Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 'G' lens review

[@trustnugget280]

Chris pushing out lens reviews like a machine gun

[@StymyParsley]

Lmao, I’m waiting for the day he has no more lenses to review. Then he’ll HAVE to start reviewing vintage lenses which he said he won’t do.

[@christopherfrost]

I am actually currently testing a few vintage lenses :-) Patreon supporters get to see those reviews first. @@StymyParsley

[@adamadamis]

This makes more sense than a 28-75 for me, if looking for something more compact than a 24-70. I'd rather lose a bit on the tele end and keep the 24mm at the wide end. Especially if paired with a high MP camera, then one can 'zoom' in APS-C mode.

[@danieldevine]

i think if it was f/2 it'd be ideal, replacing 24/28/35/40/50mm f/1.8 primes basically

[@adamadamis]

@@danieldevine That'd be nice, but also a totally different lens; double in size and probably more expensive than the 24-70GM! Here they've gone for smaller and cheaper.

[@danieldevine]

no doubt bigger, but surely not actually double in size!@@adamadamis 2.8 isnt so bad for sony because of IBIS tbf, as a canon shooter and film shooter, IS EF lenses are short supply - 35mm f/2 IS for example - or Tamron 1.8 equiv. - its rough in film land for large aperture lenses with IS haha

[@jeffbronson3696]

@@danieldevineit would be double in size mate. I reckon it’d be about a kilo or more. The Canon 28-70mm f2 is 1.4kilos (3.15lbs) for a reason. The Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8 is 1.2 kilos too. F2 is one stop of light more than f2.8, which means doubling of light. Loosely this also means doubling of weight. The 35mm f1.8 is light cause its a prime. The 35mm f1.4 is roughly 1 stop brighter and is double the weight as well. Same goes with 24mm f1.4 gm (450 grams) vs Samyang 24mm f1.8 (220g) or Sony 55mm f1.8 (280g) vs Sony 50mm f1.4 (520g). Point is when you double the light (go up one stop of light) the glass elements roughly double in size as well.

[@navpreetsingh8156]

Yea but the 24mm is not great on this lens

[@andrear9500]

Finally a not overexcited review. Thanks for being honest with pros and cons

[@olivial409]

Oh wow, I've dreamed about a lens with this focal range and aperture for ages now. It covers every prime I use in one lens and f2.8 is plenty fast. I could condense so much of my kit into a single lens. Exciting to see a lens like this exist at all even if it is for Sony. Here's hoping other manufacturers make more in their respective mounts so I can actually own one eventually lol

[@drewbennett4178]

Check out the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 if you’re liking this lens but not the price … I’ve had it glued to my A7C since it came out last year

[@boredcat7]

What do you think of the 16-35 f2.8?

[@TaylorPassofaro]

Agreed, the Tamron is a great lens and has a more versatile zoom range while costing FAR less

[@rayrayg9]

I feel like a 20-40mm range is much larger encompassing than a 24-50mm

[@iainm1594]

Depends on your use case. The majority of my photos are taken at 35mm and 50mm. I hardly ever use 24mm let alone 20mm so the Tamron wouldn’t work for me; too wide and not long enough and no aperture ring. I like the aperture rings as it makes it so much faster to use for me.

[@iainm1594]

What I’d like to see is a 35-60 and f2. That would be perfect for my travel needs as I’d only need the one lens.

[@SyntheticFuture]

I was excited for a second. I use 28mm and 50mm 2.8 very often. Not having to switch lenses is nice. But that price... 😶🥺 I'll just keep switching lenses for now 😅

[@professionalpotato4764]

Yeah, price is a bit steep. Wondering when a 28mm GM will happen.

[@SteelRoninTT]

​@@professionalpotato4764isn't it the same price as the Sigma 24-70? You're losing 20mm but getting better optics here.

[@professionalpotato4764]

@@SteelRoninTT Kinda. It's a bit of a give and take. I see it as Sony's answer to make serious APSC shooters jump to full frame as this lens gives Sigma no further reason to even attempt a redesign of the 18-35mm f/1.8. It's a smaller, lighter, and higher quality version of the much loved 28-53mm f/2.8 equivalent lens. Maybe the reason it appears expensive is because there's simply too many other options. It a too little too late lens imo.

[@SteelRoninTT]

@@professionalpotato4764 It seems that your only options for full frame is third party lenses or the G Master that cost 2x as much. Odd choice from Sony to make these lenses (same with the wide angle zoom from a few months back). I want to get back into serious photography after selling my a6000 and manual lens, but can't decide if I should get an a6700 and invest in crop glass or get a used A7iii and invest in that system.

[@martin9410]

For almost have the price, I prefer my Tamron 20-40mm. I like the wider range. One can always use the APSC mode to get closer to 50 or 60, but no way to make it wider, if you're shooting a 24mm lens.

[@CC-gt3ro]

I prefer my 17-28 f2.8 to the 20-40. It has better lens, internal zoom for my gimbal and no CA, no focus breathing. The price is higher which is an indicator with Tamron. I prefer in the future replace my 70-300 with a 50-300 VC half macro and less focusing distance. I can get 42mm in apsc mode from 28mm. I think getting a 35mm f1.8 would be more beneficial for low light and bokeh.

[@miggyloz806]

The only problem i have with that Tamron is that it loses auto focus pretty easy in low light situations. other then that its a good lens for the price

[@martin9410]

@@miggyloz806 I no longer have it. Have the Sony 20mm g lens and Sony 35mm lens. They are both faster, sharper, less distortion, and more shutters per second.

[@Augnos]

That Sims song in the outro is an excellent pick!!

[@johnnyneves19]

Chris, you're on fire today. Thank you so much for your amazing reviews!

[@MattTrevett]

Hey guys if you're reading this, Chris's Patreon is criminally under-funded. If you have a few bucks to spare, why not send him a couple? If you're willing to spend $1,100 on a piece of glass it's worth a couple dollars to get a good review from someone you can trust.

[@MattTrevett]

Interesting that it extends toward the wide angle when most zooms extend toward the tall angle.

[@WiwatChang]

Any chance comparing this to the Tamron 20-40mm f2.8? Thanks in advance

[@ElReySupr3me]

You are one of the first I go to when it comes to lenses. Thank you sir!

[@RandumbTech]

Oof - this lens relies heavily on in-camera corrections. Since I adapt my Sony lenses to Nikon Zf which does not perform in-camera corrections on non-native lenses, this lens is a no-go for me. Excellent review as usual Chris!

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Thanks for this video. I did end up buying this lens. To get other lenses as small and light and cover this range with equivalent image quality I really did not find anything less expensive. A 24mm + 50mm cost as much and don’t travel as a pair at any real weight savings or lower cost if you want to take advantage of Sony features like breathing correction. At least that is what I found. I am pairing this with an A7CR so size/weight do matter. If there is an alternative could you take the time and share that with us. The Sigma 28-70/2.8 DG DN to me comes closest but lacks the field of view at 24mm if you want or need that. Look forward hearing back from you. Take care.

[@fjp2000]

We really need a new 24-105 f4 for Sony!!

[@opalyankaBG]

What's wrong with the current one?

[@Bayonet1809]

I think a comparison with the APS-C Sony 16-55/2.8 G is quite favourable, this 24-50/2.8 on a 61MP camera offers the same 26MP APS-C crop at 50mm (where it is sharpest) as that 16-55/2.8 does on an a6700, sacrificing only the extra 5mm, while also providing the benefits of the 61MP full-frame sensor quality when not cropping for reach. Add to this comparison the fact that this 24-50/2.8 weighs 54g less, is 8mm shorter, and is actually cheaper too, and it looks like quite a good option.

[@jeroenvdw]

Well yeah but it wasn't perfectly sharp even on a 42mp camera. So with a 61mp camera it will be softer and cropping might give worse results

[@Bayonet1809]

@@jeroenvdw I thought performance at 50mm was superlative, which is where the cropping would occur.

[@abdulrahmanazmi7042]

One question. Is this lens sharp at 24mm f2.8 and 35mm f2.8 compare to sony compact 24mm f2.8 G and 35mm f2.8 Zeiss?

[@junhaophua106]

Hmm, I tend to agree with Chris on this lens. I personally find it hard to recommend it. Perhaps if you are a budding photographer dabbling in someone's wedding, you can't afford the 24-70mm f/2.8, you hate a heavy lens and you must go for a Sony, then yes, maybe this one might be a good start. You will miss some tightly cropped, solo candid portraits though. I can't over-emphasize how important the 60-70mm end is. I travelled last year to the US and it was a pain using my Sony compact camera that could only zoom up to 50mm. I was constantly yearning for just that bit more reach. My composition felt "loose" at 50mm. I also can't recommend the 24-50mm for travel. When you travel, the focal length range should take a higher priority than the aperture size. You will want a longer focal length range than only a one stop increase from say an f/4 lens. The advantage of f/2.8 over f/4 is not significant. (At this point, if you read between the lines, you could guess which Sony zoom lens I would recommend over this 24-50mm! 😃) The "G" label instead of a "GM" is quite telling at 24mm. I don't really like the somewhat blurry rendering at f/2.8-f/5.6. In such a small lens with large aperture, something's got to give. I think Sony sacrificed the image quality at the corners when using the lens at 24mm.

[@chrisbe]

thanks for your review. i am undecided if i should get this 24-50 lens or is it worth it to go for the g master 24-70 ii lens in consideration that i meanly do videos on a a7s iii? whats your recommendation?

[@albedo0point39]

Liked the cool ‘gallery’ music at the end!

[@Dhuxul9]

You are the best lens reviewer

[@michaelmiller7928]

Whoa! Slow down Chris! There's so many lens tests in one day lmao

[@Seapatico]

Love your review, as always! I'm not sure I quite follow your logic about the price, though. If a 24-70 2.8 is worth $2300, how is a 24-50 2.8 overpriced at $1100? The 24-70 is certainly a class above, being a GM vs a G, but I'm not sure I agree that this is so overpriced.

[@16-bit-trip5]

He probably feels it's overpriced because of the competition it faces. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 G2 for $900 and the Sigma 24-70 2.8 for $1100 make this a tough sell unless it fits your niche. The price makes sense in Sony's line up but unless the size fits your needs more so than the lack of reach then the value it offers against the competition isn't a no-brainer. If this was a 20-50mm 2.8 then no one would question the price. I think if it were prices at $900 then most people/reviewers would say that's a good price in the competitive space it's in.

[@Jez1963UK]

I can get this for £900. I already have the 24mm & 40mm. Should I sell those and get this at that price or just keep the two I've got? The things I don't like about this zoom are the extension of its physical size during zooming and the lens breathing.

[@davidd3969]

So what did you do? I m asking the same question…

[@armada1e]

Id probably stick with the 24 f2.8 and 50 f2.5 G lenses, although this lens could be good for indoor events where everyone's close to one another in a small space

[@karlnotyourbusiness4429]

Any chance of a review of the new kit lens on a 7C body?

[@loldart]

After seeing this review. I can see there is value in my 24-70mm F2.8 GM mkii. Still I think this is a lovely option for the price for some street photography if you want a small package

[@grahamsmith2381]

Hoping the price comes down over time, it’s $1999 in Australia on pre order.🙁

[@karlnotyourbusiness4429]

Why not do a comparison with the 28-60mm kit lens on a hi rez camera? This feels like the next level up kit lens for the C range. Could lend you one.

[@Crashentyre]

That's an interesting one. The size is nice, but for the price, I'd much rather have the utility of the only slightly larger 20-70, even if it's only F/4.

[@999slawter]

or the tamron 20-40mm

[@pyroBlastM]

When you launch a lens review on your YT at the same time (sort of) the lens is launched this means your channel is doing very well 😂❤

[@thepumpkinking13]

At first I thought that price was crazy, but then I realized my 40mm F2.8 G + 24mm F2.5 G were $1100 on sale, and this lens is basically both of those smashed together. I mean all of it definitely costs too much, but at least it puts some perspective on everything.

[@lewcehjitl3282]

I can’t decide 20-70mm f4 or this 24-50mm f2.8 😢 I have the a7r5

[@sinwt]

@@lewcehjitl3282 go with 24-50 and buy 70-200 all together. that's my plan. I would sell my 20-70 too

[@rogerdodger689]

Me also….

[@razorseal]

@@lewcehjitl3282 same

[@stefanusadrian8398]

how is image quality and af performance compared to sony mini primes like fe 24mm f2,8 and fe 40/50mm f2.5? If we buy two of those lens, it would have same price like this lens

[@0x1h0b]

would you recommend this or the tamron 20-40 instead for better value for money ..

[@davidpoo66]

I'm shocked this lense isn't sharper on the edges: it's not that cheap *to me". Fantastic review!😊

[@carimannola]

how this looks compared to 20-70 f4?

[@navpreetsingh8156]

Focal range and sharpness good, that's a lot of vignette and distortion tho for a £1200 new lens, it will show up in video

[@Jonafandango]

not sure why 16-25 was recommended but 24-50 wasn't? Seems like a similar zoom range and price

[@nightdonutstudio]

$1098 is half the price of 2470gmII. I think it is resoanble. No way Sony will price it under $1000.

[@bc82870]

Hi I am a beginner in photography. May i ask why in the test of shooting the clock's digit 6, although it is at center of the photo, F4 or slower is still clearer than F2.8? It seems to happen in every test of lenses. Humbly asking. Thanks.

[@opalyankaBG]

Because many lenses perform worse when set at minimum focus distance (i.e. they have lower sharpness and higher aberrations). Therefore, you need to stop them down for quality to improve. Most lenses benefit from stopping down.

[@bc82870]

@@opalyankaBG thank you. Oh i did not notice it was shot at min focal distance and it matters. Thank you!

[@opalyankaBG]

@@bc82870 No problem. Chris' close up test is always shot at minimum focus distance to test image quality deterioration.

[@Romanbala]

I expected better optical performance, unfortunately distortion on wide angle is crazy

[@mb-moose]

Great pictures of Cardiff bay and castle.

[@TCinSoCal]

THE review I come to YT to see. Thank you.

[@EricPIndieFilmOfficial]

just bought the kit lens 28 60 for its compact size (good len) and then this thing came out bruhhh. This len remind me of Zeiss 24 70 f4, it almost feel like it is impossible to make a good 24 70 range compact size len (regardless of aperture range). This len is cool but i would love to see a well rounded compact size 24 70 (no need f2.8) in the future

[@gehrrman]

best review ❤

[@davidpoo66]

So whats a good alternative to this lense? A Sigma?😮

[@steventan7543]

Worth it for the compactness

[@eugeneo1589]

That is not compact. Nikkor 24-50 is, but it's way too dark. Also, this distortion is awful.

[@OliverMacdonaldAD]

Was wondering if the lens hood could be stored backwards aaaaaaaand YES IT CAN lol.

[@rusinsr]

Very odd lens parameters indeed, especially when it competes in price with the excellent Sony G 20-70 F4. 🤔

[@Eikenhorst]

If they bring out the rumoured 16-25mm, combined with this lens and the 50-400mm that could be tempting. Although just a 16-35 is also tempting.

[@dreikonig2785]

I love the aperture ring. Don‘t like the price and the focal range. I will keep my 24-105 f4 G lens. I find the focal range better than 24-50. And as a landscape photographer f4 is good enough. I only miss an aperture ring on my24-105. But maybe a MII will get it. If i can afford it. Prices for lenses are getting higher these days. Edit: Thank you for the very good review. Always top notch.

[@pietro-viecelli]

For half the price I'm getting the Tamron 20-40 2.8 that has a more unique focal length..

[@Ivlodded]

I dont like this style of moving focus front element. Id rather a bigger lens without moving parts.

[@noscopesallowed8128]

Jeez I gotta agree. This is not a $1000+ lens. I really don't like how Sony continues to "cheat" with their in-camera corrections to make massively expensive lenses ok. I'd understand it on budget lenses, but if you're asking me to dump half the price of my vehicle on a lens, that glass better be fantastic. This feels like a budget lens with an arbitrary G slapped on it. As always, thanks for your reviews. They're almost certainly the best on KZbin.

[@CC-gt3ro]

I think recently the quality of lens degrade in favor of speed to allow 4k120 with dual focus motor. It is like the course to megapixel with the sensor. At one moment it must stop or the quality degrade too much especially in low light. I am afraid they will try to push the 8k despite nobody except a cinema production need it, then they have to adapt the sensor and focus motor, so they will cheap even more on the image quality and lens quality, chromatic aberration, focus breathing..

[@noscopesallowed8128]

@@CC-gt3ro Yup I agree. We've already seen the 8k marketing push in the computer world and of course it wasn't all sunshine and rainbows as everybody thought. If cameras do the same thing it will be a very bad day.

[@mcmoose64]

I don't see the point for my use case. What I would save on weight, I would lose on the extra lens I would need to add to my kit to cover the 50-70 range .

[@Crynzer]

Sims music!? Perfect! 🫶🏾

[@br2v]

Nice reviews x 4 an exotic / exciting serie 10 mm f2.8, 15mm f1.4 24-50mm f2.8 , 500mm f5.6 ...

[@PhotographerSen]

You punched me like a boxer with 3 consecutive reasons of switching to sony. Laowa 10mm, Sigma 500mm and now this, sony 24-50 2.8

[@jeffreyhill4705]

I might be the odd one out, but I would rather have this as a kit lens, verses the slow glass normally included. Camera companies need to differentiate their products from cell phones right out of the gate.

[@Bayonet1809]

Good idea, especially as a kit with the higher end Sony models.

[@JoelRiveraMD]

Agree

[@fotosvond_]

Advantage compared to Tamron's 20-40: sharpness at the long end is a lot better and you get your conventional 50mm. However, for nearly half the price, you can get their 28-75 G2 which I would rank higher than this Sony.

[@martinrimanek6015]

😁Díky!

[@christopherfrost]

Thank you! Your support really goes a long way to keeping these videos coming, sponsorship-free :-)

[@CRaul87]

Panasonic 28-200 pls Chris.

[@Snidel]

optically speaking how would you compare it with a sigma 24-70mm 2.8mm?

[@5000Helme]

For portraits... please. Use a portrait lense. 24-50 2.8 is perfectly fine for events and documentation which is the average purpose of photography in general. Not for big emotions, just for getting the work done. Ok the price is meh.

[@dickywong112]

In one day, post 3 Video.....Really hard work.....💓

[@chicojuanito2]

This is perfect - the 24-70 GM is way to heavy for street photography!

[@gibbage1]

Sony has been selling A7C camera's like hotcakes. This is for the smaller body camera's as big full frame lenses on a small body is just not good.

[@thefrenchexpedition]

Why would someone buy this over the new sigma 24-70 II? It’s same weight.

[@andrewscott7006]

If it was 20-50 2.8 I'd understand, but I don't. Really don't get it

[@Jgheiler]

This lens is making me consider switching to sony from fuji. Having a full frame superb image quality in such a small package....

[@AlphaCygni]

And superior AF. Fuji is great as long as you don't expect it to focus.

[@MrPedalpaddle]

A zoom lens with a good range for street photography, for those who want a faster, fancier lens than the 28-60 f/5.6 kit lens.

[@cryptobyt2403]

Great design, but i prefer 20-50 compact ie 24

[@Aplus205]

Wonder who's bright idea at Sony this was at f2.8 I will stick with my Tamron 28-75 a better reach..

[@astrobotnautics5291]

I don't get it, 24-50 is perfect for gimbal shooting videographers.... Why not make it internal zoom, add a few notches in the focus, zoom and apeture rings for focus pulling and add power zoom. Of course then I'd want it to bee par-focal too. At that price, this misses a big potential market. Not that the lens I've justt suggested is in any way thee same at the one Chris justt reviewed 😂

[@kifley19]

They killed the lens with the terrible focus breathing. It would have been perfect on a gimbal if it wasnt for the focus breathing and external zoom.

[@astrobotnautics5291]

@@kifley19 oh yeah, I forgot to include that too

[@Re-InCarNation]

If someday in the future a lightweight FE 20-50mm f2 lens is made I’d pay good money to get it. A lightweight wide to medium zoom with a bright aperture for full frame paired with a C lens would be perfect for my use, nighttime street photography. In big cities with tight dart alley ways and a vibrant night life like Tokyo, Hong Kong, New York, London this is the perfect lens imo.

[@mrmonday42]

That would end up being the same size and weight as the Canon 28-70 f2. So lightweight wouldn't be possible, but it would be an awesome lens

[@jackw.3643]

I suppose with Sony's vested interest in Tamron, this is a good companion with their 50-400. Need wide, slap on the Sony; anything else from short tele portraits to espionage, the Tamron has your back.

[@WS-bk7uu]

I just moved to Sony and would buy this lens tomorrow if it was cheaper.

[@adrianvasian]

not even a mention of the tamron 20-40mm f2.8 ..........

[@shawnfoodfever]

great lense 👏👏😍😍

[@yourtallness]

If they could at least have made it internal zoom

[@nageshj-v9w]

Hi Chris i am a canon shooter, now i want to shift to fujifilm, i have seen all your fuji lens reviews. but there is no fuji 8-16 f2.8 lens review, i need tele lens as well as a wide angle lens. so please do review on fuji 8-16. Thank you.

[@aldphillip2003]

I would rather they had made a 28-70 2.8 G.

[@photobatya]

28-75 g2 is unbeatable

[@urbanie]

i 40% understand the potential need for this lens and 60% see it as a not needed product. sure for a sony 2.8 lens it kind of makes sense and for the price its not THAT bad, but cmon sony, make it a 20-50 or give it f2.5 atleast.

[@ryanf2029]

If the barrel extends out at the shortest focal length, it’s an instant no from me.

[@SuperDamny]

How on earth could you say "not recommended" when it's sharp, lightweight, fast, with silent super quick autofocus?! Weird

[@peterstrachan1794]

We do not need this lens. Absolutely not for video. But parfocal 20-70 f2.8 or 20-100 f2.8 lenses would actually be very useful.

[@베이스치는마이콜]

Come on Canon! lets have some lens like this stop making 2870F2 and stuff

[@mamumonkan]

has the same serious design flaw as the rest of the G line.... but of course sponsored lens reviewers will never "notice" ;)

[@SPDTDL]

Was ready to order as it was rumoured to be internal zoom…. nope. Also Toners copy got fogging inside the lens! Pass!

[@kingsamvisuals]

The only way this makes sense is sold as a kit substantially discounted.

[@cyrilhamel8289]

I found you a little severe on this lens, on its "odity" and price. It isn't that far priced from Sigma's and Tamron's 28-70/2.8. In Sony's range it is (in France) 1000€ cheaper than their own 24-70/2.8, as well as a little cheaper than their 20-70/4. All the above make for quite a choice to go for "more tele" or "more wide angle", brighter or not so bright, cheap or not so cheap, lighter or heavier. And as always, very pleasant and complete review. 'like your style 🙂

[@martin9410]

F2.8 and longer range is a huge difference.

[@smishdws]

hell yeah sims music

[@cguniversity3447]

24-50mm F 2 could have been the better Option.

[@pabloalvaradolopez3941]

This lens for FF is kinda the legendary sigma 18-35 f1.8 for apsc dslr cameras. First, check the zoom range: 24-50 FF and 29-56 FF (or 18-35mm in apsc), And alsoooo 1.8 in apsc is like f2.8 in FF (in terms of bokeh of course, in the amount of light it's a little bit complicated) But here's the thing, Sigma doesn't have that awful distortion in raw, and doesn't have that high price. Ok, that sigma is not for FF, and don't have that aperture ring, but that doesn't justify the price of this weird quality in GMaster Lens.

[@kifley19]

The distortion at 24mm is terrible.

[@defcry_again]

This is a perfect gimbal and travel lens IMO.

[@mosthakahmed465]

20-50 f2.8 would be great

[@kyleeddy7033]

Sims 1 music