New FE 20-70 f4 vs FE 24-70 f2.8 GM II - IQ/Sharpness?

SamKnopf said:

Ephotozine tests on an A7RIII using Imatest software. AFAIK, ephotozine is the only test site that has provided formal test charts for both of these lenses. Curiously, Digitalpicture.com, which is usually quick with its reviews, has not yet tested the 20-70.

No testing procedure is perfect, but I would always choose Imatest over somebody's subjective impressions, such as those from Sonyalphablog. These are always going to be different based on the subject matter that the person shoots.

According to Ephotozine, the new 20-70 is not stellar at wide angle (which agrees with most other reviewers). The charts below suggest a signifcant shortfall for the 20-70. Not only is corner sharpness quit weak, but center sharpness is also significantly behind. (Unfortunately, the 20-70 and 24-70 were tested at different focal lengths, but the chart below is still likely to be indicative).


Sony 20-70 at 20mm, ephotozine.com


Sony 24-70 GMII at 24mm

The inexpensive Samyang 24mm f/1.8 prime has a performance that is even slightly better than the 24-70 GM. I have both the Samyang and the Sony 24-105, and my own experience confirms the ephotozine tests which show the Samyang to be considerably sharper than the 24-105. I sometimes use the Samyang in a combo with the Sony 28-60 for a very lightweight, sharp pairing:


Samyang 24mm f/1.8

Click to expand...

I take these charts with a grain of salt ;-) That is what I see in DPR studio test on a resolution chart that look pretty sharp to me. I just applied default profile (+40 sharpening) with 24-70/4.0 ZA lens profile. I really don't think 24-70 GM II will blow this 20-70 G out of water in real-world photos. I used to own Tamron FE 28-75/2.8 G2 that is as sharp as Sony GM II so I should have an idea how sharp of 24-70 GM II is.

View attachment c3c9707cb67c4ea08dac07fb6affc070.jpg

View attachment f3c044b702464b74b004f084cccb9f06.jpg

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

Wordfool said:

I'm curious if those comparing the 16-35 PZ and GM are comparing them at the same aperture, because despite being an older design I'd be surprised if the GM is not on par with the PZ at f/4. Plus the GM is about to get an update, so I'm sure the new version will be better all around.

Click to expand...

I did such test side by side. Here are in Lr, 1:1, default lens profile and default +40 sharpening (just reflect in real-world photos and processing), -100 highlight and +100 shadow, everything else default.

16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 16mm/F4.0 center


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 16mm/F4.0 left


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 16mm/F4.0 right


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 35mm/F4.0 center


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 35mm/F4.0 left


16-35 GM left vs 16-35 PZ right, 35mm/F4.0 right

I found 16-35 PZ actually is slightly wider than 16-35 GM. Between my two copies, the difference at 16mm side is a bit more than at 35mm side.

Sure 16-35 GM does have better bokeh at 35mm side and a bit smoother background rendering. But I use the lenses mainly in stop-down landscape. I do also carry prime in trips such as CV 21/1.4 Nokton that is even much faster with more subject separation if necessary, no mention much more pleasing sunstars. Otherwise much lighter/smaller 16-35 PZ is much easier to carry with. Therefore I expect the new 24-70 G has similar performance level.

--

When I compare similar lenses I then look at the components of the lens. Things like ED elements and the like. I think the close focus ability is also important and a spec I consider.



My understanding the G master badge is how Sony classifies the “premium” line.



the next thing I’d look at here since both lenses cover the same focal length except for 20 mm. How important is the 20 mm focal length is to you.
For myself if 20 mm was not critical I’d spend my money on the 24-105 mm f4. Again like focal lengths and then some.
If 20 mm was something I wanted then ask how often I’d use it and would the 20 mm make sense , Batis 18 mm or maybe a wide zoom

If I am duplicating focal lengths it would have to make sense to me.
Same idea if I think I want to look at telephoto options

Glad someone did those tests! It's pretty cool to see how much lenses have improved. I have the 16-35 gm lens and its the first lens that I got when I switched to sony. It's gotten me some great images but I always been sort of a prime guy for longest time until recent GM zoom lenses that are just bringing such stellar performances with the convenience of a zoom. I have the voigtlander 21 1.4 as well and totally love the rendering and sunstars of that lens plus its fun to use MF for landscapes. Some of these test charts honestly I always take it with a grain of salt. Real world images where I can see the infinity sharpenss is what matters more to me aside from resistance to flare and sunstar rendering.

I am really curious to see the new 16-35 GM II come out (if rumors are true) so I can get that next possibly. Tho I also have the 12-24 GM that has given me incredible photos. What I look for a lot in a lens in the infinity sharpness. The 16-35 GM definitely is an awesome performer but once I got the 12-24 GM I saw how it was better in quiet a few ways (shooting into the sun how it retained contrast, sunstars, infinity sharpness). I've been using it much less since i got the 12-24 GM.

I just got the 24-70 GM II and totally love that lens just amazing how good it is (I did exchange it for a better copy as the first one appeared to be softer on the left side of the frame). This is one thing that I've been plagued with; having to go thru multiple copies to get a good copy. Sony still hasn't improved in this aspect and it's sad to see that I had to go through 3 copies to get a perfect copy that was not decentered.

Makes you wonder how good the 16-35 GM will be. I dunno I might go back to that prime life as I just love shooting with primes, having gotten used to the 20/35 FL that I shot with often during my nikon days. Food for thought

Thank you for the effort on the side by side testing of the 2 lenses.

I am in the same camp as you, willing to trade the absolute peak performance for portability whilst still achieving pleasing results.

I do wish that they had tested with a more recent body than the 5 years old A7R3. I am curious to see the outcome of those lens tests when performed on the 60MP sensor from the A7R4 or A7R5.

I had no expectations that the 20-70 would out perform the 24-70 GMII. I would be surprised if anyone did. Based on other reviews, the 20-70 should be good enough for my use cases and expectations, and help me to further refine my gear which gets most of its use when I am travelling.

The money saved getting the 20-70 instead of the 24-70 GMII will cover half the cost of buying a 14F1.8 GM which I want to add to my kit.

SamKnopf said:

Ephotozine tests on an A7RIII using Imatest software. AFAIK, ephotozine is the only test site that has provided formal test charts for both of these lenses. Curiously, Digitalpicture.com, which is usually quick with its reviews, has not yet tested the 20-70.

No testing procedure is perfect, but I would always choose Imatest over somebody's subjective impressions, such as those from Sonyalphablog. These are always going to be different based on the subject matter that the person shoots.

According to Ephotozine, the new 20-70 is not stellar at wide angle (which agrees with most other reviewers). The charts below suggest a signifcant shortfall for the 20-70. Not only is corner sharpness quit weak, but center sharpness is also significantly behind. (Unfortunately, the 20-70 and 24-70 were tested at different focal lengths, but the chart below is still likely to be indicative).


Sony 20-70 at 20mm, ephotozine.com


Sony 24-70 GMII at 24mm

The inexpensive Samyang 24mm f/1.8 prime has a performance that is even slightly better than the 24-70 GM. I have both the Samyang and the Sony 24-105, and my own experience confirms the ephotozine tests which show the Samyang to be considerably sharper than the 24-105. I sometimes use the Samyang in a combo with the Sony 28-60 for a very lightweight, sharp pairing:


Samyang 24mm f/1.8

Click to expand...

Ephotozine is as untrustworthy as it comes, the fact they test so much and much quicker out then everyone else who do these test is a massive red flag. Many of these test are done absolutely sluppy and are generally not to be trusted there many things that can screw up such results and you need sample seize of a noticeable size before it’s even remotely reliable or else you don’t know what your testing on.

Also edge what edge!

Malling said:

SamKnopf said:

Ephotozine tests on an A7RIII using Imatest software. AFAIK, ephotozine is the only test site that has provided formal test charts for both of these lenses. Curiously, Digitalpicture.com, which is usually quick with its reviews, has not yet tested the 20-70.

No testing procedure is perfect, but I would always choose Imatest over somebody's subjective impressions, such as those from Sonyalphablog. These are always going to be different based on the subject matter that the person shoots.

According to Ephotozine, the new 20-70 is not stellar at wide angle (which agrees with most other reviewers). The charts below suggest a signifcant shortfall for the 20-70. Not only is corner sharpness quit weak, but center sharpness is also significantly behind. (Unfortunately, the 20-70 and 24-70 were tested at different focal lengths, but the chart below is still likely to be indicative).


Sony 20-70 at 20mm, ephotozine.com


Sony 24-70 GMII at 24mm

The inexpensive Samyang 24mm f/1.8 prime has a performance that is even slightly better than the 24-70 GM. I have both the Samyang and the Sony 24-105, and my own experience confirms the ephotozine tests which show the Samyang to be considerably sharper than the 24-105. I sometimes use the Samyang in a combo with the Sony 28-60 for a very lightweight, sharp pairing:


Samyang 24mm f/1.8

Click to expand...

Ephotozine is as untrustworthy as it comes, the fact they test so much and much quicker out then everyone else who do these test is a massive red flag. Many of these test are done absolutely sluppy and are generally not to be trusted there many things that can screw up such results and you need sample seize of a noticeable size before it’s even remotely reliable or else you don’t know what your testing on.

Also edge what edge!

Click to expand...

I totally agree. I've always scratched my head over any of their reviews. Just odd. At least with Marc Alhadeff from sony alpha blog he does a far better job with samples and rates the lenses based on many aspects. I also like his chart where he has a list of what lenses maximize the potential of the R4/R5/A1 bodies. We definitely need these tests to be done on a 61 mp camera that will really stress the lenses. I also really enjoy watching dustin abbots reviews. I trust his reviews more in general.

Sevan said:

Malling said:

SamKnopf said:

Ephotozine tests on an A7RIII using Imatest software. AFAIK, ephotozine is the only test site that has provided formal test charts for both of these lenses. Curiously, Digitalpicture.com, which is usually quick with its reviews, has not yet tested the 20-70.

No testing procedure is perfect, but I would always choose Imatest over somebody's subjective impressions, such as those from Sonyalphablog. These are always going to be different based on the subject matter that the person shoots.

According to Ephotozine, the new 20-70 is not stellar at wide angle (which agrees with most other reviewers). The charts below suggest a signifcant shortfall for the 20-70. Not only is corner sharpness quit weak, but center sharpness is also significantly behind. (Unfortunately, the 20-70 and 24-70 were tested at different focal lengths, but the chart below is still likely to be indicative).


Sony 20-70 at 20mm, ephotozine.com


Sony 24-70 GMII at 24mm

The inexpensive Samyang 24mm f/1.8 prime has a performance that is even slightly better than the 24-70 GM. I have both the Samyang and the Sony 24-105, and my own experience confirms the ephotozine tests which show the Samyang to be considerably sharper than the 24-105. I sometimes use the Samyang in a combo with the Sony 28-60 for a very lightweight, sharp pairing:


Samyang 24mm f/1.8

Click to expand...

Ephotozine is as untrustworthy as it comes, the fact they test so much and much quicker out then everyone else who do these test is a massive red flag. Many of these test are done absolutely sluppy and are generally not to be trusted there many things that can screw up such results and you need sample seize of a noticeable size before it’s even remotely reliable or else you don’t know what your testing on.

Also edge what edge!

Click to expand...

I totally agree. I've always scratched my head over any of their reviews. Just odd. At least with Marc Alhadeff from sony alpha blog he does a far better job with samples and rates the lenses based on many aspects. I also like his chart where he has a list of what lenses maximize the potential of the R4/R5/A1 bodies. We definitely need these tests to be done on a 61 mp camera that will really stress the lenses. I also really enjoy watching dustin abbots reviews. I trust his reviews more in general.

Click to expand...

Check this preview (from 3' 55") from Dan Watson. He said it's even sharper than 24-70 GM II and Tamon 28-75 G2. Sure it's not a well controlled test but just his observation. The lens will be released in US market after 2 weeks. Will have tons of reviews then, be a bit patience.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

PWPhotography said:

Check this preview (from 3' 55") from Dan Watson. He said it's even sharper than 24-70 GM II and Tamon 28-75 G2. Sure it's not a well controlled test but just his observation. The lens will be released in US market after 2 weeks. Will have tons of reviews then, be a bit patience.

Click to expand...

I watched. Not familiar with this reviewer before. He seemed very focused on video shooting and seemed to skim through many of the other features and attributes that I at least consider more important.

The Amateur Photographer Review is much more balanced and detailed and very favourable with the exception of price (which seems to apply to most countries except for the US).

"Leaving aside, for the moment, the price, it’s clear that the Sony FE 20-70mm F4 G is a fine optic that delivers sharp, detailed images even when paired up with Sony’s high-resolution full-frame bodies. It’s a lens I really enjoyed using, with its extended wideangle range and impressive close-up capability providing useful extra creative scope compared to a conventional 24-70mm zoom. That 20mm wide end might sound limiting compared to a 16-35mm ultra-wide, but most of the time, it’s plenty wide enough for me. I could certainly see this lens becoming a firm favourite of landscape shooters who’d prefer to carry minimal kit."

With any late model Sony lens, Sharpness is the fourth or fifth criteria for me when considering a lens.



once you consider the purpose of the lens it could be aperture, size, range, quality of blur, etc.

Mr_Win said:

With any late model Sony lens, Sharpness is the fourth or fifth criteria for me when considering a lens.

once you consider the purpose of the lens it could be aperture, size, range, quality of blur, etc.

Click to expand...

It will be personal.
And sharpness is not my primary criteria too.
And it will be a compromise or balancing of your requirements, and once again it will be personal.

And with that said, my new 20-70F4 was just delivered 10 minutes ago!

View attachment 52b6c2951577409d88f0c3dd7c3921fe.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/80s, f8, ISO 100 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

View attachment 70cf2ea4a0374053b974a9098eab991f.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/800s, f8, ISO 400 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

Would like to hear how everyone is making out with their new 20-70's now that they have finally shipped here in North America. I got mine a couple days ago, and while I've only taken a few quick test shots (above), it seems pretty good. No obvious decentering, which is a good sign.

By the way, thedigitalpicture.com has recently added the 20-70 to the image quality database. Based on the IQ comparison tool for the 20-70 vs the 24-70 GM II, the 20-70 holds up quite well at 24mm, with a slight edge edge going to the 20-70. The GM II pulls ahead very slightly at 35mm and a bit more at 50mm, but the 20-70 looks a lot sharper than the GM II at 70mm. In my real world testing of the GM II, edge sharpness at 70mm was the weakest part of the range, so this seems accurate. Basically, the 20-70 is sharper at the extreme ends of the zoom range, while the GM II is sharper in the middle. Not much in it though.

Here is the link:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisd666

Chrisd999 said:

View attachment 52b6c2951577409d88f0c3dd7c3921fe.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/80s, f8, ISO 100 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

View attachment 70cf2ea4a0374053b974a9098eab991f.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/800s, f8, ISO 400 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

Would like to hear how everyone is making out with their new 20-70's now that they have finally shipped here in North America. I got mine a couple days ago, and while I've only taken a few quick test shots (above), it seems pretty good. No obvious decentering, which is a good sign.

By the way, thedigitalpicture.com has recently added the 20-70 to the image quality database. Based on the IQ comparison tool for the 20-70 vs the 24-70 GM II, the 20-70 holds up quite well at 24mm, with a slight edge edge going to the 20-70. The GM II pulls ahead very slightly at 35mm and a bit more at 50mm, but the 20-70 looks a lot sharper than the GM II at 70mm. In my real world testing of the GM II, edge sharpness at 70mm was the weakest part of the range, so this seems accurate. Basically, the 20-70 is sharper at the extreme ends of the zoom range, while the GM II is sharper in the middle. Not much in it though.

Here is the link:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

Click to expand...

Wow, this seems very promising. I sold Tamron FE 28-75 G2 recently and will get this lens. I could wait as long as before Africa trip in late August. Hope by then even there will be EDU discount on this lens (as I bought 16-35 PZ on EDU).

BTW, this guy created a profile that works really well. Give a try. But Adobe should update soon to add this lens profile.


--

Chrisd999 said:

View attachment 52b6c2951577409d88f0c3dd7c3921fe.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/80s, f8, ISO 100 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

View attachment 70cf2ea4a0374053b974a9098eab991f.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/800s, f8, ISO 400 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

Would like to hear how everyone is making out with their new 20-70's now that they have finally shipped here in North America. I got mine a couple days ago, and while I've only taken a few quick test shots (above), it seems pretty good. No obvious decentering, which is a good sign.

By the way, thedigitalpicture.com has recently added the 20-70 to the image quality database. Based on the IQ comparison tool for the 20-70 vs the 24-70 GM II, the 20-70 holds up quite well at 24mm, with a slight edge edge going to the 20-70. The GM II pulls ahead very slightly at 35mm and a bit more at 50mm, but the 20-70 looks a lot sharper than the GM II at 70mm. In my real world testing of the GM II, edge sharpness at 70mm was the weakest part of the range, so this seems accurate. Basically, the 20-70 is sharper at the extreme ends of the zoom range, while the GM II is sharper in the middle. Not much in it though.

Here is the link:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

Click to expand...

Have you had the chance to test out flaring? I own an excellent copy of the GM II and am kinda curious. My current setup for this FL is the 20 1.8G and 24-70 GM II. Both are absolutely incredible. The GM II has been super impressive. The 20-70 has some pretty unique sunstars that I like seeing. From sonyalphablog review the GM II has slightly better flaring but I am not too sure about that. I think the sigma 24-70 has slightly better flare but it depends of course on many factors and you have to test them side by side.

Sevan said:

Have you had the chance to test out flaring? I own an excellent copy of the GM II and am kinda curious. My current setup for this FL is the 20 1.8G and 24-70 GM II. Both are absolutely incredible. The GM II has been super impressive. The 20-70 has some pretty unique sunstars that I like seeing. From sonyalphablog review the GM II has slightly better flaring but I am not too sure about that. I think the sigma 24-70 has slightly better flare but it depends of course on many factors and you have to test them side by side.

Click to expand...

Yes, I did take some test shots to show flare and sunstars (see below). Open the image by clicking "Original Size", zoom in to 100% and you will see some tiny flare dots near one of the sunstar blades. I left them in for you to see. I did not see any haze even though pointed right at the sun. I think a very good performance in terms of flare, glare and haze. I'm not big into sunstars, so I can't comment on that aspect.


FE 20-70mm f4 G - 21mm, 1/250s, f16, ISO 100 processed in LR using FE 16-35mm f4 PZ profile

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisd666

Sevan said:

Chrisd999 said:

View attachment 52b6c2951577409d88f0c3dd7c3921fe.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/80s, f8, ISO 100 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

View attachment 70cf2ea4a0374053b974a9098eab991f.jpg
FE 20-70mm f4 G - 20mm, 1/800s, f8, ISO 400 - processed in LR using FE 16-35 f4 PZ profile

Would like to hear how everyone is making out with their new 20-70's now that they have finally shipped here in North America. I got mine a couple days ago, and while I've only taken a few quick test shots (above), it seems pretty good. No obvious decentering, which is a good sign.

By the way, thedigitalpicture.com has recently added the 20-70 to the image quality database. Based on the IQ comparison tool for the 20-70 vs the 24-70 GM II, the 20-70 holds up quite well at 24mm, with a slight edge edge going to the 20-70. The GM II pulls ahead very slightly at 35mm and a bit more at 50mm, but the 20-70 looks a lot sharper than the GM II at 70mm. In my real world testing of the GM II, edge sharpness at 70mm was the weakest part of the range, so this seems accurate. Basically, the 20-70 is sharper at the extreme ends of the zoom range, while the GM II is sharper in the middle. Not much in it though.

Here is the link:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...eraComp=1538&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=2

Click to expand...

Have you had the chance to test out flaring? I own an excellent copy of the GM II and am kinda curious. My current setup for this FL is the 20 1.8G and 24-70 GM II. Both are absolutely incredible. The GM II has been super impressive. The 20-70 has some pretty unique sunstars that I like seeing. From sonyalphablog review the GM II has slightly better flaring but I am not too sure about that. I think the sigma 24-70 has slightly better flare but it depends of course on many factors and you have to test them side by side.

Click to expand...

Have you watched this Chris preview of the lens that answered all these question?


--

Chrisd999 said:

Sevan said:

Have you had the chance to test out flaring? I own an excellent copy of the GM II and am kinda curious. My current setup for this FL is the 20 1.8G and 24-70 GM II. Both are absolutely incredible. The GM II has been super impressive. The 20-70 has some pretty unique sunstars that I like seeing. From sonyalphablog review the GM II has slightly better flaring but I am not too sure about that. I think the sigma 24-70 has slightly better flare but it depends of course on many factors and you have to test them side by side.

Click to expand...

Yes, I did take some test shots to show flare and sunstars (see below). Open the image by clicking "Original Size", zoom in to 100% and you will see some tiny flare dots near one of the sunstar blades. I left them in for you to see. I did not see any haze even though pointed right at the sun. I think a very good performance in terms of flare, glare and haze. I'm not big into sunstars, so I can't comment on that aspect.


FE 20-70mm f4 G - 21mm, 1/250s, f16, ISO 100 processed in LR using FE 16-35mm f4 PZ profile

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisd666

Click to expand...

Great thanks for the reply. This looks pretty good.

Just watched it. Looks pretty good

BTW, the latest Adobe update finally supports 20-70 G in Lr and Ps

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/supported-lenses.html