Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
When we get into looking at the sharpness at the edge of the frame, you’re going to see a huge variance in the way the subject is presented. Since this isn’t a truly scientific test and these shots are all just taken exactly as the cameras they are attached to show them, there is clearly something happening internally on some of these cameras. For example, it’s pretty well known that Lumix cameras hard-bake in their lens corrections into the RAW file. There are known ways to get around this, but I opted to just show you exactly what comes out of the camera. The Sony 24-70 2.8 ii also has new XD linear motors that have increased AF performance. I think the AF speed is slightly better than the previous model, and especially noticeable in video. The market for full-frame 24-70mm zooms with a large f2.8 aperture is pretty crowded if you include optical designs that were developed for DSLRs and can be used via adapter on a mirrorless camera. But choices slim down once you focus on original mirrorless designs. Let’s start with those available for Sony E mount:
Heading out to the corners of the f2.8 image shows the lens maintaining a respectably flat field – remember this was focused in the middle of the frame – with only some darkening due to vignetting to mention. As you gradually close the aperture, this darkening lifts and there’s a mild boost in overall corner crispness, but the lens really is performing well at 24mm. https://www.dpreview.com/news/0269241343/capture-one-pro-20-update-adds-support-for-7-new-camera-bodies-6-new-lenses?comment=7709572377 Next here’s the view at 50mm, roughly mid-way through the range, and with the aperture wide-open to f2.8. Many M43 or Fuji-X lenses would be completely unusable without distortion correction. It's just part of the design parameter now. And honestly, this is fine. Correcting distortion digitally often allows you to make better lenses in general, especially if you have a size or weight target. The Sony 24-70 2.8 GM ii is a great lens for anyone who can afford it. If I had to choose between this lens and the Sony 70-20 2.8 ii, I’d choose the 70-200 in a heartbeat.Well, I am talking about distortion here, not vignetting. A full lens review should of course look at vignetting. [Vignetting correction in a sample gallery wouldn't bother me, however] Ultimately, there will always be some variation between lenses coming off of a manufacturing line for mass-produced lenses; some will perform better than others. Looking at the images produced by these two lenses and their minor differences in resolution, I suspect that an especially good unit of either one will perform better than an average unit of the other… and they’ll all be excellent lenses 2 This is based on my experience with multiple copes of the Tamron, but only one copy of the Sigma, which could, conceivably be an unusually good unit.. Either use something like C1 and disable corrections for all of them, or enable them for all mounts. For one more bokeh comparison, here’s the Sigma 28-70 at 28mm f2.8, as close as it can focus at that focal length, quoted as 19cm. There’s still some texture within the blobs, but it’s still a fairly attractive result and I enjoyed the potential for shallow depth-of-field effects when shooting at close range. Note the lens does become softer in the corners the closer you focus.
The 3rd one of the dog. Straight out of camera raw with no adjustments looks better. Doesn't look real with your changes, the reds are over saturated. Honestly, these all are not great. Every single one of them has some level of softness ranging from really soft to tolerable. As a note, take a look at the Lumix example. That truly is the far, upper-right-hand corner of the frame that everyone else captured, but you’ll notice the statue is completely missing. My intuition tells me this is due to the in-camera lens correction just cropping that part off to account for distortion. So, that noted, it’s probably no surprise that the Lumix looks the cleanest to me out of the bunch. Perhaps more impressive is how much of the statue is visible on the Sigma, and how well the sharpness competes with the Lumix despite that.Besides a lower price, third-party lens companies such as Sigma are one-upping Sony by offering extended warranties. In the case of Sigma, each lens comes with a 1-year warranty, with an extended 3-year warranty in the USA. On the other hand, Sony offers just a 1-year warranty. However, you may be eligible to join the Sony Pro program, which offers discounted repairs. In conclusion
Great Deal 
New Comment