This particular one was shot with FE24-105mm f4G OSS on a A7R2
I have been debating against this so-called convenient zoom again. I really want to sell it.
I have bought it 5 times and sold it 4 times. I think my 4th copy was the best copy , the current one the 5th copy is a bit worse in the wide end than the previous one, but it seems a bit better in the long end of it.
The FE24-105mm f4G is just an OK kind lens in my humble opinion after tested a several copies of it, but it is immensely popular here and its resell value is still very good.
I could sell it without much loss every time I sold it. I have bought it 4 times and sold it 3 times, but I have lost almost nothing on it. I think it is amazing.
I know the GM is a bit better optically as I have had a few copies of both in many times since about 2017. But the GM is only better in the wide range of their overlapping range. In fact, the f4G is a bit better from 50 mm and on, this may surprise you as it surprised me but the FE24-70mm f2.8GM is only very good and a bit better than the FE24-105mm f4G in the range of 24-45mm or so.
In any case most of reviews on these zooms are useless as they only test one copy of each and call it a day.
Seriously, the FE16-35mm GM, the FE24-105mm f4G and FE24-70mm f2.8GM are the kind of lenses you must test them yourself to know if it is for you or not......nothing else than your OWN experience tells anything meaningful about them.
Reviews are useless except the LensRentals ones, and most of reviewers are extremely biased and opinionated and always favor their kinds of lenses for their kinds of needs(they do not know what our needs are any way).
So just be it and better ignore so-called experts who do only care about extreme corner resolution or meaninglessly small optical quality differences in a lab , while dismissing anything about real life practicality or usability of lenses they say they test.
I do not mind subjective tests, but what really makes me really annoyed is that they call themselves OBJECTIVE or honest reviewers but they are so subjective and opinionated in reality.
It is really annoying.
The prime snobbery --prime vs zoom is it even a dilemma ?(updated 2)
There are a lot of prime snobs mocking zooms or any one prefer or also use zooms in addition to their primes in any FF lens forum these days. They always tell others how heavy and obnoxious zooms are when a thread like FE16-35mm f2.8GM vs a set of Voigtlander 15 plus Loxia 21 posted...but I find it really silly comparing the weight and size of a 16-35mm f2.8 zoom vs a set of dark 15 and 21 primes.
The Voigtlander 15 is a tiny lens sure but it is not as sharp as the FE16-35mm GM or the FE12-24mm f4G and that does not cover 12mm or 18mm or 21mm or 24mm or 28mm or 35mm. So it must be lighter and tiny as it covers only one 15mm FL and it is a dark slow lens.......and it is even not very usably sharp at f4.5 wideopen. At f4.5, the FE16-35mm f2.8GM(a decent copy) is very sharp across the frame, it peaks at f5 or f5.6 but at f4 it is already very sharp(almost tack sharp). And even at f2.8 it is already sharp in the center, my current copy is actually very sharp at f2.8 especially from 18 to 28 range.
So in case of the Voigtlander 15 vs the FE16-35GM the zoom has actually over 3 stops speed advantage in practice.
Also, we have to admit there are many situations in which changing lenses often, or zooming with our feet approach is not at all practical or even not possible, and for many of us the contents and the way it is framed are more important than absolute technical IQ in the edges and corners of FF.
So many of us see ourselves reaching for the set of the FE12-24f4G or the FE16-35mm f2.8GM and FE24-105mmf4G, the 24-105mm will be so convenient at the end that the other lenses will sit more in the shelf than they deserve.....but many types of works like events or shooting in crowded areas really requires a zoom like that although not many of us really want to always shoot with a so-called convenience zoom(I personally hate this term, it is really pejorative and kind of insulting).
While I actually prefer the manual primes( when it works fine for my needs ),I think using a set of FE12-24mm f4G or FE16-35mm GM plus FE24-105mm f4G is nothing bad or negative, let alone embarrassing, the term 'convenience zoom' should be used actually more positively than negatively, and that actually means it can capture those moments that no less-convenient zooms or primes can get due to difficulty of lens swapping or zooming with feet thing...
However, many prime snobs(I guess they are mostly old farts that do not actually shoot anything other than test chart or their cats) use the term convenient in a very derogatory or an insulting way and always slighting it as some sort of an embarrassing thing that no real photogs carry, let alone pros or any serious enthusiasts.
A very infamous arrogant gearhead that caused many name calling contests in many forums and now banned fro most of forums once said below:
"so it's all about convenience? eh?
That's one of the least arguments that come to my mind when I think of photography as a passion.
I could understand necessities that are derived from the subject I am photographing but not the other way around.
There is an old saying that when you hold a hammer in your hand everything looks like a nail - I guess that summarizes a zoom very well - no matter which zoom you have. My experiences is that primes force me more to zoom with my feet and search for the best possible shot. For me it's all about craftsmanship rather than convenience.
In case I want convenience I book business class when traveling
Please don't get me wrong - but it all depends on what you're shooting:
The 24-105 is a very tempting lens with the given optical quality - a fast prime like the GM 85 is still unbeatable IMHO
If you ask me whether photography is about convenience I can clearly answer that this is for me the wrong approach - when you start with conveniences aspects you might loose your best shots because you did not "zoom" with your feet and did not get close enough or with the best possible background . . ."
I say what a moron? And how rude and arrogant this guy can get.......Why does he always have to be so belittling zooms and always think using convenient zoom or whatever they call means being lazy?
In many shooting situations, it is not possible to zoom with your feet, if he is so serious about photography he should know it. How condescending he must be and his kind of people can get, how come can they be so arrogant and condescending ? Using a set of old school manual primes make them a better photog or person? Oh well......
This guy seems to think shooting with a premium prime on a FF makes him a photographer or a respected artist or special.......
Oh well, there are many times you can not use primes and/or it is not practical to shoot with a set of MF primes unless you can carry at least a several bodies of the same kind......
To me the term ‘Convenience’ borders on having negative connotations for those that are serious about creating good photographs. It's almost like saying, “He tried hard.”
Or maybe I’m just overly sensitive to criticism of my occasional sloth or diseased body. So let me rationalize a bit to make the case for my (and many others actually in real world) use of zooms in addition to my Zeiss and Sony primes.
Many times I can’t zoom with my feet because I’m spatially restricted but still need to frame the shot critically, or it is impossible to get to the point where I can actually get the shot with the best prime I do own at many occasions.....
For example: I’m standing on a rock in the middle of a river and shooting down the water and I cannot move my body due to the extreme situation.
In the above situation, it is literally impossible to shoot with a prime without compromising framing. Well, you may say then just shoot with the best prime you own and crop later on, yeah we hear this many times in a gearhead camera forums, but it does not produce any better image than shooting it at exactly the needed FL with a zoom, if not much worse.
Cropping a FF image to match an APS-C frame actually makes noise level and tonality worse than it is shot without cropping , in fact it is even worse than the best APS-C sensored camera because at pixel level, the current best FF is almost a stop worse than the best APS-C sensor camera, but its sensor surface is about 2.27X bigger than the sensor of the best APS-C in the Sony A6400 or the Fuji X-T3, so the A7R2,R3 and Nikon Z7 are a bit better at image level, but if you crop it a bit to make it close to as shot with a crop with using the same lens, then it will not be any better than the crop shot(actually worse).
So many times zooming with feet and crop the best prime image to get your actually desired composition is not practical, if not silly. Cropping out a lot of the frame makes any lens less sharp , even the best primes becomes less sharp than a decent zoom(without cropping) after cropping out a lot.
Oh also, in case of architecture interior images, there are many times we are always as far back as we can get to get the entire frame or even then it is not wide enough, in this case primes simply never work regardless of how sharp it is or well corrected it is.
So comparing the Batis18 vs Loxia 21 is ridiculous , comparing the 16-35mmGM vs the Loxia 21mm is even more ridiculous since the GM zoom can get many many shots that the boring 21mm prime can never even dream of getting ........because of the very limited not much useful focal length of it.
If you need a wider lens than the 21mm FOV, how sharp the Loxia 21 is meaningless, here you do need a wider lens that lets you frame the particular scene exactly the way you want to frame it. But even in this kind of scenario , those prime snobs (mostly Loxia or GM prime fanboys) say the Loxia 21mm f2.8 is still better lens than any zoom or the Batis 18mm f2.8.
But the real MTF tests at infinity says other wise, the Batis 18mm f2.8 is sharper than the Loxia 21mm f2.8 and even the FE16-35mm f2.8GM zoom is a bit sharper than the Loxia 21mm f2.8 that is (I consider and LensRentals seems to agree with me on this one) one of the most overrated lenses in Sony land.
Another scenario in which using a prime is almost impossible is you are shooting out of a bus or train or your car, you can not zoom with your feet because you can not move yourself, in this kind of scenario, you do need a some sort of zoom or zooms even if that might not be the sharpest lens you have in your bag.
And of course, even with preplanned, instantaneous one-time things happen where we need to capture the moment. React…compose…shoot…and very quickly.
For me a wide angle prime almost always doesn’t cut it cause I cannot swap my lens A to my lens B very quickly or it never allows the exact framing I want for the specific scene.
It is better to compromise a tiny bit of image sharpness in the far corners than framing or composition too much.
After all, the contents are more important than a bit of sharpness difference in most of cases, especially for those spontaneous interesting occurrences in a life event or trip or even an academic conference.
So, In many instances in many spontaneous occurring life events, various circumstances conspired to make a similar capture with a prime somewhat unlikely, at least in my case.
Sure your mileage may (and most likely does) vary. I understand and honor this. But none of this really has to do with ‘convenience’. It has to do with using what skill sets I can bring to the table to get the shot I envision matched with an appropriate photographic tool. This means a zoom lens the vast majority of time(even if I really dislike shooting with zoom). For me, ‘convenience’ is more related to a lighter or more compact kit, not to a FF like the A7R2 or A7R3 with a couple of zooms, in my case the FE12-24mm f4G or FE16-35mm f2.8GM plus FE24-105mm f4G.. Of course I use the best quality primes too but it is often used for very carefully planned shooting sessions or indoor studio or where I can change lenses safely.
And many times prime snobs always make the case against the GM zooms that they are too big to carry around or travel with, so they prefer the Loxia 21, the Voigtlander 15 f4.5, Sony FE24mm f1.4GM , Voigtlander 40mm f1.2(I think this one is another 'one of the most overrated' kind of lens), Sony 50mm f1.4Z, Voigtlander 65mmf2 APO, Sony FE85mm f1.4GM and Sony FE135mm f1.8GM......but this argument does not work because the set of those primes weigh much more than just two GM and G zooms set up....Or two GM and G zooms plus a couple of light primes like the excellent Sony FE85mm f1.8E plus Zeiss Batis 40mm f2CF...and most of cases the 24-70mmf2.8GM can replace all primes in its range(when needed to), it is that sharp and good for general event or landscape type of shooting, the old zooms were much less sharp than the similar generation primes, but the new GM and G zooms are no longer like that, they are sharp and very well made....with much more versatility and CONVENIENCE.
And that is why most of real working photogs use the set of GM series zooms rather than a set of amazing primes most of times. However, many forum denizens still think using zooms especially the FE24-105mm f4G or FE16-35mm f4ZA kind embarrassing or even a stigma or shame..............it is really pathetic and at the same time very interesting why they think it that way......
For me it's worth it, the FE24-105mm f4G is a superb practical tool and FE12-24mm f4G is a lens that I've always dreamed someone would eventually make it for me, and it became materialized. Sure Canon had the excellent EF11-22f4 L USM, but it is a huge lens and 3 times more expensive than the also excellent Sony FE12-24mm f4G...
I know many prime snobs say if you use FE24-105mmf4G on your FF, then you do not need a FF, you should get a set of GM primes or Loxia primes.....well we never say do not use primes or we do not like primes, farm from it, we just think belittling the zooms like the FE12-24mm f4G or the FE16-35mm f2.8GM or the FE24-105mmf4G and calling any of these as a convenience zoom in derogaratory ways is really unfair. I think we need both primes and zooms , belittling or mocking one in favor of the other is really narrow minded and stupid.
There are many types of shootings and sometimes changing lenses in the field is impossible.
And, sometimes without so-called convenience zooms, we may miss too many shots we need to get.
For many people, having an f/2.8 aperture across 46 different focal lengths that are selectable in milliseconds to achieve the perfect framing and maximizing the possibility of capturing a moment as they envisioned is more important than having the pinnacle of sharpness in the far corners of the frame. This is why I think the FE16-35mm f2.8GM is really worth the price and size. Sometimes it is the only one lens I really need.
Most of times for me, the FE16-35mm f2.8GM, the Loxia 25mm f2.4 , the Batis 40mm f2CF and the Batis 135 or 85mm are the only lenses I really need in my travel bag.
In my local areas , I sometimes add the FE12-24mm f4G or FE85mm f1.4GM to my basic 4 lens kit, but they are not very often needed.
Finally, I think so-called reviewers should write more about how the excellent fluorine coating works when they review these lenses that have the specific coating tech.
It is really important and it makes the lens very durable. So they should mention it. The FE16-35mm f2.8GM, the FE24mm f1.4GM , the FE24-105mm f4G have it (I do not know why but the FE24-70mm f2.8GM and FE85mm f1.4GM do not have that special tough coating).
To me , for a wide to mid range zoom , the fluorine coating , proper weather sealing and decent compact size are very important since I often use it in a mountain area or in a dusty city area.
The snow gets on the front element and without the fluorine coating it gets dirty easily and difficult to clean it until I get back to my hotel.
The main reason why, for me , theFE16-35mm f2.8GM plus the FE24-105mmf4G combo works better than the FE16-35mmf4ZA plus the FE24-70mm f2.8GM is the fluorine coating that the first combo has.
I think many people also find the coating amazing, but all the so-called reviewers dismiss or ignore it, and it is a real shame!
UPDATE : recently I decided never pre-order any lens any more, most of these new GM lenses are usually hyped to the point it truly becomes the 'cult of a lens ' status that no one can challenge or criticize it for at least a few months in any Sony lens related forum across the world......until the hype dies out , we cannot logically evaluate it for our actual needs.
The FE24mm f1.4 GM was the by far the most hyped E mount lens to become the truly indisputable lens of the year 2018 in every Sony E mount related forum online.
But after the dust settled, there are a few honest and I think accurate opinions on the lens popping out in some forums and I respect these brave posters that actually challenge to the cult of lens( a few leader figures of these lens forums).
I found the below comment in a big online Sony lens forum recently and I think I must thank to the poster for his incredibly honest and brave comment on that lens. It is really difficult and risky to challenge the big guys of these forums without having to induce meaningless name calling or forum bullying these days.
"As many already said , the 24mm GM is a very good lens and produces beautiful pictures, but it is not a flawless lens. I do not see a single picture here that matches my idea of "3D" (like some people and car images shot with the Sigma 20mm f1.4 found in Flickr Sigma forum). Also with Flickr I see many beautiful, but no outstanding pictures shot with the Sony 24mm GM lens.
(Similar to the new 135mm GM: Surely great sharpness, relatively small design, ..., good pictures, but nothing special, I have not seen a single outstanding picture in any of the 24mm f1.4GM related forum posts or Flickr groups).
Already after the first sample pictures with the 24mm GM it was discussed here that the pictures are nothing special, but that was lost in the general enthusiasm of some leader figures of this forum... So I could not say anything even remotely negative about it......
Quite a different story e.g. with the Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4 or the Batis 40mm f2CF, there are many pictures on the Internet that meet my idea of 3D and have something really special in my eyes.
The hype is huge on these new GMs and yes, they're good and modern lenses, but the results do not really impress me, shows nothing special.......
In addition, the lens hood does not fit properly if I want to use any of my round screw filters. This is really annoying and a big disadvantage, but nobody seems to notice this problem. Sometimes I wonder how practically relevant the many reviews really are on any lens..."
Well said,and I fully agreed , these new lenses especially GMs get hyped so much to become huge on these Sony lens forums, but none of these lenses (for me except the FE16-35mm GM) are truly outstanding or something I really need or even want...especially after the hype dies.
So it is extremely wise to wait at least a few months to see if it really works for you or me or any one for his or her specific needs.
Until the dust settles and the hype dies , we cannot honestly evaluate any super hyped cult figure lens( that I call cult of a lens).
Honestly it is really difficult to challenge any of cult figure lenses like the FE24mm f1.4GM.
But honestly I never saw any outstanding image captured with it in any lens related forum across the world.
UPDATE2: I am sure now many people appreciate those anti-FE24mm f1.4GM cult members and the long backordered status of that lens. As that has really brought back to the reality. They can now think about it more rationally if it is for them or not. I ordered my third copy of that lens but as my dealer said it won't be available another 5 months or so, it is really long back ordered...I immediately decided to cancel it and used the money for the FE50mm f1.4ZA(third time I bought this lens) and I think I finally got a great copy of that lens.
Now I kind of get it why those in FM and DPR forums are so excited about that magical 50mm so-called Zeiss.
It is a stunning lens, but I assume there is serious copy to copy quality variation with that particular design as my first copy of that lens was no where near as good as my last one I bought in last week. Sony should be ashamed about it.
