monster.
 
Last edited:
I did buy the Sony A7iii today with the 24-105 zoom lens. After I get used to it, I may get the new Sony 35 f1.8. Thank you to the fellow posters for their courteous suggestions!
 
I started with A7 and 24-70/4. My intention was to go with primes when I moved to FF. However, got a great deal on the 24-70 and for travel its been great. have not found the need for a prime.



8bd5cfbc96cb4f39843281244278c736.jpg



--
Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.
 
I tend to think most people would get most use out of something like a 20-60mm zoom. But they don't exist.
 
I am leaning towards 24-105. I am not financially constrained. I use my camera for travel primarily, so I value the zoom range and I like light weight (which I know the 24-105 is not)

Open to cheerful suggestions. .
24-105f4.

I have been struggled between f2.8 lenses but bought this instead to replace 24-70/4 for a longer reach.

It is more convenient for have better reach and let A7III to compensate more for the light loss using higher ISO
 
I am leaning towards 24-105. I am not financially constrained. I use my camera for travel primarily, so I value the zoom range and I like light weight (which I know the 24-105 is not)

Open to cheerful suggestions. .
24-105f4.

I have been struggled between f2.8 lenses but bought this instead to replace 24-70/4 for a longer reach.

It is more convenient for have better reach and let A7III to compensate more for the light loss using higher ISO
I don't have it, but my understanding is that is a good choice. Another good choice is the Tamron FE 28-75.
 
I started with A7 and 24-70/4. My intention was to go with primes when I moved to FF. However, got a great deal on the 24-70 and for travel its been great. have not found the need for a prime.

8bd5cfbc96cb4f39843281244278c736.jpg
Very nice picture! Where is it?
 
I am leaning towards 24-105. I am not financially constrained. I use my camera for travel primarily, so I value the zoom range and I like light weight (which I know the 24-105 is not)

Open to cheerful suggestions. .
The first lens I bought (same day as I bought the A7-lll) was a Tamron 28-75mm, and I just bought a Sony 70-200mm F4 and I'm very happy with both of them. I consider both of these lenses to be sort of compromise lenses - as opposed to getting the 'top quality' Sony lenses which unfortunately just cost a bit much for my budget, but as far as I'm concerned, they are both top notch choices as compromises. They more or less cover the entire zoom range I wanted, almost..!!

It would also be nice to maybe get a prime lens somewhere under 28mm to make the set truly complete but I've already by far exceeded my camera budget for this year, so I just have to be happy with what I've got (and I am). Maybe one day...!!!

Al
 
I tend to think most people would get most use out of something like a 20-60mm zoom. But they don't exist.
It actually does exist in micro 4/3's. New Panasonic lens 10 mm - 25 mm, a 20 mm to 50 mm equivalent

$1800 lens just announced

Nikon used to have a 20 mm - 35 mm and a 24-50 mm If I recall.

Just saying buy what one needs via a result driven solution not because of the name of the camera or loyalty to the brand. Plus nothing says you cant own more than one system to accomplish a task or fill a need.

I shoot the A73 myself
 
How does the 24mm prime at f4 compare to the 24-70mm at f4?
I don't have the 24mm prime but what I have seen from pics by others it is better depending on how large you want to print an image. To view on a monitor most people would not see a difference (except if you pixel peep). The edges of the 24-70 are softer than the prime. That's the major difference.
 
BY all means the 24-105 is the way to go.

I am surprised at how many pictures I have taken with the extremes of that zoom's focal length range.

Reason I shoot a lot at 24 and 105 was enough for me to skip the Tamron 28-75 when it surfaced on the market.

By all means get a single , most useful fast prime for low light situations, perhaps the new 35mm f1.8 is the way to go, but I would wait to see the users' reports on its performance first.

Dom
The 24-105 is a good start and great for travel with flexible range.

Pair that with the newly announced FE35 f1.8, and you're all set.
 
I tend to think most people would get most use out of something like a 20-60mm zoom. But they don't exist.
It actually does exist in micro 4/3's. New Panasonic lens 10 mm - 25 mm, a 20 mm to 50 mm equivalent

$1800 lens just announced

Nikon used to have a 20 mm - 35 mm and a 24-50 mm If I recall.

Just saying buy what one needs via a result driven solution not because of the name of the camera or loyalty to the brand. Plus nothing says you cant own more than one system to accomplish a task or fill a need.

I shoot the A73 myself
Certainly no reason to need another system.

You get a 16-35 and crop the 35mm end if you need 50mm you'll still be using a sensor area larger than m43. And you get a wider starting point.

Andrew
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top