Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv

Started 2 months ago | Questions
Guy Churchward
Guy Churchward Regular Member • Posts: 404
Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv
1

Just returning the Sony 24-105, not going into massive detail but didn’t feel a leap over the 16-34 I have so didn’t feel the purchase added an extra dimension for me (lens great just personal choice)

so I have a Zeiss f4 16-34 and a 100-400GM

I have 4 paths I am contemplating :-

1. Add the 200-600

2. Buy the 24-70GM and sell the 16-34 (or keep)

3. Add the 90mm Macro

4. Buy the 27-70 + 90m and sell the 16-34

.....

‘’thought process’

1. I don’t want to compromise but also find the Zeiss pretty damn good but wonder how much shaper and better a GM woul be sitting on the body daily..

2. I like wildlife photography so extra length (1.4x pairing) is always good and a monster pap lens is entertaining

3. I like proper macro photography but when I had my Canon setup 150m Macro I found I rarely used it..so likely it will be a fad lens not a regular

4. Perhaps I should spend up on a daily lens and buy the GM, gor]t nervous first time round on people moaning at weight but perhaps that’s the choice I shoo have taken in the 1st place...

right now I have concluded the 24-105 isn’t the daily I want, and will keep the 16-34 for travel... 100-400 is planted on the lens for activity in the garden and will continue with these two and learn the combos but am interested in your immediate gut reaction on the choice you would take.

so 1-4 ?

 Guy Churchward's gear list:Guy Churchward's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony a7R IV Sony 1.4x Teleconverter Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +2 more
ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Richard M Contributing Member • Posts: 552
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv

Why do you feel the 24-70 or 104 focal Length would suit you better than the 16-35 they are very different would you be happy losing that much wide angle.

you also seem to be asking should you get a really long telephoto or a macro?

-- hide signature --

Regards
Richard

 Richard M's gear list:Richard M's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7R IV Sony RX100 Sony a6000 Sony a77 II +16 more
Guy Churchward
OP Guy Churchward Regular Member • Posts: 404
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv

Richard M wrote:

Why do you feel the 24-70 or 104 focal Length would suit you better than the 16-35 they are very different would you be happy losing that much wide angle.

you also seem to be asking should you get a really long telephoto or a macro?

‘Ish .....

I am unsure if the 24-70 is better or I would have bought it

I am not asking if I should buy a long or macro..

I am asking if I ave the lenses I have and wanted to buy a 3rd lens based on the choices I laid out .. which lens gives me a larger greenfield opportunity as the 2 lenses I have cover a pretty large array

I assumed if I got the 24-105 then the extra length would feel much better and obvious and it did not.

the 16-34 is f4 so perhaps I kill 2 birds with a 2.8 and longer range

perhaps the extra reach from the 400 to the 600 with 1.4x is a better choice and think of the 100-400 as garden and nearly macro

perhaps a dedicated macro as I can go exponentially closer and open up another avenue of photography.

so it’s looks like throwing darts blind but I’m looking for advice based on what I have and potentially experience with the other choice lenses to see if they give a lot of extra scope or if I just muddle along with what I have and all is good.

i returned the 24-105 as it didn’t feel like a massive advantage to have over the 16-34, I’ve been there before with a backpack full of lenses and it’s not really me..

hope that helps a little with the explanation.... my stuff, what they don’t really cover that well and what might be a good addition or switch that I would see a marked difference of opportunity opening...

the A7Riv is a beast of a camera and I want to do it justice.. I am winding down work and winding up my photography again so it’s a progressive thing..

thank you

guy

 Guy Churchward's gear list:Guy Churchward's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony a7R IV Sony 1.4x Teleconverter Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +2 more
chrisrabe Senior Member • Posts: 1,883
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv
2

Guy Churchward wrote:

Just returning the Sony 24-105, not going into massive detail but didn’t feel a leap over the 16-34 I have so didn’t feel the purchase added an extra dimension for me (lens great just personal choice)

so I have a Zeiss f4 16-34 and a 100-400GM

I have 4 paths I am contemplating :-

1. Add the 200-600

2. Buy the 24-70GM and sell the 16-34 (or keep)

3. Add the 90mm Macro

4. Buy the 27-70 + 90m and sell the 16-34

.....

‘’thought process’

1. I don’t want to compromise but also find the Zeiss pretty damn good but wonder how much shaper and better a GM woul be sitting on the body daily..

2. I like wildlife photography so extra length (1.4x pairing) is always good and a monster pap lens is entertaining

3. I like proper macro photography but when I had my Canon setup 150m Macro I found I rarely used it..so likely it will be a fad lens not a regular

4. Perhaps I should spend up on a daily lens and buy the GM, gor]t nervous first time round on people moaning at weight but perhaps that’s the choice I shoo have taken in the 1st place...

right now I have concluded the 24-105 isn’t the daily I want, and will keep the 16-34 for travel... 100-400 is planted on the lens for activity in the garden and will continue with these two and learn the combos but am interested in your immediate gut reaction on the choice you would take.

so 1-4 ?

If the 24-105mm wasn't for you, what do you think the 24-70mm will give you that the 24-105mm couldn't?

And would you prefer more macro work, or getting in closer to far away animals?

It sounds like you are saying that you probably won't use the macro much - so it seems fairly obvious to me, from the info you gave, that you would probably get more use out of the 200-600mm... Unless the 100-400mm really is sufficient for what you want.

Both the 24-105mm and the 100-400mm are great for pseudo macro without needing macro lens (for at least getting reasonably close)

Sounds a bit like GAS. Which is ok. But just think about whether you will really use whatever it is you think you may end up with.

 chrisrabe's gear list:chrisrabe's gear list
Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony a7R III Sony a7 III Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Zeiss Batis 18mm F2.8 +4 more
Guy Churchward
OP Guy Churchward Regular Member • Posts: 404
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv

Thx Chris, per the previous note, it’s more asking people with more experience of the E-mount lenses mapped to the A7R4 if I made one of the choices I laid out would I get a marked improvement in opportunities in the vectors of light, sharpness, distance or macro.... my gut actually says the marked improvement would blight f4 min to a 2,8 but if I don’t do a lot of indoor work then perhaps void, sharpness.. -I very much doubt it as both lenses are good... reach.. we’ll I have to goto a bird sanctuary to answer if the 100-400 + 1.4 is good enough (last visit was with a 6300).. and macro.. likely a clear advantage but would I use it a lot or not ?..

perhaps this is impossible to answer but It’s a question of what I have and if that combo from a kit perspective is missing something or ‘just’ covers something them perhaps I should invest... hope that makes a little more sense... thx Guy

 Guy Churchward's gear list:Guy Churchward's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony a7R IV Sony 1.4x Teleconverter Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +2 more
blue_skies
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 11,871
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv
1

Guy Churchward wrote:

Just returning the Sony 24-105, not going into massive detail but didn’t feel a leap over the 16-34 I have so didn’t feel the purchase added an extra dimension for me (lens great just personal choice)

so I have a Zeiss f4 16-34 and a 100-400GM

I have 4 paths I am contemplating :-

1. Add the 200-600

2. Buy the 24-70GM and sell the 16-34 (or keep)

3. Add the 90mm Macro

4. Buy the 27-70 + 90m and sell the 16-34

.....

‘’thought process’

1. I don’t want to compromise but also find the Zeiss pretty damn good but wonder how much shaper and better a GM woul be sitting on the body daily..

2. I like wildlife photography so extra length (1.4x pairing) is always good and a monster pap lens is entertaining

3. I like proper macro photography but when I had my Canon setup 150m Macro I found I rarely used it..so likely it will be a fad lens not a regular

4. Perhaps I should spend up on a daily lens and buy the GM, gor]t nervous first time round on people moaning at weight but perhaps that’s the choice I shoo have taken in the 1st place...

right now I have concluded the 24-105 isn’t the daily I want, and will keep the 16-34 for travel... 100-400 is planted on the lens for activity in the garden and will continue with these two and learn the combos but am interested in your immediate gut reaction on the choice you would take.

so 1-4 ?

What do you need? The GM lenses will add sharpness, but only visible on the R bodies and in the fine details. They add f/2.8, this is more interesting, at least to some.

16-35 is too wide for daily and/or travel use. It is a convenient lens, but if you pair it with a 100mm+ lens, then you leave out a big gap.

If you like your 16-35 and 100-400 lenses, then consider keeping them and adding the 90mm macro lens (per your comments above) as well as the 55mm f/1.8 . This makes for a 4-lens kit, but adds more versatility (macro and low light).

Alternatively, you can consider the 50mm f/2.8 Macro lens - it covers the same versatility (macro and low light), but to a lesser extent., It is much easier to travel with though.

If you are serious about wildlife, consider a faster (than a zoom) fixed lens, this may give you more options (shutter speed wise). Also consider a tripod and manual focus.

The other lenses to consider are the f/2.8 Sigma zoom lenses, they are more compact and more affordable than the Sony GM lenses.

If I were you, I'd opt for the 50mm f/2.8 Macro lens at this time, and save all other options for later...

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony a7 II Sony a7R II +37 more
Astrophotographer 10 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,341
Re: Blink decision.. which one would you choose - 2kit going to 3kit ? a7Riv

Guy Churchward wrote:

Just returning the Sony 24-105, not going into massive detail but didn’t feel a leap over the 16-34 I have so didn’t feel the purchase added an extra dimension for me (lens great just personal choice)

so I have a Zeiss f4 16-34 and a 100-400GM

Zeiss 16-34 F4, I haven't heard of this lens. Is it a full frame lens?

I have 4 paths I am contemplating :-

1. Add the 200-600

2. Buy the 24-70GM and sell the 16-34 (or keep)

3. Add the 90mm Macro

4. Buy the 27-70 + 90m and sell the 16-34

Never heard of a 27-70 lens. What is it?

.....

‘’thought process’

1. I don’t want to compromise but also find the Zeiss pretty damn good but wonder how much shaper and better a GM woul be sitting on the body daily..

I have the 24-70 F2.8GM and its a lovely lens. Its my main lens and it is a bit heavy and large but its also awesome. Tamron 28-75 often gets compliments but I did read one post saying A7riv was showing up weaknesses in the Tamron. I'd stick to GM lenses which are rated to 100mp.

2. I like wildlife photography so extra length (1.4x pairing) is always good and a monster pap lens is entertaining

What is a pap lens? Slang for large, or paparazzi?

3. I like proper macro photography but when I had my Canon setup 150m Macro I found I rarely used it..so likely it will be a fad lens not a regular

4. Perhaps I should spend up on a daily lens and buy the GM, gor]t nervous first time round on people moaning at weight but perhaps that’s the choice I shoo have taken in the 1st place...

right now I have concluded the 24-105 isn’t the daily I want, and will keep the 16-34 for travel... 100-400 is planted on the lens for activity in the garden and will continue with these two and learn the combos but am interested in your immediate gut reaction on the choice you would take.

so 1-4 ?

The 24-105 is a very popular lens so if you don't like that take that into account for similar type lenses like 24-70. F2.8 is better than F4 though.

Its hard to answer questions about which lens is best without a very concise statement about what type of photos you prefer to take. Landscape, travel, family, macro, nightscapes, bird in flight, sports etc.

Greg.

 Astrophotographer 10's gear list:Astrophotographer 10's gear list
Sony a7R II Sony a7R III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Zeiss Loxia 21mm F2.8 +1 more
Ron Poelman
Ron Poelman Veteran Member • Posts: 7,602
Sony 85 F1.8 (NT)
-- hide signature --

Ron.
Volunteer, what could possibly go wrong ?

 Ron Poelman's gear list:Ron Poelman's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H2 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Sony SLT-A57 NEX5R Sony a7R +25 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads