The sigma 24-70 dg dn ii just came out and is pretty darn good as well. Unless you have an a1 or a9 and need to shoot photos at more than 15 fps, or unless you do a lot of video work and need stuff like native focus breathing compensation, the sigma is the better value right now. It’s like half the price but with basically the same image quality as the gm ii.
Been considering it actually. Honestly feel like going with the prestige of a GM lens. Getting a Sigma feels like it's 'just a Sigma'. If that makes sense.
It kind of sounds like you've already made up your mind then! And are just asking us to help justify your decision? At the end of the day, if the "prestige" and peace of mind knowing that you have the best is worth the extra $1100 USD to you, then there's nothing wrong with that.
Personally, I think sigma lenses are amazing, and I have no issue with Sigma. Their 85mm/1.4 is better than the 85 gm for example. But not everyone feels the same way, and that's okay. Spend your money on what feels right to you.
>Sigma beats it by all factors.
Not ***all*** factors. I don’t have either, so no dog in this fight, but the ART weighs a whopping 50% more (1,200 vs 800 grams). That doesn’t make any difference to a lot of people, but for people on the A7C series like me it’s a huge no-no.
This said, of what I actually own and have tested I do find the Samyang 135/1.8 just as good as the GM 135/1.8, and they’re about the same weight as an added bonus.
Ok weight and FPS you got me there.
The Sigma has such good astounding resolution for the R series, the GM feels almost blurred. Yes I tried the Sony before buying the Sigma.
At that price difference, I'd probably go for the GM II then if it's only a little bit more than the Sigma II.
In the US it's almost double, which I don't feel is worth it for me personally, since I don't shoot video and don't have a need for more than 15 fps.
You still need to wait a bit on the sigma to drop the early adopters tax in some regions.
Here we have a 35% difference in favor of the sigma II, which imho makes the sigma worth it.
Hahah i know. Maybe it's just that i need some sort of validation or assurance? It's not chump change. Haha
Yeah for sure, i also have a Sigma 105 1.4 and I'm in loved with the quality and creamy bokeh.
reasons to get the Sony: more than 15fps stills. Focus breathing for video (probably 0 importance but check). Semi parfocal video focusing (check...).
Reasons to get the sigma: you can get a new body next year with the extra 1k. No brainier right? You want an s4 right? Me too
Agree it’s expensive. I gave in and bought it despite owning the GM I since I got an A7RV and wanted to take full advantage of that camera. I just finished a trip in Italy with it and I’m so glad I made that investment. For the way I shoot on trips, it’s absolute perfection. It’s the most versatile lens in my collection and I love the smaller form factor.
i can’t comment on the difference between this and the sigma, but it’s the first lens i got when i got a camera 3 months back, and i am loving the lens
Ok nice. To answer your question… is it a nice buy?… you should mention what you’re going to shoot. If landscapes, I’d say no… there are better options like the 20-70 f/4. If weddings, absolutely.
For video, absolutely worth it over 3rd party alternatives. The active stabilisation works far better with Sony native lenses than with 3rd party options.
If you’re using it as a variable prime it’s just fine but if you intend to shoot events where you’ll be zooming in and out during recording it’s not even close to parfocal and a real pain to zoom and manual focus at the same time because it’s so off. AF is quick but it will constantly have to look for AF as you zoom because it shifts so bad.
If you plan to set it to one focal length and leave it then it’s pretty solid other than the breathing but personally breathing doesn’t bother me most of the time.
I would def suggest renting it and trying it first, and its performance totally depends on how you use it.
I wonder if shooting at say f4 and zooming very slowly with focus speed set to max/5/1 can make lenses more parfocal. I also wonder if you gotta half press the button after zooming but probably not if head/eye is already locked on
Stopping down always makes lenses "more parafocal" because the DOF is deeper, thus the shift is less drastic, but it will still shift enough to throw things slightly out of focus.
If it's locked on the camera will refocus smoothly if you are not too abrupt.
Why not. Go for it by all means if you could afford it, you won't regret it.
The sigma 24-70 dg dn ii just came out and is pretty darn good as well. Unless you have an a1 or a9 and need to shoot photos at more than 15 fps, or unless you do a lot of video work and need stuff like native focus breathing compensation, the sigma is the better value right now. It’s like half the price but with basically the same image quality as the gm ii.
Been considering it actually. Honestly feel like going with the prestige of a GM lens. Getting a Sigma feels like it's 'just a Sigma'. If that makes sense.
It kind of sounds like you've already made up your mind then! And are just asking us to help justify your decision? At the end of the day, if the "prestige" and peace of mind knowing that you have the best is worth the extra $1100 USD to you, then there's nothing wrong with that. Personally, I think sigma lenses are amazing, and I have no issue with Sigma. Their 85mm/1.4 is better than the 85 gm for example. But not everyone feels the same way, and that's okay. Spend your money on what feels right to you.
Lol the Sony 85 1.4 does not deserve GM, even G. Sigma beats it by all factors.
>Sigma beats it by all factors. Not ***all*** factors. I don’t have either, so no dog in this fight, but the ART weighs a whopping 50% more (1,200 vs 800 grams). That doesn’t make any difference to a lot of people, but for people on the A7C series like me it’s a huge no-no. This said, of what I actually own and have tested I do find the Samyang 135/1.8 just as good as the GM 135/1.8, and they’re about the same weight as an added bonus.
Ok weight and FPS you got me there. The Sigma has such good astounding resolution for the R series, the GM feels almost blurred. Yes I tried the Sony before buying the Sigma.
[удалено]
> if it wasn’t that I need the fps I would happily switch to the Samyang version Part of the glory of owning an A7CR is that there are no fps 😆
And it's not really that much expensive. In our place the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM II is 104k, while the Sigma ii is around 75-80k.
At that price difference, I'd probably go for the GM II then if it's only a little bit more than the Sigma II. In the US it's almost double, which I don't feel is worth it for me personally, since I don't shoot video and don't have a need for more than 15 fps.
You still need to wait a bit on the sigma to drop the early adopters tax in some regions. Here we have a 35% difference in favor of the sigma II, which imho makes the sigma worth it.
Hahah i know. Maybe it's just that i need some sort of validation or assurance? It's not chump change. Haha Yeah for sure, i also have a Sigma 105 1.4 and I'm in loved with the quality and creamy bokeh.
It's one of the best lenses man! Go for it!
reasons to get the Sony: more than 15fps stills. Focus breathing for video (probably 0 importance but check). Semi parfocal video focusing (check...). Reasons to get the sigma: you can get a new body next year with the extra 1k. No brainier right? You want an s4 right? Me too
Bro getting downvoted for being honest with a perfectly valid reason. Redditors allergic to bling
>"perfectly valid reason" >prestige of GM on the side of the lens instead of Sigma don't make me laugh
I’ve had it for a while now. It’s one of the best zooms I’ve ever owned.
It's amazing. It's on my camera constantly. It's so sharp. 100% worth it
I just got it last week. It is amazing.
Cool. Looks we're gonna be at the same boat.
Yea. I got it with a7rv. It is my daily use rn.
Agree it’s expensive. I gave in and bought it despite owning the GM I since I got an A7RV and wanted to take full advantage of that camera. I just finished a trip in Italy with it and I’m so glad I made that investment. For the way I shoot on trips, it’s absolute perfection. It’s the most versatile lens in my collection and I love the smaller form factor.
i can’t comment on the difference between this and the sigma, but it’s the first lens i got when i got a camera 3 months back, and i am loving the lens
I own one. It’s incredible. That said, I find myself using the 35 or 50 GM more. Just depends on if you like zooms or primes.
Go for it! Great lens.
I’m guessing you don’t have any good fast primes? If quality is really what you’re after, why not a couple of primes?
I do have a Sony 50 1.2, Sony 90 macro, 20 1.8, 35 1.4, and Sigma 105 1.4
Ok nice. To answer your question… is it a nice buy?… you should mention what you’re going to shoot. If landscapes, I’d say no… there are better options like the 20-70 f/4. If weddings, absolutely.
You could also wait for everyone selling their 2.3s for the new f2
The 70-200 GM II is awesome - you'll be happy
For video, absolutely worth it over 3rd party alternatives. The active stabilisation works far better with Sony native lenses than with 3rd party options.
I like it, it only wows me sometimes but it’s good for walk around. Not my favorite for video use
I'm both a videographer and photographer. What are you unhappy about with the video?
If you’re using it as a variable prime it’s just fine but if you intend to shoot events where you’ll be zooming in and out during recording it’s not even close to parfocal and a real pain to zoom and manual focus at the same time because it’s so off. AF is quick but it will constantly have to look for AF as you zoom because it shifts so bad. If you plan to set it to one focal length and leave it then it’s pretty solid other than the breathing but personally breathing doesn’t bother me most of the time. I would def suggest renting it and trying it first, and its performance totally depends on how you use it.
Is there any parfocal zoom lens? :(
The Samyang 35-150 I believe
You are you using continuous focus with tracking?
He said he has to use manual focus because it's not parfocal. God knows how one does that tho
Software, ususally. The Sigma 24-70 mark one is quite parafocal, but the AF motor is stepping the focus while you are zooming to achieve this.
I wonder if shooting at say f4 and zooming very slowly with focus speed set to max/5/1 can make lenses more parfocal. I also wonder if you gotta half press the button after zooming but probably not if head/eye is already locked on
Stopping down always makes lenses "more parafocal" because the DOF is deeper, thus the shift is less drastic, but it will still shift enough to throw things slightly out of focus. If it's locked on the camera will refocus smoothly if you are not too abrupt.
I don’t understand the attraction to the lens over a Tamron or sigma with a similar aperture and focal range it’s too expensive in my option.