Zoom vs Primes: Sony 28-70mm f/2 GM vs 35mm f/1.4 GM & 50mm f/1.2 GM

[@leviolson]

Don't get me wrong... I ordered this lens (coming today via UPS!!), but I can definitely see the difference in the photos when you are using primes vs this lens. That said, I agree with you, clients won't know the difference. But I could slightly argue a tiny bit that they may not be able to spot the difference, but if you showed them side by sides of the zoom vs the primes, they would choose the primes most of the time. I think there is just a time and a place for both. For example... the close up shot of the bride's face. Her whole face wasn't in focus. It was either left eye or right eye, but not both when using the prime. BUT when using the f/2 zoom, you could get much closer to having her whole face (or at least both eyes) in focus. Another example... having the subject sandwiched in between foreground elements like bushes or flowers and the background, you get a more professional/desireable look when using the f/1.2 or 1.4 vs the 2. This is subjective of course, but I think the f/2 just isn't quite perfect for this when comparing to primes. Cost no object, get primes AND this lens. But if cost IS a concern, then get the zoom! As for me, I don't use primes (I mostly shoot sports photography), so its this 28-70 f/2 GM lens and the 70-200 f2.8 GMII.

[@denizahmet2299]

And it's not only that you will benefit from lower ISO with a faster prime for better quality , but that lower ISO means you are getting far more dynamic range from your sensor.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

True

[@flol_photography]

But is that bit dynamic range worth it to sacrifice throwing away the possibility to play around with perspective way more? I am not suer, I am searching for reasons that it is, but I have the feeling that I lie to me and should switch away from primes.

[@reynaldohernandez1425]

I use the Sony 50mm 1.2, 35mm, 24 GM, Sigma 85mm 1.4 and Tamron 35-150mm on weddings. If had to choose one just for versatile without compromising sharpness it would be the Tamron. Yes, it’s heavy but just a little bit more than the 50mm 1.2.

[@WhoIsJonHarris]

I got 100% on the quiz. But I'm mainly a video shooter in chaotic scenarios. I love the cinematic look of primes but I rarely have time to switch lenses ever. And I still miss things as a documentary style videographer. The run and gun setup with the 28-70 seems like a dream. For more predictable moments I'd go with the primes though. This was a great video and exactly what I was looking for.

[@tobiahtayo5149]

For me it's not just about cutting weight, but the speed of switching focal lengths. You get 4 pretty distinct looks from the lens - 28/35/50/70 all with a turn of the hands. Sometimes you dont even have time to swap bodies for confetti, or fast paced moments, so to be able to get options and work fast is great. Re still needing a second body - this is true- but as a 2 body shooter I take 3 cameras to weddings now. Maybe that can become 2? I plan to have a second camera in the shootbag with, either with no lens or a small 35mm f1.8 on it...

[@layed_black]

And again. He's again asking the questions I want to now. Best Sony content! Thank You!!

[@jesseroussellmusic]

we need more Sony-based channels on youtube. I have 1 in the works in the upcoming weeks called, "Alpha Nerd"

[@JasonMcMullen]

4:53 If you are comparing sharpness between the two lenses they should be shot at the same aperture, as sharpness changes with aperture

[@andreas1701d]

70% for me... but you're right: clients won't care about this. As someone who rarely uses flash though, every bit of extra light helps. That coupled with the size & weight difference is why I'd stick to my primes. I also like how using two specific focal lengths creates more of a visually balanced gallery, an underrated benefit of a two-prime setup for wedding shoots.

[@ab185]

The optical formula on the 28-70 f2 is different than Sony's traditional one. It's more Leica-esque with character and life-like rendering of OOF elements. To me that's the biggest deal and hopefully a sign of future things to come from Sony!

[@Revan89]

Damn, I only got 50% right. It was a toss up. But Im with you. I also use 2 cameras, so the lens, as great as it is, doesn't fit my setup. I think for videographers it makes much more sense or if you use a lot of complex off camera flash, it's easier to focus on adjusting flashes for one camera instead of two.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

Yup, 50% is what I would expect - guessing game :)

[@arturoavalos5939]

Nice, this video demostrates that 28-70 f2 was worth pre ordering. My couples would never be able to tell.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

Excited for you!

[@erg1450]

thanks Magic, this is useful for those on the fence to get the lens, (includes me), for my eyes, hard to see the difference between 1.4 and 2.0 , 1.2 is more noticeable, but I don't have 1.2s...just 1.4's GMs, so, this I a mute point for me ........ I don't do weddings, for my events I would always have the time to reach to my backpack for my second backup camera .........this I a hard decision .........I am leaning towards this zoom , the bokhe at 70 looks very good , hard to replicate with 50 ........having two cameras hanging on the side and having to swap, I always found a pain ......I may be getting too old

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

My pleasure! It’s a decision you have to make :) not easy, I know!

[@nightdonutstudio]

But also now your second camera can pair with a dramatic different focal length like 135mm prime or ultrawide.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

True... good point. But that won't save me if camera dies during for example exit and I have to deal with 135 being few steps away...

[@DavidStella]

@@MagicWeddingPhotographerthe likelihood of your camera dying in the middle of an exit is extremely low. And if a camera dies, you wouldn’t use the working camera with the 135mm lens, you swap the lenses if that happens 😂

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

@@DavidStella I’ve heard horror stories!!

[@willw6363]

I preordered although im a prime shooter who runs two cameras myself. Things like the first dance and quick sunset portraits would be so much easier if i can run my 35mm GM and this zoom at the same time

[@phuntshotenzin7934]

Hey Magic, how do I buy your Magic master collection from Australia? The currency ?

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

@@phuntshotenzin7934 hi! The currency in the store is USD, so master collection is 199$ until midnight tonight! DM me on Instagram if you need assistance!

[@gaetanomarrone1991]

Still think tamron 35 150 it's a betterr all around. I'm using it with 24 gm and i'm thinking to get the 50 1.2

[@nickwilliams5967]

Two different lenses, different benefits. Wouldn’t say better all around at all.

[@stefanmitterwallner9614]

That's exactly my kit for weddings and it works perfectly 👌🏻

[@lawyal]

Since its maximum aperture is not fixed, how do you use it? Can you ensure the use of the maximum aperture? What exposure mode do you use? Additionally, if you use the fixed exposure mode (M mode), can you rely on Auto ISO to achieve this kind of semi-automatic exposure? If you're using a flash, can the flash and Auto ISO work together to ensure the lowest possible ISO? Thanks.

[@stefanmitterwallner9614]

@@lawyal I only use M Mode and change the shutter speed or ISO according to the slight change in exposure for the different focal lenghts. I am very used to it and it works well for me. Never used flash for a wedding though, only available light.

[@lawyal]

@@stefanmitterwallner9614 thanks for answering. I use M for stage shows and street, where the lights are relatively fixed. But for wedding, do you measure the light everytime you move into a different room?

[@ste8ven]

I've been looking for a comparison like this to see if the zoom can replace the primes. Your video colors of yourself look great, what lens and camera are you using? Do you sell you color grading?

[@nawidmustaghni6111]

Can you please compare it to the Sigma 28-45 f1.8

[@TheTensecondz]

Sony should have done everything they could have to keep the 24mm short end even if shortening the long end to 60mm or make heavier and larger 24-70mm F2.0. Sony could have done it but probably decided not to in order to protect the sales of 24-70mm 2.8 GM sales.

[@jonoy4375]

Totally agreed. Wide end 24 is sometime essential for indoor event photography

[@LF1985]

I'm not professional, but primes all day for me. They are sharper (I'm sure 24, 35, 50 GMs are sharper at F2 than this zoom) but in this case it's a tip of the iceberg, they are all high-end expensive lenses so sharpness not a practical issue. Other factor is the speed, f1.2 over f2 is a huge difference. F2 means good separation (f2.8 is not enough for mid distances) but f 1.2 is the dreamy bokeh, also f1.4 is always better. Third thing is the size, this lens is huge, I've traded Sigma 35 f1.2 for 35GM despite I preferred Sigma for portraits because of the size. Zooms are excellent workhorses, but for artistic photography always primes for me, however I'm 35-50mm range guy, for wide angle and telephoto the story maybe different.

[@JasonPierceOfficial]

Great photos, beautiful lighting, and location!

[@ginoraas]

The Tamron 35-150 is still a better choise: is 2.2 till 60, and 2.8 at 150. 28 vs 35 is not so a clear battle. It costs less than half. No brainer.

[@Kliffot]

Not as sharp & clean as the Sony zoom but I agree. Idem for the Samyang even cheaper.

[@reynaldohernandez1425]

@Kliffot I use the Tamron and the Sony 50mm 1.2 which is probably the sharpest Sony lens out there and honestly the difference in sharpness is not that noticeable. At least my copy is pretty good.

[@ginoraas]

Agree ​@@reynaldohernandez1425

[@flol_photography]

80%, never thought I would only miss 2. Does this mean I am better of with primes? I did it on my laptop. Guess on my smartphone it would have been harder and on my 32 inch easier?

[@moodakdrone5201]

This Sony lens is versatile or just useful for mainly portraits

[@Clayspeed]

Great video! What lens are you filming the talking head video with? It seems like I can hear the lense rack focusing even though your mic isn’t mounted in the shoe mount.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

@@Clayspeed its 55/1.8 and its dead silent. It’s the mic in my hand creating the noises! Sorry about that, I’ll mount it on tripod next time

[@Clayspeed]

No worries! Just wanted to point it to help. I understand how important audio is.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

@@Clayspeed yeah I even installed special plugin to get rid of that but it sounded worse at the end of the day. Lesson learned :)

[@frankfeng2701]

12:30 Even with 28-70GM on the first body, the second body can still carry a 24GM or 20G.

[@Christellezphoto]

Such a great video, Magic!

[@kasixmc]

Great video mate 🔥📸 I prefer prime look and feel 🙌

[@eike.zender]

So beautiful ❤️ 😮 I am really curious about some 'basic' workflow elements of your work. how do you find your locations? Do you tend to come back to a few all-time favorites or always new locations? And how do you deal with not optimal weather? Or bad lighting conditions - do you only offer shootings besides midday sun? Would be cool to get a more in depth view of your business ❤

[@OLTYB]

U mnie 24-70 2.8 uzupełnia setup jasnych stałek. Ale przy dobrym świetle w reportażu, czy na parkiecie z lampami, daje niesamowitą uniwersalność i brak konieczności zmiany aparatu. Zwyczajnie skręcam zoom i bang. Ale gdybym miał 28-70 2.0, to na 100% byłoby to moje główne szkło + 50mm 1.4 na drugim body, właśnie do portretów. W quizie 60% 😅

[@andreas_holm]

Yay! Thanks for this video Mr M! 🙏🏻 40% right 😆

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

Boom, what are your thoughts brother?

[@andreas_holm]

I've ordered it! I'm tired of constantly switching cameras and lenses. 😊 I tried the 24-70, but the image quality felt different compared to primes. The 28-70 seems to be quite similar. Pairing the 28-70 with the 50 1.2 seems like a solid setup!

[@crowking76]

Percentage: 60%. I like this challange, IMO it would be not so hard if you knew actual focal length used [matching to primes of course] and here you can only guess it a bit by composition an estimating background compression. Anyway in the end, what counts is how the pictures look.. Greetz from homeland ;)

[@TaylorJacksonPhoto]

HI MAGIC

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

HI TAY TAY

[@arsunartel1786]

60%. The only thing that stops me from buying this lens is that I love primes in that focal range. I am not a pro and have never been a fan of the classic 24-70mm lenses. If I were a pro, I would be all over it, no doubt. It is amazing that a zoom lens fooled me that much in such a test. It clearly has an amazing performance. For my use, it can be a great one-lens as a compromise for travel. Even in that case, I might pick 16-35 GM ii along with 50mm GM 1.2 as a two-lens combo. 16-28mm would be a great range to cover and I wouldn't mind losing 20mm at the long end. However, that is just me and YMMV.

[@vergesslich82]

Several couples and photographers gave me the feedback lately that they didn't like the 50mm 1.2 portraits as they looked "too artifical". Remind me again why did I spend so much money for that GM prime then? ;-)

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

Oh wow! Interesting! That’s the first time hearing something like this for me and I use that 50/1.2 A LOT!

[@vergesslich82]

@@MagicWeddingPhotographer People don't know what's good for them ;-)

[@JD-eo6cp]

On photography forums and comments sections for photography videos it is easy to get the idea that it is always better to use a wider aperture for people photos but talking to non-photographers I think non-photographers do think you can have too much blur in a photo. And having been an enthuiastic photographer for about 20 years, the idea of always wanting to blur the background as much as possible has certainly worn off for me. There is a place for shots at settings like 50/1.2 and 85/1.2, of course, especially if there is quite a bit of distance from camera to subject, but I have come to appreciate that certainly by 85mm, I often prefer an aperture setting of f/2 or f/2.8 or even f/4 over a f/1.2 or f/1.4, because I often prefer the bokeh (yes really!) and the more gradual transition from in focus to out of focus. To me, the more gradual transition to in focus often makes the subject seem a natural part of a three dimensional scene shown in the image (while still allowing the subject to stand out) whiile a quick transition can leave the subject seeming stuck on in front of a background. Also, particularly when ground can be seen, a very quick transition from in focus (usualy under the subject's feet) to very blurred is often seems really unnatural and unappealing to me. YMMV of course, but I do think it is a mistake to assume that your audience is always going to prefer the shallowest depth of field / most blur possible in people photos.

[@jesseroussellmusic]

because I have the 50/1.2 GM, I can tell which image is not the 28-70GM every time. I'll certainly be picking up the 28-70GM though in the summer time along w/the α1ii

[@JosefFoti]

OK now, I'm a prime lens shooter but actually I only had 30 % in the quiz, so perhaps I'm ready to replace my primes with a zoom after all 😅

[@gamebuster800]

3:24 wow! And I thought my 1.2/50 was big!

[@pixbypatric]

Awesome!

[@khorfranky9619]

The prime lens got f1.2 is more better more background smooth and more frontground blur.......

[@MrUffizzi]

70%. I'd happily sacrifice a bit of blur for the flexibility it'd give me on a wedding day.

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

You’re leading scoreboard :)

[@PokyZz]

80% in 1 minute ^^ this lens gives great results and customers will never notice the difference

[@SailorCameron]

Why does my audio go from English to German 10 seconds in? 😅

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

Dang! Mine too… and I can I switch it to English… this is some new KZbin feature - auto translation but… why am I hearing German? Working on it..

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

ok it's back to normal, but looks like you can change the languages now I guess...

[@ilamo6178]

​@@MagicWeddingPhotographerif only Russian had been added, it would have been perfect)

[@Daniel_Zalman]

I think this zoom is wonderful for pro event shooters, but too heavy for casual use. For casual use, I'd still go with a 24-70 2.8 and maybe have a fast portrait prime in my bag.

[@LESLIE_Q]

if you take a text you can see the difference between Primes and Zoom

[@Stefan.Zimmermann]

I find the F1.4 very cheesy these days. It looks so artificial to plunge everything into complete blur. 90 per cent of the photos they showed with the f2 had more character, looked much more personal and professional. But as a photographer you have to be able to do that, because the background is no longer as unimportant as it was at f1.4. You suddenly have to incorporate the slightly less blur into the composition. Money and an extremely open aperture don't make good photos, any child can do that if you explain it briefly. Thx for this Video.

[@iamakkkshay]

Although Sony GM lenses have no 3D pop but still Primes have little more than zoom.

[@lucuslopez6866]

This explains why Sigma only made the a 28-45 1.8 and not 28-70 1.8

[@Leo-jd2ny]

I only got 40% right

[@LippiVan]

3/10 I really thought I got them all right. 😮

[@jonmold6574]

Nice, I got 2/10 ;) !!

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

NOT BAD JON! :)

[@muttishelfer9122]

50mm 1,2 for the win

[@SupermanG17]

Damn, I’m looking now at these Sony cameras and lenses, or even other brands, after switching to the Leica Q2 / Q3 43 it’s just a completely different world, guys. With Leica, you feel like you’re flying; it makes you more of a photographer, and you truly enjoy the shooting experience. With Sony 28-70 sure, it’s zoom ability , but this lens look massive! How can you enjoy shooting with so many kilograms on you during a full-day wedding?

[@filippom2935]

40%

[@oriomenoni7651]

This review is so stuffed with ads and promotions that I stopped watching it just a little past half the video. I really can't understand, if you're a successful wedding photographer, why do you feel the need to stuff your videos with unbearable loads of promotions? Just make one, like everybody else does, and it's more than enough, and let the clicks bring your video and revenues up. I found this so annoying that now I'm leaving without giving the thumb up (let alone subscribing). Really, I subscribed to KZbin Premium last week, and this video makes me feel as if I was still in the normal, non-paid tier, with all the annoying ads interrupting the view.

[@jaapvansplunter2517]

Too much advertising to be pleasant now. Content of the comparison: fine.

[@stharlingdr]

my score was 50% lol i sold my 24-70GM ii already and i preordered this lens

[@kifley19]

The 24-70mm 2.8 GM II has 24mm on the wide end is way lighter.

[@EthanHart-gu5rg]

@@kifley19 only 2.8 tho. f2 is a whole stop, very noticeable

[@msfototeam8957]

I got 50% ist very hard, for me as professionell

[@joaopaulo24816]

nota 8

[@gamemusic90]

4/10😅

[@RafaelCruz-w5k]

lol I scored 4

[@street666cleaner]

I got Sigma 28-45 1.8, even more close to primes

[@MagicWeddingPhotographer]

I tried it! It’s an amazing lens! Bit too short on long end for me, but beautiful!

[@erg1450]

I've done many tests with my GM 24, 35 and 50 1.4 primes at 1.4, 1.8, 2.0 and 2.8, in my experience, difference between 1.8 and 2.0 is minimal in terms of ISO and background separation (bokeh).....major difference is between 1.8 and 2.8 ........, if you take out the cost element from the equation, this 28-70 makes more sense to me (weight wise, the sigma is even heavier !) ......