Sony A7 lll
Sep 12, 2019 10:58:36 #
Sep 12, 2019 11:02:49 #
Bazbo
Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
Leejack wrote:
What would be the ideal low-light travel zoom for a newly anticipated Sony A7 lll?
i recently asked for feedback on the 70-200. This got great reviews from the Hoggers who own this lens. The f/4 version wold be cheaper and lighter than the f/2.8.
Sep 12, 2019 11:03:19 #
For low light, Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 GM or for less than half the cost, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. But personally, I sacrifice a stop and use Sony's 24-105mm f/4 G, an outstanding lens in every regard.
Sep 12, 2019 11:56:29 #
I have the Sony 24 - 70 f2.8 GM and it is outstanding. I agree that the Sony 24-105 f/4 G is a good priced alternative, but they can be hard to find sometimes.
Sep 13, 2019 06:26:37 #
Jeffcs
Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina
Any of the Sony G lenses are awesome, cheap they are not but great glass comes at a price
Sep 13, 2019 07:25:35 #
Leejack wrote:
What would be the ideal low-light travel zoom for a newly anticipated Sony A7 lll?
The Sony 24-70mm f/2.8.
Sep 13, 2019 07:29:45 #
I have the Tamron 28 - 85 and it has better IQ than the comparable Sony. I almost never leaves the a7III
Sep 13, 2019 07:46:12 #
Sep 13, 2019 08:38:04 #
I am going to jump off the bandwagon here and recommend the 24-70 F4 OSS ZA.
- It is much smaller (426 grams, but remember what you are comparing it to. Even the little Tamron is 550. The 24-105 F4 is about twice the weight.);
- It is cheaper, ($800, but again, consider the alternative);
- The color is fantastic;
- The sharpness is not quite as good as the bigger lenses, but you will be pleasantly surprised. I would compare it to a very good kit lens.
- The distortion has to be corrected in camera, but the correction works almost perfectly at every focal length. The only thing you will notice is a little purple fringing when you shoot tree branches against the sky. My best advice is not to do that.
- It claims to be "weather resistant" (but I would not suggest testing it).
- It is much smaller (426 grams, but remember what you are comparing it to. Even the little Tamron is 550. The 24-105 F4 is about twice the weight.);
- It is cheaper, ($800, but again, consider the alternative);
- The color is fantastic;
- The sharpness is not quite as good as the bigger lenses, but you will be pleasantly surprised. I would compare it to a very good kit lens.
- The distortion has to be corrected in camera, but the correction works almost perfectly at every focal length. The only thing you will notice is a little purple fringing when you shoot tree branches against the sky. My best advice is not to do that.
- It claims to be "weather resistant" (but I would not suggest testing it).
Sep 13, 2019 13:01:09 #
I have the a7iii as well as its brother a7Riii and a99ii. My most used lens is the 24-70 f2.8. But it is heavy. I have the 28-70mm which usually sits all the time on my a7iii. It is much lighter and smaller than the f2.8. I do miss the 24mm vs the 28mm. If I only had one lens the it would be the 24-105mm. I recently had the opportunity to shoot a sunset with the 24-105G. What an awesome lens but too much money for me.
Sep 13, 2019 13:30:45 #
tomad
Loc: North Carolina
nikonbug wrote:
I have the Tamron 28 - 85 and it has better IQ than the comparable Sony. I almost never leaves the a7III
I've searched and cannot find that lens. Did you mean 28 - 75?
Sep 13, 2019 13:32:24 #
azted
Loc: Las Vegas, NV.
No one has mentioned the 70-300 "G". I find that this lens is not any heavier than the 24-105 and the F2.8 super expensive ones. Sure you don't have the wide angle, but you can always zoom backward with your feet. Obviously I used it outdoors, as it is not an indoor lens!
Sep 13, 2019 14:14:02 #
Leejack wrote:
What would be the ideal low-light travel zoom for a newly anticipated Sony A7 lll?
I'm using an ol' Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4 on my A7S / A7R II / A7 III and love it.
All the Minolta AF / Sony A lenses do require a Sony LA-EA4 adapter but are great glass and inexpensive.
bwa
Sep 13, 2019 16:38:26 #
bwana wrote:
I'm using an ol' Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4 on my A7S / A7R II / A7 III and love it.
All the Minolta AF / Sony A lenses do require a Sony LA-EA4 adapter but are great glass and inexpensive.
bwa
All the Minolta AF / Sony A lenses do require a Sony LA-EA4 adapter but are great glass and inexpensive.
bwa
LA-EA4 adapter for Maxxum-era, Minolta-mount. But for later a-mount lenses that have an internal focus motor (Sony lenses), the LA-EA3 is preferred for much better focus performance.
Sep 13, 2019 16:41:37 #
azted wrote:
No one has mentioned the 70-300 "G". I find that this lens is not any heavier than the 24-105 and the F2.8 super expensive ones. Sure you don't have the wide angle, but you can always zoom backward with your feet. Obviously I used it outdoors, as it is not an indoor lens!
Agreed, a very good and often overlooked lens. I wouldn't call it a travel lens, however (although I travel with it, my 24-105 and a couple Samyang wides).
It should be noted that this is not the same as the a-mount 70-300 G. This is a completely different, superior design.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.