24-70 comparison

If you need a 24-70/2.8 that will work on both A & E mount, then the Vario-Sonnar 2.8/24-70 ZA (that's it's full name) is your best choice. It's an excellent lens in most regards, although newer FE lenses will outperform it in areas such as corner sharpness. Also, if primarily used on aps-c cameras such as the a68 what you get is a 36-105 equivalent. A possible better choice would be the SONY 2.8/16-50 SSM.

Another issue is which film bodies you would like to match this lens. Since the ZA is an SSM lens, it will AF on a limited number of Minolta bodies, such as the Dynax/Maxxum 7, 5, (maybe the 4?) and 9's with the SSM update.

Again, if you want both A & E compatibility, then this is your best choice. But, newer FE lenses will outperform the older ZA in many regards (size, weight, focus speed, corner performance and probably color fringing-LOCA).

Hope this helps.

There are several threads on normal zooms on A-mount cameras. The conclusion:
Sony/Zeiss 24-70/2.8 SSM - the best of the bunch
Tamron/Minolta/Sony 28-75/2.8 - the best bang for your buck
Minolta 28-70/2.8 G - for lovers of great bokeh!

24-85, 24-105 and 28-105 if you want more reach and don't mind the slower aperture and slightly worse IQ.
The Sigma 24-105/4 HSM seldom is mentioned, but as the reviews back then said it was comparable the Canon version, it also is a good option.

If you go with a SSM, SAM or HSM lens, I would also get a LA-EA3 or LA-EA5 to taken full advantage of your AF system with newer E-mount cameras.

QuietOC wrote: The Sony ZA and SAM zooms have Lens Compensation support when used on the LA-EA adapters on full-frame E-mount cameras. I had a sharp Sony 28-75 SAM, but I didn't like how it rendered backgrounds. The Tamrons weren't as sharp, but they also looked awful.

It seems the Sony 28-75/2.8 used the same optical formula as the Tamron and Minolta versions, but with SAM drive and I feel tighter production tolerances. It would be the one to get.

QuietOC wrote: I have an old Tokina 28-70mm F2.8 that has nicer rendering. I haven't tried the original 28-70 G or the A-mount 24-70 ZA's. The later seems to have a lot of variation judging by the two samples DXOMark tested.

I doubt you would like the Minolta 28-70G. It lacks micro-contrast - it has enough resolution but isn't that sharp. Also, AF is slooooooow. But the rendering is wonderful.

I feel that native E-mount lenses in this range are better: sharper and faster AF. That is why I picked up the Sigma 28-70/2.8 DG DN

But OP doesn't own an A99mk2...
He also doesn't seem to need f2.8.

Given longer term upgrade path is e-mount it makes sense to buy native e-mount lenses where he can. In future he's only going to lose money if he has to sell a-mount lenses to upgrade.

Personally I'd never suggest anyone to newly buy any a-mount lenses unless it's not available natively or it's a speciality lens or you want something for it's rendering etc. None of this seems to apply to OPs case above. In fact on e-mount there's like seven 24-xx options while there's three on a-mount. If you add 28-xx then there's even more e-mount than a-mount.

Edited by nandbytes - 31 July 2023 at 07:37

addy landzaat wrote: But OP wants to use the lens on his film cameras and you can't fit a native E-mount lens on an A-mount camera. So, buying native does not make sense.

I don't really consider a film cameras as an "upgrade" to e-mount. As I mentioned in my comment e-mount is the only upgrade path since a-mount is no longer in production.
Plus OP himself has chosen FF e-mount over FF a-mount. To me that shows that he also views e-mount as the upgrade path on some level.

Tbh I consider film cameras mostly a waste of time and money (even though I own/use them myself). There aren't many shots I have seen that have benefitted from being taken on film. If people like the experience then each to their own but its not an upgrade by any means.

addy landzaat wrote: How do you count three 24-xx options for A-mount? I count 22 of all makes, ranges and aperture. Four are f/2.8: Sony/Zeiss 24-70/2.8; Sigma 24-60/2.8; Sigma 24-70/2.8 and Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC (disregarding slight updates).

My bad, I was clearly wrong then. I didn't realise Sigma and tamron made those for a-mount, thought they only made them for EF/F.
I only counted Zeiss 24-70/2.8, sigma 24-105/4 and Sony/minolta 24-105mm f3.5-4.5
I also forgot about Minolta 24-50m f4 & 24-85mm, even though I owned one myself

I guess there's more options on a-mount definitely with a big range. Of course image quality and size differences compared to e-mount is a separate discussion.

Edited by nandbytes - 31 July 2023 at 09:43

nandbytes wrote: addy landzaat wrote: But OP wants to use the lens on his film cameras and you can't fit a native E-mount lens on an A-mount camera. So, buying native does not make sense. I don't really consider a film cameras as an "upgrade" to e-mount. As I mentioned in my comment e-mount is the only upgrade path since a-mount is no longer in production. Plus OP himself has chosen FF e-mount over FF a-mount. To me that shows that he also views e-mount as the upgrade path on some level. Tbh I consider film cameras mostly a waste of time and money (even though I own/use them myself). There aren't many shots I have seen that have benefitted from being taken on film. If people like the experience then each to their own but its not an upgrade by any means.

But that is a very personal opinion. Loads of people love film photography. And one can run a dual film/digital system.

Film is not an upgrade, it is side step. Live isn't linear. With film it is all about the experience.
A lot of people would not take pictures if they had to use only digital. You can take most pictures with digital (better) but film always is better then no camera.

TBH, it is your subjective opinion, not that relevant to the question of OP.

As I said each to their own. I am not passing judgement on their choices or questioning their choices.
Opinions are subjective which is why its an opinion and not a fact.

It is relevant because OP asked forum's opinion if he should buy e-mount or a-mount. My opinion is he should buy e-mount for reasons mentioned above. Most importantly lenses are intended to be kept for a long time and e-mount provides greater longevity in my opinion.