Sony 20-70mm F4 G Review | Wide Angle Meets Standard Zoom

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This video is sponsored by Fantom Wallet. Visit store.fantomwallet.com and use code DUSTIN15 to get 15% off

[@olegvorkunov5400]

On my recent trip to London that was the only lens I used. 20mm was a life saver for taking pictures of London architecture. F4 did not stop me for taking night shots and indoor shots with no issues. A7IV perfectly handled noise and Lightroom cleanup any noise. While on the trip, you do not want to blur background much. And 70mm on the other end was perfect to compress background objects to make them closer to the subject.

[@davidligon6088]

I bought the Sony 20-70 lens after renting it for a trip to Death Valley. It not only has exceptional image quality, it is just plain fun to use. A few weeks ago I received my 70-200 F4 MACRO G OSS II, and I’m in love with that combination for landscape, macro, and even wildlife when I add the 1.4 TC. It’s a lightweight combination to carry and fits well in my 7L shoulder bag. I’m so impressed with the combination, I just sent my 24-105 to my daughter because I don’t think I’ll be using it any more. That said, I did keep my Tamron 28-200 because it is just so darned convenient.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed on all three lenses.

[@SebastianWorldwide]

Very interesting! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens too. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!

[@Smoothblue90]

Wow. Looking forward to this. I've been interested to see what this lens is about. I have the 16 to 35 PZ and have been thinking about getting something slightly longer to match with it. I admit I've been thinking about the 24 to105 a lot.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This is definitely an interesting lens, as it is really strong optically.

[@nightdonutstudio]

I have 20-70 and bought 16-35 pz but end up returned it. From my experience when I have 20-70. I only need anything wider than 20mm for specfic moment. Because 20mm is wide enough for most case. So what I find is if I find 20mm is not wide enough and I switch to 16-35. I am mostly only use 16-18mm anyway. And when I need anything longer than 20mm I just stay with 20-70. The focal length just overlap too much. I would rather just buy a 14/16mm Prime for that specific occasion. 16-35 used to be my top wishlist lens. But since I have 20-70, I find I lost the desire to purchase 16-35. I am more likely purchase a Sony 14mm f1.8 or Viltrox 16mm f1.8 or if it is zoom maybe sigma 14-24.

[@Smoothblue90]

@@nightdonutstudio Good comment. Thank you. I agree. Lots of overlap. But that's what is pushing me toward keeping the 16 to 35 and getting the 24 to 105.

[@JessDemant]

I've had the Sony 24-105mm.f.4 G lens for a few years, but I sold it, and now that I've bought the Sony 20-70mm.f.4 I have to say that I definitely prefer the new lens 🙂

[@nightdonutstudio]

@@Smoothblue90 Good choice either way. However I feel like 24-105 might get a refresh soon. 16-35 GM II is coming in few days. Leave 24-105 the only Sony high quality zoom lens have not updated.

[@Pfagnan]

Dustin is the best - so credible and user-friendly !!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the nice feedback.

[@sashinger5230]

Revisiting your review after a few months and I'm seriously considering this lens now. Have a Sigma 16-28 and a Tamron 28-75. But especially when hiking it can be really annoying to change lenses for shots between 20-35mm all the time. This and the new 70-200 F4 G II seem to be an excellent compact setup for traveling, hiking and also street photography. The 20-70 as a standalone setup might currently also be the most versatile high-quality one lens solution for Sony. I mean: An A7C II + the 20-70 is not even 1kg... very tempting. Another option would be to sell the Sigma and get the 16-35 GM and just ignore the missing 35mm (17,5mm) in the middle range when on the way and add 4mm on the wide, while I found myself not shooting too much below 20mm lately though... Tough decision. :) Thanks for your work, Dustin!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is a tough decision, for sure. If you aren't shooting below 20mm much, the 20-70 and 70-200 F4G lenses are a very compelling kit.

[@sashinger5230]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Exactly. And I could still grab an 16mm f1.8 from Viltrox if I need more wideangle or just keep the Sigma in my drawer for special occasions. ✌

[@DDHDTV]

Tamron 20-40 could have also been an option for you

[@anthonystonehouse]

I took this lens on a trip to Indonesia along with the 35mm GM. I barely used the prime as the 20-70mm was just so versatile and I was surprised how often I used the 20mm end of it. I came back with lots of sharp punchy images and 70mm f4 gave me enough subject separation. I did miss a faster aperture at night. I ended up selling it when I got back though, mostly because I want (prefers) to use my primes (35mm 1.4, 40mm f2.5, 65mm f2, 85mm f1.4) and I can crop them enough to provide some versatility in composition. I might add the 20mm f1.8 at some point having tried 20mm on the zoom. I also wasn’t a fan of the feel of the 20-70mm. The focus rings clicks as it moves around a little and the zoom ring would occasionally slip a little when changing direction quickly. It just didn’t feel up to the same build quality of my other Sony lenses, or my Sigma lenses.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It definitely provides great image quality, but fortunately, as Sony shooters, we have a LOT of options these days.

[@elzycollins]

Hi, I'm currently travelling with a 20mm f1.8. I was undecided whether to get the 20-70mm for versatility. I do have the 85mm f1.4 sigma but it is annoying to keep swapping. As a prime lens this 20mm is awesome though. I'm also carrying the 35 gm with me. For travelling the 20-70mm would of been perfect and It's on my mind to sell the 20mm as it stands 😅.

[@theunwanted8062]

@thewanderlustnet, how is the image quality of 20-70 compred to sigma 65, I have the sigma 65 and love the images & color out of it

[@anthonystonehouse]

@@theunwanted8062 I found it not as good as the Sigma 65mm but that is an outstanding lens. It's not far off though, and for a zoom with the versatility it offers I don't think it can be beat. I much prefer the experience of shooting with the Sigma 65mm though, much better build quality and nicer size to use.

[@theunwanted8062]

Thanks 🙂

[@stevenguzy570]

Hi Dustin! Perfect video for me at this time too. I'm planning a trip to Portugal this year and I am trying to figure out what lens, or lenses I should take. I already have the Sony/Zeiss 24-70mm f4. My question for you is, would you keep the 24-70 and bring along a second wide angle, zoom or prime, or go with this newer 20-70mm? What would be your ideal set up to travel with, trying to be as minimalist as possible for weight and convenience? Thanks so much!!! Steven

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If minimalist is your goal, then this lens is a nice option. Being able to go that wide does open up some new options.

[@watkinsphoto]

Great review. Very thorough. I've had mine for several months and have taken it on three or four trips. I think it is the perfect travel lens. It is versatile and amazingly sharp.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Definitely.

[@frankfurter7260]

I travel with it every time I leave the house with my camera.

[@SebastianWorldwide]

Very interesting! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens too. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!

[@watkinsphoto]

@@SebastianWorldwide I have never noticed any unusual noise with mine.

[@professionalpotato4764]

For anyone considering it as a travel lens and take group selfies often, rent it and compare it with the 16-35mm f/4 PZ. I personally picked the 16-35 over the 20-70 mainly for group selfies. 16mm is barely wide enough for a group of 4. 20mm is fine for 2 people though.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I take your point, though the counterpoint would be that many people would feel the need for a secondary lens in that scenario, as 35mm isn't very tight for framing.

[@professionalpotato4764]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Indeed. I'm saving up for the new 70-200mm f/4 Macro as a potential 3 lens setup along with a Sigma 35mm f/2. Might swap out the 35mm for a 50mm prime depending on situation.

[@unabletochoose]

I am debating between these two lenses.. I have the 24-105 for travel and family run and gun lens, but it's not wide enough, and very bulky and heavy... this 20-70 seems better, but the 16-35 looks so much smaller and lighter.. plus the additional 4mm at the wide and is interesting for me. I don't know if 35 would be tight enough tho..

[@professionalpotato4764]

@@unabletochoose I don't think you'll find an issue with the 35mm. In a pinch, you can always crop down in APS-C mode. The 16-35 PZ is so sharp it's pretty much GMii quality, just at a lower price tag. Ideally I would bring a 16-35 PZ + 70-200mm f/4. However my last 2 holidays with the 16-35mm hasn't had me desiring a longer focal length. Maybe see how you prefer to shoot with your smartphone? I personally shoot most with the 1x ~ 2x zoom which is only 24-50mm range.

[@KeeeeenW]

Beautiful photos from Mexico and great review!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad you like them!

[@JessDemant]

Again a really good video from you, thank you 👍 I have the lens and I have already become a big fan of it, because the image quality and versatility are very good, and together with my two GM lenses 35mm.f.1.4 and 50mm.f.1.4 I am well covered for weddings and events plus travels 🙂

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a great stable of lenses.

[@SebastianWorldwide]

Very interesting! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens too. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!

[@molybdnum]

Solid presentation and really concise review as always, Mr Abbott. Seems like a reasonable generalist lens way overpriced for the spec; the main gripes for me are that f/4 and $1100 is just not compelling when the 28-70 f/3.5-5.6 kit lens is a quarter of the price. If you must have the 20mm stretch, you could pick up the Sony 20mm f/1.8 AND a kit zoom used for less money than this 20-70. I own the 20-40 Tamron mentioned at the start; that's more limited zoom but only $700 and offers f/2.8 and brings even more impressive MFD, so for someone using the wide end of their kit zoom a lot and still wanting a reasonable amount of compact size and zoom flexibility I'd really suggest that as a cheaper alternative with more creative potential.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

As Sony shooters, we are fortunate to have a lot of different options for getting to the destination, so I take your point. That being said, the image quality is (frankly) garbage by comparison on the kit lens you mention. It lacks weather sealing, sophisticated autofocus, and could not dream of matching the image quality. The 20mm F1.8 and Tamron 20-40mm are different stories. Both of those are great lenses, but there are plenty of people who would strongly prefer to not have to change lenses in a moist or dusty environment and who will value the ability to go from wide angle to short telephoto in one lens.

[@professionalpotato4764]

f/4 is not really an issue on full frame. When you consider that this is smaller, lighter, and cheaper than crop sensor equivalents like Panasonic Leica 10-25mm f/1.7 (20-50mm f/3.4 equivalent), it's a really good deal. I think it's a very fairly priced lens. These days, everyone is either allergic to noise, or aren't skilled enough to not rely on 50/85mm f/1.2s to get a nice photo they want. ISO is fine, nothing scary at all. Deep focus is fine and tells a better story. The only reason to use zooms is to not switch lenses, so imo when people say, just buy a 20mm f/1.8 and a kit zoom, that's exactly the issue this 20-70mm is trying to solve. If you could and are willing to change lenses, just use a full prime setup. Also as Dustin mentioned, kit lenses are crap. Just use an iphone instead. Why buy a $2000-4000 sensor and put a stack of plastic pucks over it instead of real decent glass?

[@Someone-lc6dc]

I've been waiting a long time for this review 🙂Thanks, Dustin! I've got the 20mm f/1.8, Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 and the new 70-200f4 mk2. Not sure which lens to pick to fill in the gap. I suppose I could sell the prime and get this 20-70 f/4 or... keep the prime and get the 28-75 mk2 from Tamron (?)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, that is a tough one. We have reached a point on Sony where there are so many valid options that choosing well can be difficult. On the other hand, there are so many good options that there really isn't a bad choice either. I think you would be happy with either choice. I guess I would ask how often you use the wide aperture on the 20mm. That's the biggest thing you potentially lose if you sell it for the zoom.

[@greasyflight6609]

Is this lens better than the Sony 24-105mm G?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

In many ways the answer is yes. Optics, focus, and more features.

[@SebastianWorldwide]

Great video, thank you very much! I have recently acquired the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lens. However, one thing is bothering me or rather I would like to clarify whether it is a general issue with this lens or whether it is a defect specifically with my lens. The lens makes a noise when focussing (with autofocus). By the way, the volume of the noise varies depending on the aperture setting. At f/4 the noise is very minimal, almost inaudible. From f/4.5, however, it is clearly audible. And the higher the aperture number (for example f/13), the longer it takes to focus and the longer the noise lasts. However, these differences are small. I am not yet familiar with focusing noises from lenses recently released by Sony. For example, the new Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f/4 G and the new Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II are 100% completely silent. The older Sony FE 18mm f/1.8 G, on the other hand, also makes the noise described above, if I remember correctly. Does your lens also make this noise? Many thanks in advance!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think what you may be hearing is the sound of the aperture blades opening and closing rather than the focus motor. This is why you aren't really hearing anything at F4.

[@SebastianWorldwide]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much for the quick response. All right, very interesting. And that's not a problem if it is? So nothing to be concerned about?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would monitor it. If it doesn't get worse, you should be okay.

[@supercgn]

Hi Dustin, thank you for the great review! Do you plan to review the Sony 16-25mm F2,8 in near future?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I certainly hope so.

[@AndrewL]

may i know where can i download or buy the test chart?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid mine is one that I custom made.

[@geerthasevoets48]

Thanks for the in-depth review, Dustin. I own an A7CR HMP camera and am hesitating between this sony 20-70 F4 and the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2. Which of these lenses is the sharpest in your experience? Which one would work best with e A7CR?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Both lenses are perfectly adequate for 61MP of resolution. I would base your decision on other factors (what lens better suits your needs?) rather than sharpness.

[@geerthasevoets48]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you, Dustin. And already a happy Newyear from Belgium.

[@ALWH1314]

It’s a lighter, cheaper and practical alternative to 24-70 f2.8, 20mm is very useful indoor or group photo; but for travel 24-105 f4 with stabilization is a better option at about the same price.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough.

[@darrenhaken]

Dustin, would you favour this lens or something at f2.8 for travel? I normally carry a 16-35 and 24-70 lens for travel but I’m wondering if consolidating to this lens makes sense with a prime. I’ve valued 20mm a lot when travelling but I could live without 16mm.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I liked this as a travel lens. Pair it with a lightweight prime for when you need something brighter.

[@darrenhaken]

@@DustinAbbottTWIwould you pick this over say the 24-70 Gm ii for travel?

[@darrenhaken]

@@DustinAbbottTWIand as always, thanks for taking the time to reply, Dustin.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@darrenhaken You're welcome.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@darrenhaken As far as being lightweight, yes, and probably because of the ability to go to 20mm, which does help a lot when in interior spaces.

[@gitithadani]

I got a feel for the lens when I bought the sony a7r5 a few months ago. And it was very tempting. This is one of the lenses & lens combinations (new 70-200) to pair the r5 with. Both zoom lenses offer tremendous versatility & quality but however at a significantly higher price at other combinations. The tamron 20-40 goes at half the price, slightly lighter & gives better MFD & 2.8 aperture. It can be paired with the tamron 50-400 or even the 70-300. The combination that I have for more DOF sharp but slow zooms is the compact sony 28-60 & the tamron 70-300. Weight is less than 700gms & fits into a waist pouch with a prime fast option or when I need to photograph architecture+interiors the tamron 17-28. However, it is another great addition to the sony eco system

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is definitely a great addition.

[@christophmunch4796]

Still waiting for the 16-35 f4 PZ review... twiddling thumbs...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid that one's not on a the radar at the moment. I missed the opportunity and now the schedule is full for a while

[@professionalpotato4764]

Just buy it. It's great even as a photography lens since it's sharper than the current 16-35mm f/2.8 GM. I used it extensively with a Sigma 35mm f/2 as my travel combo. The zoom ring was also a lot better than I expected.

[@bhekuwenza]

Def a vacation lens, as that distortion is a deal breaker for work. I could have been ok with the F4 as I still use the 16-35 F4 for interiors. It has very minor distortion

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It would depend on your work, but for interiors, I would say that's correct.

[@Smoothblue90]

Yes. I'm using the 16 to 35 for construction sites. Mechanical rooms. Electrical rooms. Pretty happy with it.

[@feudaler]

really really nice review. really really nice lens. i mean, really really really. 🙂

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That’s really, really kind of you ;)

[@lilyfirenze]

Doesn't seem like a fair review without comparison to Zeiss 24-70 F4. Since it replaces it. Is it better? Is it worst? In which way? No profile could ever correct geometry for Zeiss 24-70 wild distortion levels. People faces were distorted in the middle of the frame making them look like not people. If this one has more distortions, then it is not for people and not for interiors, then what is it for? No optical stabilization for increased price? Yes we need it even with IBIS. If all this information is missing, going with used Canon Zoom with lovely F2.8 looks like a very solid plan with Sigma MC-11 for change, I would stay away from this lens then.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This is a much better lens all around than the Zeiss. I didn't have the Zeiss for comparison, so I didn't include that.

[@Sergey_Sergeev]

👍

[@jyuesheng7899]

中華民國五拾元! 這連我都沒有你竟然有 哈哈哈 真懷念!

[@seleemzid7881]

this lens is not meant to be for photographer it's for videographer .

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I just don't think that's true. It's a fantastic lens for photography and should be strongly considered for travel.

[@dwightlooi]

SONY is VERY ANNOYING in that they allow X.Fine JPEGs and Fine + RAW but not X.Fine + RAW. Hey, call me a noob or call me whatever you want, but I SHOOT JPEGs. I don;t always want to tweak or edit a shot in Lightrm or PS. I often just want to use or share it as is because it's quick. Also, I like the in camera lens corrections more more often than not over manual ones. In this age of dirt cheap SD storage it is very annoying that they make you choose between X.Fine JPEGs and RAW with inferior JPEGs. I really cannot give a rats arse about storage size because I can afford all the GBs I need on the cards!!! This is especially true when you are packing a 20-70/4 or about walkabout lens while leaving lots of glass at home. I have already made the decision to not go for ultimate quality, so humor me with the best JPEGs you can save without making me give up RAW for the once in a blue moon need to bring a shot back from the brink.

[@professionalpotato4764]

Fujifilm might suit your shooting style more.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

What camera are you referring to? In my two Sony bodies I can definitely choose RAW and X Fine JPEG.

[@dwightlooi]

@@DustinAbbottTWI A7RII

[@TVe200]

I bought it a month ago, even if I own the 24-105 (I will sell that).

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Don't blame you. That extra 35mm is easier to crop in than it is is to try to go wider on the 24-105

[@TVe200]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, and I also bought the new 70-200 G2 one week ago (sold the Tamron 70-180). Mostly because I can use my 1.4x TC when needed.

[@juanmoreno8217]

Hi Dustin, do you think that having the Sony 35mm GM and the Sony 70-200mm GMII, can I change my Sony 24-70mm GMII for the Sony 20-70mm G? I work in events and portrait photography and sometimes I take nature photos as a hubby. I think that this f2.8 zoom is not so necessary for me having my other lenses. thank you so much.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That makes sense to me.

[@withtiago]

Exactly what I'm doing! ❤

[@jayneptune2568]

Great review and I have come to the same conclusion as others here - I no longer need a zoom 'trinity' for travel. This lens and a 70-200 does it for me as my 'dynamic duo'. :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed.

[@6gwilliams]

Thanks Dustin, another of your superb and informative reviews. Cheers

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure!

[@unclefart5527]

I've used it from day one. Just got back from a few weeks in Pukaskwa Park. To be brief, my conclusion is it's a very expensive general purpose travel lense. Let me know if you want a 5,000 word review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

LOL.

As usual another great review. I was just wondering is this a parfocal lens

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don’t recall it being parfocal.

@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you

[@olegvorkunov5400]

I am getting terrible CA for photos. Tree branches against the sky have horrible blue lines around. I can make a short video to demonstrate. I ordered a second copy to see if it the one I have is a bad copy. But it is ruins everything. Beyond repair. :( I wanted to like this lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That definitely sounds like a defective lens. I didn't see anything like that.

[@olegvorkunov5400]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, it was a bad copy. Got another one and it is much better and overtook my Tamron 28-75 in picture quality, while the first copy was behind.

[@patmat.]

And if you want to crush the background better use a fixed focal f/1.4 or 1.8 lense.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

True.

[@IanBrown-e3v]

superb as always. Thank You

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome!

[@oriwo99]

I mainly use the Nikon Z system, but since Nikon unfortunately has no such f4 S-Line combo I now use the 24-70mm together with the 4/70-200mm (also G-Line) and the two teleconverters, together with the a7iv as a compact two-zoom travel system , which on top of that can macro! Best Fullframe travel kombo.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a great, portable kit.

[@nonagenarioguillen]

Had you not considered using this lens with the ETZ21 Adaptor?

[@oriwo99]

@@nonagenarioguillen Hello, no the adapter I did not know so far, but in the end I am also skeptical from previous experiences how well something like this works. Mostly there are some problems and be it only the sealing against water and dust or mutual firmware problems.

[@jimmydane3527]

Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@machmutdoener]

I am still waiting for the 24-105 2.8. Is it that Hard to Build?

[@paulyeung6608]

I think so. There are very few zooms with a zoom ratio greater than 4x that still open to f/2.8. In modern lenses, the Tamron 35-150mm f/2.0-2.8 is the only one off the top of my head

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think it is that hard to build. People have been asking for that lens ever since I became a photographer a long time ago...and it still hasn't come.

[@machmutdoener]

@@DustinAbbottTWI yeah it seems that way. But we are getting closer with the Tamron 35-150 2.0-2.8. Maybe we arent that far away from getting that lens

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

Even if it could be built, it would be very big, very heavy and very expensive🤷‍♂️ there’s a reason not one manufacturer makes one.

[@machmutdoener]

@@Jabber-ig3iw I mean the same Thing has been said about so many leises before. Just a matter of time I guess

[@teodormaxim5033]

Hi there and thank you for the thorough review! I'm currently looking to upgrade my street photo lens - using an a6000 with the 16-50 PZ kit lens, the photo quality of which is at best underwhelming. I wish to not have to go prime because I don't want to find myself swapping lenses, as I'd have to carry them around in something and stop to swap, which kind of always results in missed shots. The 17-70 Tamron and this Sony seem to be stellar options, optically speaking, and price-wise I'd go for the Tamron, but I'm concerned about its size - apart from weight considerations, I don't want to stick out like a sore thumb in public, which I find that just by carrying a camera is difficult enough already. The Sony seems a little smaller, but I'm not sure how much of a difference it would make regarding that, especially given the external zooming. What could you say from your experience? Is the size of this Sony an impediment? In essence, I'm looking for something that zooms to ~100mm on APS-C, is compact enough to not stand out (much) in public and has at least better image quality than the kit lens. Or do you know any other lens/setup which would fulfill these requirements? Or do you have a different perspective on this matter? How are you shooting street photos? Thank you.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This lens isn't really a LOT smaller than the Tamron, so if you plan to stick with APS-C, the Tamron's zoom range is going to be more useful because it goes wider. I'd personally get used to the size/weight, as it isn't ridiculous.

[@OneWeekGetAway]

Thanks - great review as always. I think you have the wrong written narrative - this is for the 20-70G, not the 70-200G.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've fixed it. My previous changes must not have saved

[@Toglander]

I would love to see your review of the Sony 16-35 f/4 PZ. I’d also love to see the image quality compared to the new 16-35 f/2.8 GM II. Thanks and keep creating these amazingly insightful videos!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the feedback.

[@davesit9256]

Did you son get married? If so, congratulations.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes he did.

[@stro_photography]

Thanks for your workl ! Have a healty 2024 !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks, you too!

[@denizahmet2299]

Essentially the G lenses are turning out to be optimised for video use.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would view it more as they are designing lenses with the recognition that the case use for modern cameras is a hybrid of photos and videos.

[@FarzadFarzamfar]

I believe the conclusion is missing from the Video.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, if I watch the video it is there.

[@woodworkingphoto8083]

​@DustinAbbottTWI it ends at 22.43 for me

[@devondesroches]

I am seeing the same thing, no conclusion. Video ends at 22:43 and the time stamp for the conclusion doesn’t work.

[@Sil3nC4]

The conclusion is there, it's just the timestamp in the description being wrong.

[@FarzadFarzamfar]

Yes, it ends at 22:43 for me too.

[@miguelquezada1916]

Was waiting for Mr. Abotts review. The use case scenario for this lens for me is bulletproof autofocus. I have the Tamron 35-150 and find the autofocus fails about 20% of the time in studio dog photography and with video content can sometimes focus hunt. Also in the studio the tamron is just too heavy to use for more than 1 portrait shoot per day.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's interesting about the Tamron, as I have found autofocus flawless on my three bodies.

[@garrettcphillips]

Is it sharp though at 70mm??

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I do a very detailed image quality breakdown, so I think that is answered in the review.

[@martinpickard5818]

I’ll keep my. 24-105….I prefer the reach rather than the wide.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough. Sony shooters are blessed to have many options these days!

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

And some will prefer the 20mm of the 20-70🤷‍♂️

[@martinpickard5818]

@@Jabber-ig3iw 4mm extra width over an extra 35mm reach …..really…..I’d get that if it was 16mm over 24mm but not 20mm….

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

@@martinpickard5818 yep that 4mm at the wide end is more important to me that the 35mm at the long end. You be happy with your purchase and I’ll be happy with mine, just because others chose differently doesn’t degrade your choice.

[@martinpickard5818]

@@Jabber-ig3iw 😂😂😂

[@michaelfrymus]

F4? Ugh I have a 24-70, but going to consider the 35-150

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 35-150mm is a brilliant lens; it's the one I reach for the most.

[@Jabber-ig3iw]

F2.8 snobs are strange people, they think every photo needs a shallow depth of field but then buy an f2.8🤷‍♂️

[@frankfurter7260]

@@Jabber-ig3iw, most people can not compose an interesting shot so they blow out the background and convince themselves shallow DOF = pro. 🙄

[@whygamewhy]

@@frankfurter7260easier to wow friends for sure. My family and friend doesnt care about composition, they see a bokeh and tell me it must be from ur big camera! But actually,i just used the portrait mode from my phone.

[@ourhouseuk]

This lens wont sell well unless it’s a lot cheaper than other g lenses. Too dim and mustache distortion if you want the wide Inside. Not enough reach for a walk around. Not wide enough for an ultra wide with this sort of distortion. I just don’t see who buys this over many many other options. Dustin has been very diplomatic in his approach to a probably less than mediocre lens for the price.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's not my take at all, so I wasn't diplomatically covering how I really feel. I wouldn't choose this lens for real estate, but its a great travel lens or event lens, and for most people 70mm is enough for walkaround, particularly with the deep cropping abilities on the higher resolution cameras.

[@frankfurter7260]

I bought it. So at least one person.

[@whygamewhy]

Didn’t age well.

[@puppet_master]

You say that we can find a link to your text review in the description, hate to break this to you, your description is an illegible mess. I do love your content though.

[@dmacrolens]

I can only imagine what else you fail to fundamentally comprehend.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Not quite sure what you mean, as I see it in a second below the review, but here's the link: bit.ly/20-70Greview