Sony 20-70 f4 REVIEW: NOT My First Choice (vs Sigma 24-70, Tamron 28-75, Sony 24-105, Tamron 20-40)

[@davidkatsmam]

I just got the 20-70 F4. I had several 24-70 and 24-105 and this is the best all around lens I have ever used. Specially the weight and ergonomics.

[@86BBUB]

I have have the 24-70 GM II and the 20-70 G. The latter is my favorite "travel" lens. A light "one lens" solution.

[@IRFAN-po5sz]

After usage of both lenses what’s your best choice please ?

[@86BBUB]

@@IRFAN-po5sz The GM is the "better" lens when 2.8 is valued.

[@marike1100]

The Sony 20-70 f4 is one of the sharpest zooms that Lenstip has ever tested, it easily outperforms, the Sigma/Tamron 2.8 standard zooms. So if an F4 max aperture is not an issue, if you don’t want to carry around a boat anchor, the 20-70 f4 G is great choice.

[@godsinbox]

it is an issue, Jared couldnt see thru the viewfinder at F4, IT WAS SO DARK! 10:01

[@joooeforlong]

​@@godsinbox This part made no sense to me. If it's too dark then your image is just underexposed because of your shutter/ISO. It isn't the aperture's fault

[@999slawter]

@@godsinbox I didn't even have such problem with my sony 70-200mm f4... on an apsc body....

[@0x1h0b]

@@joooeforlong you are right ... but does it justify the price ? .... i had this lens .... yes its very versatile when there is hot sunny day ..or else it just a dull lens ..

[@rogerbrackin9274]

As an owner of both an A7R3 and Sony A1, and also the 24-70 F2.8 II and also several primes including the 20mm f1.8. I guess it would not seem an obvious choice. was going on holiday around Europe and wanted the smallest package. So i took the A7R3 and this lens. I have to say the images seem as sharp as the 24-70. And for street photography the 20 is much more use than having longer range. As an aside, when 'snapping' I often have the camera in manual but with Auto-ISO (in effect in auto). In this mode I just find the aperture ring much more natural than the on camera option (A) as you can depth of field bracket very quickly (you cant move both dials and once with one hand, whereas this works better, one hand for aperture one for shutter speed, and youre grip on the camera is better). So I guess I'm a big fan of this lens from a photographic standpoint.

[@MHarvey-tp5km]

Thanks for sharing I appreciate your input

[@pgy8863]

Jared, thanks for your opinions, but that's what they are. I think you missed the point of this lens maybe. Sony offers a feature known as 'small' for a premium - take the A7C series as exhibit 1. There is a place for this little lens in many users' minds. Just see the comments. And just because you don't use aperture ring controls, it doesn't mean that others don't value them, some put a high priority on them. I do. I'd buy the 20-70 over the 24-105 for that feature alone. Some people don't like changing lenses in the field. Some people don't like exposing their sensors to dust. Some people want a high quality, compact kit. It was a bit odd that you reviewed this lens without corrections. No other reviewers did and I would bet that most users would enable them. I've generally liked your reviews, but I found this off target. Still, everyone is entitled to their opinions and you expressed your values clearly.

[@diegsp]

100% agree with your comment (you also phrased it very kindly, kudos!). I don't really have much to add, except I agree that Jared seemed to be biased against this lens a priori and focused on some very odd aspects of it. As you said, he is entitled to his opinions and this lens was clearly a poor fit vs what is important to him. But every single lens out there is basically a bunch of tradeoffs, and I don't think Jared gave credit to the tradeoffs that Sony intentionally made for this one. I just picked this lens over all the competitors as a walkaround/travel lens for my A7CII because of the size, 20mm wide end, optical performance, and excellent autofocus. The new Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG DN II is equivalently priced, and though it is smaller and has better autofocus than its predecessor, the Sony still beats it on both. Practically, I don't need

[@andreas1701d]

I think this lens finds its place in the "travel lens" category because its a great walk-around range (speaking strictly for photos here). Yes the Sigma 24-70 is better, but I simply dont want to carry the extra bulk, and the 20 in this context is more useful than the 2.8 of the Sigma 28-70. Same goes for the 70 vs the 2.8 of the tamron 20-40. Another overlooked aspect is the close focusing performance which is a nice bonus (again, for travel and/or hiking). So yes I would buy it as a travel lens, but no I dont love the price. IMHO, if it was around 899-949 USD, that would be fine, and I plan on picking one up when it inevitably goes on sale.

[@nickwilliams7867]

My thought as well. If I was after just one lens to travel with this would be one to consider. I do think its nice manufactures are no longer sticker to the same focal length every time by adding new lenses such as this and lenses like the Tamron 20-40 and 35-150

[@rogerbrackin9274]

Yes, I agree. And i grabbed a couple of cheap extension tubes and it takes this lens even more to macro.

[@ajschot]

If you want it as a travel lens… i would always choose the 24-105 because you will have more reach you not always can come closer or you will miss the moment. I love my 24-105 and no it is not sharp but if i have to go somewhere and can only take one lens… it is the 24-105. For travel you need more then one lens to cover this so more weight then the 24-105. I think people are really overlooking the 24-105. When i switched from canon to sony i bought the 28-75 so happy with is and yes i still have it and use it more then the 24-105 but with going on a teip with the kids i missed the 24-105 that i had for my Canon 6D (i sold it) i know next time i will sell it it will be for a better version or if an other company would make a 24-105 or a 20-135 (would be the best).

[@Drivel-mr5pw]

@@ajschot You can ALWAYS crop from 70 to 105. In fact the 20-70 when cropped to 105 is still sharper than the 24-105 at 105 lol. However there are situations where you can't step back to get the 24 to 20, so that is the big difference btw both lenses. Not to mention the 20-70 is nearly 200g lighter and 1.5 cm shorter. If I am fine with the 24-105 weight/size, I rather get the 24-70 GM2 instead.

[@Princeton_James]

I agree 100%. The sigma is better but it's very big especially if carrying it around all the time. For travel this is perfect. I also don't like to blow everything out when I'm traveling. F4 is great. I also always carry a small flash when traveling.

[@mrmonday42]

For landscape photography, I prefer 20mm on the wide end rather than 105mm on the long end. With 20mm on the wide end I can justify not bringing a dedicated wide angle lens. 105mm isn't long enough to cover my telephoto needs; I would still want to bring a 100-400mm

[@dalemansukh]

I'm along the same lines of thinking...this lens paired with sigma 100-400mm, and get the sony 85mm 2.8 macro to cover the gap. I may finally make the jump to full frame from apsc with a7iv and this lens.

[@JLStreetDoc]

I thought that too, but saw a video today that completely changed my mind.

[@benldr]

​@@JLStreetDocwhat changed in your mind exactly? What are you referring to?

[@JLStreetDoc]

@@benldr That was a month ago, I have no idea what I was referring to. Sorry.

[@frankfurter7260]

@@JLStreetDoc 😂

[@MichaelSpeckartMedia]

Jared, a lovely comparison. I would say the aperture ring for video is insanely useful. Controlling aperture with the camera body is steppy and jarring when trying to change aperture during a roll. The ring makes this process super smooth and allows for micro adjustments - less than 1/3 stop at a time. I wish every lens had a declicked aperture ring to open up this custom level of functionality.

[@Junochrome]

You are missing the point here. The sigma art 24 - 70 is heavy. Too heavy. Tamron G2 is great but it doesnt offer the wide angle of 20. Tamron 20 - 40 is great but it doesnt offer the 70 mil at the zoom end. The 24 - 105 is old, less sharp and, wait for it, ... heavy. This lens has the perfect focal ranges for a travel videographer/photographer. Yes, it is an f/4 but that is okay as we almost always shoot at f/4 minimum unless indoors or shooting portraits. The samyang 45mm f1.8 is the best bang for buck portrait lens out there and I picked up mine for just 180 euros used. So, yeah, I am sending my G2 back, cancelling the 24-105 order and getting this lens instead. Also, yes to UV filters and anyone who advices not to use a UV filter is mad or gets his lenses sent to him for free.

[@lorenzo4262]

It's my same idea, sell the 17-28 tamron and take this 20-70 keeping my 45 samy and 85 sigma But i wait

[@RockyColaFizz]

The thing with Non Sony lenses, is that Active Stabilization in video is massively crippled for them. Take a Sony 20f1.8 and walk in a video with it, then do the same with the Tamron 20-40. It’s the main reason I stick with Sony lenses.

[@Kevon420]

Incredible lens top to bottom, if it was a GM with OSS it would be truly perfect, but otherwise it’s all you need in a midrange zoom for modern digital photography. Pair this with a 70-200/4 mk.II and your favorite prime and you have a kit that can cover almost any kind of regular scenarios.

[@juanpablogbdev]

Which one would you chose? tamron 20-40mm or tamron 28-75mm. As context I'm amateur an I'm gonna use mostly on family trips. I have a sony a7II. I just bought it last December, it cames with a 28-70mm kit lens. I already own a Rokinon 24mm f2.8.

[@999slawter]

28-75, because you got the 24mm and the 28-75mm does everything the 20-40mm can do above 28mm...

[@christophemoulin9878]

What's wonderful with Sony line-up is the extreme variety of choices you have, and this is probably the most important to retain. When I started to invest in the A7 at the early beginning, there were nearly no choices - and finally bought the Sony/Zeiss 55mm to be able to take advantage of the camera. Today, there are plenty of options depending on your ”needs”. 20-70 looks to be a nice range for landscape and if this was available a few years ago I could have bought this lens, but there more I practice the more I find that a longer focal is also very interesting fore landscape photography and personnaly I well keep the 24-105 and continue to invest little by little into some primes. One more comment regarding the aperture ring on the new Sony G lens, if it may sound useless/redundent on sime A7 cameras, this is a great feature for the A7C.

[@Sqeezy3]

One of my lenses has an aperture ring and it's awesome. I don't know what I would do without it. Spin the front dial? It's a manual lens

[@HR-wd6cw]

I think the aperture ring is nice to have even if you're not using it for videos. As a Nikon shooter, I wish Nikon would make a clicky aperture ring, or at the very least, make it so you can activate and deactivate the extra "control" ring (which some people assign to aperture) on the lenses so you don't accidentally change aperture since the control ring is NOT of the "clicky" type. Plus with a switch you could just lock it, and not have to disable it in the menus, if you're concerned about moving it when you aren't using it. So I think the inclusion of the ring is nice but probably not necessary for video as you say, but for stills shooters who like the manual aperture ring, it may be a nice feature.

[@JourneymanActor]

For "vlogging" the best bang for your buck FF lens is the Tamron 20 - 40 2.8. It's sharp, light, and has a 2.8 constant aperture.👍

[@billybolang7052]

Tamron kickass!🔥🔥

[@Princeton_James]

Probably getting this Sony but I already have the Tamron and yes for vlogging 100% the Tamron. It's one of my favorite lenses. For travel though id easily go with this one.

[@FPSTiger]

but it sucks for stabilization. only sony lenses are good with stabilization, even if they dont have oss

[@m4rcin847]

​@@FPSTigerSo buy 24-105 or 20 f1.8. I shoot with Sigma Tamron and Sony and didnt see much difference. I will pick Tamron 20-40 over this Sony every time. The price is just ridiculous for that 24(after corrections)-70 with fckn F4.

[@SnIpErX07]

I do love lenses with Aperture ring. Started with the Panny Leicas and its really great as an control option. Since it's also part of the barrel, having more features would not hurt. I do agree the earlier design might cause users to rotate it accidentally. But improvement were made to lock it via a switch. And overtime the handling technique will change to accommodate this additional aperture ring.

[@houserhythm]

What many people don't realise is that the difference in angle of view between 70-105 is the same 10 degrees as between 24-20, because 70-105 sounds like so much more. So between the 2 Sony lenses the question becomes: do you want it wider, or tighter by 10 degrees? I would always pick wider, because it's not a big crop from 70mm to get the 105mm frame out of it, but you can never "crop out" from 24mm if there is no room for you to step back.

[@EddySawaya8637]

Yeah, but at the same time the compression and the bokeh possibilities are much higher with a lens that goes to 105 or 120. In the end, it all depends on your priorities. 24mm is usually wide enough for most things, 70mm on the other hand is still pretty short.

[@houserhythm]

@@EddySawaya8637 Compression is only influenced by distance between sensor and subject. So if you take a photo at 105mm then at 70mm (and crop in to 105mm equiv), from the same distance, your subject will look exactly the same. But you're also right, cause with a wider lens you have to choose between compression and bokeh - stay farther to get the compression and you get less blur, get closer for the blur and screw with compression.

[@EddySawaya8637]

@@houserhythm It seems you do not understand compression exactly. That is not an accurate description at all. There is a reason why 100-105mm lenses are used for macro work. That is because they render physical features in a flattering way regardless of distance. If you had to fill your frame with the same subject in the same way using a 15mm lens, it would look completely disproportionate. Distance between objects is massively exaggerated. On the other hand, shooting with very long lenses can cause the subject to look flat as distant objects start looking closer to each other.

[@houserhythm]

@@EddySawaya8637 yes, filling the frame with a 15mm would look completely different because you'd have to get A LOT closer with it to fill the frame. Just try doing what I said and compare the results, it's really not hard, you can do it at home. Take a shot with a long and short lens, from the same distance, then crop the one taken with the short lens to match FOV of the other - you'll see subject looks the same, just bokeh is different.

[@VangelisMatosMedina]

Eddy is so wrong about compression, 2023 and people do not get it.

[@davidligon6088]

I'm not seeing a lot of love for this lens. I think Sony marketing missed the boat. In fact, I think Sony is missing the boat, completely, on their recent 100% focus on vlogging bodies and lenses. That said, if it's very sharp and light, and I actually get 20mm after lens corrections, it would be a great landscape lens. I'd probably use it over the 24-105 for that purpose.

[@frankfurter7260]

Lemme just jump in and say FO with the Sigma. I hate that effin’ brick. I’ll take the Sony 20-70 over all those lens.

[@benldr]

That's my thing. I'm looking for a lens to take to disney for video and photos. Carrying that beast around all day for a week doesn't sound like fun at all to me. If I get the new 16-35mm it will limit what I can take photos of more so than this lens. I think having 20mm could be really beneficial. I'm really torn in which lens to get. I have a 35, 50, and 85mm f1.8 prime lenses and a 24-240 lens which was supposed to get me by until I can afford 2-3 zoom lenses of higher optical quality. I'm tempted by this lens because I've had heavy lenses before and they are no fun. This 20-70mm could really be good during the day time and I could bring out the 35mm f1.8 at night which happens to be tiny and easy to bring a long. I don't think it would be worth having a 24-70mm f2.8 for double the weight but maybe I'm wrong. Or maybe I could get the two sigma zooms and take two lenses and have f2.8. Tough decisions.

[@adaster98]

Been leaning towards the 20-40 personally. I have my 85mm prime if I wanna go longer. But i'm mainly shooting wide, normally I shoot on my 35mm prime the most. So having the ability to still shoot at 35mm but pull out to 20mm is incredibly appealing to me. Especially as I hate heavy lenses.

[@bobstevens5202]

Tamron 35+ on the 24-40 is weak unfortunately. Still a great value lens though.

[@HoomanBhr]

Considering between sigma 24-70 f2.8 vs 28-70 f2.8. I like the 24 focal but it's heavy and big . what is your suggestion ?

[@BryanLee-dl4eu]

is this lens good for A7R5 ?

[@evangatehouse5650]

As a lightweight travel lens it would be great. The lower weight is significant vs a 2.8 and I can maybe skip bringing a 16 or 18mm prime.

[@andrebauer777]

That the 20mm is more like 22-24 when using active stabilisation might reduce the advantage. But for stills you have the 20mm and that might often be wide enough to keep the lens on and dont change to the 16-35. and this is a big pro for travelling. And it is lighter ! 70 vs 105 - sure but here you can crop. So for me very very interesting allround lens.

[@andrewlee8667]

Jared thank you for explaining "expectations of privacy". I have been a working tv camera person for 25 years and for the last decade that has merged with still photos. That small two minute explanation was well done and you could do an episode on that. Rights, mae lasnners, expectations and the law. I had a person pull over when I was shooting a scenic of horses in a field in Sweden and have that person lecture me if I had permission to capture images of the horses which were in full view of the road. I digress... I was not within meters of the horses. I wonder how they think images get taken and put on tv.

[@thibaultgras5854]

I mean you might be right, but also always check what the local laws are. Sweden might not be the same as the US

[@romanticdonkey468]

The way to handle people like that is to tell them the horses gave you written consent to photograph them. Then you simply ignore the person from that point forward.

[@jjj0k3r]

Yo Jared... if you go out for shooting a sunny day with a non weather sealed body and the weather changes to rainy...in prime lenses you will appreciate the lens hood been backward...it will give you some extra shoots as it covers and protects the focus ring ....

[@donald.kelley7000]

Great Review, Jared !! I purchased this lens and then returned it. I wasn’t happy with the corner sharpness at 20 mm… even stopped down.

[@boukou]

I managed to snag a used Sigma 24-70mm for $750. This video helped me decide if I should stick with the Sigma or go with the Sony. The 20mm is nice, but the f2.8 of the Sigma (plus the savings of going used) put me over the top.

[@Tricklarock]

How are you liking the Sigma for video?

[@boukou]

@@Tricklarock I primarily stick to photography. That’s another reason I went with the Sigma.

[@stevenguzy570]

I don't quite understand the loss at the wide end, from 20mm to 24mm. Is that with just video when using IBIS? Can you explain that to me in a little more detail? Thanks!!!

[@ryen7512]

The camera body will essentially crop into the video to provide better stabilization digitally when active stab is selected. That's in addition to ibis itself which doesn't crop.

[@padiver]

Thank you for this video! You helped me to decide on buying the 24-70 sigma 2.8 over the Sony 20-70. Going this week to B&H to get myself a new lens

[@Tricklarock]

You said that you wouldn't choose the Sigma Art 24-70 2.8 for video, what WOULD you go to in that price range? Thanks in advance!

[@p13579a]

Great review but I really thought the sniff test would swing it. Did you have a cold perhaps?

[@roadrider_2771]

I'll be using this with my Sony A7RV for an all around lens. I'll be pairing this with my 35mm f/1.4 for my everyday carry :)

[@ZOB4]

If you're going for a vlogging lens from Sony (and don't want to spend GM money), the recent 16-35 f/4 PZ makes way more sense.

[@randeezy3914]

Jared is entertaining. No doubt about it. And he's very knowledgeable. However, sometimes I think he's a disservice to the community, especially to impressionable novices. The 20-70 is a great lens. Vignetting is a non issue. Easily corrected in post. Just like all E-mount lenses. Yet for some reason he decided to go off on a rant about this lens, like he tends to do in his Sony reviews. F4. This lens is great for walking around, travel, landscape, architecture, etc. Optically, it's great and very versatile. Not everyone needs / wants 2.8 in a zoom. A few slow zooms and a fast prime or two is a great combo for many photographers.

[@richbottarini86]

I own the 24-105 and it works very well travel. I upgraded my 16-35 to the new model and that pair is great. I am waiting for the upgraded 24-105, which should be soon. No, I would never consider the 20-70.

[@yessum6477]

Hopefully an updated 24-105 comes out . All I ask for is for knife sharp quality out of it

[@timzusa]

It doesn’t seem like a 24-105 update is coming.

[@wirton7]

Wow. This is certainly one of the worst gear reviews I’ve ever seen. It is 90% about your personal preferences (“I don’t care about 20mm or aperture ring, I miss OSS”) and 10% about the lens features. You miss the whole point that make this lens not only unique, but very desirable: the combination of compactness, versatility and IQ. From all of the serious reviews I’ve seen, at many settings this lens is significantly sharper than any of those others you compared it to. And only the 24-70mm GM Ii comes close to have my favorite feature of the 20-70mm: high magnification at 70mm (instead of the wide end) . Not to mention that it barely has focus breathing even in cameras that don’t have compensation. And it’s almost parfocal at some settings.

[@pgy8863]

What he said, and the new lens is feature rich, like having an aperture control!

[@PC-oz7tz]

Love you man...thanks! Liked this video... and really like your HAIR♡♡♡♡

[@landonhammett]

Great video!! Wondering if you've done a review of the Nikon 24-120 F4? I'm looking for your opinions on that particular lens.

[@godsinbox]

F4? F4? Jared couldnt see thru the viewfinder at F4, IT WAS SO DARK! 10:01

[@Ydkoll]

Jared thanks for a great video! Just on a side note, you remind me of the younger version of guitarist Neil Schon. LOL

[@Twobarpsi]

Yeah he does!

[@MHarvey-tp5km]

Genuinely like your opinions and commentary. Polin seems like a really cool guy

[@plogigamer]

Thanks for First normal Review! It is Good lens but OVERPRICED like u said. In Europe is 1699€ !!!!! (With VAT). Mindblow!

[@elnitram4313]

I quite like the range I'm not sure it's worth upgrading from my Tamrom 28-75mm. Probably makes more sense to buy the 20-40mm.

[@benjaminchoo3220]

The ultraboost has lost its place in a running shoe line up. It's not particularly fast to be considered a race shoe while not particularly cheap to fall into that daily workhorse shoe.

[@Hodenkat]

I would get a 16 or 24 prime for vlogging. I'm getting the f/2.8 or better if it's the same money.

[@zygmuntziokowski7877]

Thanks for being honest about the price and which one is worth getting.

[@Lee-vo7dl]

I would purchase the 24-70mm 2.8 Sigma art lens.

[@t_mcb_1342]

what's with Wirestock?

[@godsinbox]

What a confusing statement about lens correction, he turns it off and lets adobe choose his destiny, except when he doesn't and they haven't. Here's some footage of where you should clearly leave it on, which Jared never does! But must, because the video would be unusable. Glad we got that out of the way!

[@mustang2005]

Yes 20mm becomes basically a 24mm with active stabe, but a 24mm is gonna be close to a 28mm. Especially if you use focus breathing comp on top of it

[@livejames9374]

Sony didn’t send you the 50 1.4?

[@uncimark]

Im a dad with young kids. This lens lloks like a great all rounder for family days without weighing me down too much. Sold

[@dgipson50]

Which one would you pick as a vacation lens?

[@Photografather]

Sigma 24-70mm

[@DavidStella]

I’d like to give the Sony 20-70mm a try. I had the Sigma 24-70, and although it is a fantastic lens, it had the tendency to feel heavy after being out and about all day.

[@rnetphoto]

Looking forward to the pReview of the Sony 50 1.4 tomorrow.

[@joshualarson5916]

Great work Jared

[@joooeforlong]

Chiming in as someone who shoots events with two camera bodies paired with a Tamron 28-75 + 70-180. I find myself having to swap out one of these lenses several times per job for my 17-28 because 28 is just not wide enough for certain things. I've considered picking up a 24-70 to replace both the 17-28 + 28-75, but to convey the scope of a venue I have found that 24mm is still not wide enough. I haven't used this lens yet, but I think having 20mm on the wide end would be a worthwhile trade for the F4. My other option is shooting one body with the 17-28 and picking up a 35-150 for the other, but that 35-150 is *HEAVY*.

[@lorenzo4262]

so I, i have 17-28 (and i find it excellent, especially in flare resistant, sharpness and shots against bright light). I have 17-28 and samy 45 1.8 (both excellent), but in travel change lens so often is boring. So or this 20-70 f4 or the tamron 20-40. The tamron hasn't completely satisfied me at 40mm sharpness and 20mm f/2.8 flare resistance (in a try at a shop)but nice bokeh. I'm oriented vs this 20-70 but i'm sad to loose 17mm Don't know what to do

[@balkangetaway]

I have just bought this lens for travel lens and determining factor was size. For the 7c compact ff cameras it just makes no sense carrying a huge lense. Paid 899€ and probably wouldn't pay much more than that.

[@IbanezRG1527]

50mm 1.4 GM review soon?

[@richardlambert5571]

Hi Jared, a great video and comparisons as usual, thanks again. I decided recently to replace my F4 Zeiss Sony 24-70 mm for a Tamron F2,8 20-40mm on my Sony Alpha 7 III. I appreciate having a better aperture with 2.8 and win 10 degrees angle. 😉

[@Twobarpsi]

Fro knows fro-toe!!

[@razafiarisonmichael4421]

I'm not interested on this lens. They should have made the wide version that complete it first, like a 12-20 for example. Because it does not makes sense to me go at f/4 at this price for buying a wide lens later that already have 20mm. I prefer sigma 28-75 price and 2.8 aperture

[@ocelotsix6six]

I use my sigma 24-70 sony is getting out of control what they are charging for less then equal tech

[@davidkatsmam]

I am selling my Sigma 24-70 F2.8 after buying this lens, specially due to the weight and ergonomics of this lens. It is very sharp and the extra wide in more important than extra reach for me.

[@999slawter]

Hi, I am really struggling right now, cause I am not sure taht I should go for the sigma or this sony? Can you tell me pelase about your low light experience?

[@Mraz75]

I bought this 20-70mm lens. I mostly find my focal lengths are at 20mm and 70mm. Rarely go for 35mm or 50mm. Love the ultra wide as well as telephoto in one single lens. The lens is really light and i love it. If you ask me what i miss about the lens? It is the bokeh. I am not going to sacrifice this lens for bokeh nor i’m going to get another prime lens just for the sake of bokeh. I am trying to restraint myself with just one lens policy. 😊 try to control my gas syndrome..

[@olegvorkunov5400]

Vloggers need wider lenses, and they got it in a form of Sony 16-35mm f/4. This 20-70mm lens, as a video creator and photographer, I do not see any use case for it compared to the other options you mentioned. This is more like a kit lens.

[@mr.y1965]

Yes, the 20 is what I've been waiting for for so long.Only the bokeh could be better...

[@Παύλος-Τζαγκαράκης]

No Samyang?

[@allencrider]

Isn't Sony's IBIS good enough? I guess not.

[@RussandLoz]

Nikon 24-70 f4 is a pro lens you can get for £300 used, this is £1000 for 4mm extra...

[@MCLAKB]

I think if it’s a true 20-70 then the lens would have it’s place. But active mode eliminates that 4mm is HUGE, IMHO

[@Lynd8]

One of the few times I have to disagree with Fro-man I am traveling to Egypt this year - I've heard horror stories of people trying to bring multiple lenses in and getting hung up by authorities. Also, there's a lot of dust to deal with - I don't want to be switching lenses in an environment like that. I opted for this 20-70 as I'm trying this trip with just one lens. Its low weight and range are what appealed to me - I'm hoping the F4 will not be an issue. Several videos with detailed studies on sharpness show how sharp it is and its much sharper than the 24-105. I'm figuring if I need the reach I will just crop and one of the videos I watched showed that the 70mm cropped was sharper than the uncropped 105.mm.

[@iainatkins7683]

I use a canon 24-104L so I would probably go with that over the 20-70

[@totalwargamer183]

Yeah, seems like Sony missed on this one. Sigma Art lenses are fantastic for the price. Def would go with that. Or, if I’m using it for vlogging I’m getting a prime, smaller, lighter, better sharpness usually. But if I’m being honest my absolute favorite lens that pretty much lives on my camera is the Tamron 35-150 2-2.8.

[@godsinbox]

that choice wasnt an option here. fun fact, apsc crop mode switched on with the 24-105 equals the 35-150 focal range for free. Same with most sony's video crop. 24-105 are common on the used market now and are a third of the price of the new Tamron.

[@totalwargamer183]

@@godsinbox sure, but aren’t those f4’s? Also going into APSC mode you are losing about half of your sensor and effective MP’s. I’d rather use the whole sensor and all my MP’s

[@tt113]

Thank you Jared! This is by far the most subjective review I have seen for this lens.

[@Lu-cho]

To BAD didn't include the Nikon too. 😱

[@JonathanBarrow]

Please review the 20-40mm separately

[@stepheneckert4006]

We already filmed and edited it, should be out later this week or next

[@swistedfilms]

That vignetting is just savage! For $1100 this is a hard pass. If it was $650 it would be a lot closer. If I'm vlogging I likely don't need the zoom and there are much better primes available, like the Sigma 20MM f/1.4. This lens would make a great bookend for my Betamax tapes I have on the shelf.

[@godsinbox]

All E mount FF have that vignette, you normally dont see it because you should have in body corrections on. The E mount FF flange diameter is flawed in that way, hence canon RF and Nikon Z are HUUUUGEEEE.

[@mrwashur1991]

Jesus dude, it’s not like it’s unusable. I’m not gonna buy it but it better than a book stop. Not sure if you know but vignette is completely correctable in camera and in post..

[@swistedfilms]

@@mrwashur1991 You know who makes a better lens for less? Sigma. And Canon. And Nikon. And probably Tamron. They don't require that much correction. Sony needs to do better. But "good enough" has always been the Sony battle cry, quickly followed by "overcharge!" I'll lay off when I get my money back for all the abandoned proprietary formats they created!

[@stavroskyriakopoulos8699]

Where is Jared Polin????

[@livejames9374]

Why would the viewfinder look any darker using a f4 lens on mirrorless? There should be no difference. Seems Sony really pushed the limits with this lens. Good and bad.

[@Drivel-mr5pw]

It doesn't, Jared just doesn't know how to control his exposure and made a silly statement when all F4 lenses will give the same results...

[@achilleszafiris2578]

The best part? Price in europe is about 1700$ !!!!!!! so not even hard pass!

[@SerielThriller]

You could just upload your "guide to low light" to your website so that we don't have to enter our email. It would make it much more accessible.

[@ro3843]

Isn't it great that there are all these third party options? :-)

[@stkuj]

Sony 24-70 GM II is the best choice of all those...

[@isavkov]

And the most expensive one 😂😂😂

[@henrygenesis7542]

I would hope so at that price 😂

[@robinprobyn1971]

Trouble with Sony zooms , for folk coming from video / Cine zooms ,is they zoom the wrong way round ! Sigma has it right. All video/ cine zooms zoom one way, it's an industry standard , and luckily Sigma is the same.

[@Lu-cho]

Have the Nikon 20mm and somehow had the VIGNETTING.. 😱😬😬 But figure out.. 😬😡 the hood wasn't attached CORRECTLY... 🤣🤣😬😬 And looks exactly like your picture. So? It's your HOOD? your problem??

[@jyuesheng7899]

我還是買了2070G這顆鏡頭! 因為他真的夠好 對得起這個價錢 I still bought the 2070G lens! Because it is really good enough Worth the price

[@Realletsplaygrey]

Not quite sure what Sony was going for here. $1100 is heinous for this lens. $600-$750 would have been more appropriate

[@Twobarpsi]

Agreed!

[@WheelsAndHelmets]

I have the sigma 24-70 art lens for my a7rv and love it. Seeing the pictures in your video compared to mine, the Sony is definitely priced too high. In fact, I'll argue I don't see the point of the Sony lens.

[@pgy8863]

Funny, no one is moaning about the price of the older, less refined Sony 24-105 f4 lens, which is even more expensive?

[@photobatya]

Bokeh is PRO photography, the rest is phone snapshots, take the widest aperture lens any time and go to gym to be able to work with. It is insane. And it is how Sony makes money on idiots. I have shot 12 hours event with Tamron 35-150, and when you are paid for this and have nothing else to do it is ok, but when you have little children on beach, my choise is 28-60 kit lens :)

[@GamingMailbox]

Here he goes again making a good video. Sheesh...

[@godsinbox]

i think he has lost the plot.

[@Image1Nation]

Wait till Jayce’s fro comes in 😅

[@vladimirkraus1438]

If I should select a single universal travel and landscape lens, then Sony 20-70 would be it.

[@Matti6950]

You find 1099 dollars expensive, you must know they are asking 1599€ for this in Europe, so must be even more insane.

[@YonniFui]

I love putting my lens hood bc it’s pull of stickers lol

[@SW-tech]

I'd get a used 24-105 until I could afford a new GM Mk 2.

[@michaelbohler333]

In Europa it's 1600...

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

OSS is not nearly as good as active mode. And active mode is not as good as catalyst browse. I shoot my handheld shots with a 16-35 @ 16. However, 20-40 can be stabilized with a gimbal. I highly disagree that the 20-70 with active mode would be the same as 24-105 with OSS and without active mode.

[@petercofrancesco9812]

I agree. This is why they are coming out with these wider lenses. That's why I own the 20-40 Tamron because I like using it hand held without a gimbal for low profile documentary work in that case I need active stabilization. I own the A7IV one really annoying thing it does in 4k60 it crops and with active stab indoor work can be difficult to get wide enough. But I agree it's priced more than it should be but that always seems to be the case with oem lenses. Plus native lenses get focus breathing which in nice for video. I'm planning to get the Sigma 24-70 2.8 for indoor event work. When ever you get into the use case for a lens it's open for debate.

[@grzegorzmeder7715]

​@@petercofrancesco9812 Active stabilization does not work (has no visible effect) with 3rd party lenses, just adds a crop. I've tested it with with sony a7siii, a7rV and sigma 28-70, tamron 20-40 and a bunch of sony lenses 16-35 zeiss, 24-105, 35mm, 20mm etc. Somehow none of YT testers / reviewers could not find it out so far. Also none of sony websites will tell you this. Do not take my word on it, check it for yourself. For photography it does not matter, for video it matters a lot.

[@petercofrancesco9812]

@@grzegorzmeder7715 I use active stabilization on my A7IV with a Tamron lens. I verified through tests that it does work. Not sure why you can't see a difference.

[@grzegorzmeder7715]

@@petercofrancesco9812 Try active mode with any of sony lenses. Difference is huge.

[@petercofrancesco9812]

@@grzegorzmeder7715 I don't have a Sony lens to test so maybe it does but that doesn't make sense because Active Stab is in body stab where the sensor is moving around. Shouldn't matter what lens you use. Only scenario I can think of if you use a manual lens it's necessary to set in the menu what focal length it is otherwise the camera can't properly compensate for it.

[@homeboi808]

I’ll stick with my 24-105. Internal zoom & OSS. The difference between 20-24 is the same as 70-105 though. I just use my iPhone when I want ultra-wide.

[@JLStreetDoc]

Which 24-105 has internal zoom?

[@homeboi808]

@@JLStreetDoc Whoops, could of sworn it was. I guess I got it mixed up with the 18-105 for APS-C that I also own.

[@JLStreetDoc]

the f4 24-105? The zoom extends out the front. Internal zoom mean zero extension. My old Nikon 24-70 and 70-200 was internal zoom. The front element stayed in place. The lens looked no different no matter the focal length.

[@JLStreetDoc]

@@homeboi808 all good. I wish it was internal.

[@ericpneuma2352]

Thanks Jared for all you do 🖤

[@forjobid]

i want frog pack3

[@thesisunatorpodcast6850]

Let's see the sigma 60-600!

[@ZOB4]

He did that video recently