f/2.8 Mark II zoom battle: Sony vs Sigma Vs Tamron 24-70 / 28-75mm comparison

Here are the three Mark II / G2 full-frame fast standard zoom lenses currently available for Sony E-mount cameras (the Sigma lens is also available on L-mount, and the Tamron lens, also on Nikon Z-mount).
Full reviews with further details, and affiliate links (thanks for your support!):
Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II:
• Sony FE 24-70mm f/2.8 ...
geni.us/Sony24...
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN 'Art' II:
• Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG...
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2:
• Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 D...
geni.us/Tamron...
All pictures taken by me on a Sony a7R III camera.
Support me on Patreon! / christopherfrost
Equipment I use for making these reviews and other videos:
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonE...
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonE...
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma5...
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonR...
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/Marumi...
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020...
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSm...
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC...
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1...
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMin...
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons....

[@hoatd1993]

Not expecting G2 to keep up with others. Impressive!

[@gamebuster800]

yeah, but 28mm.... that sucks

[@potatowithbbq7373]

@@gamebuster800 Yeah, but it cheap.... Thats good for my wallet

[@paiman_]

​@@gamebuster800tbh not everybody needs that extra 4mm. It makes the lens heavier, bigger & more expensive. I have the Tamron G2 & I am super happy with it.

[@richardgrant418]

@@gamebuster800 “Sucks” - for you, GB haven’t you heard of the expression your mileage may vary

[@recklesscoding]

@@gamebuster800 it really depends on your use case. For the traditional use of a normal lens, i.e. portraits and events, the 28mm is wide enough. Its compact size and price really make up for those scenarios. In fact, you can purchase the Tamron 17-28mm and 28-75mm used at the same price as the Sigma! The fact that it shares the same filter thread as multiple GM primes (67mm) is also a good bonus. Now, if you want to critique the lens then do so for its average bokeh and not-that-great weathersealing.

[@craigcarlson4022]

Chris, You keep outdoing yourself with your videos!…Impressively well edited, concise, but you didn’t leave any key feature out. I’m in the Nikon system, but i do envy the Sony users for their lens options. Am about to update my full frame option and really like this Tamron for its balance of image quality and low weight.

[@sanjayvijayanathan5038]

much as I love the look of a sigma lens, tamron wins it for me with the 28-75, 70-180 and an A7r4 in a 5L sling bag, with room for an iPad

[@intelligentlydesigned2903]

Sure thing. Tests show the Tamron 28-75 G2 and 70-180 G2 to be some of the best lens ever made. The 70-180 is on par with the 70-200 GM2. It actually beats the 70-200 GM2 on the shorter and more useful side of the focal distance. On the other side, the Sigma 70-200 (2024) lags behinds both the GM2 and the V2 by a considerable margin.

[@sidharthdas80]

Which 5l sling bag do you use?

[@sanjayvijayanathan5038]

Hi- the old Peak 5L sling mark 1- the new V2 one is 6L and usefully roomier with better zips

[@artmaltman]

Supreb, timely comparison! You are reading our minds. Well done! I love that there is not a compelling reason for me to sell my Tamron 28-75mm G2. Personally I find that the extra 4 mm on the wide end distorts peoples faces on the edges. 28mm limitation is therefore a useful constraint for me. Also I have to factor in weight of lens due to relying on backpack in NYC. Tamron far lighter. Suggestion: I would love to see you add a face/eye autofocus test to your standard routine.

[@WRPhotography-zx5dv]

Great review, for $699 in May 2024 the Tamron is the best option for the money.

[@mattltech]

As always, a fantastic review. Thank you. I own the Tamron G1 and it is one of my favorite lenses. I love the way images are rendered using the lens. They seem to have an unusual depth to them, almost 3-D like.

[@RM-hy4so]

I started out with the Sigma 24-70 2.8 first generation. It was very good but not as good as my adapted Canon EF 24-70 2.8II. I sold both and replaced it with the Sony 24-70 2.8 II. This zoom was breathtakingly fantastic. It’s the best zoom I have ever used across any platform. The colors, bokeh and sharpness are just outstanding. I’m not sure what to do with my prime lenses in that range. They are now relegated to low light and bokeh duties in very challenging conditions only. I must add that I prefer the warmer colors of the sigma zoom. While the Sony zoom was at a very painful price point. I am glad I purchased it. Trading in my other zooms did help.

[@maggnet4829]

Short and on the point. Great summary!

[@tuanminh3720]

I have tamron G2 and its fantastic, most important is its the lightest of the 3

[@idkanymore3382]

being light is not important in any feild. Even photography

[@javiermacu]

@@idkanymore3382 it all depends on what the photographer wants:) Personally I want a zoom lens, but I don't want it to be heavy af, that's why I'm saving so I can buy a sigma 28-70 2.8, which is such a good lens, but at the same time a light one

[@idkanymore3382]

@@javiermacu lmfao get stronger, those lens are light. I carry 2-3 pounds on all my lenses

[@老实人-g9n]

@@idkanymore3382 no, weight is important.

[@idkanymore3382]

@@老实人-g9n No it isnt. Get stronger, stop whining. My rig is 5 to 6 pounds on a regular

[@Jviotr]

These 3 have perfected lenses lately. Long gone are the days where getting a Sigma or Tamron meant sacrificing noticeable image quality. You have to pixel peep in the corners to even see any differences.

[@Fededrums25]

This is the comparison we were all waiting for, unbeatable as always! Thanks Christopher for your great analysis! ♥

[@JayC133]

Interesting that this is the 5th Sigma 24-70 review I've seen and the first with that level of LOCA. Maybe production quality variance.

[@paiman_]

I have the Tamron G2 and I love it. Compact, lightweight, sharp, cheaper than other 24-70's, and it does the job for me. I don't mind the 28mm. I don't shoot that wide anyway (I had a 24-70 in the past, and I didn't use 24mm that much). Glad to see lenses are becoming more compact & lightweight.

[@Eikenhorst]

I personally shoot a lot at wide angle, but then there is the 16-28 to cover that ;)

[@paiman_]

@@Eikenhorst Exactly. 24mm is honestly not that wide anyway if you wanna shoot super wide angle. You only need 2 lenses to cover 16-75mm.

[@samk_8426]

That pin-cushion distortion at 3:23 looks pretty wild

[@fuyufx]

yeah I''m surprised he didn't mention it

[@Riskbreaker2009]

sigma shows some bowing deformation at 24mm when focusing, that may be an issue when focus bracketing, thats a shame when having the maximun magnification of 0.37

[@classic.cameras]

You should do a comparison video of all three Sigma 24-70mm ART lenses.

[@fuyufx]

I got the tamron G2 on sale for half as much as the sigma, and based on this video I am not missing all that much :)

[@JoshChristiane]

Great comparison!!

[@MarkusGebhard]

I love these comparison! Thats such valuable content

[@Maverick99]

Awesome work! Thanks.

[@JMatic-xk9vq]

The G2 is really a statement from Tamron for the Sony E-Mount! Impressive! You can go hardly around it - If you own a E-Mount Full Frame Camera.

[@Jason-fm3qi]

Looks like there is a slight magenta color cast on the Tamron vs the other two? Maybe it's just my screen....

[@kellenholt6655]

I was looking forward to this video as I debated heavily on which standard zoom to buy back when I bought my Tamron 28-75 G2, and I was interested to see if it was worth making the jump to the new Sigma. After watching this video, I’m still happy with my purchase. Weight is a big factor for me and the lack of it on the Tamron was a big selling point for me when I bought, and that still rings true today. I was really hoping Sigma would find a way to trim even more weight off the 24-70mm II considering the original was a boat anchor, but the amount they trimmed isn’t enough to sway me. I’d love to see Tamron make a competitor to the Sony 20-70mm F4 as that might make me ditch my 28-75.

[@Vantrakter]

Nice comparison! It's fun being on E-mount. Worth mentioning is perhaps (I did not hear you mentioning it) that the Sigma zoom ring, besides being narrower, turns the other way, as Sigma zooms tend to do, compared to other zooms for E-mount. I like 24 but when it comes to wide I like primes more. Am saving for the Sigma 28-70 to go with an A7C.

[@vbvel5436]

24-70 you mean

[@shanecrowe1309]

Thanks for the comparison. I think I’m going to pick up both the Tamron 17-28 & 28-75. That covers way more range for basically the same price as the Sony 24-70

[@MadeinOtherTimes]

Imagine explaning the quality of our day's zoom to a photographer from 60's...

[@marleenvandam6931]

Thanks Chris! I think the biggest neg for the Tamron is the loss of 4 mm at the short end

[@robertcudlipp3426]

Totally agree. As I invariably shoot wider, the loss of that 4mm is critical.

[@enjoygary]

Compare the sigma 28-70 vs 24-70ii

[@VynZography]

Hey great comparison!

[@Ali80D]

Thanks for this video Christopher! You made a perfect comparision between these three lenses, I really thank you for made me and others learning lenses world 🤍, For me I will choose the Tamron 28-75 because it has better looking images and bokeh, 7:39 I love how the Tamron lens rendered this scene, still love my Sigma lenses but sometimes I prefer Tamron. best regards.

[@jamescaldwell5]

Another perfectly executed review. As long as I have been watching your reviews I just made a note of your use of a Crystal Pepsi bottle. Pretty sure I have seen this in other reviews but did not think much of it, what is the story on that? I googled it and sure enough, just like in the US, the product was not on the shelves long in the UK.

[@RelaxingRivian]

well done mate!

[@pedrol.5417]

I ha e the Sigma 24-70 DG DN II since august. I use it in my Sony A7RV and it is a great lens. I have rented de Sony GMII several times before buying the new Sigma, and I did not notice ant diference. I can not find any difference between pictures taken by the Sony or the Sigma. Buying the Sigma you save 1000€ for a prime lens.

[@JeanV1986]

As a Tamron 28-75G2 owner, I am not surprised at all by the results: this lens is a beast in IQ, in use it is flawless.

[@trektn]

you are the lens?

[@JeanV1986]

@@trektn yes I am 😅 oops, forgot the "owner" 🤣

[@ericlamont4130]

Appreciate the comparison. I got the Tamron G2 for $150 off, as an Open Box lens with full warranty from Adorama. This video just makes me even more thankful for my screaming good deal on an amazing lens. Wish it had an aperture ring but I can live with out it.

[@hedydd2]

Lack of aperture ring worries me not. Am well used to using the front control wheel for aperture settings on every camera and seldom use the lens control on those that have it. The exception being with my Leica Q2.

[@skoma93]

My ex-girlfriend also had a Tamron G2. It's not a bad lens, and it's lightweight too. The only drawback was that after about 1-1.5 years, the focus ring rubber started to degrade.

[@awiemuc]

Having bought the Tamron G2 I am now debating getting the sigma (again). I decided against the 1st version due to size and picture quality. I like the G2 but it is not the right choice for travel. Only 28mm annoys me a little bit - more than I initially thought. Indeed optics of Sigma seem to be more less unchanged to the initial version and they have mainly made a feature update.

[@kevinrtres]

How about a 20mm f/1.4 or f/2 then, Sony or Sigma?

[@razafiarisonmichael4421]

I would've like to see how the Sigma 28-70 compare to those lenses since it is the cheapest and still compete in IQ. Good review as ever, thank you for sharing.

[@intelligentlydesigned2903]

Resolution considerations should be tackled with a focus on the charts rather than the price tags as it is much more than meets the eye. The Tamron is shown to be extremely sharp by a very reputable website. At 50 mm central resolution reaches 75 lpm at f 2,8 and a record-breaking 80 lpm at 50 mm f4 the highest mtf value ever reached by any zoom lens !!!! As far as I know, only 4 AF prime lens exceed that performance by 1-2 lines. That resolution exceeds the performance of 24-70 GM 1 and Sigma 24-70 V1 by a huge margin as none of them beat the 70lpm limit. Unfortunately your review does not show that. Moreover, unbiased comparisons should be made between equal focal distances and not between the limits of the focal lengths.

[@nickwilliams7867]

I hope Sigma use better paint than they did on my 85 f1.4. It has chipped terribly on the metal part of the lens. So bad it's hard to read some of the numbers. It's lost a lot of its value if I go to sell 5he lens. It's a shame as it's a great lens. None of my GM lenses have the same problem.

[@photographerjonathan]

I can afford the Sony GM lens if I really wanted it. but If I buy one it will be the Sigma. the images without pixel peeping will look just as good as the Sony. and I don't care about shooting more than 15 fps. and personally I think some of the Sigma lenses have a nicer look with how they render an image than the competing Sony GM glass.

[@sharp_focus]

@6:56 For the chromatic aberation the angles are different, giving the most advantage to Tamron followed by Sony and having Sigma's angle the worst by far.

[@NeptunusRex1971]

As usual an independent, trustfull and reliable test. There are only a few out there which I trust for evaluating my next lense. Thank you Christopher! Very much appreciated. Stay independent, please. I have the Sony GMII and I have access to the Tamron G2. Both lenses are fantastic for their individual scope and I'm sure the Sigma is also more than worth the money. Don't get me wrong, the Tamron meets up optically to highest professional standards but sure has the limitation with 28mm only. On the other hand it is very light & wide open shockingly sharp around the wider center and has to my understanding a superior contrast (black is very black even on white foregrounds). I'm uncertain if the Sony is realy worth so much money more than the new Sigma but it is indeed even more sharp, especially as mentioned in the test also on the edges wide open. But actually, who cares if the lense is wide open sharp on the extreme corner? In real life a rather seldom advantage for my personal scope. Flare resistance (congratulations Sigma), bokeh, CA's and contrast against bright lights are more striking to me. Great to have the tough choice between these three fantastic lenses for the Sony universe. Please continue to create such comparable content on your uniform standard.

[@mattstolzman]

Oh thank you Chris and God bless!

[@Riskbreaker2009]

3:24 sigma shows some bowing deformation at 24mm when focusing, that may be an issue when focus bracketing, thats a shame when having the maximun magnification of 0.37

[@princeharbinger]

Do you mean barrel distortion?

[@breakfastforyousoul]

Great Job Chris! Seriously, they are all great lenses. If you set the pictures ore especially video up in the real world side by side, no one could tell the difference, other than the 4 mm difference. I like the TAMRON option, you can buy that used for 630 dollars! That is enough money to buy a WHOLE OTHER PRIME LENS IN SAVINGS! Just me because I am a value minded guy who wants the best for the money. Totally understand if money is no concern go for the absolute "best". but the tamron is 90 percent as good as the others, plus it is lighter! I love my G2 and I am sticking with that. Nothing really to gain by buying the others as I dont shoot 24-27 much, I can just take a step back if I want to.😊😊

[@breakfastforyousoul]

You can almost buy the 16-28 Sigma and the Tamron used or JUST the price of the Sigma.. Then you would have a MUCH wider zoom range if that was your only hold up.. Just saying!

[@takeone22]

thank you! it's a shame that you didn't post real-life compression side-by-side the chart that you use doesn't deliver the same results as a portrait shot or a subject I am interested to see the differences in skin tone and texture side by side.

[@patrickgilmour1221]

based on other reviews, they are saying the opposite. sigma has a semi macro mode that allows you to get closer to the object and still remain in focus, which the gm doesn't have.

[@wakeywarrior]

I got the Tamron, Grey import for about £600 I think in the UK. It’s a nice lens for that money.

[@luisfilipelopes2900]

Love your review, amhands down to what people need. I have to say, to those who can afford it, Sony pulls it off. Not only for the extreme sharpness without the fall of broken, but because tha macro capabilities are astonishing for these type of lenses

[@jasonlam1466]

Nice comparision 😊

[@BryanMiraflor]

i've had the sony 24-70mm f/2.8 GM2 for two years now and boy oh boy, does this thing suck up dust like a vacuum. I just recently sent it into sony to see if they can clean out the dust. i really hate how these lenses aren't internal focusing anymore. they always extend like a zoom

[@kostasrestas]

hope new sigma 24 70 keep dust away ,cause the 1st one it was a magnet of dust, dust dots inside of glass found very easy just after a walk at the park

[@wmathlener]

Thanks Christopher for all your hard work. Any chance you can complete the new GM2 holy trinity lineup of Sony zoom lenses by doing the 70 - 200 F2.8?

[@christopherfrost]

Thanks for reminding me - I've just sent a sample request to Sony.

[@Riskbreaker2009]

12-24mm GM🙏

[@didimiorios3781]

With one you prefer in terms of image sharpness and quality, Sony 20-70 f/4 or Sigma 24-70 f/2.8. Not interested in focal length or aperture, just sharpen and image quality, thanks.

[@ritrattoaziendale]

Clearly the Tamron is the best buy, it's sharper then the Sigma and cost 2.5 times less then the Sony. No brainer.

[@JanMalysz]

Hm, ok, Im buying Tamron, you conviced me.

[@AsalgadoMultimedia]

No te vas arrepentir y más en video.

[@TheJamesBraun]

you should also have tried to get closer to subject when having the aperture wide open at 24, since the Sigma has improved here and would beat the sony.

[@BorisZX6R]

Tamron is on sale now in the US for $699. Most likely the best deal.

[@oexel]

The contrast on the tamron looked really bad in your video. I wonder if you have a bad copy. I never noticed that with mine

[@trustnugget280]

What you should have mentioned is that only the Sony can suppport the 30+ fps of the a1 and a9 cameras which is a dealbreaker for some wildlife and sports photographers. But they hopefully know already anyways.

[@16-bit-trip5]

I really want on of those 24-70f/2.8 GM mk2 but until I have the coin to spend on it, my old mark I GM will have to do.

[@ienosis]

In case anyone was looking for a length comparison: 119.9mm - sony 124.9mm - sigma 117.6mm - tamron

[@Tonyy.224]

24-70 f2.8 Z vs E vs R bro

[@muctrun9me7768]

Thankute, I need this comparison

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

So unless you care about corner sharpness, chromatic aberrations, zoom direction, maximum magnification, close up image quality, and fastest fps available on higher end bodies, the Sigma is for you.

[@mahid9257]

to anyone having the Tamron, should I buy the new sigma ? I would like to shoot when I am in holiday and maybe some portaits or product photography... are there some negativ points with the tamron ?

[@petergunndetective]

I just picked up the g2 on nikon. Very nice lens.

[@Espere]

So how does the new Sigma compare to the Canon L-Series? I'm very hesitant to drop the Canon lens, so I'd be very interested to know how the new Sigma stacks up, even though it's not available to either EF or RF mount yet.

[@OkwyUgonweze]

My choice will be the tamron 35-150,it's cheaper than the dony 24-70 and is more valuable. Am gonna have a wide angle lens anyway.

[@Tech_Stuff_and_Other_Stuff]

Was the Tamron tested on a different chart? It looks a bit weird, gritty... compared to the sony and sigma

[@emokia15]

Waiting for sth like this

[@rogersmith1643]

How does the GM II compare with the Canon 28-70 f2, which was generally held to be the best standard zoom to date?

24-70 mm always win with 28-75 mm :) You can't compare it side by side. Buy 28-75 mm if you're sure you won't need 24-27 mm range.

[@bngr_bngr]

I prefer the 50/1.4 & 85/1.4. If I used the zoom, I would buy the Sony. I want to be able to use all the cameras features.

[@xFreyelis]

Sigma 24-70 v1 is better, especially in the Chromatic Aberration side

[@Princeton_James]

Ive already seen most of the reviews on the new Sigma and i dont see a reason to upgrade.

[@jeroenvdw]

Just get the Sigma 24-70 mk1 if you're on a budget and shooting on any camera up to 42mp. If you need the best resolution for your A7RV get the Sigma mk2 and if you just need the best of the best get the Sony mk2. With that said I have the Sigma mk1 on my A7RV and it's still great, you don't notice the little worse resolution in normal use cases. People with such a lens usually don't need to crop anyway.

[@djestar]

I'd recommend the Sigma mk2 because the Sigma mk1 has dust issues.

[@jeroenvdw]

@@djestar I think they fixed that issue with the lens after a few months, so the ones you buy now won't have it

[@djestar]

That's what I thought since I had a later serial number but I still had dust issues that were noticeable in photos. Sigma stated the mk2 has resolved the dust issues (Gerald undone review) which only proves the mk1 is flawed.

[@megamastah]

@@djestar so far no issues on my MK1.

[@apwip]

There wasn't a lot of difference between 24mm and 28mm as can be seen on the video and 24mm nowadays isn't considered very wide angle. I have paired my 28-75 G2 with the 17-28 or a compact 20mm prime which is a great lightweight combination for landscapes.

[@Vantrakter]

I disagree that there isn't a noticable diff between 24mm and 28mm..but I agree that a standard zoom starting at 28mm isn't a problem because there are so many great dedicated wide options.

[@apwip]

@@Vantrakter I didn't say there isn't a noticeable difference, those are your words. I said there isn't a lot of difference (IMO). Best regards Alan

[@DjimmyTrovy]

I have the 17-28 from Tamron and it's great, however, I would still prefer to pair it with a 24-70 instead of 28-75 right now.

[@apwip]

@@DjimmyTrovy Nothing wrong with choosing 24-70 f2.8's but they are heavier and more expensive for the extra 4mm at the wide end. The 28-75 is lighter and cheaper, so its all about preferences. I don't believe 24mm is very wide angle anyway. The Sony 20-70 is an interesting proposition in this context. Btw I got the 28-75 and 17-28 for less money than one 24-70 gm.

[@Vantrakter]

@@apwip I thought and still think "There wasn't a lot of difference between 24mm and 28mm" implies the difference isn't significant and that's what I responded to. You clarify by saying it's "noticable" but not "a lot", which again implies low significance. It's a personal thing I suppose, where one likes to switch lenses, and indeed for what scenarios one does not wish to switch lenses.

[@hansn.433]

How does the closeup work out. Doesmt the sigama bave the best magnification?

[@davidpardo1341]

sigma 24 70 ii vs lumix 24 70??

[@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691]

The CA on that sigma lens is truly disturbing! If one were to shoot something like a wedding, wouldn’t it ruin a lot of shots?

[@jimchizz]

No reason to get rid of my G2

[@allania277]

Why the filter diameter is bigger on the Sony and sigma, is it to have a better light absorption? I have the sigma 28-70 but the filter tread is 67mm but the most premiums are 82, why not 77 or 67

[@byronvinix]

Because of the 24mm on the wide side

[@dexteroiio]

2:03 whoa Whats is this lens?? Look at that very bad field curvature - right side of the frame is almost blured while center is sharp from 2m to infinity. It`s a Sony? :))

[@safari8292]

I will pay the expensive G-master price every day for the quality of the picture.

[@Yupthereitism]

Man, the Sony system is the best. I bet any canon shooter is steaming knowing how spoiled Sony shooters are

[@yukonchris]

Nice comparison, Chris. This sort of video is truly helpful given the plethora of choice on some mounts today. That said, I would love to see this sort of three-way side-by-side extended to actual systems. I think it fair to say that no matter how good a specific camera may be, the very nature of interchangeable lens systems means that you aren't just buying a body, you're buying into an ecosystem of sorts. I think it could be argued that the more choice a photographer has on a given platform, the better that platform. I'm sure you've chosen to compare these lenses in e-mount for a reason--choice. I wonder how Canon, Nikon, and Sony compare in terms of choice, lens mount to lens mount? Now that would be a truly interesting video. Of course, doing a side-by-side like that would be a herculean task and almost certainly alienate, at least temporarily, a third of your viewers. :-) Still, food for thought, and as always, I would love to see some m43rds lenses given a little love as well. Cheers.

[@ernstvandijk6342]

Although the Tamron doesn't have the 24-28mm range, it does have the 70-75 mm range. So for portraits the Tamron may be the best choice. For wide views, just buy the stellar yet affordable Viltrox 16mm. Chris, is it true that you cannot afford the Sony? That's hard to believe from a prominent photographer like you. Anyway, great comparison!

[@EdvardKALEN]

In real life, the difference between 70mm and 75mm is negligible, but between 24mm and 28mm is significant.

[@ernstvandijk6342]

@@EdvardKALEN That's true. But even 24mm isn't really wide, so you would have to get a really wide lens (14-18mm) anyway. When you have the Viltrox 16mm (which is really good and not expensive) you can go with the Tamron and get some extra reach. But that's my view. Your mileage may vary, of course.

[@datdudeinred]

Wow that ca looks terrible. Especially for 1.2k & also love how tamron is supporting nikon z the best system there is with least drawbacks.

[@jurgenknight]

I wish sigma makes lenses for nikon z ✌️

[@VaHe2KG]

Sigma for the win :) price is really fair.

[@stkuj]

The F2 wars will start soon LOL

[@idkanymore3382]

and be awful giving soft images, abberations, and being useless until stopped to 2.8

[@EdvardKALEN]

Price, weight, size. Get ready to suffer.

[@sunlbx]

Too bad there's no such video for Canon EF 24-70 F2.8 zooms

[@EdvardKALEN]

Canon RF 28-70mm f/2.8 vs Canon RF 28-70mm f/2.8 vs Canon RF 28-70mm f/2.8? Yes, that would be epic.

[@sunlbx]

@@EdvardKALEN why focus on rf when ef is also sharp as hell and cheaper?

[@EdvardKALEN]

@@sunlbx Let's be honest, we are forced to consider options under EF only because we do not have variety under RF. And Sony have it in E mount. Canon really screwed up.

[@sunlbx]

@@EdvardKALEN we? 5dsr is still better for landscapes than any RF camera.

[@EdvardKALEN]

@@sunlbx why?

[@hedydd2]

I had the Sony standard [not ‘G’] as a kit lens with my A7III and was not impressed, so I sold it very soon after the kit purchase. I might be tempted by either the new Sigma or the Tamron. I’m generally not a fan of 24 or 28mm lenses although I have examples of both. Thing is, I have 24, 28 and 35mm prime lenses plus a seldom used 50mm [It’s a cheap manual focus dumb lens] plus 85mm. Would the purchase of the 24/27-70/75 [any of the ones in the video] either make the primes redundant or would I tire of the size and weight of the zoom and continue to use mainly the primes? Since I have doubts and am a notoriously stingey Cardi [Cardiganshire folk are notorious for having deep pockets and short arms] I’ll leave the decision until some later date when I might have some definitive guidance. Or not.

[@marcocretella9348]

In my opinion, the advantages of a fast zoom lens outweigh the disadvantages of one, also compared to the disadvantages of using primes only. If you're doing some kind of photography, where you don't have the time to switch lenses according to the situation, for example Events or some kind of documentary photography, the comfort of zooming far outweighs the improvement in picture quality you'd get from primes. Also since you're using an A7m3 and not any A7r, the "loss" in picture quality won't be as noticeable as with the higher megapixel sensors sharpness wise. For contrast and colour rendering, that is a different story. For me, I consider myself stingy with sharpness, but my Samyang 24-70 2.8 never left me unsatisfied optically. Of course it isn't the same as using the Sigma 35mm 1.4 DG HSM or 85mm 1.4 DG DN, but it gets the job more than done.

[@xmeda]

Sigma wins again.

[@6042833]

Ah, reality! If you have a print from every lens, you ain't gonna notice difference. What is different between them? Nothing at all?🤣🤣🤣

[@CristoforoBonissone]

W O W 😮

[@shem44]

Over here sony is only 55% more exp than sigma and is more worth it to get over the latter.

[@hikertrashfilms]

Let’s look at the 85mm F1.2 battle....oh wait Sony isn’t invited 😭

[@jasurdiyorov2206]

Ehj4j4

[@idkanymore3382]

Oh wow, its garbage vs garbage vs garbage

[@HenryPiffpaff]

so true! I wonder why he didn't include Canon and Nikon in the comparison, they're all just such a bunch of losers. Not to mention Hasselblad and Leica...

[@idkanymore3382]

@@HenryPiffpaff im a cine only guy, but canon/nikon is killing it rn. Shame their video lineup is limited

[@starbase218]

@@idkanymore3382 With Nikon having acquired RED, that might start to change in the future though.

[@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691]

They really are fairly disappointing for the price tags

[@idkanymore3382]

@@starbase218 I didnt even know this! wow! I am a blackmagic guy, but if RED gets a great nikon mounted cine cam with new cine line lenses... mmm