28mm for sony : I need change old 28mm f2

Yeah I am not very keen on using the FE 28 F2, I compared it with the old old Minolta Maxxum 28 F2 with LA-EA5 and I find the old lens much sharper.
Just slower(actually not that slow)/noisy AF and no fancy new digital coating...and obviously bulky in use with the adapter...

--
Maxxum 7
KM 5D
Sony Alpha 700
Sony Alpha A77 II
Sony A7 IV
 
Last edited:
Hello guys

i hate the old 28mm sony because with a7IV and riii show every weakness and softness.

I need a new 28mm can be with low distortion and support high iso.

Can you help me?
If you just want it to be sharper, try another copy. The one I currently have is sharp wide-open. It has nicer rendering than the Sony FE 24mm F2.8 G which has even more distortion. The 24G may have less copy-to-copy variation.

I've tried quite a few SLR 28mm primes and the Sony FE was sharper than all of them especially in the corners. Yes, the Sony FE has more barrel distortion, but the cameras all have electronic correction.
Same.

The 28mm FE copy we have at the office outperforms both versions of the 24-70 GM at 28mm. Everyone fights over it.
 
Thx alla for some tips .

I will give you some answers.

First i don’ want use zoom because for me is more important have a prime for space (Usualy they are compact) .

The idea to buy a 24mm and crop is a good idea and you suggest me to buy the 24 gm. I will see soon this choice . The compact 24mm sony i wanna avoid because it is with eccessive distortion for my .

What about the Laowa 28 1.2?
Just in case you haven't already seen this review :


Some interesting comparisons between the different 28mm available for Sony at this time :

- Laowa f/1.2 // Sigma f/1.4 // Viltrox f/1.8 // Sony f/2

- Sigma 28-70 f/2.8 DN // Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 G2

For what it's worth, Marc isn't found of the Laowa regarding its sharpness, especially in the corners. Even if you don't mind manual focusing, it's also quite heavy and the most expansive.


The Sigma seems to be the best performer, but at the penalty of price, size and weight.

Now that all the Sony 14/20/24/35/40/50/85 are out there... it's time for a modern 28mm f/1.8 G lens, like the 20mm, but a more compact f/2.8 would be fine too.

Regards, Fred

PS : Another point of view on the Viltrox, especially about bokeh and sunstars if it's important for your photography


I would add that you use DXO instead of Capture One or Lightroom, there is no correction profile yet for this Viltrox
 
I sold my Sony 28mm some time ago, but I missed it so much that I've ordered another one. I know it lacks the modern buttons and controls (especially an aperture ring) but the optical quality is much better than the low weight might lead you to expect.
I prefer it that it doesn't have an aperture ring. It probably lowers the price and it removes unnecessary clutter. I just wish they had a similar 50mm instead of that snail AF motor.
 
Yeah I am not very keen on using the FE 28 F2, I compared it with the old old Minolta Maxxum 28 F2 with LA-EA5 and I find the old lens much sharper.
Just slower(actually not that slow)/noisy AF and no fancy new digital coating...and obviously bulky in use with the adapter...
Hmmm, .... tests by Philip Reeve show the opposite, with the Sony 28/2 the clear winner (even outperforming the Zeiss lens in some respects):

 
Can you help me?
Not really because the short answer is... there isn't one.

I like the 28mm f/2 and don't have any of the issues you mentioned. Using an A7RIII.
Well, there is two other real 28mm alternatives imo to the Sony 28mm f2, but neither might be suitable;

1)Viltrox 28mm f1.8, the viltrox is probably better overall but, its not weather sealed and possibly not as sharp in the center stopped down, but its 28mm and its an af lens. It really comes down to compromises, the Sony though wide open is soft in the corners, but does it matter, if it does get the Viltrox 28 1.8.

2)The Sigma 28-70 2.8, is not f2 at 28mm its 2.8, but its going to be better imo than the Sony 28f2 prime at 2.8, but yes it doesn't offer f2, but based on user feedback if f2 is so dissapointing do many users even use f2? The great thing about the Sigma 28-70 is its a hard stop at 28mm, you always know its 28mm, unlike a 24-70 where you have to check all the time, its hard stop is 24mm. The Sigma also has the huge advantage of the range and 2.8 throughout and the fact its very small and compact for a zoom.

Unless you need f2 at 28mm and extra size of the Sigma 28-70 is not to your taste then the Viltrox is a 100% viable option and at £/$300 definitely worth a go.

Personally, hr bodies with 4:3 and 5:4 ratios offer the most flexibility going forward, essentially offering 1.125x and 1.2x crop in-camera but still retaining 100% raw files. For this purpose if you want the best possible iq, use the Sony 24 1.4 or if you want something cheaper/smaller but with a well integrated aperture ring the Sigma 24 f2. The Sony 24-70 2.8 used in 4:3 ratio will also offer oustanding iq throughout and using 24-70 2.8 in 4:3 makes it a 28-80mm zoom with a hard stop @28mm :)
 
The Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN C is quite good, but there are several other zooms with hard stops at 28 mm:
  • Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN C
  • Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 RXD
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 VXD
  • Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD
  • Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
  • Sony FE 28-60mm F4-5.6
  • Sony FE PZ 28-135mm F4 G OSS
Owning three of these, I don't have much reason to keep the prime. I also have a very nice Samyang AF 24mm F1.8.
 
My own testing with the 2:

The first 4 shots are of the 28s, I think I did F2 and F4 and placing the subject in center and edge of the frame. All 100% crop. Left image is always the Minolta.

Aside from the edge frame I think distortion/bokeh quality of the old lens I don't see in my sample anywhere I'd prefer the new 28. But it certainly seems like the variation out there between sample quality is pretty high. Maybe I have a good old Minolta(I know mine is good, I've had that for closer to 15-20 years), but I definitely don't have a good Sony.

I compared with a few other lenses as well but no where do I see the difference where the old one just do better.
 
The Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN C is quite good, but there are several other zooms with hard stops at 28 mm:
  • Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN C
It's logical hard stop is 16?
  • Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 RXD
It's logical hard stop is 17?
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD
Its big
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 VXD
Its big also
  • Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD
Its very big and 28mm 2.8 wide open well behind Sigma
  • Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
Its slow and poor at 28mm wide open
  • Sony FE 28-60mm F4-5.6
Its f4, but small
  • Sony FE PZ 28-135mm F4 G OSS
Very Big????
Owning three of these, I don't have much reason to keep the prime. I also have a very nice Samyang AF 24mm F1.8.
Sure, but I believe its not very sharp in the center but corner s are decent and you'll need to use 4:3 ratio to emulate hfov 28mm!
 
The Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN C is quite good, but there are several other zooms with hard stops at 28 mm:
  • Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN C
  • Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 RXD
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD
  • Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 VXD
  • Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD
  • Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS
  • Sony FE 28-60mm F4-5.6
  • Sony FE PZ 28-135mm F4 G
the best of those optically is the tam 28-75 G2 UWAs are always at their worst at the long end , the fe28-70 Sony is dreadful. The PZ is a very expensive massive video lens , the 28-60 is a nice small option and a good choice if size matters more than optical perfection or aperture speed .. neither the Tam 28-200 or 28-75 mk1 or the sigma 28-70 are as good across the frame at 28mm f2.8 as the Tam G2 but are excellent compromises if size (Sigma) , price (mk1) or range (28-200) are more important

the most cost effective option is get a modern good copy of the Sony 28mm f2 . Some are very good but like most less than recent Sony lenses, sample variation isn’t good ..

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **
 
Last edited:
Yeah I am not very keen on using the FE 28 F2, I compared it with the old old Minolta Maxxum 28 F2 with LA-EA5 and I find the old lens much sharper.
Just slower(actually not that slow)/noisy AF and no fancy new digital coating...and obviously bulky in use with the adapter...
Unless you already have the lens which swap hands for good money, I'd take the Viltrox first, Sigma 28-70 2.8 second and Sony 28 f2 3rd if you dont have a 4:3 ratio in-camera. If you do, I'd take Sony 24 1.4 first and Sigma 24f2 second and then the 3 above in same order, 3rd/4th/5th. If you can afford it the GMii 24-70 in 4:3 ratio but the largest/expensive option too.

The 24 primes have the obvious advantage as they can be multi purpose 24/28 and on the a7cr 5:4 ratio too so 30mm as well! If money not an issue Sony 24 1.4 must surely be the best 24/28mm option on a modern hr Sony body with Sigma 24 f2 offering similar levels of iq in a slightly smaller package and not quite as fast.
--
Maxxum 7
KM 5D
Sony Alpha 700
Sony Alpha A77 II
Sony A7 IV
 
Last edited:
The copy of the 17-28 I had was pretty good at 28mm. I was considering getting rid of all the primes in that range after I bought it.
 
The copy of the 17-28 I had was pretty good at 28mm. I was considering getting rid of all the primes in that range after I bought it.
definitely one of the better ones at the long end (some especially DSLR fit 16/17-35s even OEM Pro F2.8s were borderline unusable faster than F8) but from experience, the wide end was a lot better ..
 
I wouldn't advocate going out to buy an old lens, I'd much prefer a new 28 F2, it more just I don't find the Sony F2 being very good to recommend...

I got a 24GM only recently and its a phenomenal lens, pretty light but I wouldn't say its compact compare to the old or new 28mm. or 24G/40G .

24G might be a good option if you don't mind the F2.8.

--
Maxxum 7
KM 5D
Sony Alpha 700
Sony Alpha A77 II
Sony A7 IV
 
Last edited:
I love that you make some comparison or dgive me zoom solution.

I love prime and I want a prime, in this moment I think really to get 24 gm crop solution or sigma 24 solution.
 
It baffles me as to why people select one lens over another primarily based on a minor performance differences, rather than form factor, features, and build. Unless you are making really large prints (like 20x30 inch or larger) or radically cropping, users will never see these differences in the real world, only through extreme pixel peeping. A fixed prime is a different beast from a zoom in terms of speed, weight and size, It's hard to fathom why a user would be comparing a 28mm prime against zooms with that in the range?
 
Last edited:
A fixed prime is a different beast from a zoom in terms of speed, weight and size, It's hard to fathom why a user would be comparing a 28mm prime against zooms with that in the range?
The Sigma 28-70 2.8 is a phenomenally small lens for what it offers. As far as I know, there are numerous primes at 2.8 or greater, so why is it hard to fathom that in the case of the Sigma 28-70 2.8 it does indeed at 28mm offer a very viable and I would have thought for most users a much more compelling option to many primes. Certainly in my case there is no way I would buy the FE 28F2, the Sigma 28-70 offers so much more imo.

Sigma 28-70 on a7cr is less than 1kg and the 50gr more than a 28f2 on a7rv, so it will also depend on your camera body too as to what the weight is.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top