Sony vs Viltrox lens comparison: I am debating between the Sony 28mm f2 and the Viltrox 28mm f1.8, mostly for street photography; shooting on Sony A7cii. price and aperture differences...

dkeysser Loc: Minneapolis

I am debating between the Sony 28mm f2 and the Viltrox 28mm f1.8, mostly for street photography; shooting on Sony A7cii. price and aperture differences not an issue, just overall image quality. Suggestions? Thanks.
Don

User ID

dkeysser wrote:

I am debating between the Sony 28mm f2 and the Viltrox 28mm f1.8, mostly for street photography; shooting on Sony A7cii. price and aperture differences not an issue, just overall image quality. Suggestions? Thanks.
Don

More suggestion than recommendation:

I use the Sony 28/2.0. Great AF (single, never tracking). Cant comment on the Viltrox 28 but am happy with other Viltrox items.

After many months deliberating ($) about the Sigma 24/3.5, I stumbled onto a used one and ordered it (B&H). I am already happy with four other Sigmas in the same series as that 24, and my suggestion is to consider the 24/3.5.

If speed is an issue, theres also an f/2.0 version as well. Cuz I already have the Sony 28/2.0, I chose compactness over speed for the 24. I guess you would prefer speed ?

Dennis833 Loc: Australia

I'm not a street photographer but I have heard that the Sony 28-60mm f4-5.6 mite be worth considering?

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

dkeysser wrote:

I am debating between the Sony 28mm f2 and the Viltrox 28mm f1.8, mostly for street photography; shooting on Sony A7cii. price and aperture differences not an issue, just overall image quality. Suggestions? Thanks.
Don

At 24MP you might not be able to see a difference.

I haven't seen a review or a price for the Viltrox but it's likely to cost more than the Sony and f/1.8 is virtually the same as f/2

User ID

selmslie wrote:

At 24MP you might not be able to see a difference.

I haven't seen a review or a price for the Viltrox but it's likely to cost more than the Sony and f/1.8 is virtually the same as f/2

Uh huh. Sonys 28/2 has been around for a looong time and its price has fallen to near half of its intro price years ago.

It never gets rave reviews. But that never shows in actual use. Its no dog.

OTOH the OP is dismissing price concerns.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

User ID wrote:

Uh huh. Sonys 28/2 has been around for a looong time and its price has fallen to near half of its intro price years ago.

It never gets rave reviews. But that never shows in actual use. Its no dog.

The 35mm version works fine too and it's better for street photography.

User ID

selmslie wrote:

The 35mm version works fine too and it's better for street photography.

24, 28, 35, 45mm ... kinda depends on the width of your streets, dont it ?!?

Riverside broad avenue
Riverside broad avenue...

(Download)

Nonvehicular zone
Nonvehicular zone...

(Download)

Narrow one-lane street
Narrow one-lane street...

(Download)

Downtown intersection
Downtown intersection...

(Download)

User ID

Dennis833 wrote:

I'm not a street photographer but I have heard that the Sony 28-60mm f4-5.6 mite be worth considering?

Inneressing ... Id never heard that. I wonder why such a narrow range lens slows down to f:5.6. Maybe its really tiny ? Is it a pancake ?

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

User ID wrote:

24, 28, 35, 45mm ... kinda depends on the width of your streets, dont it ?!?

Lively and loaded with energy

User ID

joecichjr wrote:

Lively and loaded with energy

Thanks. Acoarst "street" needs a bit of that. Whod want to see a bunch of subjects just standing idly around ?

User ID

Dennis833 wrote:

I'm not a street photographer but I have heard that the Sony 28-60mm f4-5.6 mite be worth considering?

Thanks for bringing that up. Its a semi-tiny and very decent kit lens. I looked it up and found no significant complaint, just sillyass gripes like thinking that 40.5 is a rare filter size (common in m43), not incuding 24mm (could not be small any more), or it doesnt measure up to Zeiss (duh ?).

In researching it I stumbled on a used one, Adorama for $195 ... natcherly I ordered it. Having three midrange Sony zooms is NOT GAS, merely common sense :-)

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

dkeysser wrote:

I am debating between the Sony 28mm f2 and the Viltrox 28mm f1.8, mostly for street photography; shooting on Sony A7cii. price and aperture differences not an issue, just overall image quality. Suggestions? Thanks.
Don

Both will deliver sharp images. Honestly, image quality with todays lenses come down to the photographers knowledge and skill rather than judging the overall all image quality of a particular lens.

zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas

Size matters--at least for street photography. The Sony weighs 200g, while the Viltrox weighs 367g, and is accordingly a lot larger. I have used the Sony 28mm f/2 for street and liked the results. Yes, the Sony 28mm is an older lens, but it performs well in every respect. I use the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 more frequently as I prefer 35mm for street. Plus the lens at 120g is tiny. To me, speed doesn't matter much for street as I shoot at f/8 anyway to increase the depth of field.

Canisdirus

Neither...I'd get the Sony 20mm f/1.8.

You can easily crop with 33MP down to 28mm if you need to.

It's tack sharp, and gives a very flat image...so astrophotography as well...very well.

Frankly, it' a steal.

User ID

Canisdirus wrote:

Neither...I'd get the Sony 20mm f/1.8.

You can easily crop with 33MP down to 28mm if you need to.

It's tack sharp, and gives a very flat image...so astrophotography as well...very well.

Frankly, it' a steal.

True, its priced competitively, but its still way bigger and more expensive than the lenses in question here. But thanks for bringing it up, cuz now that Ive looked it up Im tempted.