no issues pre-ordering on Adorama.
I had the 24-70GM and sold it in 2017.
I have a really good 24-105 and I have been wanting a faster zoom and this seems to fit my need the best compared to some other lenses with a similar focal length and speed.
All jokes aside, if I wanted this lens I’d order it immediately as with the 70-200 verson II it’s going to be very hard to get given what’s going on in the world. Probably even worse now.
I preordered one within the first few minutes it went live on B&H. I wish it would arrive before my trip to Yosemite this summer but it probably won't make it in time. After having held off buying any other standard zoom or travel zoom option until now, I'll just have to continue being patient.
Alan Parker wrote:
A potential practical downside I see for this 24-70 II GM is the protuding 82mm front element, with the barrel being skinnier on this lens.
This was my thought as well. It looks like they could have gotten this down to 77mm. I wonder if they kept it at 82mm for "filter compatibility", although the 70-200 uses a 77mm?
I got my order in under 1:30 after a bit of fumbling around figuring out I needed to set the payboo payment option before I could move on.
My twisted enabling logic: how can I justify having GM primes if I don't have a GM zoom when I find zooms more versatile and use them more? That works, right? I view the standard zoom as my most important lens. So far I have the Tamron 28-75 G2, Sigma 24-70 DN, and Sony 24-105 G, maybe I have a problem and am still in denial? Anyway I really only plan on keeping one standard f/2.8. I have been torn between the small size and good focus of the Tamron and the better optics and 4mm on the wide end of the Sigma. The GM seems like a good compromise on those features at a cost of slightly more than the Tamron and Sigma combined. So do I sell the Sigma before the GM arrives or hold onto it to compare the optics? I think the 24-105 is safe as I really like the extra range for walking around, but sometimes I hear the Tamron 28-200 calling me.
Still, overall, according to the Northrup's, it bests the Canon and Nikon equivalent, so I don't think you could expect much more:
Another concerning report of patchy sharpness: I find it hard to believe that Sony would send out untested copies to reviewers. Sample size is still too small to draw any conclusions, but alas, sample variation has already reared its ugly head:
tschopp wrote:
I think the 24-105 is safe as I really like the extra range for walking around, but sometimes I hear the Tamron 28-200 calling me.
After owning 24-105 multiple times, I finally switched to 28-200 and have no regrets.
ajamils wrote:
After owning 24-105 multiple times, I finally switched to 28-200 and have no regrets.
Hay, that's not fair, I already ordered one lens today But, it would make the walk around lens to the significantly lighter lens and the better optics lens the heavier one.
tschopp wrote:
So far I have the Tamron 28-75 G2, Sigma 24-70 DN, and Sony 24-105 G, maybe I have a problem and am still in denial? Anyway I really only plan on keeping one standard f/2.8. I have been torn between the small size and good focus of the Tamron and the better optics and 4mm on the wide end of the Sigma..
do you find your 24-70 DN better optically than the 28-75 G2 ? I had the Sigma before the Tamron, and while I can't compare both now, I think the 28-75 is at least as good (and maybe a bit better after 50mm) than the Sigma. Maybe I didn't have a great copy of the Sigma. AF is definitely faster on the Tamron.
I expect the Sony v2 to be similar or better than them, but it's going to be by a very small amount given the good performance of these 2 lenses.
Fboss wrote:
do you find your 24-70 DN better optically than the 28-75 G2 ? I had the Sigma before the Tamron, and while I can't compare both now, I think the 28-75 is at least as good (and maybe a bit better after 50mm) than the Sigma. Maybe I didn't have a great copy of the Sigma. AF is definitely faster on the Tamron.
I expect the Sony v2 to be similar or better than them, but it's going to be by a very small amount given the good performance of these 2 lenses.
Yes, on my copies the Sigma 24-70 DN beats the 28-75 G2 at all focal lengths. The difference is mainly in the corners, the Sigma maintains the sharpness better in the corners, the Tamron falls off more. In the center it is hard to see much difference, they are both really good. The focus on the Tamron is better, not only is it faster, but it has more gradations in focus ability, smooth and lots of control. In MF on the Sigma you can see the individual steps on the focus motor. The camera needs to select the correct step or critical focus will be missed, I think this is some of the challenge for that lens. I have had some disappointing misses in focus on the Sigma. I'm sure the camera has an impact as well. I am using the 61mp a7riv, the high mp along with an older focus algorithm and a slower read sensor. If I was shooting the a1 the Sigma might miss less often.
I think the GM II will do a decent job of filling the gaps on those two lenses. For the Sigma, I think the GM will bring better focus and lighter weight / size, it might be better optically as well, but I am happy with the optics on the Sigma. For the Tamron it brings 4mm on the wide end and takes the optics up a notch.
I put in a preorder for this lens with my local camera shop today, and I’m just hoping it comes in time for an overseas trip I’m taking in July.
The new GM fixes literally every issue I had with the original. The size and weight is now comparable to the 24-105 G, which makes it much easier to use as a travel lens. The new optical formula and glass coating bring the image rendering closer to that of the newer GM primes. The updated autofocus motors are reportedly as fast as the 135 GM and will hopefully hunt less in low light. The minimum focusing distance is greatly improved and is now competitive with the Tamron 28-75. The corners are sharper. The hood has a window for adjusting the lens filter. There’s a second function button for vertical shooting. And now there’s an aperture ring? Oh my goodness.
It may be true that the overall image quality is only slightly improved from the original, but I think this is a case where the user experience whole is greater than the sum of the lens’ individually upgraded parts.
)...