yet another lens recommendation question.

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

NowHearThis said:

wed7 said:

If you are to own 1 lens assuming you can get them at the same price AND could only afford one lens and to be used for general/rural photography/portraits/travel/landscape

which is worthwhile to to purchase and what lens you are to complement it with another?

Sony 20-70/4

Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art II

Sigma 28-105/2.8

Tamron 35-150/2.0-2.8

Thank you

#SonyA7IV

Click to expand...

I switched from Olympus to Sony just a couple weeks ago. I had the O8-25/4, O12-100/4, PL15/1.7, P42.5/1.7.

Selling all my gear only let me get the A7RIVa and one lens. The only thing that could do what I want is the 20-70/4 it goes just wide enough and 70mm on 60mp is fine. The next thing will be to pair it with a prime for lower light (Sigma 35/2 seems like a good option, but it’ll be a year before I worry about that). I’m going to try to get one lens a year if I’m lucky,

Click to expand...

welcome to the club, I think you will be thrilled. I’ve traveled the same path. Keep in mind there are a tremendous array of inexpensive, compact 3rd party lenses that don’t give up much IQ vs expensive Sony lenses!
I’ve owned the sigma 35f2, and while it is a beauty, I suggest the Samyang 35f1.8 will come very close for half the cost and 40% less weight.

the recent viltrox 14f4 is a brilliant cheap little lens!

I have the sweet Sony 40f2.5G, but suggest you get ttartisan 40f2, or viltrox 40f2.5

Click to expand...

The Samyang 35/1.8 has a lot of copy variation and is less robust than the Sigma. Looking across reviews, even a decent copy of the Samyang is noticeably behind the Sigma at f2.2.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think u are seriously under-rating the Samyang

Click to expand...

I’ve had two copies of the Samyang and looked at multiple reviews. I now have the Sigma 35/2 and have looked at multiple views of that too.

Andrew

Click to expand...

Andrew, when I was shooting L-mount, the sigma 35f2 was my favorite of a dozen lenses.

I now own 3 of the 4 Samyang “Tiny” f1.8 primes. They are excellent

RaysJ said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

NowHearThis said:

wed7 said:

If you are to own 1 lens assuming you can get them at the same price AND could only afford one lens and to be used for general/rural photography/portraits/travel/landscape

which is worthwhile to to purchase and what lens you are to complement it with another?

Sony 20-70/4

Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art II

Sigma 28-105/2.8

Tamron 35-150/2.0-2.8

Thank you

#SonyA7IV

Click to expand...

I switched from Olympus to Sony just a couple weeks ago. I had the O8-25/4, O12-100/4, PL15/1.7, P42.5/1.7.

Selling all my gear only let me get the A7RIVa and one lens. The only thing that could do what I want is the 20-70/4 it goes just wide enough and 70mm on 60mp is fine. The next thing will be to pair it with a prime for lower light (Sigma 35/2 seems like a good option, but it’ll be a year before I worry about that). I’m going to try to get one lens a year if I’m lucky,

Click to expand...

welcome to the club, I think you will be thrilled. I’ve traveled the same path. Keep in mind there are a tremendous array of inexpensive, compact 3rd party lenses that don’t give up much IQ vs expensive Sony lenses!
I’ve owned the sigma 35f2, and while it is a beauty, I suggest the Samyang 35f1.8 will come very close for half the cost and 40% less weight.

the recent viltrox 14f4 is a brilliant cheap little lens!

I have the sweet Sony 40f2.5G, but suggest you get ttartisan 40f2, or viltrox 40f2.5

Click to expand...

The Samyang 35/1.8 has a lot of copy variation and is less robust than the Sigma. Looking across reviews, even a decent copy of the Samyang is noticeably behind the Sigma at f2.2.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think u are seriously under-rating the Samyang

Click to expand...

I’ve had two copies of the Samyang and looked at multiple reviews. I now have the Sigma 35/2 and have looked at multiple views of that too.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I have read numerous reports from Samyang buyers, returning lenses due to faults, put me off the brand.

Click to expand...

Usually the complaints are louder than any amount of satisfied buyers... I'm not discounting Andrew's experience nor even chiming in on the debate over 35mm options as I've not owned that particular SY, heck I think the Custom button literally fell off (right out of the box) on one of the SY 35/1.8 that Andrew tried and that's inexcusable... However I also think sample variation is a sad fact of life with all brands and people should test their lenses thoroughly within their return window.

I've owned 3 Samyangs now and I didn't have any issues out of the box nor over time. I got good samples on the first try with all three, the 45mm, 75mm, and 135mm f1.8. In fact, even tho the SY 35/1.8 got a few more glowing reviews than the 45/1.8 I think the latter is somewhat underappreciated... And I'm not saying that cause I own it either. I just got thru comparing that 45/1.8, my 35/1.4 GM, and an even cheaper TTArtisan 40/2.

Sharpness-wise the Samyang is downright impressive even wide open, in the center and at f1.8 it looks every bit as good as the GM at f1.4, the TTArtisan is just a slight step behind. How do you know I'm not praising the SY cause I own it? I'll soon be selling it to MPB or KEH (along with a couple other things). It has a warmer color cast than the other two, and the TTArtisan 40/2 is smaller and has an aperture wheel, after I sell the SY it'll basically be free. I care more about that practical stuff than minute IQ differences.

When I do care about that last % of IQ, I use the GM, smaller lenses always tend to feature some compromises... Those small 40/45 more so than the midsize 35s, but the latter are still making some sacrifices against stuff like the GM or Viltrox LAB/Pro (or the better Sigma Arts).

Bob A L said:

I only have one Sony camera, an A7Riv, and chose the 24-240 as the only Sony lens I found that kinda covered a use for anything lens. It works great, only wish it went longer then 240 on long end. Camera came to me used with only a 16-35mm 2.8 lens that works for indoors, but not all round use.

Click to expand...

If you want more reach (and a sharper lens), you could ditch the 24-240 for a Tamron 50-300 and let your 16-35 handle the wide stuff.

RaysJ said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

NowHearThis said:

wed7 said:

If you are to own 1 lens assuming you can get them at the same price AND could only afford one lens and to be used for general/rural photography/portraits/travel/landscape

which is worthwhile to to purchase and what lens you are to complement it with another?

Sony 20-70/4

Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art II

Sigma 28-105/2.8

Tamron 35-150/2.0-2.8

Thank you

#SonyA7IV

Click to expand...

I switched from Olympus to Sony just a couple weeks ago. I had the O8-25/4, O12-100/4, PL15/1.7, P42.5/1.7.

Selling all my gear only let me get the A7RIVa and one lens. The only thing that could do what I want is the 20-70/4 it goes just wide enough and 70mm on 60mp is fine. The next thing will be to pair it with a prime for lower light (Sigma 35/2 seems like a good option, but it’ll be a year before I worry about that). I’m going to try to get one lens a year if I’m lucky,

Click to expand...

welcome to the club, I think you will be thrilled. I’ve traveled the same path. Keep in mind there are a tremendous array of inexpensive, compact 3rd party lenses that don’t give up much IQ vs expensive Sony lenses!
I’ve owned the sigma 35f2, and while it is a beauty, I suggest the Samyang 35f1.8 will come very close for half the cost and 40% less weight.

the recent viltrox 14f4 is a brilliant cheap little lens!

I have the sweet Sony 40f2.5G, but suggest you get ttartisan 40f2, or viltrox 40f2.5

Click to expand...

The Samyang 35/1.8 has a lot of copy variation and is less robust than the Sigma. Looking across reviews, even a decent copy of the Samyang is noticeably behind the Sigma at f2.2.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think u are seriously under-rating the Samyang

Click to expand...

I’ve had two copies of the Samyang and looked at multiple reviews. I now have the Sigma 35/2 and have looked at multiple views of that too.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I have read numerous reports from Samyang buyers, returning lenses due to faults, put me off the brand.

Click to expand...

The quality has increased over time. The 24/1.8 is in a different league than the earliest lenses. Read the reviews carefully - some are quite good but do your homework.

RaysJ said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

NowHearThis said:

wed7 said:

If you are to own 1 lens assuming you can get them at the same price AND could only afford one lens and to be used for general/rural photography/portraits/travel/landscape

which is worthwhile to to purchase and what lens you are to complement it with another?

Sony 20-70/4

Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art II

Sigma 28-105/2.8

Tamron 35-150/2.0-2.8

Thank you

#SonyA7IV

Click to expand...

I switched from Olympus to Sony just a couple weeks ago. I had the O8-25/4, O12-100/4, PL15/1.7, P42.5/1.7.

Selling all my gear only let me get the A7RIVa and one lens. The only thing that could do what I want is the 20-70/4 it goes just wide enough and 70mm on 60mp is fine. The next thing will be to pair it with a prime for lower light (Sigma 35/2 seems like a good option, but it’ll be a year before I worry about that). I’m going to try to get one lens a year if I’m lucky,

Click to expand...

welcome to the club, I think you will be thrilled. I’ve traveled the same path. Keep in mind there are a tremendous array of inexpensive, compact 3rd party lenses that don’t give up much IQ vs expensive Sony lenses!
I’ve owned the sigma 35f2, and while it is a beauty, I suggest the Samyang 35f1.8 will come very close for half the cost and 40% less weight.

the recent viltrox 14f4 is a brilliant cheap little lens!

I have the sweet Sony 40f2.5G, but suggest you get ttartisan 40f2, or viltrox 40f2.5

Click to expand...

The Samyang 35/1.8 has a lot of copy variation and is less robust than the Sigma. Looking across reviews, even a decent copy of the Samyang is noticeably behind the Sigma at f2.2.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think u are seriously under-rating the Samyang

Click to expand...

I’ve had two copies of the Samyang and looked at multiple reviews. I now have the Sigma 35/2 and have looked at multiple views of that too.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I have read numerous reports from Samyang buyers, returning lenses due to faults, put me off the brand.

Click to expand...

Over the past 5 years, I've owned about a dozen Samyang lenses, some bought new, others used. I still have nine primes and a zoom. I've tested them carefully, and all have performed exactly as expected and served me well.

Keep in mind that folks are much more likely to complain than to praise. Also note that I'm not the only enthusiast or pro around here who is happy with Samyang's lenses.

RaysJ said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

ahaslett said:

rashid7 said:

NowHearThis said:

wed7 said:

If you are to own 1 lens assuming you can get them at the same price AND could only afford one lens and to be used for general/rural photography/portraits/travel/landscape

which is worthwhile to to purchase and what lens you are to complement it with another?

Sony 20-70/4

Sigma 24-70/2.8 Art II

Sigma 28-105/2.8

Tamron 35-150/2.0-2.8

Thank you

#SonyA7IV

Click to expand...

I switched from Olympus to Sony just a couple weeks ago. I had the O8-25/4, O12-100/4, PL15/1.7, P42.5/1.7.

Selling all my gear only let me get the A7RIVa and one lens. The only thing that could do what I want is the 20-70/4 it goes just wide enough and 70mm on 60mp is fine. The next thing will be to pair it with a prime for lower light (Sigma 35/2 seems like a good option, but it’ll be a year before I worry about that). I’m going to try to get one lens a year if I’m lucky,

Click to expand...

welcome to the club, I think you will be thrilled. I’ve traveled the same path. Keep in mind there are a tremendous array of inexpensive, compact 3rd party lenses that don’t give up much IQ vs expensive Sony lenses!
I’ve owned the sigma 35f2, and while it is a beauty, I suggest the Samyang 35f1.8 will come very close for half the cost and 40% less weight.

the recent viltrox 14f4 is a brilliant cheap little lens!

I have the sweet Sony 40f2.5G, but suggest you get ttartisan 40f2, or viltrox 40f2.5

Click to expand...

The Samyang 35/1.8 has a lot of copy variation and is less robust than the Sigma. Looking across reviews, even a decent copy of the Samyang is noticeably behind the Sigma at f2.2.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I think u are seriously under-rating the Samyang

Click to expand...

I’ve had two copies of the Samyang and looked at multiple reviews. I now have the Sigma 35/2 and have looked at multiple views of that too.

Andrew

Click to expand...

I have read numerous reports from Samyang buyers, returning lenses due to faults, put me off the brand.

Click to expand...

I also have the 135/2 dumb Samyang and the VAF 100mm T2.3 Cine. Both are fine. I agree with Uncle Vanya that you need to do your research. There are bad copies of the 35/1.8 - you can see by comparing across reviews. There are also bad copies of the Sony - ditto.

I had two bad copies - such is life. The Sigma 35/2 only needs stopping down to f2.2 to be very close to the Viltrox LAB at f2.2. You need to look at high magnification to see any difference. It’s even close to the Tamron 35/1.4 SP.

The main difference is the bokeh isn’t quite as smooth on the Sigma. It has lesser onion rings on point highlights than the Tamron. Neither is bad.

Andrew

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Just make sure you buy the new generation 16-35G PZ, not the old Zeiss version!

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Why not carry just a 16-35 and the 50-300? I pair my 50-300 with a Tamron 20-40/2.8.

rashid7 said:

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Just make sure you buy the new generation 16-35G PZ, not the old Zeiss version!

Click to expand...

Yes, l'm not interested in the Zeiss version.

Jacques Cornell said:

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Why not carry just a 16-35 and the 50-300? I pair my 50-300 with a Tamron 20-40/2.8.

Click to expand...

Because the gap is too large and in a fairly used FL range.

Having one lens and not changing often, is a good thing when working on beaches.

Not sure the quality of the Tamron 50-300, is so good as the Sony 20-70. AF is certainly not as good.

It would also mean carrying both lenses all the time.

RaysJ said:

Jacques Cornell said:

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Why not carry just a 16-35 and the 50-300? I pair my 50-300 with a Tamron 20-40/2.8.

Click to expand...

Because the gap is too large and in a fairly used FL range.

Having one lens and not changing often, is a good thing when working on beaches.

Not sure the quality of the Tamron 50-300, is so good as the Sony 20-70. AF is certainly not as good.

It would also mean carrying both lenses all the time.

Click to expand...

You might also consider Rokinon/Samyang's 14-24/2.8.

Jacques Cornell said:

RaysJ said:

Jacques Cornell said:

RaysJ said:

When l moved to Sony about 5 months ago from Canon l bought the 20-70, the idea was it be my only lens on some trips and outings and so it has proved so far.

l occasional use my Tamron 50-300 but probably less than 10% of the time.

The problem with the 20-70 is at the wide end, maybe l have a bad version, but reviews do say it the weak area.

I'm seriously considering buying a 16-35/4, to cover the 16-24 range. I plan to do more architecture in the future.

Click to expand...

Why not carry just a 16-35 and the 50-300? I pair my 50-300 with a Tamron 20-40/2.8.

Click to expand...

Because the gap is too large and in a fairly used FL range.

Having one lens and not changing often, is a good thing when working on beaches.

Not sure the quality of the Tamron 50-300, is so good as the Sony 20-70. AF is certainly not as good.

It would also mean carrying both lenses all the time.

Click to expand...

You might also consider Rokinon/Samyang's 14-24/2.8.

Click to expand...

Thanks l will look into that lens.