Is There A Difference?! Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 GM I VS. II Comparison, Sample Footage

[@dwightlooi]

Here's the thing... the GM II has sunk the GM's resale value through the floor. You can pick one use USED in excellent condition for somewhere between $800 and $900. That's cheaper than any of the Sony F4 zooms. If you don't mind a little extra bulk it's a great deal.

[@andrewsaraceni]

Completely agree; at that price, it's a steal for the IQ, what it offers, etc.

[@95Ldunc]

I’m a full time corporate video/photographer. I purchased the 24-70 GM in 2018. It’s my workhorse and is worn but still in very good shape. I use this lens on 75-80 percent of my jobs. It’s in good shape and I really don’t need to replace it. It would strictly be just a newer lighter lens. I was thinking about getting a 50mm F/1.4 just for those occasions when you want the extra stops of light and for that really shallow depth of field. I’m not convinced I need either but if I have to choose, I think I’d rather have the “Porsche” (50mm F1.4) in my garage…..my “pick up truck” (GM 1) has 100,000 miles but it’s still going strong.

[@andrewsaraceni]

The 24-70 GM with a good 50mm prime for shallower depth of field/low light is a great pairing. I have that now similarly with the 50mm f1.2 GM.

[@trevor759]

i decided to pick up a GM I for 1500$ on B&H i was told to get the sigma 24-70 but from my research i seem to like the GM I because the AF is a bit faster. Idk if it was worth a 500$ extra but i dont mind sticking to the sony ecosystem. Came back here to make sure i made the right choice in not splurging for the GM II as i do not shoot professionally just for a hobby.

[@andrewsaraceni]

You made a great choice - the GM I is a fantastic lens. Always loved the look I got out of it.

[@taylaluva]

I purchased the Sigma but returned it because dust got in it so fast. Went with the GM I instead.

[@andrewsaraceni]

@@taylaluva Interesting to hear the Sigma is still suffering from this. I had heard they corrected it on newer versions, but haven't gotten to see/test myself.

[@Daniel_Zalman]

It's a bit difficult to tell the differences via KZbin. Some unedited sample images would be really helpful.

[@andrewsaraceni]

KZbin compression always make it tough. I'll probably do a photo comparison as well for future videos.

[@sidvicious3129]

Andrew, you did a fantastic job here for those that are going to make purchases this year. No one is doing a comparison like yours with photos and video. I was expecting the GM2 to simply blow the GM1 out of the water, but that's not what we got here. The GM1 held its own against the GM2. I think the size, weight, aperture ring, and extra features, might make some go with the GM2, especially if you were going to buy the GM1 new. I came across a deal that I would have been stupid not to go with and that is a used GM1 for $923 with shipping from a camera store in very good condition. I also came across a used Aputure X300 (V-mount) with a Aputure Light Dome II, total package $545.00 in fantastic condition with everything included some items in the bag were not opened, but I missed out on the Aputure 300 color. Most used prices for the GM1 are about 1198-1298. I have purchased from this store before and got a 55mm 1.8 Zeiss for $225, which was in great condition, and I didn't think that the GM2 was $1276 better than the GM1 and your test are proof of that to me. Have you ever compared either the GM1 or GM2 with the equivalent Tamron 28-75 G1 or G2 or even the Sigma 24-70?

[@andrewsaraceni]

Thanks, I appreciate that! I've seen the Tamron in action with a couple of friends' setups, but haven't gotten to do a deep dive test myself. As you said, I think the 24-70 GM I (new or used now) is one of the best deals out there, given being so much closer in price to the Sigma and Tamron compared to the GM II and what it used to be.

[@williamshakespeare9815]

I agree. Im going to get the GM1 because there doesnt seem to be much noticeable difference in picture quality, certainly not enough to justify the jump in price. I don't see the aperture ring as an advantage, I can change the aperture easily on my camera.

[@RobbyHuang]

Man, the original is so much more affordable now, but damn it’s just so heavy and big. If only that wasn’t a big issue for me.

[@andrewsaraceni]

Yeah, it's a preference thing; I never found the weight of the original 24-70 GM to be too bad, but the original 70-200 GM is another story...

[@cadenprosise2609]

Thats what I thought owing a 24-105 and wanting to get the 24-70 gm1. I can say with confidence that im glad I got the gm1 the weight and size make it easier to keep steady. I forget sometimes how the gm1 doesnt have OSS like my 24-105 f4.

[@Flexin010]

I’m thinking of getting the gm1 for stills.

[@andrewsaraceni]

Great choice, hard to go wrong with that - I just put out a full review on the GM I.

[@AaronOverEverything]

I will not be upgrading. this was a great video. they almost got me lol.

[@andrewsaraceni]

Thanks! Yeah, no need to upgrade if the GM I works for you now.

[@satheeshv7640]

Hi which one is best for videography (shortfilm) Gm i or Gm ii

[@andrewsaraceni]

I've used both for video extensively, and I can honestly they're both great optically. Really just depends on if you need the features (aperture ring, smaller size/weight, smooth/tight zoom) and don't mind paying more for the GM II vs. the GM I.

[@satheeshv7640]

@@andrewsaraceni thank you sir

[@donnas8408]

Eye tracking is better with the original Sony 24-70 GM - NOT worth the upgrade - next

[@yushi213]

Thanks for the review. This two lenses are so close quality wise

[@andrewsaraceni]

No problem! I completely agree - they're both stellar options.

[@jamescastleton2191]

Really helpful. Thank you!

[@andrewsaraceni]

No problem, James!

[@thegorn]

The image quality improvement is very minimal. The real benefit I feel is in the greatly reduced size and weight, and smaller close focussing distance.

[@andrewsaraceni]

Agreed, those are the main reasons to upgrade (or, stick with the GM I if IQ is your main concern).

[@CesaRomeroPHOTOGRAPHY]

I have a Sony A7R V and Sony 24-70mm GM1 lens ! Should I upgrade to GM2? Is it sharper?

[@andrewsaraceni]

I love my 24-70 GM II, but the GM I is a great lens as well, so it all depends on if you're happy with the results now. I would say it's sharper, but not a dramatic difference unless you really pixel peep.

[@CesaRomeroPHOTOGRAPHY]

@@andrewsaraceni awesome Thank u 👏🏻

[@vvenkat3358]

Hi Andrew Saraceni , which one you Suggest Better one Either Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 GM II OR 24-70mm GM?

[@andrewsaraceni]

Both are excellent, I'm still forming my opinions on the 24-70mm GM II (full review will be coming later). But if you can afford the GM II, I'd go for it, otherwise the original GM is still great.

[@COCOPAWS544]

Ty for review

[@andrewsaraceni]

No problem!

[@JamesJones10]

Thank you!

[@andrewsaraceni]

No problem, James!

[@avisexable]

expensive lens but excellent

[@andrewsaraceni]

Agreed - it's pricey for sure, but great IQ.

[@azzazz4549]

Is the mark 1 worth the 1400 dollars?

[@andrewsaraceni]

I think so...it was my go-to lens before the mk II, and still would be today otherwise. I have a full review coming on the mark 1 in a couple weeks that talks about that.

[@azzazz4549]

@@andrewsaraceni Ok thanks. I'm going to buy the mk1 tomorrow so wanted to make sure

[@charruaporelmundo]

Need to use metric system too 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@andrewsaraceni]

Yeah you can tell I'm based in the US, you'll have to do some conversions.

[@charruaporelmundo]

@@andrewsaraceni You can reach more audience.. 🤷🏻‍♂️… just write the number down 👍🏼

[@Tugela60]

​@@andrewsaraceni You don't have to apologise for being backward.

[@andrewsaraceni]

@@Tugela60 😂

[@WildExposures]

Version 2 much sharper.....period.

[@andrewsaraceni]

There's a difference in sharpness, but I usually have to be in pixel peeping territory to notice it.

[@donnas8408]

Wild bought the two and sold the original 😂