Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS lens review with samples (Full-frame & APS-C)

[@thingsandso]

If there is one person on youtube that I feel I can trust regarding lens reviews, it is definitely you. Thanks for your work!

[@travisdeclan1701]

I dont mean to be so off topic but does any of you know a way to log back into an Instagram account? I somehow lost my login password. I love any help you can offer me

[@travisdeclan1701]

@Corey Chandler Thanks for your reply. I found the site thru google and I'm in the hacking process atm. Takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

[@travisdeclan1701]

@Corey Chandler It worked and I now got access to my account again. I'm so happy:D Thanks so much you really help me out!

[@coreychandler6449]

@Travis Declan No problem :D

[@linsnowx]

I also own this lens and have brought it for two trips. I agree the zoom ring can feel a bit better but the image quality is so good and the zoom range is so convenient so 90% of the time I’m too lazy to swap to other lenses

[@XDR2201]

Best camera gears reviewer ever along with Mr. Dustin Abbott.

[@Drvishnucnair]

You are one of the very few trustworthy reviewers I have ever seen in youtube. Please do Nikon reviews also.

[@HagaishiSama]

As a professional sports photographer who photographs boxing and muay thai. I normally use the Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 which works perfectly but wanted to see if they had FF glass that's it is equivalent. And I just found it. Sadly it's not as sharp or as fast as the Tamrom but it's good to know it's out there. And your review was awesome. Ty so much fir this

[@stevetqp9152]

Very good review of this lens, Christopher! As a landscape and product photographer currently using the Fujifilm X-System, with their stellar Fujinon XF optics, I am intrigued by the Sony lineup, such as this lens and the a7III. I'm always looking to obtain higher-quality images, especially in terms of image sharpness and detail. I use the excellent Fujinon XF16-55 f/2.8 for landscapes, and the ultra-sharp Fujinon XF80mm f/2.8 Macro for product photography, and am quite pleased with the results...able to print 24" x 36" posters with superb sharpness and detail rendition. However, I always wonder if I'd get even more detail with, say, the a7III and this lens, amng others of course. However, from what I've seen thus far, I don't see much improvement in terms of image sharpness and detail, from my current kit (and a very solid tripod, optimal exposure, with good post processing). That said, I've love to see a direct image comparison between this Sony zoom and the Fujinon XF16-55 f/2.8. Thanks again!

[@brianknight7208]

I picked one up a few months ago. Very useful. Don't underestimate the OSS when coupled with IBIS. I've been able to get good shots down to 1/15 in low light scenes. Granted, that's if you are only concerned with your movement.

[@CC-gt3ro]

I don’t trust this review. I also myself seen the 24-105 with oss and an a7c and the ressult is better than any other lens with ibis. Also the guy say that it is not for video is a lie, especially when everybody else say it is perfect for video and constant f4.

[@tshev]

Sony 24-105mm f/2.8 with an internal zoom would be a dream!

[@ygerekhirosaki172]

Watched a ton of your very good reviews, and decided that this lens is the one I'm buying. Your work is very much appreciated my dude.

[@GiNodrog]

It's my favourite travel lense. I normaly have this bolted on my A7RIII, but my next trip im considering putting on A9ii ! I know I'll loose more mp on the A9ii when in aps-c mode. "I usually assign to the focus hold button ".

[@badgastein2]

I have this lens. I use it on my aging full frame sony camcorder VG900 and these were designed for each other, the camcorder combo looks professional but not ‘flashy’ . Video results are very pleasing. Colours are nicely saturated. Worth the expense.

[@KhoaSV]

I love the build quality of this lens, the plastic is nice and light and feels sturdy enough.

[@epocketlsaml]

this is how a lens test is supposed to be done. good job sir. subscribed.

[@giannimoisson4000]

Congratulations for your reviews, after seeing your test, I intend to replace my 18-135 mm by this lens 24-105 mm for my Sony a6500, I feel that it works really well with an Aps-c.

[@roywood2853]

It was between this and the Taron 28-75mm. I ended up with the 24-105 and heartily agree even with the price it was the one to buy.

[@rogerbeltz2370]

Thank you for this totally honest critique of this Sony lens. Not afraid to point out the "cons" as well as the "pros. Wanting to move from Canon to a Sony mirrorless camera. Trying to decide (with a limited budget in mind) the best lens (withing a $1000. - $1300. range) if I buy a Sony a7 III. My primary objective is "sharpness and clarify" of images - not so much for "features".

[@roadrunnerruud61]

Just a couple of weeks ago I bought the Sony A7III. Had been struggling about the lens to buy with it. The cheaper and much apprechiated Tamron 28-75mm, this more expensive Sony 24-105mm or perhaps the Sony 90mm which I think is a great lens for macro and portraits. Finally decided to buy the Sony 90mm. However after having used this lens 2 weeks I decided to return it and go for the 24-105mm. Main reason for this: the versatility of the 24-105mm! I am not a professional photographer and now that Sony lenses are quite expensive (perhaps to expensive ...) the 24-105mm will be the lens for me. Image quality is excellent and the issues mentioned in the review are not really a problem for me. Note that the A7III can solve some issues as distortion and CA in the camera itself. Anyhow, I am quite happy with this combination! Btw, the Tamron dropped out for me for a) the focal lenght and b) I preferred a native lens. Thanks for this review.

[@sasquatch5863]

have a look at canon rf prices 2k for 24-70/2.8 !!! - sony are cheap as chips ;) - not to mention 100+ sony FE lenses to choose from

[@nil4309]

Been thinking about buying this lens so glad you have done a review!!

[@JohnDennery]

That was amazing! Thank you for including so many sample images, this is the perfect style for a lens review. First time on your channel, instant sub. Cheers!

[@colinbarnes705]

I was just searching for your review of this lens the other day, and was sad you hadn't reviewed it. You read my mind!

[@nadeemafzal8984]

Great review Chris And bought lens on ur recommendation For A7c Not regretted a single day - As u said at the start - covers most basis’ and is very sharp

[@stephanerivard5919]

I got my hands on a used lens, but from a pro photographer, so I know it was well taken care of compared to being owned by an amateur. Got it including a UV filter for $1000 CDN... This lens filled the gap I had with my other lenses to give me the best options when going on a trip without bringing a full bag. My 20mm G f1.8, Tamron 28-200 f2.8-5.6 and this one will be the best combo on a road trip... I could always add my Laowa 100mm f2.8 2x macro lens as a forth just in case.😊😊 Thanks for the review Chris, always very insightful. Best regards...

[@AB_223]

Any reason you went with this instead of the 20-70?

[@beerequalsheaven]

personally as a stills photographer I am very glad of the stiff zoom, no lens creep. I looked into the Tam 28-75 2,8 but was very put off by the rendering, by this I mean at close focus i.e portraits and so forth it looks incredible but for landscape small far of trees are rendered 'bitty'? and you need to keep your eye on that with Sigma or even native lenses. I would advice anyone buying a lens to look at fine videos such as this and by Mr Abbott but also go to flickr, look at real world images (hi res) and try and zoom in and look at fine details...you will be quite surprised! I could be wrong but it looks as if Sony lenses seem to be strongest at the long end of zooms, weaker in the middle? I have seen this trend with the 24-105 and 70-200 (f4). Thanks for your time Christoper

[@philg6757]

The Sony A7 system is great, lens prices not so. If Sony drop there prices down to Canon etc equivalent they would control the market.

[@christopherfrost]

Agreed

[@steven2809]

Agreed. Thank goodness we have Sigma and Samyang!

[@davidpotter6564]

I'm kind of hoping that with Canon and Nikon now competing at full frame mirrorless and with the excellent new Tamron zoom we'll start to see Sony bringing those prices down.

[@dasaauto2024]

Canon has a larger base to spread out the costs of developing lenses like these, which does make a bit of difference (at least that was the case with DSLR cameras). Also, it sounds like the UK gets hit harder by currency differences. In the US, both of Canon’s new 24-105mm f/4 zooms (the EF and RF) are priced at $1,100, with this Sony 24-105mm f/4 at $1,300. The Sigma Art 24-105mm f/4 is $900 and Nikon’s 24-120mm f/4 is $1,100 also.

[@caldera878]

Canon RF and Nikon Z lens prices are just as bad and no one is batting a eye, while people scold at Sony prices.

[@konstantinosmastrodimas5522]

Hi Christopher! Had you visited greece in this review? Thank you for all video all these years!

[@DiaLFonZo]

Very nice review as I'm actually shopping for my new a7ii coming from a6000 with the 18-105.

[@the_anxiousphotographer]

Hi Christopher, Im curious between this lens and the 24-70 f2.8 from sigma, probably quite a difference. I usually shoot landscape and wildlife mostly, which would you prefer? Thanks keep up the great work!

[@PhotoArtBrussels]

I own this lens and i find it, as you say, a very good lens. It is the perfect "all types of work" kind of lens and is great in most situations. If i had to have only one lens, it would be this one. Great review, as always. Like people said below, you are my reference in lens tests and comparisons. I'm now looking out for a 35mm f1.4 with auto-focus ... i'll be checking your findings! :-) Greetings and season wishes from Belgium!

[@csabagrunfelder]

I'm also really happy with the Samyang 35mm f1.4 AF, a bit loud (if you are looking for video not ideal) but razor sharp and nice lens.

[@PhotoArtBrussels]

@@csabagrunfelder I use it pure for photo, so sound is not so an issue.

[@christopherfrost]

The Samyang 35mm f/1.4 FE is great :-)

[@diegoe.4639]

​@@csabagrunfelder its sharp, and i regret selling mine but a bit heavy for .y use

[@HISPEKK]

how do you think it compares with the Tamron 28-75 cheers ps where do you get your sharpness chart from. cheers BAZ

[@sherrinkangaroo2090]

​@Foto4Max Get the Tamrom if you can't afford the Sony mate

[@amitkrupal1234]

@@sherrinkangaroo2090 Even I am confused with this lens selection. I just shoot weddings(D3300+18-55,35f/1.8,55-200), was considering A7iii with 24-105 f4 or Tamron 28-75f/2.8 or 2870 kitlens with Samyang 85 f/1.4. Is Tamrom good for product photography as well as studio shoots for magzine also at 75 mm. My knowlegdge is limited in studio shoots. I have seen most photography showing product photography tutorials using 90/100 mm macro lens. Is the 3rd option good.

[@Paul-kw1og]

Great lens

[@anulearntech]

Nice video as always. This lens is often put against the all in one zoom 24-240 f/3.5-f/6.3; constant aperture and image quality vs ultimate zoom convenience. Would like to see a comparison. Many prefer this one, but some won't give up the 10x zoom which keeps the lens changing to a minimum and lets you get the shot in the heat of the moment.

[@christopherfrost]

One day I might review the 24-240

[@felixespana2004]

@@christopherfrost I hope that day will come someday! Awesome as always mr. Frost!

[@jimstirling7223]

Whether we like it or not the software correction is part of the lens designs with most mirrorless lenses. The focal length stated on the lens is what you get after applying the corrections so shooting with them turned off is not how it is designed to be used. Sony seems to let uncorrected vignette go a bit wild to gain better sharpness allowing the software to fix it. It is not just Sony of course take a look at some of the uncorrected results from m43 wide/standard zooms to see epic software input.

[@saopaulosoul8714]

oh shit, this was a surprise, lol. never thought you would do this one anytime soon. cool review. this was a great lens for photo but I returned this to get the 18-105 for my APS-C instead, best decision. the video was better suited for that, no issues with gimbal balance whilst changing focal length, and no issues with zoom ring because of power zoom!

[@davidwallace8980]

Apparently you have an earlier copy. Mine has no seam and the zoom and focus rings are smooth turning with no zoom creep. I can't detect any decentering either. The Chinese factory must have improved their manufacturing process since your copy. Mine appears to be equal the the 24-70GM in build quality. My serial number indicates that it is over 7,000 copies later then yours. This could account for the improvements. Sony has been offering discounts for the past year from time to time in the US.

[@airdailyx]

This is a very interesting one for me. Switching to Sony from Nikon, I went with the A7III with the 18-35 f2/8 GM on the wide end and the 70-200 f2/8 on the telephoto end. I really needed something in the middle and narrowed it down to the Tameron 28-75 f2/8, the lens in this review, and the 50mm f1/4. Ken Rockwell gave this lens one hell of a review and the Tamron is still sold out. I decided to get the 50mm f1/4 to bridge the gap while still keeping the 23-105 for travel where i need that 1 lens. This is the most detailed review i’ve watched thus far. That offset sharpness has me concerned now. I may go with the Tamron after all. Lets see if Sigma releases a native FE zoom next year.

[@jimstirling7223]

Lensrentals tested the lens www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/02/mtf-tests-of-the-sony-fe-24-105mm-f4-oss/ they have access to multiple copies of lenses so their data point is helpful

[@GABRIEL_CRAFT]

Thank you as always Christopher!

[@vma1234]

Thanks Christopher for the excellent review. Just got a used Sony A7 III camera and a 35 prime len. Would you recommend Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G for shooting video? Love to see the cinematic effect on the full frame camera. Is it better to get the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? I only have budget for 1 zoom len. Thanks for your advice.

[@christopherfrost]

I talk about using the 24-105 in this video - take a look.

[@Teeb2023]

1:45 That overly stiff zoom action is something that really annoyed me in the 100-400 Gmaster. Not something you'd expect in a £2500 lens. I sold it. I hated the fact that the simple action of zooming the lens (while hand-held) caused the camera to move around all over the place, causing you to re-acquire your subject.

[@giannimoisson4000]

Christopher Frost Photography, honestly, the Sony FE 24-105 mm f4 seems really better with Aps-C than the Sony E4/PZ18-105 mm f4 ?

[@christopherfrost]

Yes, it does seem better

[@febianns]

Yes, i feel the OSS of this lens compared to other lens isn't very effective for video, still struggling with micro shakes 😕

[@willrose650]

Hi Christopher, great lens review, I have this lens and agree with your synopsis. How do I download sample files please?

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Maybe do a comparison with the Canon R mount 24-105 (I think this is its closer competitor). Tnx for an excellent review as usual.

[@hildasolislearningacademy9963]

I was lucky to try it and it surprised me how well it worked.

[@greasyflight6609]

Perfect first lens

[@robt4194]

4:26 If you factor-in the price, would you say you're getting more, or less for your money as compared to the 18-105mm lens (albeit FE vs E) ?

[@brentjamesonparker]

Does the OSS not work in connection with the IBIS to give better image stabilization?

[@robbie154]

I wish sigma would make this lens for E mount. Was my favorite lens on my d750. Build quality was superb and much sharper than the nikon variant.

[@KeyLimeyPie222]

I found that the black vignetting in the corner at 24mm is pushed out when you correct the distortion! I was worried about that before I bought it, since I didn't have your review yet :D

[@edgar.avanesov]

I am looking for a zoom lens to pair with Sony A7M3, would you recommend Sigma A 24-70 mm f/2.8 DG DN or Sony 24-105 f4 G OSS? The price in my country is absolutely identical. Those of you that had experience with both, in terms of bokeh, autofocus and image clarity, which would you recommend?

[@christopherfrost]

If you want out of focus backgrounds, then get the f/2.8 lens. If you want a longer zoom range then the 24-105

[@Motelecomp]

Brilliant review, thanks!

[@dasaauto2024]

That sucks to hear about the lens stabilization. I’m assuming you had the IBIS on in the camera, right? Considering that the OSS is supposed to work together with the IBIS I’m surprised it didn’t do better handheld at 105mm. :/

[@HISPEKK]

just had a good look the sony looks a bit sharper overall but the Tamron is cheaper faster and lighter. love your straightforward tests no waffle just facts great keep up the great work. ps wats the best sony fit full frame f 1.2..

[@sherrinkangaroo2090]

Get the Tamron if you can't afford the better lens mate

[@anto1112]

Thanks for the video, I have a sony Alpha 7 iii and a sony 85mm 1.8 for portraits, I would like to add a lens for travel. And I'm hesitating between the SONY 24-105mm G OSS and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2. I'm afraid that f4 will be limited at night, after which I still have my 85mm 1.8, but I'll be limited on the focal length. Any advice on which one to choose? Thanks :)

[@pawelmod3292]

What is more important for you, light or focal length? Sony is wider and has more teach on the tele end. In my opinion matching F4 zooms with F1.8 primes is very good bang for the money. If you have $$$ yon can always go for 2.8 zoom and 1.4 primes ... Whatever you will choose there is always a compromise. For me it works like this: If I have zoom on the camera I'm missing the light, if I have a prime I'm missing the flexibility ;-)

[@sebastianfilms4499]

Another vote to compare this to Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 for video , focus breathing usability etc!

[@christopherfrost]

Take a look at my video of the Tamron lens, that should give you all the info you need :-) neither are perfect for video TBH

[@sebastianfilms4499]

Thanks!! Your channel # 1!!

[@irasarita747]

Hi Chistopher, Which IQ is better between this one or canon 24-105 F4 IS USM? I would like to pair this one with Sony A7III or If canon has better glass I will use adapter. Thank You

[@Wistbacka]

What is your opinion: Sony 24-105 vs Tamron 28-200?

[@jukeboxjohnnie]

Ive just played with mine got new and was pretty disappointed until I realised it need to be shot at f5.6 for really good quality, such a difference on mine from F4

[@Rm07ann]

Definitely getting this one

[@ПітерАндрійХенфілдКолісник]

Hi. This lens is £879 on E-infinity so quite cheap. I find this place is a good place to buy lenses and cameras as they are very competitive.

[@christopherfrost]

I've heard that you may have to deal with heavy import changes if you go with E-Finity

[@ПітерАндрійХенфілдКолісник]

@@christopherfrost When I am in the UK I buy my gear from E-infinity and I have never paid any import charges. I bought A7 III, A9 and RX10 MKIV when I made my change to Sony. Lenses Sony 28mm F2, Sony Zeiss 35mm F2.8, Sony Zeiss 55mm F1.8, Sony 85mm F1.8, Sony 90mm F2.8 and Tamron 28 to 75mm F2.8 in the last 18 months and the service has been excellent and I never paid any more than the price shown. By the way these lenses are all solid performers. I am waiting to see your review on the Tamron 17 to 28mm when it is released. If it is as good as the 28 to 75mm F2.8 it will be in my lens bag. I see Tamron have patented a 70 to 200mm F2.8 and 150 to 600mm for Sony full frame. I would for sure buy the 70 to 200mm F2.8 when that is released. Buy the way Tamron is partly owned by Sony

[@gibsonsg4100]

Switched from Nikon to Sony some months ago and I am trying to find the right zoom for me, but it is impossible for now. Sony 28-70 is acceptable but not wide enough, I need that 24mm on a zoom. Sony 24-70 is acceptable, but very expensive and not worth it. Sony 24-105 is very expensive too. I miss my Nikon 24-85 VR and 24-120 f4, which were good and cheap. Sony needs to design a cheap 24-85 f4, or at least f3.5-4.5. This is the most useful range in my opinion. You have the wide 24 mm and on the other side get nice bokeh at 85mm f4 or f4.5. For now I am sticking with my Sony 28-70 f3.5-5.6 and I feel limited and downgraded from my Nikon zooms.

[@josefkhalifeh4663]

Have you looked at Sigma’s 24-70mm? It’s sharper at the center and has better contrast than Sony’s 24-70mm version at half the price. It’s also cheaper than Sony’s 24-105mm

[@atyl1972]

Hey Christopher, could you please do a comparison with the Nikon Z24-70 f4, and the Sony 24-105 f4?

[@3flyte_3flyte]

If you point the camera downwards, does the lens extend?

[@shamilchachba786]

Please if it’s possible can you make a review of canon ef-m 32mm 1.4? It came out couple months ago and many people are amazed with its sharpness and after watching so many of your videos it would be very interesting to compare it to other lenses

[@ParadiseProjectsGroup]

How is that in any way related to a 24-105? Maybe he can do a review of a Honda CRV while we're on the subject.

[@MrJAM-np7go]

The best minivan! Not a fancy super car, but it could do everything. But I choose the Tamron 28-75 over this lens, simply it is cheaper.

[@truckingpix]

great review thanks

[@pranavan_shoots]

Excellent review....

[@chryseass.5143]

Can you compare this lens to the Tamron 28-75 f 2.8 please?

[@christopherfrost]

Watch my review of that lens - my tests are standardised, so you'll be able to compare for yourself :-)

[@eViperRabbit]

Chris already did. He ended the video (at 9:00) by saying that "in fact it's the best standard zoom lens I've tested on any Sony camera..." He tested Tamron 28-75 six months before Sony 24-105.

[@professorstein5855]

I just had to double check and MAKE SURE I was subscribed. Yes I was.

[@mrnomore]

i have this lens and i've made test very much like yours and i had no softness in the corners like you. a little bit @F4, but not this much. this is by far the best zoom i've ever had and i had a lot. maybe you should check if your lens is really OK. there are some bad copies out there. i even prefer this lens before 24-70 F2.8 because of it's range. picture quality doesn't differ that much. this is the perfect all-arounder....and yeah, F4 isn't what is used to be. ISO 6400 in the A7III is like ISO400 in the Canon days. [EDIT] you had a bad copy! i looked at the video again. i missed the part about you saying one corner is better then the other one (kids screaming). get a proper copy. you will be amazed

[@jimstirling7223]

I think that shooting these lenses uncorrected is a flawed methodology ,the corrections are an intrinsic part of the design compromises. If you turn off the corrections you will see epic vignette { I have the lens since it came out} however the corrected result is the actual focal length stated so you are really shooting out of bounds when you test them that way. I have been very happy with the lens

[@itmedia2227]

If cristofer says recommended, Im buying it.

[@RenEdgeX]

Made a video with what lens is compatible with Sony VCT-SGR1

[@wilismatrix9847]

how is it comparing to Sony SEL18105G E PZ 18-105 mm f/4.0 G on a full frame camera ?

[@randydietmeyer5883]

I use the Sigma 24-105 f/4 myself, both on my Canon and Sony a7III. Most focus modes are available using the MC-11 but surprisingly IBIS isn't -which DOES work on all my Canon lenses when adapted. Go figure. LOL Most reviews on this lens are just glowing, so it really sounds like you must have gotten a bad, or at least a "not quite so good" copy (haven't touched it myself yet and the only reason I haven't is because of what you brought up a few times, it's price.)

[@christopherfrost]

This is a pretty 'glowing' review though of the lens's optics: the thing I criticise is its rather average IS and build quality which is not good for a lens over £1,000

[@UncleAlpha1]

Better than the 24-70 2.8 GM?

[@user-eh2rg7tv3h]

Thank you 🙏

[@maZec31]

great lens but it is time to version II and fix 105mm weak performance

[@tornike550]

Why is this video on "Canon EF-EFS" category?

[@ryanwooten3118]

Do you think the size of this lens would be too much of a hassle to use as a travel lens on an a6600?

[@christopherfrost]

It'll be a bit oversized. Just get the new 16-55 f/2.8 G. I'm testing it right now and it's spectacular

[@FarEastSurvival]

Thanks for the recommendation. I purchased this lens when it first came out. I wish it was bit faster but aside from that it works great on my full frame and APSC cameras. For landscape photography however there are better options with wider focal ranges.

[@ParadiseProjectsGroup]

If it was faster it wouldn't be a Sony FE 4/24-105mm now would it?

[@Flyinghigh-s1f]

which is the best lens for landscape on 6400

[@romaaredam]

Hello Christopher, If you have to pick between Tamron 28-75 and this 24-105 sony, which one would you pick? thank you

[@josefkhalifeh4663]

So based on what I’m seeing the Sigma 24-70mm is optically sharper than the Sony 24-105mm. I am in between these two lenses to bring on backpacking trips.

[@RicochetForce]

According to DXO Mark this lens is apparently sharper and fewer issues like chromatic aberration.

[@whatsthesauce]

Hey, I was hoping if you'd review Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 for canon mount?

[@christopherfrost]

I have already. Look at my review of the Samyang 14mm f/2.8

[@nico.m8346]

Close focus minimum distance is 37mm? Are you sure?

[@赵今-c9z]

Nico .M haha, should be 37cm

[@BuyrukA]

For the sharpness and distortion tests, can you have the aspect ratio and the MP on the screen, please? Asking mainly because most Sony cameras don't offer the max MP i.e. 24 or 42, unless you choose a specific aspect ratio. Thank you.

[@christopherfrost]

Not sure what you're talking about here. APS-C and full-frame cameras shoot in 3:2 ratio

[@BuyrukA]

@@christopherfrost they do not shoot in 3:2 exclusively though, they can also do others like 16:9, 4:3 etc. that's why i thought it might be a good idea to include the AR and/resolution in the captions.

[@christopherfrost]

@@BuyrukA I already say the resolution of the camera I'm testing on, and everyone knows that those cameras are designed to shoot primarily in 3:2.

[@VisitWithAsghar]

nikon p1000 review please

[@dopamining7621]

Now I really want you to redo your Sigma 24-105 review, on your A7R7. I feel underwhelmed by this Sony lens.

[@christopherfrost]

It takes a lot to get me to re-review a lens ;-) I don't know, maybe I can do an extra resolution test one day...I don't have much time though :-(

[@camil721]

I have the Sigma 24-105 and I tested indoors and outdoors the Sony 24-105 G on a Sony A7 III and I can say that Sigma is very close in sharpness to sony. To be a pixel peeper, I'd say that only the extreme corners, on my Sigma, are softer at 24mm f/4 but mostly on far away distances, in landscape, not visible at 1,5 to 4 meters (and a little darker and mushy, but not equally - decentering defect, perhaps, or a knock?) With Sigma MC11 adapter, the AF speed is a tad slower (I use AF-C both in photos and video) and the AF is noisy in quiet rooms (like a small Geiger counter). But on 4K video, outdoors, in afternoon sun and indoors, I saw no difference, nor in sharpness, nor in corner softness (b/c the video area is letterboxed). The Sony 24-105 is the sharpest and homogenous zoom lens I put my hand on... I would use it only on f/4, but it's so expensive!... For the price, Sigma is so good in all respects, (beside weight) that I'll say go for Sigma anyway ! Beautiful review Christopher, as always!

[@dopamining7621]

@@camil721 Great info, many thanks !

[@ingbaza555]

Is the manual focus linear ?

[@caldera878]

Very good job of Sony.

[@vivash2785]

min focus distance is 1.25ft not 37mm 7:18

[@Cory.S]

Please test the Sigma DC-DN E mount line 30, 16, and 56 1.4 if you can, thank you.

[@christopherfrost]

The 56mm review has just come out

[@sergioserramusic]

The distortion is very bad on this lens, seems even worse than the first Canon 24-105. I mean, in this price range you can get the much better Tamron 28-70 2.8

[@ReneUhlver]

For my a6300, would it be worthed to get 24-105 or 18-105 regardless the price? I am struggling to choose one.. also there is the 18-135 which makes me a hard time to decide. Thanks!

[@christopherfrost]

If you want zoom range and portability, the 18-105. If you want image quality, the 24-105

[@ReneUhlver]

@@christopherfrost Thank you Christopher, I am curious to see a side-by-side comparison between both of them.. seems like I can exclude the 18-135 from my options.

[@dasaauto2024]

The 18-23mm range encompasses a really large field of view, so make sure you’re okay with that if you go with the full frame lens. It’s FoV would be equivalent to using a 36-158mm lens on full frame. If you shoot more video than photos, the 18-105mm would probably be your best bet. Cause of its smooth power zoom. If photography is more important, the 18-135mm you mention is a really sharp lens, all things considered, with a much wider range than either of the other two.

[@ReneUhlver]

@@dasaauto2024 Thank you for your consideration! I ended up buying the 18-105 because of the FoV, also I saw that some reviews show that the 18-135 isn't sharp at the corners in some situations as the 18-105 is, I really hope I made the best buy!

[@anthonysmith9864]

Anyone else have ghosting issues when taking "macro" shots wide open? Edit: and or halo effect? Not sure of the terminology

[@moshesani]

Sony 24-105 or Sigma 24-70?

[@christopherfrost]

It's up to you - whether you want the extra zoom range, or a brighter aperture

[@YogevMontekyo]

The Bokeh is disappointing. Overall i prefer the Sigma.

[@kevc.2958]

sony needs to update this lens, both z and rf equivalents are much better

[@xtrweb]

I have this lense with A7R3 and it's great. But for low light I had to get the 24mm 1.4 GM

[@Wardeneo]

What’s it like compared to Canon EF 24-105 mm f/4L IS II USM? And as others have asked - a review/ comparison to canons new Canon RF 24-105mm f4L IS USM would be awesome

[@christopherfrost]

It'd be very difficult to compare, because to be a fair comparison I'd need to test on the same camera system

[@fuadsyawal7461]

WHY? WHAAAY? Why did the notification come so late

[@chamodmalalathunga6920]

7:20 37mm?

[@ryansecord8071]

Viewer request: Astrophotography series.

[@christopherfrost]

I'd love to but the weather where I live is so often poor for astrophotography :-(

[@ryansecord8071]

@@christopherfrost Fair point, understandable limitation. However, many people live in areas with questionable conditions and light pollution. I think it would show which lenses are practically best for city dwellers with specific demands. Regardless of conditions, your findings are surely valuable, I know I would watch.

[@xcokelat6296]

The OSS of this lens is awful for handheld video shot. Hope Sony brings new firmware to fix that issue.

[@CC-gt3ro]

Where did you see that?I have seen footage that show oss is better than ibis with this lens. I have seen somebody comparing 16-35 f4 with ibis and this 24-105 without ibis with oss and the 24-105 is far better. I don’t trust this review.

[@MrWizardjr9]

@@CC-gt3ro well it is better than ibis but compared to other OSS its not as good. i also have this lens btw

[@CC-gt3ro]

@@MrWizardjr9 so if is not as good as other oss, it is better to take a lens without stabilization at all like tamron 28-200 (which is outstanding) but very lightweight and using a gimbal. Anyway even owner of gh5 or olympus are also using gimbal despite good stabilization, i can see that online. There is no camera that beat a gimbal until now. The closest i have seen from a camera is the gyro stabilization post processing but it is complicated as it also need higher frame rate on chaotic ground and require time and a powerful video card like the nvidia 1080ti with a lot of cuda cores. On smooth surface my a7c and gyro catalyst browse stabilizes like a gimbal but the walking slow movement (slow high and down) are a bit more visible Not exactly like a gimbal where all movements are well controlled. However it is the closest. For static videos and photos even without oss, and just ibis my a7c gives very good result.