Being involved in digital photography for over 16 years and photographing a wide variety of subjects including event photography, that found me photographing indoors and outdoors, covering wedding, baptisms, family gatherings and portraits along with other events the focal length works for a variety of subjects and a good every day lens, now if you shoot on a APSC camera with 2.8 aperture and use a zoom that covers the same focal length the 20-70mm f4 will give you better background separation than the equivalent 2.8 lens on APSC.
I think I love this lens already! I have the 35-150mm but sometimes I want something light weight. I was about to get a 24-70mm but to save on size and I don’t mind F4. Price is also competitive.
I ordered my 20-70 the other day to pair with my 35-150 Tamron. I totally agree with wanting a lightweight walk around with the ability to go further than 40mm. I actually sold my 20-40 due to it not having an aperture ring for video. The IC was good on that one, but this Sony will be killer!
Another nice review. Looks like a great option. If I didn't already own the 24-105 and the Zeiss 16-35 I would seriously consider it. And you're right re f4. Modern Sony cameras' high ISO is amazing.
But as far as ISO goes, it's like taking fine grain film and replacing it with coarse grain high speed film. The picture will degrade or not be as tight/ detailed. I come from the land of film cameras and used anything from fine to coarse film. The sensor is not film, it doesn't act like film. The further you enlarge, the worse the picture gets, as in terrible. It's because the grain gets bigger and detail gets softer but dig into the sensor and you will something entirely different. That is why I like to use a high pixel count body, like the A7R3. Wish I had the R5.
The two lens that you mention may be f2.8 but don't have the aperture ring and other features of the Sony lens, don't have the focal length and is not as sharp through the focal length of the lens.
Last year, I switched to Sony too. It was for Tamron lenses. Sony is making it very interesting and competitive. Now, we have too many choices! I was getting ready to replace my Tamron 17-28 with the 20-40. Getting the 20-70 will also make my Tamron 28-75 G2 redundant. I wish there was a way for me to test the 20-70 before I buy it. Tamron lent me the 20-40 and the 50-400, both of which I loved, until now!
It's "aggressively priced" here in the UK too - as in, "whack you over the head with a club and steal your wallet" aggressive. 1400 GBP! :O. It is cheaper to fly to Canada, buy this lens, and fly back, than to buy it here.
I have the 20 G and a Sigma 24-70 so I can see the value with that lens, but at f4 I would rather get the 24-105 G. The lens I really want to get though is Tamrons 35-150 and pair that with the 20 G, yep.
All hating on Nikon for starting there mirrorless line with a small and sharp 24-70 f/4 and praising Sony for nearly doing the same 4 years later. Funny.
Had it been a new 20 -105, it would have had me. But I am more likely to consistently use the 71 -105 range on a 24-105 than i am the 20 -23mm on this.
Check out the 16-35mm PZ zoom f4.0. That is really small, short and light. Not big and clumsy as the 20-70. I'd stick with the 24-105. It is a great and very sharp lens. To compliment this lens, I have the Sigma 14-24 f2.8. That's quite a bit wider and now you need only two lenses, the other being the 24-105. I think these videos are made to convince people to buy and sell and lose money thinking they are going to finally get the Holy Grail. 20mm will eventually not be wide enough and 70mm will not be long enough.
This is an interesting lens, but I think Im going to go for the Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 only because I think I'm getting the A7R5, so I can get the 40 to push to 60 at 31mp. I currently shoot Nikon (swapping to Sony) the A7R5 is now at £3000 and the Tamron is £600 - a lot of money but its my dream combination for my social media work
Hi Mark, I just got done testing the 20-40. Tamron lent it tome along with the 50-400 for a few weeks. I loved both lenses. I already own the 17-28 and the 28-75 G2. I think the 20-70 would be a good replacement for a one-lens solution. I am debating whether I would miss the one stop going with the 20-70. I am shooting with the A7RIV and loving it. The resolution and dynamic range insanely good. I tried the 20-40 in APSc mode for a 60mm reach. You still get a 26MP resolution which is plenty for most situations. Had I not had the A7RIV, I would have gotten the A7RV in a heartbeat. BTW, I love Nikon bodies, their color science and ergonomics. The reason I did not go with Nikon was the fact they are asking serious money for their lenses which are out of my budget range. With Sony, I have lots of alternatives. With Nikon AND Canon there are few or non. Sony body with all Tamron lens line up has served me well.
This lens is really confusing me. I have 16-35/4 ZA and the 24-105/4. I use 70-105 a lot, I use 16-20 a lot. But a single carry lens that chops off a bit from each lens .. is super useful. It has an aperture ring too, which I value a lot. Thanks Sony. Always baffling me with options. Could be worse- could be a Canon/Nikon shooter.
Great video! I sold my 24-105 for the 20-70 to pair with my newly acquired A7CR. The 20-70 is much smaller, lighter and sharper than the 24-105 and I am extremely impressed with how well it fits my everyday needs as a walk about lens. Too many people are judging this lens because its an f4 without considering its features and capabilities that, in my opinion, easily overcome it not being an f2.8.
personally still prefer the Tamron 20-40mm f2.8. This has a more versatile telephoto end but that f4 got me shaking in my boots lol. It's also a bit too clinically sharp for my taste.
@@chrisbrockhurst I know but my precious bokeh! 😂. Did a video for a school with the Zeiss 16-35mm f4 on the a7 IV and the shots were all clean. Even interior low lit stuff. But I need at least one f1.4 lens in my life lol
Depends on what you want to pair it with and how you intend to use it. The 20- 40 is perfect for street and travel. I am pairing it with Tamron's 28-200 but it also plays well with, say, Sony's 85 f1.8 for an even smaller kit. All three lenses have the 67mm filter size which is very handy. The Tamron 20-40 f2.8 is currently priced at $699 USD where the bigger and heavier Sony 20-70 f4 is selling for $1099 USD. Hmm, that is a $400 difference. I think that is why all the reviewers are shying away from the more obvious comparison of these two "new to the market" lenses and instead comparing the Sony 20- 70 to its older brother the 24-105. I chose the Tamron 20-40 lens after checking out Sony's 16-35 f.4 G lens and don't think this new Sony 20-70 f.4 lens will cause me to regret my buying decision. Hope that helps! Btw, I am using Sony A7c and A6500 currently. I have checked it out on my A7iii as well. The Tamron 20-40 balances very nicely on those camera bodies.
I am torn between this and the tamron 20-40 f2.8 which I can get a 60mm f4 equiv in crop mode with. What are your thoughts between the 2? Also, is it true native glass works a lot better with active steady shot?
I wonder how much the Canadian price will be?? I am pretty happy with the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 and am pairing it with Tamron's 28-200 for a very workable travel kit. Much lighter than the combo that you are using in this video ( and a lot cheaper!) I even have room to throw in a nice fast prime and still save on weight! Yes, I am a weakling!
Great video, thank you very much! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!
Yeah… without the OSS, this kind of misses the mark. The reason why the 24-105 f4 was a phenomenal lens was because of the OSS and it’s use for video. For photo, there are better options all around…
Fair opinion but counter argument - lenses don't need OSS anymore with any of the newer Sony bodies, i highly doubt we'l see it on anything thats not a telezoom moving forward. Also, in terms of Sony there isn't any other lens that covers this focal range, you'd need multiple lenses.
@@chrisbrockhurst Fair enough on the focal length part, I think the 20mm end does add some options which is neat. Regarding OSS, the only issue I have with that is Sony IBIS still isn’t comparable to Panasonic IBIS or Canon OSS+IBIS - thoughts?
☝🏻 sorry but I have been looking for a lens like this 🥳🥴 (you said in your video, nobody asked for it )… why? ;because it matches the 10/35 mm zoom from zeiss, which I was using for years on the GH5! 👋🏻🙃 just saying carry on.
yes 20-70 f4 dosent sound amazing ant first. then I was like wait 20 to 70?!? wow wow wow... 20? nooooo... this is better than 24. like if you think about todays day and age of content you want a wide lens. this might be the best lens for run and gun lens
This is overpriced and should be around the Tamron 20-40's pricepoint imo. 30mm more reach but losing a lot of light. This is probably the lens I'll get for my next RU-vid series but I feel like I'm overpaying for what it is.
Damn, I was really interested in this lens. Turns out it'll be much more expensive in Europe. 1599 euro's (and the dollar and euro are roughly the same these days). Sad
I run 24-105 and the old Zeiss 16-35, very happy with both except corners when widest. I didn't realize what a GM would do until I got the 100-400. Not likely to replace any, but I can see how 24-70 owners might be tempted
