in a scenario where I can only have two lenses the 24-70 makes more sense. Yes it's bigger but I'm also able to shoot a nice portrait spontaneously without changing the lens. Just the price tho..
AH yes this is the REAL choice. THB if I was considering a 24-70 F2.8 it would be the Sigma one based on price as the image seems about the same as the Sony GM one.
Great comparison. Thanks. For me, the main takeaway for the 24-50 is that you get two lenses in one, so to speak. A FF 24-50 F2.8, and with APSC-crop also a 50-75. What do you think about that use-case? Given that thought, I’m surprised you did not mention the Tamron 20-40 F2.8. Very neat little lens. You get the 20-23mm on the wide end and can still APSC-crop to 60mm. Would that be a good option for travel and walkabout photography? I’d say yes.
I legit want to replace my 24-70 Art with a 24-50 G Whenever I shoot with the 24-70 I always shoot between 24 and 50. If I go past 50 I'm always a little too short and would rather use an 85mm.
Thanks for the video. As of May 2024 I own both the 24-70/2.8 GM II and use it with my A1 and A7RV and the new 24-50/2.8 G and use it on my A7CR and A7CII that I bought for lighter/smaller travel. I have the 70/2.8 GM II for two years now and the original GM before that. All great lenses and for me size does matter. Take care.
I wish they would zoom the same way as all cine zooms . This is an advantage of Sigma . If Sony is going after folk used to cine zooms they should change , but stills folk might get pissed off ? Their power zooms ,you can change it in the camera menu.
@@alphaandomega2709 I love the lens. It's better than expected.... sharp, small and compact. Covers the most important focal lengths for me 24, 35 and 50mm. Definitely recommend.
More like we are spoiled as Sony shooters. Once you shoot F2.8 and also can shoot F4 making it more versatile you won’t go back to F4 lenses. Overall a Win Win for Sony.
