Archiefamous Loc: Manhattan

Crutchfield has a generous 60 day return policy. Great for making decisions

starlifter Loc: Towson, MD

Look at that lens in the Tamron G2 version of that lens. About half the price.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

repleo Loc: Boston

If the camera is a Sony, why is the salesman recommending a Canon RF 24-70 f/2.8 ? If it is $2K, I suspect you are referring to the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM. That is a excellent top of the line Pro lens - way more than you need for pictures of kids and dogs and birds in trees. The Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 would be much better value at about $900 and near comparable quality. The Sony-Tessar T* FE 24-70 mm F4 ZA OSS at about $800 would also be a good choice although I prefer the Sony 24-105 f4 at about $1200.

Actually , none of those are a good choice for birds in trees. If birds are important to you expect to spend at least another $2K on something like the Sony FE 200–600 mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS, but that won't be any good for kids and dogs.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

"I'm trying out a Canon A7 lll. It seems great so far. At Crutchfield the sales person strongly recommended a expensive lens the Canon RF 24-70 f/2.8 for over 2K. Does anyone have any experience with this camera and lens? Any recommendations? Most of my pictures are my grand-kids, dogs running and birds in my trees
Thanks"

First thing first, I am not a Canon shooter if that matters and I do not believe that Canon makes a A7 III body. The only A7 III body I know is made by Sony.
Assuming that your camera is a Canon body, do you have the need for such an expensive professional lens? Photographing your grand kids and birds in your trees seems to me to be covered although you did not mention what lenses you own. The 24-70 f2.8 lens is a very good lens from what I know but it is not for everyone. In your case the 24-105 f4 could be a very useful lens without braking the bank. Let me repeat it, I do not know what lenses you are using now but buying such an expensive lens considering the type of shooting that you do makes no sense to me.

Be wise and save your money.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

Myself as well........crazy !

jcboy3

Do you want to buy a bridge? I have a good deal on one.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

There's a certain appeal to having The Best, but after you have it, you wonder if you actually needed it. Maybe a less expensive, non-Canon lens would also let you take pictures. Read reviews and consider buying used. I've ought all sorts of things used - never a problem.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

I have a Tamron 28-75 F 2.8 Sony Mount and it’s very good. I bought it used at less than 1/2 of the cost of the Sony f2.8
Have fun!

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

I have the Sony a7iii as well as the a99ii, a7s, a7Riii, and a6000. I have Sony "kit" E 28-70mm f3.5, Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8, (A-mount) and Zeiss E 24-70mm f4 . I am guessing the Sony FE 24-70 f2.8 G lens is similar in bulk to the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8. The f2.8 lenses are big and heavy but fantastic lenses. I like the 28-70mm but I shoot mostly nature and really prefer the wider lens. The Zeiss E 24-70mm f4 is a nice size and weight. It is a great compromise. I'm sure the 24-70 G is a fantastic lens but a bit of overkill on the a7iii. You would be able to see a noticeable difference on the higher resolution a7R series. I think the Zeiss E mount 24-70mm would be the best choice and save you $$$$$.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Since the camera is a SONY a7III...

You DEFINITELY do not want a Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 lens. That won't even fit and AFAIK isn't even adaptable for use on the Sony. (Some Canon lenses... EF and EF-S... can be adapted for use on Sony cameras.)

For what you want to shoot (kids, pets, birds), you will most likely need two zooms:

1. A general purpose "walk-around" zoom... a 24-105mm f/4 is a versatile choice that's not too big and heavy. Sony's costs $1195. Depending upon the second lens you buy, an alternative might be Sony's 24-70mm f/4 that sells for about $800. These moderately wide angle to short telephoto f/4 zooms will be reasonably compact and manageable, good for portraits, close ups, interiors, scenic shots and just general purpose. There are also fairly affordable Tamron and Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 lenses, as well as Sony's own rather pricey 24-70mm f/2.8... but all these f/2.8 lenses will necessarily be bigger and heavier. Or, a variable aperture lens like the Sony 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6 can be smaller and lighter, as well as less expensive.

Here is a pretty comprehensive list of the "walk around" zooms that are compatible with your a7III: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?labelId=48194&fct=fct_zooms-primes_5903%7czoom-lenses%2bfct_lens-type_3446%7cstandard-zoom&is=REG&from=detail&showAllAcc=Y&sku=1444401&

Note: If you have not purchased the camera yet, often there are favorable deals that include one of these lenses bungled "in kit" with the camera. At B&H Photo, I see the a7III being offered with choice of four different "kit" lenses, as well as "body only" without any lens.

2. You'll want a telephoto zoom for those pets and bird photos, as well as kids playing at a distance and other purposes. The bare minimum you'll want is a 70-200mm or 70-300mm. These can be fine for kids and pets, but pretty short for birding. In fact, birders will sometimes say, "There's no such thing as a 'long enough' telephoto lens!" If birding is important to you, start looking at longer focal lengths such as 100-400mm, a 150-600mm or the recently announced and not-too-terribly-expensive Sony 200-600mm... under $2000, which actually is a really good deal. Once you start buying lenses longer than 300mm, the prices can be as much as a used car! These are some more affordable options, mostly under $2000 and some even under $1000. All these lenses will be bigger and heavier than that "walk around" zoom above. It's just the nature of the beast! The longer the focal length, the larger the lens has to be!

Here's a pretty comprehensive list of telephoto zooms compatible with your camera: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?labelId=48194&fct=fct_zooms-primes_5903%7czoom-lenses%2bfct_lens-type_3446%7ctelephoto-zoom&is=REG&from=detail&showAllAcc=Y&sku=1444401&

Some might recommend a single "all-in-one" zoom. I usually don't recommend those for several reasons. First, there's actually only one offered specifically for Sony a7III... Sony's own 24-240mm that sells for a bit under $1000. There are other zooms of this type that are "adaptable" for use on the camera, but that's adding the cost of an adapter (about $250), complexity and may or may not give satisfactory performance. Another problem is that all-in-one zooms very typically compromise in some performance factors... AF speed? Image quality? All-in-one zooms are mostly about convenience, with performance factors secondary. Also, when you opt for an all-in-one, you're stuck with a rather large lens all the time. If the all-in-one is the only lens you've got, you can't switch to a smaller, lighter "walk-around" lens when you don't need the telephoto range. Besides, the whole idea of buying an interchangeable lens camera (ILC) is to be able to change lenses in order to adapt it for different purposes. If you're not going to do that, maybe you should be looking at a fixed-lens compact camera instead... maybe the ILC is a waste of money.

An exception is that sometimes when traveling an all-in-one zoom may be useful keeping things to a minimum.... In some situations you may not have the option of carrying extra lenses or changing out lenses at all.

Finally, a 24-240mm on a full frame a7III really isn't "long enough" for birding, if that's important (or for much small wildlife, as well as many sports). The longest all-in-one for other systems (that might be adaptable for use on an a7III) only go to 300mm, not very much better.

Try to narrow it down to a few appealing lenses, based upon whatever criteria are most important for you (price, intended use, etc.).... then carefully compare things like size, weight, etc.

azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.

I own a Sony A7iii. I have the 28-70 kit lens, a 16-35 F4 Zeiss lens, and the 70-300mm "G" lens. For your family shots, the kit lens at about $200.00 is your best bet. I have seen reviews that it is better and sharper in the corners than the 24-70 F4 Zeiss lens. I have tested the Tampon 28-75 F2.8 lens, and I can say that it is very sharp. The Sigma 24-70 F2.8 has not been released yet, but it will probably be sharper yet, with better bokeh because it has 11 blades on its aperture. I think the Sony 24-70 F2.8 is very overpriced, and I think all of us should send a message to Sony and stay away!!

I do not bird, but I do not think the 70-300 will be enough range for you. The post above mentions the 200-600 mm lens that is very new, and you should probably look into that.

ralf Loc: NJ

I am a Nikon shooter, but they have a very similarly priced 24-70mm f/2.8 lens like the Sony you mentioned. I got the Sigma 24-104mm f/4, which is very sharp throughout the zoom entire range, and is less than 1/2 the price of the "top-flight" Nikon. If I need a lens faster than f/4 I can simply pick one of the f/1.4 or f/1.8 primes. My strategic plan is to get as few zooms as possible and invest in fast, top quality primes for the long run. My "few as possible" zoom list consists of: Sigma 24-105 f/4, Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, and Nikon 200-500 f/5.6

aellman Loc: Boston MA

With the type of photography you describe, you do not need a f2.8 lens and its attendant cost. Start with the kit lens. I think you'll find it does everything you need.

Harry13

Yeah, I wouldn't go after birds with anything less than a 200mm lens or better yet, a 300mm or 400mm. Dunno what Sony's got but Canon has all three, so Sony should have a 300 or 400 if not both. Harry