Print Page | Close Window

Sigma 24-70m f2.8 vs Sigma 24-105 f4 A mount

Printed From: Dyxum.com
Category: Equipment forums
Forum Name: A-mount lenses
Forum Description: For A-mount lens discussions
URL: https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=137530
Printed Date: 14 July 2020 at 00:45


Topic: Sigma 24-70m f2.8 vs Sigma 24-105 f4 A mount
Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Subject: Sigma 24-70m f2.8 vs Sigma 24-105 f4 A mount
Date Posted: 20 December 2019 at 14:16
Hello people!

While I'm waiting to pickup my new A7RIV I'm going nuts about the corresponding lenses to enjoy it.

I already have a A850 with some glass which I expect to keep: Sony 50mm f14; Sony G 70-400 f4-5.6 SSM; Sony 85mm f2.8 SAM, KM 28-75mm f2.8 (Tamron later Sony), Sony 100mm f2.8 Macro; plus a few cheap M42 lenses and A mount APS gear which I'm going to sell.

BTW I still use film cameras for B/W, so those lenses have good use in my mINOLTA 7 ETC-

I am counting every dime left, and I need a good quality standard zoom for the new camera.

The decision is between a brand new native E mount Sony 24-105mm f4 or to buy a used Sigma 24-105 f4 for A mount + LA-EA3 or a used Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 IF EXG HSM + LA-EA3, which would save some good money anc would find use with my secondary camera and film equipment. Does the LA-EA3 induce flare? Does allow the latest AF wonders?

I shoot a lot of portraits and people, social events and urban landscape, both for work and personal projects. You can see some of my stuff at http://www.instagram.com/manuini - www.instagram.com/manuini (I'm refreshing my webpage, sorry).

Sorry for such a lenghty post!

Manuel from Buenos Aires



Replies:
Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 20 December 2019 at 14:29
Just get the native Sony 24-105mm. Its a very good lens and you will really appreciate its quality and weight savings on A7RIV.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: QuietOC
Date Posted: 20 December 2019 at 16:00
If you plan to use AF-C bursts, the Sony LA-EA adapters only AF at the slowest frame rate on the A7RIV. The EF or SA versions of Sigma Global Vision (i.e., post EX) lenses with the corresponding MC-11 don't have that limitation. They get all the native AF modes and even embedded lens profiles like native FE lenses.

However Sigma doesn't support the latest A-mount or E-mount stuff even with their native mirrorless offerings. The not quite yet available Sigma 24-70 DG DN Art FE lens doesn't support the native lens performance updates Sony made in 2016. The Sigma A-mount Art lenses don't support the native lens performance updates Sony made in 2011.

The SEL24105G is the most up-to-date FE normal zoom.

-------------
Sony A7III A6000 HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 22 December 2019 at 18:27
Thank you guys for your kind responses. It seems my money is going towards the Sony 24-105G.
One last question: is the Zeiss A mount 24-70mm f2.8 + LA-EA3 adapter a better combo?
I'm not into nature photography or sports, the slower burst rate suits me well.

!Gracias!


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 22 December 2019 at 19:29
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

Thank you guys for your kind responses. It seems my money is going towards the Sony 24-105G.
One last question: is the Zeiss A mount 24-70mm f2.8 + LA-EA3 adapter a better combo?
I'm not into nature photography or sports, the slower burst rate suits me well.

!Gracias!


You'd be better off with buying the new sigma ART 24-70mm f2.8 FE version which is priced rather nicely or the tamron 28-75mm f2.8 FE version.



-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: Miranda F
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 08:04
I generally find A-mount lenses which I enjoy using on A-mount cameras feel long and cumbersome when adapted to E-mount*. The Sigma 10-20mm, for exmaple, which is perfectly fine on the A58 but adapted via LA-EA2 just feels silly and wrong.
So despite my original intetions I'm gradually getting compact MF primes for E-mount. Latest two are the esxcellent (recently upgraded) Meike 35mm f1.7 and Samyang 12mm f2, both of which are great to use and have brought back much of the fun of photography.
But I guess I'm not in the best position to discuss AF performance with adapters ...

*Edit: I forgot to mention the Sony SAL85f2.8 which is still pretty light and small even when fitted to LA-EA1/3, like the other easy-choice primes, and the combo is stil smaller and lighter than most E-mount 85mm offerings, if that matters to you.

-------------
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 10:26
considering you could have got FE85/1.8 for £370 on offer last week doesn't make much sense to buy the SAL85/2.8.

There are very few a-mount glasses that are worth adapting and they are mostly telephotos that e-mount lack or don't have cheaper alternatives for. Even then you are better off adapting canon EF glass because Sony won't do a screw driven LA-EA5 which supports all the AF modes. And honestly MC-11 from sigma seems to be better supported than LA-EA adapters in terms of firmware updates. Pretty poor show by Sony IMO in terms of a-mount glass support but then there may not be much ££££ in it for them to care.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: addy landzaat
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 14:08
I did not think that was the point that Miranda was making, but as you are. The Sony A85/2.8 costs 240,- and you can get a LA-EA3 for 160,- making it 400,-. The Sony FE85/1.8 costs 650,-. So, it is much cheaper.

The support Sony gives us with the LA-EA3 is just fine - I would like a better screw mount option, but in general, it is fine. It is not a poor show by Sony IMHO. You simply expect to much.

I would get the FE85/1.8, it is a great lens if you're looking for a fast sort tele lens But it is all off topic.

@Manuel: Do I understand that you have the Sony A-mount 28-75/2.8 SAM? Just get the LA-EA3 and just use that one. I do not find lenses in this zoomrange useful (that is just me) and I have none for my A7r2. The Sony 24-105/2.8 seems to be a fine lens, but if you need/want the f/2.8 the Tamron seems the cheapest good option.

I do not know what lenses you use the most and for what, but did you consider some primes like the FE55/1.8 and FE85/1.8?

-------------
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 14:14
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

I did not think that was the point that Miranda was making, but as you are. The Sony A85/2.8 costs 240,- and you can get a LA-EA3 for 160,- making it 400,-. The Sony FE85/1.8 costs 650,-. So, it is much cheaper.

The support Sony gives us with the LA-EA3 is just fine - I would like a better screw mount option, but in general, it is fine. It is not a poor show by Sony IMHO. You simply expect to much.


please re-read what I have written. FE85/1.8 can be had much cheaper than your quoted price on the many number of occasions it has been on offer.

And that's your opinion. I only expect as much as what the competition offers i.e. canon.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 14:57
Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:

And that's your opinion. I only expect as much as what the competition offers i.e. canon.
Currently it's only one competitor (Canon) that does a bit better with adapters and as far as I know they don't have something as advanced as "real time AF" that the later A7's and A9 have. Even their Eye AF isn't as good and very "young". So you can't have it all in one camera/brand so there's always choices to make. To call something "bad" because it's not meeting your needs, but competition is lacking in other aspects is a bit selective judgement in my mind. My opinion vs. yours, no more or less

-------------
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/picture-size-for-posting_topic114856_post1379537.html#1379537 - see here


Posted By: Miranda F
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 20:19
considering you could have got FE85/1.8 for £370 on offer last week doesn't make much sense to buy the SAL85/2.8.[/QUOTE]

https://uk.webuy.com/product-detail?id=slenssonsal85f28a&categoryName=camera-lenses&superCatName=electronics&title=sony-sal85f28-85mm-f-2.8 - £105 from CEx in the UK . I think mine was less than that from LCE a year ago, s/h. I don't see much point in buying A-mount lenses new, and if you buy an adapter that can be shared between lenses.

Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:


There are very few a-mount glasses that are worth adapting and they are mostly telephotos that e-mount lack or don't have cheaper alternatives for. Even then you are better off adapting canon EF glass because Sony won't do a screw driven LA-EA5 which supports all the AF modes. And honestly MC-11 from sigma seems to be better supported than LA-EA adapters in terms of firmware updates. Pretty poor show by Sony IMO in terms of a-mount glass support but then there may not be much ££££ in it for them to care.

I think that judgement depends on the person adapting ...

-------------
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .


Posted By: addy landzaat
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 21:03
Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:

Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:

I did not think that was the point that Miranda was making, but as you are. The Sony A85/2.8 costs 240,- and you can get a LA-EA3 for 160,- making it 400,-. The Sony FE85/1.8 costs 650,-. So, it is much cheaper.

The support Sony gives us with the LA-EA3 is just fine - I would like a better screw mount option, but in general, it is fine. It is not a poor show by Sony IMHO. You simply expect to much.


please re-read what I have written. FE85/1.8 can be had much cheaper than your quoted price on the many number of occasions it has been on offer.

And that's your opinion. I only expect as much as what the competition offers i.e. canon.
I re-read it and it says the same thing as the first time I read it Yes, you probably found a place where they sold the FE85/1.8 for 370 GBP. What shop was it? Does the shop offer full (EU consumer protection) warranty? That is not a normal price and not one that is matched by any of the shops in The Netherlands or the shops I regularly check in the UK.

Comparing a one off price is useless, you should compare the normal prices.

-------------
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 21:19
Originally posted by addy landzaat addy landzaat wrote:


I re-read it and it says the same thing as the first time I read it Yes, you probably found a place where they sold the FE85/1.8 for 370 GBP. What shop was it? Does the shop offer full (EU consumer protection) warranty? That is not a normal price and not one that is matched by any of the shops in The Netherlands or the shops I regularly check in the UK.

Comparing a one off price is useless, you should compare the normal prices.


amazon, was on for £420 and there is £50 cashback on top at the moment in the UK. It's been on offer a fair few times recently, wouldn't be surprising if it was on offer again.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 21:26
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:



https://uk.webuy.com/product-detail?id=slenssonsal85f28a&categoryName=camera-lenses&superCatName=electronics&title=sony-sal85f28-85mm-f-2.8 - £105 from CEx in the UK . I think mine was less than that from LCE a year ago, s/h. I don't see much point in buying A-mount lenses new, and if you buy an adapter that can be shared between lenses.

I think that judgement depends on the person adapting ...


its also out of stock and will probably never be in stock

of course its their judgement because its their money. I have simply pointed out what I feel is prudent.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 21:35
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

Currently it's only one competitor (Canon) that does a bit better with adapters and as far as I know they don't have something as advanced as "real time AF" that the later A7's and A9 have. Even their Eye AF isn't as good and very "young". So you can't have it all in one camera/brand so there's always choices to make. To call something "bad" because it's not meeting your needs, but competition is lacking in other aspects is a bit selective judgement in my mind. My opinion vs. yours, no more or less


I was wondering when you'd pitch in

Well only one competitor is kinda 50% of the competitors really and other 50% being nikon.
panasonic don't really have much they can provide in terms of their previous legacy AF glass.

actually canon's AF with the latest update get pretty darn close to 3rd generation sonys. Not quite as good as 4th gen but at the pace they are moving I wouldn't surprised if the match or get close enough to Sony on their next bodies.

I do not understand why you keep trying to make it about my needs when I never really mention my needs. Its objectively bad in my opinion. if "bad" is good enough for you then great for you. just as A7 was once up on a time good enough for me. But I was never under the impression that A7 would be up there competing with the likes of DSLRs for AF, IQ or ergonomics or anything else. Though there was no real mirrorless competition for Sony so it was as good as it got on mirrorless.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 22:15
Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:

I do not understand why you keep trying to make it about my needs when I never really mention my needs.
If you call it "bad" and say you might move to Canon because of it, it obviously doesn't meet your need (or your standard). I can support your claim that one competitive brand is better re. adapters but that same brand has many areas it still needs to catch up both in AF as well as other aspects that my opinion is that Sony doesn't have to fear many people jumping ship at this moment.

-------------
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/picture-size-for-posting_topic114856_post1379537.html#1379537 - see here


Posted By: minolta_mutley
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 23:07
I can add to the discussion i've been using the 24-70 Sony Zeiss f2.8 a-mount 1st gen. with the LA-EA3 on a A7RII and it performed good enough for my needs.

I'm still thinking to buy a lens for my mc11. Any suggestions for a great affordable canon lens?


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 23 December 2019 at 23:15
Originally posted by pegelli pegelli wrote:

If you call it "bad" and say you might move to Canon because of it, it obviously doesn't meet your need (or your standard). I can support your claim that one competitive brand is better re. adapters but that same brand has many areas it still needs to catch up both in AF as well as other aspects that my opinion is that Sony doesn't have to fear many people jumping ship at this moment.


I think I said that in another thread in another context. Just as it not good to cross quote me, it's not good to assume my needs and standards because I haven't got many needs and almost no standards. My only need is for it to be fun. Remember not long ago I was shooting A7 when I could have been shooting many other bodies with better AF etc.

To put things in context Canon RF is the mostly likely system I'd switch to based on what I have seen for adapting cheaper tele-primes. It's not going to happen any time soon if at all.

p.s. if I am talking about my needs I generally reference it as such. Otherwise it's just my opinion on the matter rather than anything specific to me.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 03:52
Hi there!

@addy_landzaat I own the KM 28-75, served byscrewdriver motor. I wish I had the Sony 28-75 SAM! If so, I would buy the Zeiss 16-35 right away. Not such a bad lens, but I lose the AF on E mount, and when mounted on my A850 has a below average succes in well focused shots. Ah! but when it really nails the focus, it's outstanding.
As they said before, the best choice is the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Art for FE, but it seems we have to wait a few months or more to see it live.

Meanwhile, I just started playing with my Super Takumar SMC 35mm f3.5 and a cheap Helios 58mm f2 with an M42, but that belongs to another thread...


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 03:56
BTW, my A 85mm f2.8 has mostly replaced my 70-400G for portraits. Is light and nimble with very good results (I know, is far from being top notch).
I just want to see the results when mounted to my A7R4! Unique, I guess!


Posted By: Miranda F
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 08:06
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

BTW, my A 85mm f2.8 has mostly replaced my 70-400G for portraits.

Good call. I don't think a 70-400 would be my choice for a portrait lens, unless I was always a long way from the stage ...

-------------
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .


Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 08:52
Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:


I think I said that in another thread in another context. Just as it not good to cross quote me, it's not good to assume my needs and standards because I haven't got many needs and almost no standards. My only need is for it to be fun.
I think the context was very similar but so be it, but in the future I hope I can assume you don't like it when you say it's "bad" or a "poor show", otherwise discussions on these fun subjects get very difficult

But I agree in the end it's all about having fun and creating photo's you like with equipment you enjoy using..

Back to the OP question, I don't have experience with any of the lenses you mention and while I think adapters (especially AF ones) can be a great solution but I would only use them to adapt lenses you can't get native or lenses you already have. Once you buy the lens + adapter new I would always think very hard if buying an equivalent native lens isn't a better option technically even if it is more expensive. Native lenses is for me one thing less that can go wrong, less compatibility issues and one less connection where either mechanically or electronically something can go wrong. I usually buy my lenses for the long term (camera bodies come and go) so spending a little more on them isn't very significant for me in the long run. Obviously YMMV.

-------------
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/picture-size-for-posting_topic114856_post1379537.html#1379537 - see here


Posted By: QuietOC
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 09:48
Originally posted by minolta_mutley minolta_mutley wrote:

I can add to the discussion i've been using the 24-70 Sony Zeiss f2.8 a-mount 1st gen. with the LA-EA3 on a A7RII and it performed good enough for my needs.

I'm still thinking to buy a lens for my mc11. Any suggestions for a great affordable canon lens?

28/2.8IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 100/2

There are no native FE 40/2.8 or 100/2 options. I assume the 24/2.8IS and 35/2IS are as good as the 28/2.8IS.

The Sigma MC-11 may not be the best adapter for those, but it works.

-------------
Sony A7III A6000 HVL-F45RM LA-EA3 LA-EA4 MB-IV MC-11 EF-E II MD-NEX KR-NEX DA-NEX
Minolta Maxxum 600si
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 AF-P/Q


Posted By: addy landzaat
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 09:50
Originally posted by nandbytes nandbytes wrote:

it's not good to assume my needs and standards because I haven't got many needs and almost no standards. My only need is for it to be fun.
But why, oh why, do you assume the needs and standards for others? For my needs, the way Sony handles the LA-EA3 is just fine. It might be "bad" for you, but for me, it is really fine.

Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

Good call. I don't think a 70-400 would be my choice for a portrait lens, unless I was always a long way from the stage ...
Apart from the size and weight (maybe the aperture) it really is a nicely rendering lens (IMHO) that can be used for portraits. You don't have to be at 400mm, 70mm is also nice

Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

@addy_landzaat I own the KM 28-75, served byscrewdriver motor. I wish I had the Sony 28-75 SAM! If so, I would buy the Zeiss 16-35 right away. Not such a bad lens, but I lose the AF on E mount, and when mounted on my A850 has a below average success in well focused shots. Ah! but when it really nails the focus, it's outstanding.
As they said before, the best choice is the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Art for FE, but it seems we have to wait a few months or more to see it live.
On the A900/A850 the best sensor is the centre one with the double cross, that should help with the in-focus shots. The same goes for the 7 btw.

You said money was tight and if it is, the new Tamron FE 28-75 is a really nice option. But if you can stretch your budget to the Sigma, it seems to be as good bang for your buck!

-------------
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 09:51
Originally posted by minolta_mutley minolta_mutley wrote:

I can add to the discussion i've been using the 24-70 Sony Zeiss f2.8 a-mount 1st gen. with the LA-EA3 on a A7RII and it performed good enough for my needs.

I'm still thinking to buy a lens for my mc11. Any suggestions for a great affordable canon lens?


I have used the following myself and been pleased with results:

EF 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 USM (still own this one)
Sigma ART 35mm f1.4 (I have also owned the native version which does work better)
EF 70-200mm f2.8 with and without EF 1.4x TC [1]
EF 40mm f2.8
EF 50mm f1.8 STM
EF 50mm f1.4 USM
EF 100mm f2 (really loved this lens, I wish there was a native alternative. Prefer 100mm to 85mm personally)
EF 200mm f2.8 [2]
EF 24-85mm f3.5-4.5
EF 28-105mm f3.5-4.5
Voigtlander 40mm f2 (manual focus only)

[1] - didn't own, borrowed from a colleague for airshow. I posted the results on dyxum.
[2] - didn't own but borrowed for a whole day to shoot family and in the end gave up on eye AF for my toddler son as the hit rate with the 70-200GM I owned at the time was twice as high. I was hoping to save some weight, space and money but in the end stuck with the 70-200GM for the better hit rate. If I wasn't shooting an over hyper toddler I probably would have been happy lol.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: addy landzaat
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 13:18
There are at least three different Canon EF 100-300 lenses: 100-300/5.6, 100-300/5.6L and variable aperture 100-300 USM. I own the 100-300/5.6L and IMHO my copy is comparable to better copies of the Minolta 70-200/4 and 100-300 APO that I own.

Missed the question about the Canon lenses by Minolta_Mutley. It depends on your definition of affordable.
EF 200/2.8: as sharp as the Minolta, good bokeh, but not as good as the Minolta's Bokeh.
EF 85/1.8: really nice rendering lens - somewhat akin to the Sony E 50/1.8: not the sharpest lens but it is really nice to use and gives enjoyable results. Some say the EF 100/2 is slightly better, but there is not much in between them. Buy by favourite focallength.
EF 24-70/4: the macro capability is really nice. And it is a good, underrated L-lens. The word is, that it is better then any of the 24-105/4 lenses for Canon (but not as good as the 24-70/2.8L II).
EF 400/5.6: great lens. Light, reach and a great match for the A7-series cameras.

If you can find a good deal, any of these also is interesting:
EF 24-85/3.5-4.5: comparable to the Minolta version, though completely different, if you know what I mean
EF 17-40/4L: at the time the best wide angle Canon had to offer - but they were not that good in wide angles. But if the price is right, it is an enjoyable lens. I prefer the Minolta 17-35/3.5G over this one, but that is one of the nicest Minolta lenses around.
28-70/2.8L: Old and heavy, not as sharp as the 24-70/4L - but if you can get one cheap, it is a classic L-lens.

And the Canon 50's. They are 80's 50mm lenses and there is a whole debate about these 80's 50mm lenses: some prefer Canon, some Minolta. I myself prefer the Minolta versions but QuietOC prefers the Canon ones. I guess you have to try them for yourself The 50/1.8 STM probably is the best of the bunch.

Finally the Sigma 35/1.4 ART (and probably all ART lenses): really nice and really good on both LA-EA3 and MC-11. (With the Canon R however, you have to turn off the automatic corrections )

-------------
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 13:45
I update my post to say which 100-300mm I own. It is sharper than the minolta 100-300mm APO I owned.

my EF 200mm f2.8 was not as sharp as my minolta 200mm f2.8 HS.

LA-EA3 and mc-11 works differently with the respective sigma ARTs. EA3 is better overall for accuracy but mc-11 and EF version is easier to buy and sell at a good price. MC-11 tries to emulate a native lens so you get all the native AF functions while EA-3 doesn't, so you don't get functions like DMF.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: minolta_mutley
Date Posted: 24 December 2019 at 20:09
Thank you for all the canon+mc11 reply's - that's a nice list to start with.
Sorry i changed the thread to a more or less different subject...


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 25 December 2019 at 15:56
Merry Xmas!/Hannuka/Whatever!

Addy, thanks for the advice, I know well about the different AF sensors, as a matter of fact, I used to be the Sony Digital Imaging specialist for Argentina and Latinoamerica in a previous life.

It just seems that the KM 28-75 doesn't provide a consistent AF behavior, which is a shame, 'cause it's awesome when it delivers.

BTW, I'll pick up the 24-105G tomorrow. I can't wait for the E mount Sigma 24-70, and I need the wider 24mm FOV (so no Tamron 28-75).

The next steps are getting the LA-EA3 and MC-11 adaptors, and maybe the adaptors for the K/F/OM mounts... oh well.


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 25 December 2019 at 16:13
24-105mm is one of my favourite lenses. It's really my workhorse for many things.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: balacau
Date Posted: 27 December 2019 at 12:04
Regarding an earlier comment by Miranda and using the Sigma 10-20mm lens on an e mount body via and adapter, I doubt I'd have much of an issue using a lens if that size or weight on my a6600. However I've recently been trying the Samyang 135mm f2 lens via the LAEA3 and I do find it quite awkward due to it being very front heavy. I dare say the Sigma 18-35mm Art won't be any different. I may end up using those heavier lenses on my a68 and stick with lighter glass for my a6600.

It almost makes me glad I no longer have a 50-500mm lens anymore.

-------------
Understanding is a 3-edged sword. Your side, their side and the truth.


Posted By: Miranda F
Date Posted: 28 December 2019 at 10:04
It appears the https://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=786 - E-mount Version is longer and heavier still - basically the same lens with an extended mount. You could try the 85mm f1.8, I suppose, which is half the weight and designed specifically for mirror-less. That's more or less equivalent to 135mm on FF.

-------------
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras . . .


Posted By: addy landzaat
Date Posted: 28 December 2019 at 10:15
Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

It appears the https://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=786 - E-mount Version is longer and heavier still - basically the same lens with an extended mount. You could try the 85mm f1.8, I suppose, which is half the weight and designed specifically for mirror-less. That's more or less equivalent to 135mm on FF.
The E-mount version has the adapter build in.I would not bother with the Samyang 85/1.8 when you can get the wonderful Sony 85/1.8 for a little more.

-------------
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101


Posted By: balacau
Date Posted: 28 December 2019 at 11:23
Seems a common thing with lenses having an inbuilt adapter installed to make them suitable for mirror less camera use.

Don't get me wrong, I love the incredible quality of the 135
Mm both in terms of lens construction and imagery but I do find it just a bit awkward to use on the a6600 body. Anyway it's a keeper. I've had the Sony SAL85F28 for years and used it yet little. I don't imagine I'll be investing in an 85mm prime anytime soon but the 135mm f2 doubles as a decent telephoto lens on an aps-c body.

Originally posted by Miranda F Miranda F wrote:

It appears the https://www.dyxum.com/lenses/detail.asp?IDLens=786 - E-mount Version is longer and heavier still - basically the same lens with an extended mount. You could try the 85mm f1.8, I suppose, which is half the weight and designed specifically for mirror-less. That's more or less equivalent to 135mm on FF.


-------------
Understanding is a 3-edged sword. Your side, their side and the truth.


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 30 December 2019 at 20:22
BTW,I have already used the A7R4 + 24-105G combo side by side to my A850 + KM 28-75 f2.8.
Cruel comparison indeed! While editing, when I switch from pictures of the A7 to the A850 , is like images lacked bite, sharpness... everything.
I'm really happy with my new gear, want to see the results of the A7R4 with my A mount lenses (Sony 50mm f1.4, 70-400G, and specially with my dear 85mm f2.8).

Best regards!


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 30 December 2019 at 21:17
You should try the FE 85mm f1.8. you won't hold that 85mm f2.8 so dearly after that


-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 04:26
I know, I know, but the LA-EA3 comes first in the list. And this is a long list!


Posted By: pegelli
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 14:27
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

While editing, when I switch from pictures of the A7 to the A850 , is like images lacked bite, sharpness... everything.
Obviously first there is a much better lens but then also the A850 has a much stronger AA filter than the A7 and therefore the files need a bit more sharpening (preferably deconvolution rather than unsharp mask) to develop more "bite" that comes more natural to cameras with weaker AA filters.

And I fully agree with nandbytes, the FE 85/1.8 is really a very economical hidden gem, in the same league as the Batis 85 as well as the GM 85/1.4, both of which are much more expensive.

-------------
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/picture-size-for-posting_topic114856_post1379537.html#1379537 - see here


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 15:37
85GM does not have much over FE85/1.8 apart from the bokeh rendering which is really excellent on 85GM. Otherwise FE85/1.8 is overall better.

I currently own the 85GM and owned FE85/1.8 for 2 years. 85GM is more of an indulgence

if you are happy with the f2.8 aperture also consider the FE 90mm macro.



-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 19:46
I've read raving reviews of the 90mm Macro, but I doubt wether is fast enough for people photography or not, it would be awesome if so!
I already have the A mount Sony 100mm f2.8 and a couple of nice enlarging lenses which I can attach to a bellows and rail system. Together with my enlarger's column I would use them to digitize my negs, that's my New Year resolution for sure.


Posted By: Hezu
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 20:28
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

I've read raving reviews of the 90mm Macro, but I doubt wether is fast enough for people photography or not, it would be awesome if so!
Prior getting Sony FE 2.8/90 Macro I also thought that macro lenses must have slow AF since all my older A mount macro lenses (Tamron 90 mm and 180 mm and the oldest version of Minolta 100 mm) focused slowly. But alas, FE 2.8/90 Macro focuses about as fast as most other Sony FE lenses (on the other hand Sony FE 2.8/50 Macro then again has quite mediocre AF) and there is also focus limiter.
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

I already have the A mount Sony 100mm f2.8 and a couple of nice enlarging lenses which I can attach to a bellows and rail system. Together with my enlarger's column I would use them to digitize my negs, that's my New Year resolution for sure.
Ok, you may not then necessarily need a new macro lens, although remember that Sony (and older Minolta) 100 mm macro lenses lack built-in AF motor and if you want to get any AF on E mount, you will need LA-EA4, which has its disadvantages in AF capabilities.

-------------
http://hezu.1g.fi/ - Galerie Hezu


Posted By: nandbytes
Date Posted: 31 December 2019 at 20:29
Originally posted by Manuel Iniesta Manuel Iniesta wrote:

I've read raving reviews of the 90mm Macro, but I doubt wether is fast enough for people photography or not, it would be awesome if so!
I already have the A mount Sony 100mm f2.8 and a couple of nice enlarging lenses which I can attach to a bellows and rail system. Together with my enlarger's column I would use them to digitize my negs, that's my New Year resolution for sure.


it has a focus limiter and with it the AF doesn't hunt through the entire range. So can be easily used as a people/portrait lens. The AF is rather fast and accurate too.

Unlike the Sony/minolta 100mm macro lenses the FE 90mm macro is internal focussing i.e. does not extend.
Its really an awesome lens to use.

-------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nandbytes/ - my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 14 January 2020 at 19:44
I bought the 24-105G and is a joy to use. The image quality is awesome for a zoom, I still wonder how would it compare vs. The Zeiss A 24-70 f2.8, which is much more heavy and cumbersome.
Meanwhile, it seems that my Fujinon EX enlarger lens on a bellows is much better than my Sony 100mm Macro. I still have to try my Componon-S 50mm, but is easier to work with the 75mm. A longer focal lenght might be better.
I saw a bargain Componon-S 80mm f5.6, I wonder if it's better than my Fujinon EX. What about a Rodagon N 80mm f4? Maybe I should ask this in another thread hahaha.
The 90mm Macro is climbing position to my Top 3 of desired lenses...


Posted By: waldo_posth
Date Posted: 14 January 2020 at 23:22
It's a bit strange that your headline is about different lenses (Sigma? A-mount?).

-------------
"Stare, pry, listen, eavesdrop. Die knowing something. You are not here long." (Walker Evans)    http://www.flickr.com/photos/waldo_posth/ - http://www.flickr.com/photos/waldo_posth/


Posted By: Manuel Iniesta
Date Posted: 15 January 2020 at 00:29
Waldo, I know, I started asking about A mount lenses for a E mount camera, and then, time passed, I bought gear, etc.
Life is full of deceits, I guess.



Print Page | Close Window