Samyang AF 24 f2.8 vs SEL2470 f4

[UBrot]

I currently have the samyang 24 which i quite Like. Its small and lightweight and with sufficient IQ.

But i am still in the return period and Just now thinking about returning it and buying a used Sony 24 70 f4.

The 2470 ist considered as weak. But how does it compare to a prime Like the samyang? It would be about 120eur more.

 

[BrentSchumer]

I currently have the samyang 24 which i quite Like. Its small and lightweight and with sufficient IQ.

But i am still in the return period and Just now thinking about returning it and buying a used Sony 24 70 f4.

The 2470 ist considered as weak. But how does it compare to a prime Like the samyang? It would be about 120eur more.

The Tamron 24mm F2.8 is another option if you really like that focal length. Very good sharpness.

 

[Corelli]

The 24-70 F4 Zeiss at 24mm is FAR worse than the Samyang 24 2.8. NO COMPARISON.

I bought one new years ago for my A7r and was shocked at how poor the corners and edges were even stopped down compared to my 16-35 F4. I sent it back and got the 24-240 which at least at 24mm was clearly better.

I now have the 24-105 F4 with the A7rIV which is excellent even wide open.

I also have the Samyang 24 2.8 as a light and very good WA prime. It is again better than my 16-35 F4 at 24mm.

If you want a zoom, go for the 24-105 F4. It is absolutely worth the price.

Cheers

 

[UBrot]

The problem is, I really like the Samyang 24. It's sharp enough, compact, lightweight and fit's in the pocket. Alas, as my camera and format-change drained my budget the Samyang is currently the only lens I own (aside from an old Minolta 135 3.5).

My plan was to compliment the Samyang 24 with it's 45 sibling.

But I ran across a cheap Zeiss and am thinking about how much would I give up on behalf of image quality and gain flexibility with the zoom.

But perhaps it would be easyer to just replace the 24 with the Zeiss 24-70. But at that the 24mm end has to be at least good.

 

[StefanMunich]

You nearly never can compare prime sharpness with zoom sharpness, primes are with some expensive exceptions like some GM zooms, that are on par especially with cheaper primes, always sharper.

BUT: Sharpness is not the only thing. The Sony-Zeiss zooms have a beautiful rendering and pictures have some own touch compared to some other lens makers lenses or lines that are sometimes mouch more sterile (not valid for every lense, each is different). I think it has something to do with their coatings and also other focus on different things during kens development.

I still love the pictures that come out of my 16-70Z Sony Zeiss APS-C zoom despite of having much sharper lenses like 24mm GM prime or Batis 40.

Having the decision between 24-70Z and 24mm Samyang I would go the Sony-Zeiss zoom way especially when you are on a budget and will not be able to afford multiple other lenses.

Fur sure it is not the sharpest lense in the world, but sharpness is not the only deciding and important criteria.

 

[Corelli]

I certainly agree that sharpness shouldn't be the only or even primary criterion, but at least on my copy of the 24-70 Z the edges and corners were a blurry, smeary mess. At 28mm things improved. The price at the time 6 years ago was around 1300 Euros and I just couldn't justify the price/performance ratio.

There are much better and much cheaper 28-70mm zooms these days.

 

[Tristimulus]

I certainly agree that sharpness shouldn't be the only or even primary criterion, but at least on my copy of the 24-70 Z the edges and corners were a blurry, smeary mess.

The extreme edges are the weak point of this lens.

However over most of the field the Zeiss 4/24-70 is sharper and has higher contrast than the Canon and Nikon equivalents.

So if the over all image matter then the Zeiss 4/24-70 actually has something to offer. At least for general and reportage style photography. Did use this lens extensively for years and comments about the images and image quality was very positive - but then the audience did not know which lens I did use.

Still keep the lens, compact and light weight, good image quality where it matters (unless beeing one of the pixel peepers obsessed with the few last millimeters of the extreme corners - then there might be some food for bashing).

At 28mm things improved. The price at the time 6 years ago was around 1300 Euros and I just couldn't justify the price/performance ratio.

Primes usually offer good sharpness for the money. The cheaper ones usually have slower and less precise auto focus. But so it is - pay more and you get more...

There are much better and much cheaper 28-70mm zooms these days.

Depends what is meant by better. Cheaper usually means slower and less precise auto focus. But most seems to be hung up on extreme corner sharpness anyway so other things might not matter at all... :-D

 

[jcm56]

I have owned both at the same time, and the Samyang is miles better than the 24-70F4, at least at around f8-f11. It is much sharper. The Zeiss has better colour, though this can be offset by a few tweeks in processing. The zoom, at 24mm, is pretty smeary in the corners, and not much better at the edges.

 

[Corelli]

Actually, I'm not a pixel peeper, but when I buy a new lens I do compare it with other lenses I own. I don't expect a zoom to have the edge quality of a prime, but it should measure up to other good zooms. The Zeiss didn't, but I agree it did render nicely from about 28mm. I really wanted the 24mm FL at the time in an all-round travel lens and after comparing the Zeiss to the 24-240 Sony I sent it back. It's all about the compromises you are willing to make and there are always compromises.

When the 24-105 F4 became available, I bought it immediately. It blows the 24-240 out of the water even wide open. It has prime to close to prime quality. Sold the Sony.

Cheers

 

[BrentSchumer]

Actually, I'm not a pixel peeper, but when I buy a new lens I do compare it with other lenses I own. I don't expect a zoom to have the edge quality of a prime, but it should measure up to other good zooms. The Zeiss didn't, but I agree it did render nicely from about 28mm. I really wanted the 24mm FL at the time in an all-round travel lens and after comparing the Zeiss to the 24-240 Sony I sent it back. It's all about the compromises you are willing to make and there are always compromises.

When the 24-105 F4 became available, I bought it immediately. It blows the 24-240 out of the water even wide open. It has prime to close to prime quality. Sold the Sony.

Cheers

Have you tried the 28-200mm? It seems to split the difference between 24-105mm IQ and 24-240mm reach.

 

[Corelli]

I haven't tried the 28-200, but if it had been available 4 years ago I most probably would have bought it since the photos from it look excellent. I do make a lot of use of 24mm, but I could cover that with my Samyang 24 2.8.

Cheers

 

[mcslsk]

I currently have the samyang 24 which i quite Like. Its small and lightweight and with sufficient IQ.

But i am still in the return period and Just now thinking about returning it and buying a used Sony 24 70 f4.

The 2470 ist considered as weak. But how does it compare to a prime Like the samyang? It would be about 120eur more.

The Tamron 24mm F2.8 is another option if you really like that focal length. Very good sharpness.

But rather slow AF. Returned mine.

 

[mcslsk]

The Samyang starts to shine from f5.6. Overall, my copy of the 2470/4 is as sharp but renders more nicely. The Samyang is for small footprint, the zoom for flexibility.

 

[UBrot]

Thanks, you really gave me Lot to think about.

 

[Mr_Win]

Actually, I'm not a pixel peeper, but when I buy a new lens I do compare it with other lenses I own. I don't expect a zoom to have the edge quality of a prime, but it should measure up to other good zooms. The Zeiss didn't, but I agree it did render nicely from about 28mm. I really wanted the 24mm FL at the time in an all-round travel lens and after comparing the Zeiss to the 24-240 Sony I sent it back. It's all about the compromises you are willing to make and there are always compromises.

When the 24-105 F4 became available, I bought it immediately. It blows the 24-240 out of the water even wide open. It has prime to close to prime quality. Sold the Sony.

Cheers

Have you tried the 28-200mm? It seems to split the difference between 24-105mm IQ and 24-240mm reach.

It’s much closer to the 24-105 than 24-240, it’s very good

 

[BrentSchumer]

Actually, I'm not a pixel peeper, but when I buy a new lens I do compare it with other lenses I own. I don't expect a zoom to have the edge quality of a prime, but it should measure up to other good zooms. The Zeiss didn't, but I agree it did render nicely from about 28mm. I really wanted the 24mm FL at the time in an all-round travel lens and after comparing the Zeiss to the 24-240 Sony I sent it back. It's all about the compromises you are willing to make and there are always compromises.

When the 24-105 F4 became available, I bought it immediately. It blows the 24-240 out of the water even wide open. It has prime to close to prime quality. Sold the Sony.

Cheers

Have you tried the 28-200mm? It seems to split the difference between 24-105mm IQ and 24-240mm reach.

It’s much closer to the 24-105 than 24-240, it’s very good

Yeah I rented it and was impressed by the IQ. The only weakness is a lack of lens stabilization.