Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS: Review and IQ Breakdown | 4K

[@robwasnj]

This review is not only of use to those contemplating a purchase of this lens but also extremely informative for those of us that already own it. The tests you did save us a lot of time doing our own tests to determine optimum apertures at different focal lengths and how to best use this lens. I found it interesting that the lens isn't super sharp at it's minimum focusing distance and actually noticed that myself prior to seeing your review, I do wonder if using my 77mm close up attachment will help in those regards, guess I'll have to test it. Overall I gathered this is the best 24-105 money can buy compared to other brands including the Canon. Thanks again for a great review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to help out!

[@6gwilliams]

Lens is $1299 at B&H and Adorama. You said $1399 incorrectly. The great Sigma Art 24-105mm f4 is $899 respectively. I have had both lenses and loved the image quality on the Sigma since last January on my A7R2. I have made thousands of great images with the Sigma in the US and Europe. I upgraded to A7R3 and when Sony came out with their own 24-105mm f4 I tested them and found the Sony focused a bit quicker and was lighter weight ,and had focus stop button feature. So I traded in my Sigma and bought the Sony. I still have other Sigma Art lenses for my A7R3 and love them, but find I like this Sony 24-105mm , and for me it was worth the difference in price. Cheers, and thank for your review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're right - I had $1300 in my head and said $1399. Your assessment of the Sigma vs Sony sounds about right. Probably others will not feel the difference is worth extra $400, but I'm glad you're happy.

[@6gwilliams]

Fortunately as a pro I can afford the difference. I found as I trekked across the Scottish Highlands for three weeks, the Sigma 24-105mm lens gave me great, even spectacular image quality, but the weight (with the added excellent MC-11 adapter) tended to wear on me by the end of the day. I still have great Sigma Art 20mm f1.4 lens , Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm f5-6.3 lens, and Sigma (APS-C) Contemporary 16mm f1.4 for my A6500.. These Sigma lenses are keepers, and compliment my other native Sony lenses. Dustin, thanks for your efforts. I always enjoy your well-made ,informative videos.

[@dustinoyler10]

There is no Sigma Art 24-105mm f4 for e-mount cameras is there? Hope I am wrong but it's only made for the a-mount so you're using an adapter?

[@ianbrown704]

As always top quality and non biased review

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks!

[@OptimaMrL]

Dustin does have one weakness - he does not know how to do a bad review. Fantastic content, as always!

[@noehernadez]

I’m becoming a fan of you with your honestly reviews

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@inazhargalova5839]

FGH Casadediosrecords, me too, unfortunately, not all the bloggers are honest

[@KetansaCreatesArt]

I dropped the idea of 24-70 GM, and decided to get this FE 24-105G & FE 90 G Macro. And now I got turned off by the Barrel and Pin-cussion distortion that it originally has, without the body inteligence correction. Are all the G lenses originally less corrected like this? What should I do? 🤔

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's more a matter of the longer zoom range. There are more compromises involved with big zooms.

[@martynphillips6646]

Thank You another superb review that helped me have the confidence to buy this lens, there is no better reviewer on youtube

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the feedback.

[@wawanbalik]

Thanks a lot for a very comprehensive review Dustin! I'm considering purchasing this lens as a travel lens and this really helps.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to help out.

[@pawelpajor6423]

I really like your reviews because there's a lot of technical knowledge combined with practicality which gives a good idea to viewers/potential buyer's

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's my absolute goal.

[@robwasnj]

I couldn't agree more, looking at buying some gear and these reviews are incredibly helpful to us.

[@michaelcilenti8653]

Thank You for your reviews. I had purchased this lens from B&H on sale for $1098.00 and am very happy with the results. At this point in my life I'm forced to use One or two zooms to keep cost down so it's nice to see a good and honest review. I'm using this combined with the A7III and will be upgrading my old A6000 soon to a newer A6xxx series. Thanks again.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm glad it helped you out.

[@RichardsWorld]

We know the new Sony cameras have 5 axis stabilization. But can you make a video comparing using a lens with and without the OSS? Does adding a lens with OSS on a camera that already has 5 axis stabilization make much of a difference? I mostly video.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I didn't find the stabilization as effective as what I thought it would be (the combination of IBIS and the built in IS on the Batis 135mm was magical). I didn't have any real issue with it, but I expected more.

[@dopamining7621]

I believe the bodies offer 3, not 5-axis stabilization on their own; 5 is only achieved with compatible Sony lenses.

[@6gwilliams]

dopamining, Sony says the camera bodies themselves achieve five-axis IBIS of the sensor in the camera. That has nothing to do with any lens attached, whether that lens has OSS or not. IBIS is all internal, not dependent on any lens help.

[@PeZi3000]

I own the A7RII and am pretty impressed by the IBIS. With my 16-35mmF4 I can easily achieve handheld shots till 0.5sec(!) without any kind of visible shake in it nor loss in resolution!! I compared it with tripod shots and zoomed in on the computer at 2:1 (not 1:2) and can't see any difference at all. --> I'm impressed !

[@greasyflight6609]

When going to shoot and you do not know what to expect ..the Sony G 24-105 has your back. and will deliver. I just love this lens.

[@stevecraig9384]

I have had this lens for a year and the price is strong but that extra reach (105) is what I needed and has saved my bacon many times shooting event photography. Over all it works for me.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad you are enjoying it.

[@jeremyqu8348]

Thanks for this video, I was looking for it!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome

[@lesiakadam1977]

I have decided to get this lens first for my second-hand, almost new, a7r III. I got a new lens through Sony Poland special offer for just 980 dollars, which is about 70 dollars less than Tamron 28-75 G2. Why not Tamron? Few reasons: 1) That extra 4mm on wide end. It's just more practical for my needs. The end. 2) Convenient focal range. Travel, street, landscape - that's what I need. 3) Sharpness at that focal range. In my book sharpness beats bokeh every time. I'm not saying that Tamron is not sharp, but even at F4, Sony is a bit sharper. And for portraits I will get different lens altogether (probably Tamron 70-180 F2.8). All in all, 1600 dollars for used, 4k shutter count a7r III and 980 dollars for this lens, I don't think I could have done better for an enthusiast setup?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's good pricing for sure

[@ggivensjr]

I know it is an old review. However, have you since had occasion to try it with a 7RV?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't. This review was the last time I had one in hand.

[@sbonnema2007]

Using the stone wall worked very well for sharpness evaluation. This was very helpful!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks!

[@alexvasquez537]

Workhorse lens. Just got it. So far I'm lovin' it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That’s a good way to label a lens like this.

[@tedbowling5036]

Your reviews are first class. I can’t thank you enough. Cheers!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Much appreciated!

[@xell1969]

Very useful review Dustin, your knowledge is amazing, thank you very much for sharing it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@JeffSpeers]

I almost bought the Sony 24-240mm super zoom, but after watching your review it seems like a lot better idea to get this lens. With the extra sharpness this lens provides I think I can make up most of the extra zoom range with cropping, plus I would get a constant f4 and a closer focus distance. Your thoughts?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That sounds reasonable to me. You'll have better image quality, and the ability to deeply crop does help make up the difference.

[@memoktc]

How does this lens performs in low light? Like say a concert or a dark club house? How does this compare to the 24-70 f2.8 GM lens? Kinda torn between the 2. Do i need f2.8 or the f4 is sufficient for low light?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The lens seemed to focus fairly well in dim situations, though I wouldn't be surprised if the 24-70 GM lens would outperform it in that kind of venue.

[@coreytomsrealtor3072]

I have this lens and the 16-35 f4 and I love the ease of use. But, I am also the kind of person who wants the best image quality. Do you think I would see a discernible difference if I were to say use a 3 prime set (25 f/2, 55 1.8, and 85. 1.8) in image quality?? I will say that in the middle distance focus range I don’t do as much “pro” shots as I do at wide (real estate/architectural). But, I do like sharp and good contrast images. Would the ease of use with this one lens trump the proposed increase in image quality of those primes? I shoot on the a7riii. Thanks.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Are you wanting to shoot them at smaller apertures, or will you use the primes at larger apertures for some shots?

[@coreytomsrealtor3072]

Dustin Abbott both. I would imagine mostly wider however. I do more city scapes,land scapes, and architecture. Weight is not as much of a concern. Mostly just “look” micro contrast etc....

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's no doubt you will see an image quality improvement with the primes, but it will mostly be realized at wider apertures, as many zooms are quite good stopped down.

[@coreytomsrealtor3072]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Perfect. Exactly the insight I needed. Thank you!

[@ayman1035]

Hi Dustin, just a quick question, did you notice any degradation in quality with the OSS on ? and did you take the photos in the video while it was on or off ? Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Most all of the photos in the video were taken with it on, other than those shot on a tripod. I didn't notice a difference either way.

[@ayman1035]

Thanks Dustin

[@riteshthahryani]

The lens profile is inbuilt with the lens or do we have uptdate the lightroom version that supports the new lens..?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The profile is built in.

[@menthalA]

Thanks for making this review. We really needed that

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@brianknight7208]

I was taking some video with this lens the other day of my wife walking with the dog, and she commented on how her face looked big. I was wondering if the in-camera lens correction works for video as well as photos.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes, but any wide angle shot will have some perspective distortion (keystoning) of subjects near the edge of the frame. No correct helps with that, as it is not an optical aberration. It's physics.

[@brianknight7208]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Good info. Thanks for the reply!

[@raineescoto25]

If i use this 24-105 on crop mode a7iii whats the mm?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Multiply the focal length by 1.5x, which is the crop factor on sony.

[@noxspector]

Thanks Dustin!! How would you compare image quality for this vs the Sigma version? I'm mainly a landscape shooter so it would be stopped down a few stops most of the time.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think they are roughly similar, with some give and take depending on the focal length.

[@6gwilliams]

noxspector, I used to own the Sigma 24-105mm f4 (for almost a year) and it was every bit as sharp and as great image quality as the Sony 24-105mm f4 that I own now. I wanted the hold focus button and lighter weight, so I switched back to the Sony Lens. But I have shot many thousands of photos with the Sigma 24-105mm f4 and it gave me outstanding image quality. It helped me make some pictures-of-a-lifetime that are keepers in my professional portfolio now. You will love it for landscapes. I made some stunning and great landscape images with the Sigma 24-105mm lens all across the US and in Europe last year.

[@MarcoZhang689]

finally a decent review on this lens!! been waiting for too long

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's funny how this lens is pretty much on all the reviewers a7R3 bodies that they've reviewed, but no one really reviews the lens.

[@MarcoZhang689]

Dustin Abbott exactly! thank you for your video! one more question. I plan to buy the a7r3, what lens should I get with it between the 24-70 GM or the 24-105?? I'm really hesitating. I do all kinds of photography.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't used the 24-70 GM yet (I've used a lot of different 24-70s, but I'm new to Sony).

[@DrTarekahmad]

Exactly! This is the only review i found on KZbin. Thanks and subscribed!

[@DrTarekahmad]

I was thinking exactly the same, but i decided to go with the 24-105 for many reasons. I think the extra 35mm is useful, plus it´s lighter and smaller. What really put me of the 24-70 though is that it´s not very sharp and it´s double the price of 24-105

[@nelsonkskim]

Which one would you get between this and tamrom 28-70 considering you have 1.4 primes?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I like the 28-75 for a few reasons.

[@greasyflight6609]

Thank you Sir....Your reviews are outstanding.

[@shawndean100]

Mr Abott, Tamron 28-75 or Sony FE 24-105? Which one should I buy? I got FE28 F2.0, 50F1.4ZA & 85F1.8.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would personally choose the Tamron, as I value the sharper IQ (at least center of the frame) and wide maximum aperture.

[@shawndean100]

Dustin Abbott thanks a lot

[@jrprophotography5961]

Thanks for the review. Quick one: how this 24-105 4.0 compares to the very expensive very heavy 24-70 2.8 GM ? Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't yet used that lens, so I can't comment.

[@6gwilliams]

As a Sony user with both G-Master and G OSS Sony lenses, I will give you what I have found. G-Master lenses are their best optically, made to resolve up to a 100 megapixel sensor, so basically they are future-proof. Also to earn the G-Master tag these lenses have to have (in their internal optical lens design) the most correction for chromatic aberration and barrel distortion. Whereas lens profiles within the camera's processing software and also in computer imaging software (like Photoshop,Lightroom, Capture One,Affinity) takes care of this lens correction after the shot is taken. G OSS lenses like this 24-105mm (which I own) may have virtually equal image quality as their more expense G-Master lenses at any given focal length, but just not as much internal correction. FYI , I have two Sony G-Master lenses, the 85mm f1.4, and the 70-200mm f2.8. , both kinda pricey. Many folks prefer the Sony 85mm f1.8 and the 70-200mm f4 as excellent, more affordable, and lighter weight alternatives. Other Sony glass I have includes the G 18-105mm f4 (APS-C) lens, and full-frame FE 28mm f2. My advice as a pro would be that if you are only buying one, the 24-105 f4 G or the 24-70 2.8 G-Master, your money is better spent on the longer focal length range of the 24-105. My 24-105mm f4 stays on my camera more than any other lens, especially when traveling and out in the field. F4 is fine for the great sensors on modern cameras, still good enough for blurred backgrounds .

[@kietlu8953]

I totally agree with Gerald's statement because I have the same experience. I owned the 24-70 f2.8 GM and sold it because it was not that impressive. However, the 24-105 f4 is quicker in AF and sharper.

[@leroyjones769]

Gerald Williams ...that was awesome thank you

[@6gwilliams]

Leroy, my pleasure to join in this discussion.

[@filmzfilmz]

If you can remember dose this lens have a 3d effect like the prime 50mm f1.4

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Look at the photos in the image gallery; that’s the best way to determine if the photos have the look you want.

[@thatchinaboi]

How bad is the focus breathing? Can I use this lens for cinematic focus pulls?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I can't recall if I tested that, and the lens is back to Sony. Sorry

[@thatchinaboi]

Dustin Abbott Thanks for your prompt and honest reply.

[@RakeshVigVlogs]

Please suggest i want to buy new sony a7iii and I'm confused in lens which one to buy from these two.. Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or sony 24-105 f4

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That depends on your needs. Do you need the wider aperture or the bigger focal range more?

[@cactustweeter2890]

Have you had a chance to use the Sony FE 24-70 f/2.8 GM with the a7r iii? If not, will you be doing that review?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't yet, but probably somewhere down the road. I can't start doing Sony reviews exclusively, so it may take a while before I can fit it in.

[@shawndean100]

Tamron has focus issue. If the image quality of FE 24-105 is better than the Tamron, I really like the focal range. For low light, I will switch to prime lens. Mr. Abott, do you think 24-105 is as sharp as 24-70 GM? Some reviewers asserted so.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The Tamron doesn't really have a focus issue. I have not been able to make the "focus issue" occur even trying to make it happen. The IQ of the 24-105 isn't better than the Tamron at wide apertures. Stopped down I think it may have better corner performance.

[@shawndean100]

Dustin Abbott Thank you for your professional advice. I will get Tamron!

[@nadeemafzal8984]

An absolute brilliant review (once again) - purchased !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Enjoy!

[@artyomoh63]

Great video as always!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you!

[@vettepwr23]

Have you tried this the A7rii? If so, how does it work on that camera body?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't used it on an a7r2 - only III

[@analienundercover8207]

i love watching your reviews … they are so perfect about every aspect of lenses… specially about bokeh and ca and rendering which is hard to correct in videography

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to be a help

[@RY4Nnn.]

Thank you for this great review!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@johnchan485]

Quality review, please keep going!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Will do, thanks.

[@yorgohoebeke]

Would you recommend the Tamron 28-75 2.8 or this Sony FE 24-105 ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's not a wrong choice there, but rather a right choice for your needs. I love the Tamron, myself, but I value the faster aperture over the broader focal length. The opposite may be true for you.

[@yorgohoebeke]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your fast answer. I might opt for the Tamron. It looks also sharper than the Sony 24-105 and is cheaper. To be honest, I have a Sony a7riii and used it mostly with vintage glass (it's amazing) and Sony aps-c 18-105. I am looking to buy my first FF glass and hesitating which one to buy without becoming bankrupt

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I use the Tamron all the time. It's so useful!

[@yitzchallevi8208]

Are you still loving the A7riii vs the Canon 5div, or are you having second thoughts? I spent a day with the 5div using my Canon 35mm 1.4L lens and was really enchanted again with Canon... though I still enjoy the Sony. My problem with the Sony, though, is just that the lenses don't seem to have the same quality as the Canon lenses I've used over the years. Shalom rev.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This is less a competition for me, as I plan to use both bodies. Having a 5DIV/a7R3 + 80D/a6500 gives me the flexibility to do a lot of different kinds of reviews. I do agree that Canon has the best lens selection. The 5DIV + 35L II combination is a beautiful one.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

P.S. Shalom to you, my friend.

[@RickMentore]

Hello DA, I am considering buying this lens or the Sigma 24-70 f2.8. I am a landscape photographer, I have a Sony 70-200mm f/2.8, size and price are not too much of a factor. Really, the only factor I am considering is image quality. Given those factors, which one would you recommend for Landscape? I appreciate your reviews and just want to say your movies are a service to photographers.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would go with the Sigma, I think. It's got more punch.

[@RickMentore]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you kind Sir, I appreciate your prompt response. I will get the Sigma.

[@carlsmith5013]

hi Dustin, thankyou for your review, I have this lens and it is my go-to lens for travel and walk around, outdoor events etc. However I am considering trading for the new Tamron 35-150 for it's better low light performance and improved image quality. I am concerned about the additional weight when travelling though. Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is heavier, for sure, but the Tamron is a very special lens.

[@carlsmith5013]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I think I have my answer! 😉 Thanks for taking the time Dustin. 👍

[@sendog5]

Very nice review! If I shoot landscapes what would be the optimal aperture value to get the sharpest image before defraction hits? What‘s the lens‘ sweetspot?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Usually around F8

[@sendog5]

Thank you very much for your fast answer and the hard work you put into your reviews! Your doing a great job! Subscribed :)

[@town3]

Sure glad you have some Sony gear these days. Great review Dustin keep them coming

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My hope is to cover both brands moving ahead.

[@town3]

Sounds like a smart move Dustin. Thanks again and Have a great day

[@speecher1959]

I sure hope that you do! I'm a Canon Boy with a much-loved lens line-up and by the time I could afford to change systems, Canon will likely look very different (I'm sure there are some who say that's impossible.). Meanwhile, I do like to see what the competition is up to.

[@KsMontoya]

Thank you for the excellent review on this lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@pieromonteverde3169]

Worth comparing against the Sony 16-35mm f2.8. It seems to me that both IQ is comparable at landscape friendly apertures. Both sort of soft in the far corners.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't used that lens yet, but if it is kind of soft in the corners, that's not fantastic.

[@pieromonteverde3169]

Dustin Abbott I’d say that it’s is not sharper in the corners compared to the 24-105, but I’d look for validation of my results.

[@njrtech]

Piero Monteverde not even close. Own both... 16-35 2.8 GM kills this lense and it’s a BIG difference in sharpness, rendering

[@pieromonteverde3169]

@@njrtech I also own both. Do you see that difference at f56 to f8? I don't see a big one, even at 3:1. But I prefer always the faster lenses for rendering and overall better quality.

[@owelnote3702]

thanks a lot sir for this review , may I ask for your opinion considering I'm on budget , I do love canon because the menu is very easy and fast changing settings and I'm looking for Full frame sensor it's good in high ISO + it's easier to adapt lenses , I like the canon 6D 24-105 4 L but it's still high price in my country Germany and I found A7 28-70 kit for much less 999 euros , so do you think it's better choice for me my dad have arsonal of legacy lenses mamya medium format and canon FD line and more , so I'm wondering between easy to use canon and ability to mount all EF by default or I should go with sony and using adapters or reducer to be able using medium format lenses ? I'm sorry for these many lines and thanks in advance , kind regards .

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't personally tried use medium format lenses, so I don't know how well that works. The 28-70mm lens is not very good.

[@nagol5178]

I have to disagree a little bit Dustin. I know the numbers and test that have been done, however, I still have photos saved from when I owned the Sony A7R, one of the lenses I had was the 28-70mm, I also had the Zeiss 55mm and Zeiss 16-35, this was before Sony even had a 24-70 FE lens. The photos I have with the A7R combine with the 28-70mm are MUCH sharper and pretty much blow away my Canon 6D with 24-105 F/4 attached. I guess the higher resolution sensor and no AA filter may make up for the 28-70mm not being the best lens in the world but on a Sony body it's certainly sharper than the 24-105 F/4 Canon. The same can be said about the Zeiss 16-35 F/4 OSS, DXOMark doesn't score it very high but that lens on a A7R yields some incredible results.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

When I used it on a a7R2 I was not particularly impressed, but that was only for several weeks (and the other lens I was reviewing was the exceptional Zeiss Batis 135mm f/2.8)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Remember too that you used the lens on a 24 MP sensor. A 42 MP sensor isn't nearly as kind to it.

[@nagol5178]

No I ran it on a 36 Megapixel sensor, I didn't have the Sony A7, I had the A7R. The original had the D810 sensor.

[@christianzoror4301]

Nice job here. Very nice review. The creamy bokeh is fantastic for me and remind me minolta beercan 70-210/4 bokeh. The general rendering is good but I'm surprised by how extensive the barrel and pincushion distortions are, and the ghost flares are too strong for a lens with the latest possible coatings. But for a general purpose lens it's there with great results. Thanks again for this extensive review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@oriomenoni7651]

I consider the lack of the power zoom button in this lens a serious limitation to its value. One of the reasons I switched from Canon to Sony was the video features of Sony cameras. However, only the E-mount 18-105 aps-c lens offers the power zoom button, aside from the cine lenses that is. This is disappointing, as I shoot weddings in the fusion style and video has become a part of my workflow.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Powerzoom lenses have never seemed to really catch on. I haven't heard of many people buying the powerzoom accessory for Canon since they launched one last year.

[@oriomenoni7651]

Indeed. But Canon's approach is more split (photography vs. videography) whereas Sony's approach is more mixed.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's true.

[@oriomenoni7651]

Like anything, you have to use it with a grain of salt. Panning too makes the audience dizzy if you pan all shots ;)

[@kunalmarjadi]

Have you done a review of the Sony 24-70 f2.8???

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No, though I might try to bring one in to compare with the new Tamron 28-75 next month.

[@JessDemant]

Great review! I have this lens and agree with your rating of it. So all in all, I'm a happy owner of this lens :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Enjoy it!

[@mike_MKvipPhoto]

Thanks for the - like always - honest review, Dustin. 'not too bad a performance' doesn't really cut it at that pricepoint.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

As I said, this is the best 24-105mm that I've reviewed, but the nature of 24-105mm lenses is that there are some compromises involved.

[@mike_MKvipPhoto]

Dustin Abbott: sure there are compromises to be made, but I like optical corrections to take place in my lenses, not in software, so I was very disappointed when I saw that image w/o lens correction applied. It looks just like the APS-C 4/18~105mm G which I used to own - but that lens costs only 500€, and at that price point lens profile corrections are acceptable. Usually I prefer ultrafast primes, but I use the Sigma 4/24~105 Art as a walkaround lens on my a7III www.flickr.com/photos/mike-mkvip/40866023852 and it is optically far superior w/o the need of any lens profiles - and it is amazingly sharp already wide open. That's the second reason why I refered to the price point of the SONY. Oh, and btw: the Sigma w/ the Metabones Mark IV focuses perfectly on the a7III and the a6500 - including fast and precise eye-AF in AF-C, as I detailed here: www.flickr.com/groups/canon_lens_on_sony_e-mount/discuss/72157672950643686/#comment72157692886713941 Keep on rockin' and telling it how it is, Dustin - I love your unbiased reviews :-)

[@pawelmod3292]

Hello to everyone who is watching that video in 2020, when Sony 24 105 competes with Sigma 24-70 2.8 or Tamron 28-75 2.8 There is so many review and tests so I will not focus on quality of the lens and stills/videos it delivers. But you need to be aware that the prices these days drops significantly, and I would say it doesn't cost a premium any more. Situation in Europe: - official Sony EU price: 1350 Euro - regular price in the store: 1199 Euro - special price in the store: 999 Euro - cashback: -100 Euro Your final price for the lens: 899 Euro !!! In my opinion, for that price that lens is fully worth it. And I'm happy to enjoy it for a couple of days :-) Thank you Dustin for this and all the other reviews - it is very, very helpful, especially if your budget is limited and you must/need to aim into optimal lens for you needs (I am not a pro so basically you are limiting number of lenses you are using). Best regards and stay safe! PS: main reason to buy that lens is that I have decided not wait any more for Sigma 70-200 2.8 for Sony FE any more. I have decided to use combo Sony 24-105g and Sigma 100-400 DN instead of combo Sigma 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. Ii is a more lightweight package with 2 times more reach ;-)

[@LauraJohnson23sVideos]

A great review as always Dustin, will you be able to do a review on the 18-135 at all?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I plan to, but in the process of adding the a7R3 there is so much ground to cover.

[@benjaminbrosdau1626]

In today's age where autocorrection in software is commonplace, lens designers are no longer forced to rely on physical size to to reduce the effects of heavy vignetting for example. In fact a lens may be underdesigned on purpose - thus achieving a smaller physical size - which in turn creates a heavy vignetting most notable on the wideangle side. Having a lot of barrel distortion on top of that works in favor of the designers since the autocorrection moves the heavily vignetted corners out of the frame.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would definitely say that Sony's strategy on everything save their G Master lenses includes that hybrid approach.

[@ofirk60]

Love your videos !!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you!

[@acme9538]

Dustin, I just thought of something funny, & thought you might get a chuckle. I do masonry work . . . I've seen some block walls that I CERTAINLY don't think would be appropriate for lens testing! LOL . . . Let's just say the installer perhaps forgot his level that day ! LOL. Anyways, great review as always. Helped me make an educated decision. Thanks again.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's true. I've got a couple of masons in the church I pastor, and fortunately they are both good

[@kietlu8953]

Another great review!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you!

[@soundslikewater]

Thanks for making this 🙏🏻

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@bmkq2007]

nice review, but what about focus breathing? is there any?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There are two different types of focus breathing (one for video, one for stills). Which do you refer to?

[@bmkq2007]

Dustin Abbott for stills? I'm sure it's breathing for video. but if the breathing exist for still, its for video also applies?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Focus breathing for video refers to the size of objects changing with focus (they are often larger when defocused and smaller when focused if the lens "focus breathes"). Lenses that don't breathe are preferred. Focus breathing for stills refers to a lens behaving as shorter than its focal length at close focus distances. I didn't see a lot of focus breathing in the latter sense with the lens.

[@bmkq2007]

Thanks Dustin, since you have reviewed a lot of lenses, have you came across a wide angle lens that doesn't have a focus breathing in stills mode. I usually take landscape photographs and started to make focus stacking, ive noticed breathing and although you can beat this in Photoshop, it would be nice to know if there is a solid lens that have free breathing. Or if possible make it into one of your beautiful videos so we all can benefit from it. Again thank you dear

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid that I've moved on from this lens, as I have a lot of demands on my time. I'll keep your suggestion in mind, though.

[@themartian1]

Dustin, thanks for the comprehensive review! Will you be looking into the sony 16-35 f4, f2.8 and 12-24 f4?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Maybe at some point, though doing reviews of existing lenses will take time as there are so many new lenses to cover (I've got 7 at the moment!!)

[@michaelespeland]

I love this lens! So versatile, with good results across the board

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's the best of the 24-105s I've tested or used.

[@IGF-en7gn]

Great video, thanks 👍

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome

[@noehernadez]

Thanks Dustin for this review I’m getting this baby tomorrow

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Enjoy the lens.

[@fantomfoto]

Dustin, would you say the new Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is sharper corner to corner than the Sony? I'm mostly a landscape shooter but occasionally shoot concerts so f/2.8 is appealing but my main concern would be stopping down to f/5.6 or f/8 and if there's a sharpness difference. Shooting on an A7R3.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't think there would be a major difference between either lens when shooting at smaller apertures. Wide open (at 24mm) the Sony is sharper in the corners but has less contrast.

[@MyFrenchTube]

Thk you for this review... Someone try this lens on the Sony alpha 7 II?

[@dariusben6106]

works awesome!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for chiming in, Darius. I hadn't tested that combo.

[@dariusben6106]

I’ve had it a couple weeks before a7iii was released and of course AF is slower but it’s still a great combo which I can recommend

[@MyFrenchTube]

@@dariusben6106 I have this combo since 2 weeks and I can say now that Alpha 7 II + 24-105 give nice shoots, great! 👍

[@sayyar9]

So... As a sharpness & in general using.. which one do you prefer? sony 24-105mm or Zeiss 24-70mm?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't used the 24-70mm yet. What I can say (from a Canon perspective), is that I ended up dropping the 24-105 for a good 24-70 because the wider aperture was more useful to me than more zoom range.

[@KemFronabarger]

Excellent review of one of my favorite lenses. It is balanced and accurate, both when discussing the strengths and the weaknesses of the lens. Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@KeyLimeyPie222]

THANK YOU! I have been looking for a good review of this lens! I was worried about those corners at 24mm, but I'm glad to see the distortion correction fixes it :) Of course I have Canon and Sigma prime lenses, but I wanted a nice, versatile zoom (with native mount for AF ) :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a very versatile tool.

[@andrewdinh5428]

Is it worth to get this lens? I already have 28mm F2.0 and 85mm F1.8

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's really only a question you can answer. The zoom brings versatility, but it won't be an improvement optically.

[@Fleet42]

Which lens do you think is optically better this or the Tamron 28-75?

[@KlNGSlNGH]

Would you say this is an all in one lens. Something I can take on a trip and not have to keep switching lenses.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Exactly

[@baianchen2940]

Thanks for the great review! Could you please do a comparison with the Sony 24-70 F4?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm sorry, but the lens has already gone back to Sony.

[@subirthapa8542]

Nice Review Dustin , I also think its better than the Canon 24-105 IS II .

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That lens underwhelmed me.

[@putteg1958]

Nice review. Gonna buy it

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Enjoy!

[@anulearntech]

I would really really love to see you do a review of the 24-240 while comparing it with this 24-240 gem. Even today its a matter of debate among newcomers to sony lineup, whether to go for the 24-240 or 24-105. Now I know that the IQ isnt comparable or consistent like the f4, but from all reviews I've seen and read, all suggest that it gives its best performance from ~27mm to 110mm competing quite well with the 24-105 at same apertures. IQ then dips from 120 to 200, and recovers some what at 240. In fact some say it bests the 24-70 zeiss at same f stop. Although its considered a non pro lens its surprisingly used by quite a bit video makers, and also some pro photographers who claim that it enabled rhem to get the shot when there was no time to change lenses. Also this lens is known to have a lot of inconsistencies from sample to sample - sample variation. Thanks, and I wish a happy new year to you and your family. !!

[@mc2efx]

I know Canadian snow when u see it... Where in canuk country are you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Ontario!

[@mc2efx]

Dustin Abbott great.. Hopefully you are in the toronto area and can show a grasshopper a thing or two about photography

[@howardkahn4330]

I own Sigma's version, much cheaper and I find it as Sharpe. or sharper....but I do wish my 24-105 was a f2.8 as to avoid carrying a flash.......My copy is for Sony "A" frame used on Sony SLT camera bodies, Sony a99/2 and a77/2.....Not into the "E" frame

[@aklaasvandalen207]

Without correction-profiles this is not a very good lens. That is what I see. Am I right? Is this lens after correction beter than Sigma or Canon on the same camera? I know how important correction-profiles are, I use DXO and ACR. I think after correction the differences are marginal???

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't shot the Sigma. The Canon has more CA and is bit less sharp. Otherwise there is little difference.

[@aklaasvandalen207]

When digital corrections are important to compare lenses than other things are also important to judge a lens. In fact you judge a result and not a lens. In DxO there is a camera sensor correction and CA and fringing are pretty well corrected. So it is possible to get almost the same results with different lenses. The Sony lens is a good lens thanks to the corrections, but the other lenses you mentioned are good as well thanks to a optimal workflow.

[@leroyjones769]

MAN you tell it like it is... THANK YOU!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@vma1234]

Dustin. Thanks for another 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? Is it better to get the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? I only have budget for 1 zoom len. Thanks for your advice.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I love the Tamron 28-75 and use it on my channel all the time. The 24-105 is a good option, too, though I’m not sure it is worth the price premium over the Tamron

[@vma1234]

Dustin, Thanks for sharing your insight! It’s helpful to learn from you who actually use the product. I just need to decide whether I prefer the f stop or the zoom range.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's exactly right.

[@Garrythegoat1]

Review the 16-35gm

[@igorhajjar]

Great review! Good job.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@bobvila1010]

Great video! I'm looking to buy a A7iii. If my wide-angle woud be a Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM, what will be your recommandation for my second lens: Tamron 28-78mm F2.8 or the lens that you review in this post Sony FE 24-105 F4. Many thanks and continue please to provide again great video!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I personally added the 28-75 and love it. I prefer a faster aperture, myself, and the Tamron’s great magnification figures make it even more versatile. I actually use it to film a lot of my video segments because the focus is so good.

[@bobvila1010]

Thanks Dustin for your quick response. Just to make sur I understand, in addition of the 16-35mm GM, you prefered the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 over the Sony 24-105 F4? merci!!

[@marc6652]

Thank's for yours videos, all very interesting. I bought this lens as a "all-in-one" lens for holidays few weeks ago. That's a very versatile lens and very useful on travel. But it's also very far from my 55 f:1.8 or 135 f:2.8 Zeiss in terms of image quality. I'm a little disappointed...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's the nature of lenses with such a wide focal range - they are only so good optically. You trade convenience for IQ.

[@pematamang9268]

Vignette is easy to correct for photography not for videography..

[@MNanabhai]

Hey Dustin, Love your reviews. You are easily top reviewer in KZbin. I need your help. I am a real estate photographer and have been using Nikon D7200 + Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, I am planning to buy Sony A7r3 and confused with wide angle lens to buy. I have shortlisted 3 lens 1. Sony Zeus’s 16-35 f/4 2. Laowa 12mm zero D f/2.8 3. Laowa 15mm zero Df/2 The easy one would have been Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 GM but it is out of my budget. Can you pls help me choose. I usually shoot at f/8 , f11 for real estate and hotel.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Unfortunately I haven't used the Sony, so I can't comment on that. If real estate is your priority, though, then either of the Laowa options will give you less distortion. The 12mm is your best bet, as you can crop in tighter but in smaller rooms will probably need the extra width.

[@ZOB4]

I really like this lens, I use it frequently with my A7c and it consistently produces excellent results. It's become my go-to set up for hiking and exploring.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a very versatile focal length.

[@cesarebonazza]

Very professional

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@adibonts]

subscribed!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks!

[@braunshugar1]

I subscribed as well . . This is the vid that did it for me after watching quite a few of your reviews . .

[@alexgpanda2012]

Thanks for the video, really useful. Could you do another review of this lens on a camera with less megapixels? I feel like 40+ megapixels will make any lens have amazing details.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid the lens has already gone back to Sony.

[@PeZi3000]

Your "Sharpness test" at the brick wall doesn't consider the field curvature and therefore can't tell anything about corner sharpness! But I'm sure you already know that and don't need a "beginner" like me to tell you that ;-)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You must not have watched the whole episode, as there is also an infinity test included with a landscape scene. By the way, the wall actually shows field curvature better than infinity does. If you focus on corners and they are sharp while not sharp when focused at center, you can easily detect field curvature.

[@zyxyuv1650]

Please also test the stabilization in video episode.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'll show some handheld video footage in my next episode - which covers the a7r3 video performance.

[@MichaelLaing71]

Sorry about that, My post was meant to be posted on Tony and Chelsea Northrop's 85mm review for Nikon and some how it ended up here. Someone was complaining that they were not reviewing the Canon 85mm f1.4, so I clicked on here to get a link to your youtube page, so they could find your review of the Canon 85mm f/1.4. Somehow, my other comment, ended up on here though. Not sure how that happened. :(. And stupidly I deleted the comment before I copied it, so now I have to re-writed it out. I think my brain cell has gone to sleep today.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No problem.

[@Taykorjg]

"I'll render a final verdict" Nice

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

:)