FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

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

Page  <1234>
Author
nandbytes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 2890
Post Options Post Options   Quote nandbytes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by nandbytes - 23 December 2019 at 21:48
my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii
 



Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 28865
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by pegelli - 23 December 2019 at 22:23
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
minolta_mutley View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 01 August 2010
Country: Belgium
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 733
Post Options Post Options   Quote minolta_mutley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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?
Back to Top
nandbytes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 2890
Post Options Post Options   Quote nandbytes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by nandbytes - 24 December 2019 at 08:21
my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii
Back to Top
Manuel Iniesta View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 08 November 2018
Country: Argentina
Location: Buenos Aires
Status: Offline
Posts: 25
Post Options Post Options   Quote Manuel Iniesta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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...
Back to Top
Manuel Iniesta View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: 08 November 2018
Country: Argentina
Location: Buenos Aires
Status: Offline
Posts: 25
Post Options Post Options   Quote Manuel Iniesta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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!
 



Back to Top
Miranda F View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: Bristol
Status: Offline
Posts: 3492
Post Options Post Options   Quote Miranda F Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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 . . .
Back to Top
pegelli View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Dyxum Administrator

Joined: 02 June 2007
Country: Belgium
Location: Schilde
Status: Offline
Posts: 28865
Post Options Post Options   Quote pegelli Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by pegelli - 24 December 2019 at 09:29
Mind the bandwidth of others, don't link pictures larger then 1024 wide or 960 pix high, see here
Back to Top
QuietOC View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 28 February 2015
Country: United States
Location: Michigan
Status: Online
Posts: 2841
Post Options Post Options   Quote QuietOC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by QuietOC - 24 December 2019 at 10:05
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
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Online
Posts: 10406
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
nandbytes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 2890
Post Options Post Options   Quote nandbytes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by nandbytes - 24 December 2019 at 13:26
my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii
Back to Top
addy landzaat View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 22 April 2006
Country: Netherlands
Location: Netherlands
Status: Online
Posts: 10406
Post Options Post Options   Quote addy landzaat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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
Back to Top
nandbytes View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 09 January 2014
Country: United Kingdom
Location: London
Status: Offline
Posts: 2890
Post Options Post Options   Quote nandbytes Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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.

Edited by nandbytes - 24 December 2019 at 13:49
my flickr
A7RIV & LX100ii
Back to Top
minolta_mutley View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 01 August 2010
Country: Belgium
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 733
Post Options Post Options   Quote minolta_mutley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post 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...
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  <1234>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania

Feel free to contact us if needed.