Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Sony 24-240?
Jul 14, 2018 19:54:16   #
rappar Loc: Kingston Ontario
 
I have been looking for a 'travel lens' to take for my A7iii on a 3 week trip to Scotland and Ireland. This seems to play to some decent reviews. Another choice is the 24-105.
Sony shooters, what would be the better choice?
Thanks,
Ron

Reply
Jul 14, 2018 21:38:01   #
repleo Loc: Boston
 
rappar wrote:
I have been looking for a 'travel lens' to take for my A7iii on a 3 week trip to Scotland and Ireland. This seems to play to some decent reviews. Another choice is the 24-105.
Sony shooters, what would be the better choice?
Thanks,
Ron


I have the 24-105 F4. It is a outstanding lens. IQ is as good as most primes. I go to Ireland at least once a year and have never found a need for anything much longer than 70mm. If you are only taking one lens, the 24-105 would be my choice. I have only handled the 24-240 in the shop but I wasn't impressed.

FYI - If you are going to Ireland, don't overlook the Antrim Coast in Northern Ireland. The Causeway Route is incredibly beautiful. Just a short hop across to Scotland too. You can see the Mull of Kintyre from Antrim on a clear day.

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 06:53:05   #
lwerthe1mer Loc: Birmingham, Alabama
 
The 24-105 is reputed to be a much better lens. I love mine.

Reply
 
 
Jul 15, 2018 07:07:58   #
kangurw Loc: Newark, NJ
 
I have the de 24-240. I bought this lens 2 years ago to use with my A7m2 as a walk around lens. The quality of this lens is very good based in price. It's a bit slow in aperture but do the high in good light. Picture quality is comparable to the Zeiss fe 24-70 f4, after 150mm lost a bit, and this lens is water and dust resistant.
I live my copy of this lens.
Good luck with your choice.

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 08:15:50   #
IzzyKap Loc: Rockville, MD
 
I have both lenses. The 24-105 is really a very nice lens and is better than the 24-240. Prior to availability of the 24-105, I have taken my 24-240 as the sole travel lens. It did a reasonable job. It depends if you need a longer range and the ultimate image overall quality.
rappar wrote:
I have been looking for a 'travel lens' to take for my A7iii on a 3 week trip to Scotland and Ireland. This seems to play to some decent reviews. Another choice is the 24-105.
Sony shooters, what would be the better choice?
Thanks,
Ron

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 08:42:04   #
Robert Bailey Loc: Canada
 
Here is the dxomark rating on the 24 to 240 lens (mounted on a Sony A7R-II).
It gets a score of 26 (more or less out of 50). If you click on "Measurements"
you can see the test results in various categories.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/Sony-FE-24-240mm-F35-63-OSS-mounted-on-Sony-A7R-II__1035

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 09:29:34   #
imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida
 
rappar wrote:
I have been looking for a 'travel lens' to take for my A7iii on a 3 week trip to Scotland and Ireland. This seems to play to some decent reviews. Another choice is the 24-105.
Sony shooters, what would be the better choice?
Thanks,
Ron


I would much prefer the 24-105 and use the in camera 1.1-2X Clear Image Zoom to get you to 210mm f4 if needed.

..

Reply
 
 
Jul 15, 2018 10:57:49   #
chapjohn Loc: Tigard, Oregon
 
I own ad use both the 24-105G and the 24-240. I have the 24-240 for aquarium photos and some event work, as well as landscapes. I am happy with this lens as it versatile providing good images. All Sony E mount glass is good glass.

As for the 24-105G. It is a great lens.G glass is superior to Zeiss and any other glass you want to use. However, it does not give you the range of a longer lens.

You need o determine what your needs are in lens. If is long range than you consider the Sony 70-300G lens. If is wide, then 24-105G. As already stated, the 24-240 offers a good choice with some limitatons (i.e. focus speed, apeture variable).

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 15:07:31   #
SonyBug
 
I just took a 3 week trip in China. I carried the a7III and a 18-105 f4. I know that it is a aps-c lens and most stores will tell you it won't work on a FF camera. But they would be wrong. What tipped me was a review of the a7III where one of the pics was taken with that lens. I already had it for the a6500 I sold, so I tested it thoroughly. It was very satisfactory. On the trip a fellow passenger had the 24-105, so I borrowed it, and took several pictures with the same settings with each lens. I could see a very minor difference with the 24-105 being just a tad sharper. I mean I had to expand the pictures to full size to see any difference.

Let's face it, how many times do I print in full pixel size? Ha, never. So, the only negative of the aps-c lens is its' photos in jpg are only 10 MB and the ff lens is 24 MB. The huge advantage is the ff lens extends about 3 inches to change the focal length, and the aps-c lens in internal completely. It weighs much less and is much smaller. For a travel lens, it can't be beat. Someday I may spring for the 24-105, but since I already have the 75-300 ff lens, maybe not. Oh, and lastly, the aps-c lens is half the cost of the ff lens.

Hope this helps.


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 15:13:38   #
azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.
 
I bought both the 24-240 and the 70-300 at the same time to compare. I ended up returning the 24-240 because the quality was just not there. I have now purchased the 24-105, and I will start using it on the next trip I take. My initial shots are very sharp, and it focuses very fast on my A7ll.

Reply
Jul 15, 2018 17:49:01   #
Toment Loc: FL, IL
 
18-105 for travel, but using a6500. Have an a7riii, but a6500 is nice and small for travel.
Have a great time!

Reply
 
 
Jul 16, 2018 11:44:43   #
Logan1949
 
rappar wrote:
I have been looking for a 'travel lens' to take for my A7iii on a 3 week trip to Scotland and Ireland. This seems to play to some decent reviews. Another choice is the 24-105.
Sony shooters, what would be the better choice?
Thanks,
Ron

It all depends on how large and sharp you want your prints to be. I loved the 24-240mm for its versatility, zoom range, and smallish size, but it is a little fuzzy in the corners on a 24x36 inch print. Yet, some of my favorite shots were made with that lens (including the ID-pic above).

If you looked at the DXOmark rating referred to in a previous post, this lens currently has a sharpness rating of 15 on an A7Rii camera (sharpness is dependent on the sensor's megapixels). Compare that to the sharpest Sony lens, the 90mm G macro, with a sharpness rating of 42.

Yet, I still use this lens on occasion, even on the Sony A9 body. It is a good travel lens if you are willing to accept slower focusing, and a slightly softer sharpness which should not be noticeable under 12x18 inches.

Reply
Jul 18, 2018 22:29:05   #
alamomike47 Loc: San Antonio, Texas
 
I have the 24-240mm and used it until I got the 24-105mm. Have touched the 240 since get the 105. My choice for travel is the 105.

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.