Sony 20-70 vs 24-70 vs 24-105 // Which should you get?

[@walkingchopsticks6731]

Thanks for showing the difference in focal length in the real world. A lot of reviewers don’t show the difference in real time

[@chrisbrockhurst]

I Gotchu.

[@dlun]

Dude, you are the only one in youtube have the guts to do a comparison between the 20-70 and the 24-70, huge respect!

[@laurenthenry]

Honestly on the Fx3 OSS is a big change even with active stabilization. Sent my 28-70 Sigma back and bought a 24-105mm for that reason only.

[@IRFAN-po5sz]

Hi, I have Sony a7Cll, OSS in this lense will beneficial same as in your case please ?

[@Thunderbird1337]

Definitely the 20-70 f4. The focal length range and the small size are just the perfect "always-on" package for traveling/ cities/ landscapes. 20-70 is just genious. It's a pity that there are no alternatives from Sigma or Tamron yet.

[@noopynnus]

I’m currently contemplating a switch to Sony FF (with the A7RV), thinking the 20-70 f4 might be the best first lens for that body? Use case will be for a couple upcoming trips to Portugal and Asia, mainly want to do landscapes, vacation shots, and some travel vlogs for personal consumption. What do you think?

[@Thunderbird1337]

@@noopynnus I would say it's perfectly usable for that purpose. You have plenty of wide angle for landscapes and vlogs and it's very versatile. If low-light is no priority, the F4 won't be a problem. If low-light is a prioroty (often city at night etc.), then you should better consider something with f2.8, but then you will have much less zoom range with that form factor/ weight. Or you consider one additional lens for lowlight situations.

[@m4rcin847]

The price for an F4 lens with terrible distortion at 20 is just ridiculous. Id rather pay more for GM and get top class lens or really cheap, used 24-105 and some primes. They need to cut the price in half to make the it resonable.

[@Thunderbird1337]

@@m4rcin847 Sure, the price is too high, especially in Europe. But the image quality is top and there's simply no alternative in this form factor and focal length range, that's what you pay extra for. 24-105 is a monster, almost 700g. I would never take this on a trip, that's simply not its usecase. And only 24mm, absolutely not comparable. The 20-40 is a compact travel lens and for this purpose it's great. Sure it has distortions, but that's in the nature of things when you put a 20mm wide angle zoom in that form factor. Currently the price here in Germany is round about 1200€, still too high in my opinion, in the US it's round about 1000$. But when there's a chance to get it on sale for 1000€/$, I would say that's definitely worth it.

[@FPSTiger]

f4 is unusable even in daylight. f2.8 minimum, preferably 1.8

[@ScyllaWyrm]

Absolutely love the 24-105. I might get a 20mm f1.8 for specific shots eventually, but for now I'm settled with the versatile and cinematic 24-105.

[@spacefarer61]

Really appreciate this side by side, great "real world" comparison of the features people care about. I'd love to see more content like this, but it would be helpful to put more words on the screen during the tabletop discussion(e.g. list the numbers like you did for the weights). Sometimes you're picking up and setting down lenses so fast it felt like the shell game and I couldn't tell which lens you were talking about! Again, thanks for the comparison!

[@JustAaronJoshua]

I love the 24-105mm with OSS. I’ve paired it with the Sony a7IV and man the footage I get is *almost as good as a gimbal.

[@chrisbrockhurst]

The OSS in it is REALLY good

[@chleepy]

@brownbraniac6461oss + ibis is pretty sick idk why ure downplaying it. almost as good as a gimbal is pretty accurate

[@benldr]

​@brownbraniac6461what are you talking about?

[@Kunal0915]

Yes. Paired with the relatively cheap Tamron 17-28, the 24 to 105 makes good sense.

[@СтасГрищук-ц7б]

​@@superemesean5907 with sony a7s3 and FX 3 f4 not the big problem.

[@Vincentecreativeservices]

I have owned the 24-105 and now have the 24-70 GMii and have owned the gm1 before that. It’s not just about focal length, it’s the actual quality of image. The GMii is the best, 20mm isn’t a big enough difference really, and the 105mm is pretty amazing and more useful than I thought it would be. Still, the micro contrast and color rendition of the GM just puts it a step ahead of the other two.

[@karikaru]

The 24-70 gm ii is probably the best standard zoom ever made in terms of optical quality for photos. I say that as someone who doesn't even own a Sony. Being said, for the money, I don't think anyone should even consider that lens unless they're getting consistent paid work or they're well off in their finances. It's great, but the incremental quality boost just isn't necessary for most shooters especially enthusiasts who could invest the difference in something else and get a lot more from it (like investing in a workshop or travel or lighting)

[@lorenzo4262]

@Gunslinger have you tryed the sigma 24-70 dg dn? if yes could you tell me what you thing vs 24-70gm1 and 24-70 gm2?

[@Vincentecreativeservices]

@@lorenzo4262 that was my first big lens purchase, the Sigma 24-70. It’s super bulky, and I grew to hate the images it produced, there’s a lack of micro-contrast, it has this smoothing effect, the bokeh and skin tones look super smooth, too smooth, it annoys me now after editing 20,000 photos with it. Then I got the GM1, it’s probably my favorite in terms of image, it’s detailed and soft, looks like it has a diffusion filter built in. The GMii is the lightest and easiest to wield in the field, and on paper has the best quality but it’s so clean it can get boring. I don’t notice how good it is until I compare it to another lens, and then I see the superiority in contrast and color reproduction and sharpness. I’ll see about putting a video up comparing it with the Tamron 35-150, I just got footage from that lens earlier today.

[@lorenzo4262]

@@Vincentecreativeservices In terms of "bulky" also the GM is too. So It seems you prefer the GM1. I've tryed personally (a few shot) the 35-150. It's very good, also at f/2. In hands after time is heavy, but the difference is not much between a 24-70 2.8 like GM1 and Sigma, about 300 gr. . It's not little, but considering the long focal range... I had thought about it, but for sports use, I don't find the autofocus so responsive, at least on a7r3. In continuos shot, I noticed that the frame rate was not at its best when the camera was setted at "AF priority mode". In "Shot priority" all goes at max speed. THis mean that the confirm of focus lack, and it's more slow (this doesn't happen on sony 70-200 f4 G). It's ok, is not a sport lens. THe af engine has to move heavy lens.. But for other use the af is quick.

[@Vincentecreativeservices]

@@lorenzo4262 well what I mean about the 24-70 GM1 is that it looks best, but I sold it because it’s too heavy. I will say it doesn’t feel as heavy as the Sigma, and isn’t as awkward to use, it has much better weight balance, the Sigma is a lot more front heavy.

[@TXTundra-ex8bw]

24-105 with my A7IV along with 50mm 1.2 GM that’s usually all I need

[@Azorion13]

+ the Sigma 150-600 DG DN ^-^

[@WilliamAbbate]

Great video Chris. I was looking at the 20-70 but think I’ll stick with my 24-105 a bit longer now that you have shown the real world difference. I do like the 80 to 100 more for portraits, where 70 is just a bit too short. The bokeh at 80-105 f4 is really good imo, virtually the same as my 100 2.8 prime for portraits.

[@Kunal0915]

Yes. My Tamron 28-75 is short for portrait at even f2.8. The 24-105 F4 makes sense.

[@Xetenor]

This is a great review for all these 3 lenses that many landscape photographers are looking at I am sure. Makes me be very happy that I own the 24-70 GM II (after going thru 3 copies to get a excellent copy sadly). Everyone is going to have different needs and budgets so not everyone will agree that one lens is better in every way. I also own the sigma 24-70 2.8 dg dn lens that I've gotten so many great images with. The new 24-70 GM II is even better than the sigma in so many ways especially in wide open and corner performance in almost all focal lengths. Also think about size and weight. Right now my absolute fav combo for when I go out to shoot landscape is my 20 1.8G + 24-70 2.8 GM II + 70-200 2.8 GM II (damn do I love this lens!). I also do have the 16-35 GM that I adore as well. All 3 takes same size filters (use a step up filter for the 20 1.8) which is important as my 82mm filters are expensive. What I also noticed about the GM II is that it renders things at infinity REALLY well which is an important aspect for landscape photographers. Also one thing to consider is sample variation which has always annoyed the living crap out of me. I've always had to test 2 or 3 copies of a lens to get a better copy that is still happening in 2023. I wish this was improved. Happy shooting everyone with whatever lens you go with!

[@lorenzo4262]

What about sigma 24-70 dg dn vs 24-70 GM1?

[@lewcehjitl3282]

How do you test to see if you got a good copy? I am going to buy the 24-70 f2.8 gmii soon 😊

[@apaajaayo8759]

I Have Sony 24-105 F4 and sigma 24-70 F2.8, then sold the 24-70 because of weight, dust issue and versatility. The 24-105 is Great Lens with OSS inside which 90 percent live in my camera body. Its a Great Arsenal

[@lorenzo4262]

So is true the dust issue of the sigma... and regarding sharpness between the two in real use?

[@edzmunoz7727]

Is 24-105 good for Wedding and Portrait Photography too?

[@Princeton_James]

I got the 20-70 and it is one of my favorite sony lenses. I compared it against the 24-50 2.8 and I'll definitely be returning the 24-50. The 2.8 doesnt create a noticable difference and neither does the size/weight or bokeh. I also own the 24-105 and Ive had it longer than the 20-70 but im constantly reaching for thr 20-70.

[@M0LLER75]

On 16:45 you say that you can program the two buttons differently…how? I only get access to one setting on both buttons with the 20-70 lens on FX3…

[@temujen]

My man said “eugh” to the 24-105 @7:55 😂. If they updated this lens, it would sell so well.

[@SourPlanet]

Awesome breakdown. Perfectly done. I think it will help a lot of people. 24-105 vs 20-70 is such a tough choice too. There are two things I keep going back to. One, missing 30 on the long end often doesn't cost you a shot. You can still grab your subject, it just may not be as tightly framed as you want. Maybe a bit less bokeh, maybe the compression is lacking. But you will get the shot. 20mm however.. is not a matter of a step back like people say. Plus, sometimes the fact you can't step back is a major deal. Particularly in interiors or cities. Two, many bodies can somewhat compensate for the loss of 70-105 via aps-c mode. It's not a perfect replacement (crop is not a focal change, of course) but in a pinch it can make a difference. I'm starting to lean towards ditching my 16-35 and 24-105 for just the 20-70. Maaaaybe. Love both those lenses.

[@professionalpotato4764]

Compression isn't lost with cropping. That's affected by distance to subject and to background. Cropping a 70mm down vs a 105mm both shot on the same spot will yield 100% identical images. There's some resolution loss of course, but for majority of people publishing on the internet or making small prints, it doesn't matter. Cropping vs focal length change actually gives identical fov. The only issue will be noise and resolution.

[@SourPlanet]

@@professionalpotato4764 My point was that to get the same image with a 70 vs 105 means you will stand in a different position and thus effect compression. I may not have explained it well in my original response, which is quite convoluted on re-read ha.

[@Hobbies4Hire]

Great job on the video Chris! Thanks for making it.

[@chrisbrockhurst]

Appreciate you 🙏🏼

[@biancabusetti9200]

Thanks so much! 100% what I needed!

[@JimIBobIJones]

Depends what your loadout is? If you are taking a 70-200 as well then the additional reach on the 24-105 is wasted and you have a bigger/heavier lens. But if you are going one lens only, then the 24-105 is going to give you the most versatility. If you are only carrying telephoto lenses, then the f2.8 constant on the GM is going to make a big difference, but if you are using the standard zoom to supplement prime lenses, then f4 is good enough and you are better off saving some money with the F4 options. You also have the old 24-70mm Zeiss, which is significantly more compact and has OSS. It has a bad rep but its on par with the "G" lenses - people were annoyed because its not quite good enough for the Zeiss label. I usually take the Zeiss 24-70 f4 + the 70-200mm f4 along with the 50mm f1.2 GM and the Laowa APSC 9mm f2.8 (just because its tiny and fun lens that stows away pretty much anywhere). If I am just carrying one lens, I actually go APSC and take the 18-105 f.4 G. A lot more range (27-160mm equivalent) for a lot less space and 26mp in crop mode is good enough.

[@nomad-media]

This is the best real world test I've seen for these lenses. Thank you!

[@tsizzle]

But what about the Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8?

[@AngelikuS_]

For most low-budget fans, the 24-105 is the ideal one. If you look at the price, the 24-105 is the most affordable. Otherwise, it depends on the need for light and mm (shorter or longer)

[@digitalclips]

Happy to stick with the 24-105mm; I also have the 14-24mm Sigma Art if I need 20mm.

[@stevesilvas5277]

This is really helpful - thank you!

[@gancho030169]

Firstly, this video did not show how 105 mm would affect the difference between those lenses. Also, the stabilisated lens makes differens because it akts together with the IBIS of the camera. Also, Sony 24-105 f4 has the best macro abilities among those lenses, which, for me, is important. All in all, the 24-105 f4 is still the most versatile lens. The 20-70 f4 is predominantly for landscape and architecture photographers. The 24-70 f2.8 is for rich people. Also, I have never missed super wide lenses. I had 14 mm 2.8, and I have a fisheye lens, but for me the most enjoyable focal length is between 24 mm and 135 mm.

[@mattwruff]

I love my 35-150 Tamron, but I also have the 16-35 GM, A customer returned a Tamron 28-74, and being that he a good longtime customer I let him even though I could not return it but I rarely use it. Because for most of my interviews, I use my Fujinon- MK 18-55 Super 35 (on my FX30)

[@robertsteinberger]

So what about the OSS and the active steady shot combined? Is that possible?

[@bobbywiederhold]

this is the video comparison I have been looking for before purchasing an OSS lens for the a7rv

[@Pasha_Shin]

To be honest I’ve been your subscriber for a while, but in the past I did not like your way of delivering. But know I really do like it, reasonable and valuable. I think your videos about 20-70 are best on KZbin. Cheers!

[@SiTuanNgo]

I would still keep the 24-105 for oss instead of buying the 20-70 for the wider angle. For 20mm, I would buy an addtional Viltrox 20 f2.8 - cheap and small

[@IRFAN-po5sz]

If my cam ( Sony a7cll) has in built in stabilization, oss in lense has additional benefits?

[@SiTuanNgo]

@@IRFAN-po5sz more is better. I have the a7r4 and both ibis and oss work well together - better than only ibis

[@HK-NYC]

Chris, when these 3 lens zoom moving internal component in and out, does it suck in rain or sand in windy areas? Over time?thanks.

[@meat_loves_wasabi]

Like the portablity and IQ of the 20-70 but A7r5 has a firmware for the 24-105 which is suppose to further improve the stabilization.

[@professionalpotato4764]

The 24-105 is kinda too soft for 61mp though.

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

As a non pro with a landscape bias I chose the 20-70 because I valued the wider focal length over the extra reach of the 24-105 and brighter f stop of the 24-70, price was also a factor with the 24-70. Fantastic lens, everything I need it to be. Pared with my 35mm 1.4 GM and 85mm 1.8 I’m pretty much sorted for all my needs.

[@mikec1851]

Great minds must think a like. I just sold all my Fuji gear and went out and bought an A7IV plus the 20-70mm, 35mm 1.4 GM and 85mm 1.8 for the same reasons as you. Would have loved to get the 24-70mm f/2.8 GMii but at $2300 AUD I just could not justify spending that on one lens, albeit a very good one. I got both the 20-70mm + 35mm f/1.4 GM for the same price as the 24-70mm f/2.8 GMii.

[@rex870426]

I’m looking into the same lineup! Looks like 20-70 is the last piece of puzzle

[@PNW-Media]

Great video! I started a real estate media business and I think I have settled on the sigma 14-24 2.8 and the Sony 20-70 f4, paired with Sony A74, what do you think?

[@tjdultra6982]

A stabilized 24-105mm F/4 hands down is the best all-rounder for travel and hybrid stills/video use. Sometimes you'll find that the focal plane of f/4 is wider and more comfortable thus helps with autofocus. Oh crap, I shoot Canon btw. 🤣

[@bluetvsports]

which for indoor sports photography?

[@lukazupie7220]

2.8

[@benjaminjacobs5553]

Your comments on the minimum focus are slightly incorrect. The 2470GMii has it's minimum focus of 0.21m at 24mm focal length and is 0.3m at 70mm. The 2070G is the opposite. It has a closer minimum focal distance at the long end of its zoom range, 0.25m at 70mm. This makes the 2070G able to make a larger image of a subject (macro-type image), not because it is a closer minimum focal distance overall but because that minimum distance is when the subject is larger in the field.

[@ChaseLancaster]

Such a hard choice. I’m between the 24-70 and 24-105. I’m about to get an A7 IV after shooting on an a6300 for 5 years. On the a6390 I’ve used a 24-105 most of the time so part of me wants to just get the 24-70 to finally experience true full frame f/2.8. What do you think?

[@professionalpotato4764]

f/2.8 may not even be fast enough in some cases. Also keep in mind you need to stop down for DoF. Can't shoot f/2.8 for a group shot even if it is dark. You'll need flash and still shoot f/5.6. Personally I would go 24-105 if there was a mk2 version, but if not a Sigma 24-70 is sharper. If you do lots of video, the OSS might be handy though. Maybe get the 24-105 used and put money in some GM primes. The 24/35/50 f/1.4 are pretty sweet.

[@martinpickard5818]

Love the 24-105…..only thing missing is the 2.8 aperture……imagine a 24-105 f2.8……c’mon Sony…..🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻

[@waynerm002]

Why not an 18-120 f2-2.8?

[@chrisbrockhurst]

haha would be the size of a bus

[@waynerm002]

@@chrisbrockhurst have to keep the bokeh folks happy. 😀 One lens to rule them all! LOL!

[@martinpickard5818]

@@chrisbrockhurst the tamron 35-150 isn’t…..

[@chrisbrockhurst]

@@martinpickard5818 yeh it’s huge compared to these

[@mrfairycake4333]

Great video and very usfull. how do you get the screen to display in the video as ive tried tethering mine but i dont get the camera info on screen? thanks

[@andrebauer777]

GREAT REVIEW !!

[@switchunboxing]

Question about minimum focus distance. Yes, that’s how close you can hold a object up to the sensor, but then, if you for example switch from 24mm to 35mm doesn’t that effectively zoom in on the object, but you wouldn’t lose clarity because it’s all about how close you can hold the object right? So really you can make your minimum focus distance appear better by just going up to a higher mm right?

[@annawimmer4101]

I own the 24-105mm with OSS f4. Due to my budget I only owe one lens. I am thinking about selling this and buying the 24 -70 GM 2.8. I def can‘t keep both but i am sooo unsure :( i love my current lens but sometimes i wish to have a f2.8 haha . What would u guys suggest?

[@Lucamitm]

Is the 20-70g focuses fast enough for moving subjects like kids and dogs ? Thanks

[@switchunboxing]

From my understanding, that’s all going to come down to your camera

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Thank you. I own the 24-105/4 OSS G and the 24-70/2.8 GM II but admit the newer 20-70/4 G interests me due to its smaller size for one of my compact “C” bodies the A7CR. Definitely different trade-offs and it looks like you covered them all. I’m also considering the new 24-50/2.8 for the A7CR as well.i guess it’s key what I want to use it for. Event/People or Landscape. Take care.

[@brettharrisphotography7463]

24-105mm f4 OSS on the A7IV is a no brainer. The OSS with IBIS are working together is ample even without Active stabilisation on. If you want a better lens with f2.8 look at the 24-70mm f2.8 G Master II much smaller and lighter than the older 24-70mm f2.8 GM.

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

Don’t need OSS as I know how to hold a camera properly🤷‍♂️

[@solosatvik6215]

Sir which software you are using

[@derekhorsburgh6238]

Love your channel! Q. Sony ZV-E10, will Sony update the sensor & stabilization anytime soon, should I wait to buy? what's your thoughts? thx

[@chrisbrockhurst]

Too kind, Thankyou! In terms of the q. I have no idea, It’s hard to justify waiting to upgrade if your in need of it now. If it’s a want that’s a different story though

[@derekhorsburgh6238]

@@chrisbrockhurst Fair answer Chris 👍

[@justanickname8960]

Great video, thanks 👍

[@MeAMuse]

I think most hybrid or video shooters are going to like the wide option (especially if they vlog). Personally I just do photography and I prefer the F2.8. I feel like getting the same FOV of 20mm is only one or 2 steps back, and 105 is a step or 2 forward (or just crop) whereas you can't replicate the F2.8 on the F4s. Obviously there are going to be situations where you can't step back or forward, but you can't have everything. I totally get that for some people having wider, longer, shorter minimum focus distance, or lighter lens or whatever is going to be a priority. You really can't go wrong though...

[@Daniel_Zalman]

To me, 20mm really adds versatility indoors. However, for stills you are going to have to bump up the ISO if you don't have ideal light. The extra 35mm on 24-105 would be handier outside and (potentially) indoors for portraits (more bokeh). Another option is the 24-70 Sigma version 2.

[@Obscurainc]

This video is really helpful

[@Ade5]

Whats going on at 13:59 - 14:01 btw? :P

[@IMDABROWN]

i thought it was my machine. looks like he added the clip twice

[@pinikpikantv3555]

What would you recommend a 24-70 GM OG(I) with no box @ 970 $ vs 24-105 G OSS with box @ 925$. I have 7RM3 so far no plan on upgrading for the moment.

[@pawelmod3292]

For R I would go with GM.

[@cleysoptique8749]

So I used to own a 24 to 70 GMii But I actually ended up trading it for a 200 to 600 with 400 cash on top on his end making it worth the trade for me. As I like to shoot long distances with animal photography at zoos and/or car photography from a distance. My question is I would love to get back into a lens like that but I can't justify paying out pocket cost of $2,000 or more for the 24-70 GM I personally wouldn't want the version one which I know can be had for around $800 to $1,100 on the used market. My concern is the 24 to 105 is at F4 But is it really sharp with photography because like the 70 to 200 f2.8 wide Open at 2.8 it's actually not sharp. But I can get it for $550 used which I feel like is probably worth it just in that sense.

[@mtbboy1993]

Would be nice if future videos had the lens name in the comparison to eliminate confusion. I know you are saying the names.

[@TylerEdwards]

The 20-70 still has me scratching my head but I already own the 24-105. Regardless, great comparison!

[@chrisbrockhurst]

yeh i think alot of people feel that way, when more poeple try it they will change their mind

[@kylesharbrough1817]

Low key liking the 20-70 f/4 then if I need the reach I can turn on APSC mode

[@lukazupie7220]

U can turn apsc on 105mm too😀

[@wakeywarrior]

Wish there were more 16/17 to 50 or even 70. There’s a Tamron, I love my Zeiss 16-35 F4 OSS (bargain at around £450 second hand) I’m always on the 16mm of that but the 35 end I wish it was closer.

[@switchunboxing]

Now how does the GM I stack up against these being a price point in the middle

[@nathanksimpson]

This includes a lot of useful information for content creation, or interview video shooters but what about more cinematic applications? What about manual focus?

[@Mraz75]

This is my theory, May be nobody notices that Sony’s new cameras now have 1.5 zoom in. That is 1.5 times crop factor. So 20-70mm F4 is the new replacement for 24-105mm f4. The 70mm if you in the zoom it is going to be 105mm.. Plus you get a wider FOV at 20mm. Bought the lens and it is light for travel & run n gun. Pair it with my ZVE1.😊

[@jamesmlodynia8757]

The 1.5 crop factor only works well if you have a high megapixel camera say 40mp or above, my highest mp camera is a Pentax K1MKII, IT has 36 mp and in 1.5 crop it turns to a 16mp so you lose 20mp.

[@ly8370]

That's Super35 mode which is not practical for my Sony A7c with only 22MP. For clearimage zoom, it only works for JPEGs.

[@Andy_Diep]

I love my 24-105, before i had the sigma dgdn 24-70 that thing was so heavy and not too great for run and gun type of shooting. I havent personally tried out the 24-70gmii yet, but that would be the dream lens. What i love the most about the 24-105 is the extra focal length. I do lots of travel vlogs sometimes i can't get closer to the subject that extra reach is a game changer. There are a couple of downsides for me, the first is the f4 during night time shooting. I often see lots of noise in my shots. And when i do vlog type shots i would have to gold the camera as far away as possible. To solve that issue i recently bought the tamaron 17mm f2.8 to fill in the low light and wider shot. Its also tiny and relatively inexpensive.

[@coltonmonroe9824]

Thank you so much!

[@DukeMorse]

35-150 FTW! 😆

[@chrisbrockhurst]

Great lens

[@thegeneral123]

The Sigma 24-70 F2.8! ;-)

[@switchunboxing]

Hmmmm

[@craigspencer2927]

Good review

[@marknathan7744]

They are all great lenses from reviews i see but i dont own any of them i use tamron 20-40f2.8 & 70-180 f2.8 with a 55 f1.8 this covers everything for travel .

[@randysmith9967]

And the 24-105 filter diameter is the same as the GM100-400. Although it will not take a multiplier.

[@thenewyorkgamer]

real question , what did you film this review on......Inception

[@chrisbrockhurst]

haha why you ask that?

[@waynerm002]

I got the 24-105 with the A7R V, it’s a good lens but it would be nice if it has the new motors in it to make it faster. For video it works well and is lighter than the 24-70 f/2.8. The lighter weight of the 20-70 f/4 along with the updates motors caught my attention. Word is Sony will be releasing more bodies and lens this year, I’m curious to see which of their old designs gets updated.

[@chrisbrockhurst]

There will always be need bodies and lenses and they will always have something newer and better, it never ends 😅

[@a55tech]

missing low light comparison 2.8 vs 4

[@chrisbrockhurst]

ok

[@allanolivas9814]

I want the tamron 35-150 it’s my dream means but the one I can barely afford is the 28 to 200 anything else it’s beyond my budget and expertise

[@GilbertTV]

I'd go for the Samyang 24-70

[@chrisbrockhurst]

budget choice, not bad!

[@YounanPhoto]

Weighs 1kg..

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

Was tempted until I saw it weighs more than the moon.

[@HSNG10]

Good review. But when you have 3 lenses in front of you in a talking head video, it may be better to close your aperture so that the 3 lenses are in focus. It is frustrating to see them out of focus just because every youtuber is obsessed over the bokeh background. This is often overlooked by youtubers in their presentation.

[@zencollectiongallery]

24-105

[@mr.y1965]

Only 20-70 F4

[@elementalview1]

There's no such thing as an all-in-one lens. Let's cure ourselves of the swiss-army-knife syndrome. Here's a thought: Carry both 16-35 f4 and a 24-105 f4. Weight issue? Manage one's expectations.

[@simmo303]

Not a good idea to overlapping lengths.

[@CristoforoBonissone]

Buy the 20-70 😬

[@chrisbrockhurst]

😉

[@유튜브같이보기]

2070 is the best

[@Symptomix]

little editing error there 13:57 :D

[@adipop]

👍😆👍

[@Ade5]

Ye, none of these.. Sigma 24-70/2.8

[@davidwallace8980]

The A7II is the first body to have IBIS. The A7III was firs to have Z battery.

[@VideoRecapBot]

Wow you’re green