So I finally pulled the trigger on an a7 IV after saving up for ages and now I'm totally spiraling over the lens choice. I've spent hours watching reviews and I'm stuck between a few things. My logic was to just get the Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM II since it's the gold standard but $2300 is a lot to swallow and I'm worried it'll feel heavy after walking around Tokyo for 10 hours straight. I've got a trip to Japan coming up in November and I really want a one-and-done setup for that.
Here is what I've been thinking:
I read that the Tamron is basically 95% of the performance for half the price but then I see people saying 24mm is a huge difference from 28mm for landscape and street stuff and I'm worried I'll be constantly backing up into walls trying to fit stuff in the frame. My budget is strictly under $2000 so the GM II would have to be used which is fine but is it actually worth the extra weight and cash for a general hobbyist? I just cant decide if the extra 4mm on the wide end or the f2.8 is more important for a general walking around lens or if I should just stop overthinking it and buy the Tamron...
> I see people saying 24mm is a huge difference from 28mm ^ This. Also, i am super happy with the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G lately. 20mm is a total game changer for those tight Tokyo alleys. Honestly, f4 isnt a dealbreaker because the a7 IV sensor handles high ISO like a champ. If you really want f2.8 without the GM price, the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN II Art Sony E works well and saves you cash for sushi. No complaints from me... it is a beast.
Just saw this. Honestly, be careful with that 28mm wide end. In tight cities like Tokyo, those extra 4mm are vital for architecture. You might want to consider the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN II Art Sony E instead. It hits 24mm and has way better corner sharpness than the Tamron without the GM price tag. Just make sure to check the weight specs before you commit to walking all day.