Least Expensive Way to get 24-70mm f/2.8 on a7rii?

[kazooless]

For portrait work, there are so many options to a 24-70/2.8 lens. Especially if you shoot outdoors. Most lenses of this kind has noticeable distortion, except somewhere in the middle. The f2.8 is too bright to use in daylight, yet it does not give enough bokeh in situations where you can use it.

 

I think a better setup would be a 70-200/2.8 and a f1.4 prime. For the 70-200 you have lots of adapted options that have been in use for years, such as Canon, Tamron and Sigma.

 

Your current gear is more like an allround setup so if you specifically go for portraits you could easily sell it and replace it with more suitable gear.

 

Jaf,

I take your point and am aware of all the options. I do have a 35mm & 50mm prime. I've also got the 70-200mm f/4.0 G. It all makes sense, sure. However, I started the topic as one of inquiry for specific options for the 24-70mm f/2.8. I think I've seen them all now, and indeed the pickings are slim. I think it will be very nice when a serious competitor makes a full frame mirrorless. Competition is always good for the user, right?

 

Based off a 15 minute YouTube video showing the Tamron version with a metabones, I went ahead and ordered that combination.

 

Thanks,

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Jaf,

I take your point and am aware of all the options. I do have a 35mm & 50mm prime. I've also got the 70-200mm f/4.0 G. It all makes sense, sure. However, I started the topic as one of inquiry for specific options for the 24-70mm f/2.8. I think I've seen them all now, and indeed the pickings are slim. I think it will be very nice when a serious competitor makes a full frame mirrorless. Competition is always good for the user, right?

 

Based off a 15 minute YouTube video showing the Tamron version with a metabones, I went ahead and ordered that combination.

 

Thanks,

 

Buy cheap buy twice. If you start at the bottom of the ladder, usually what happens is that you waste time and money on constant upgrades.

 

The FE 70-200/4 doesn't really do what a 70-200/2.8 does, neither does a 50/1.8 do what a 50/1.4 does.

 

I'm just saying that if portraits are your thing, you'll save time and money by going for the right lenses straight away.

[kazooless]

Buy cheap buy twice. If you start at the bottom of the ladder, usually what happens is that you waste time and money on constant upgrades.

 

The FE 70-200/4 doesn't really do what a 70-200/2.8 does, neither does a 50/1.8 do what a 50/1.4 does.

 

I'm just saying that if portraits are your thing, you'll save time and money by going for the right lenses straight away.

 

 

Jaf,

 

You're right, of course. My typical MO is not to buy cheap first (hence the a7rii) but sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

The style of portraits I do 95% of the time is family portraits with plenty of space around them. I don't even use f/2.8 for that but I wanted to the 2.8 for the 5% of the time I go with a different style. Same with the 70-200/f4. I use it for the families walking. F/2.8 would be too shallow so I don't expect to even want to replace that one; it's a great lens. So, the 70-200/f4 & the 24-70/2.8 will literally meet 95% of my needs.

 

As much as I love that Tamron 28-75mm/f2.8, I really don't want to deal with the limited autofocus points. That is seriously the only reason I'm not keeping it. The images are amazingly sharp.

 

kazoo

[Username]

LOL

 

Grumpy much? I don't recall mentioned I "need" this. 

    

   

Forgetful much ?   

   

You own words from the 3rd post in the thread:  

   

Thanks. I need f/2.8 though.

[kazooless]

Forgetful much ?   

   

You own words from the 3rd post in the thread:  

   

Thanks. I need f/2.8 though.

 

LOL

 

touché

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Jaf,

 

You're right, of course. My typical MO is not to buy cheap first (hence the a7rii) but sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

The style of portraits I do 95% of the time is family portraits with plenty of space around them. I don't even use f/2.8 for that but I wanted to the 2.8 for the 5% of the time I go with a different style. Same with the 70-200/f4. I use it for the families walking. F/2.8 would be too shallow so I don't expect to even want to replace that one; it's a great lens. So, the 70-200/f4 & the 24-70/2.8 will literally meet 95% of my needs.

 

As much as I love that Tamron 28-75mm/f2.8, I really don't want to deal with the limited autofocus points. That is seriously the only reason I'm not keeping it. The images are amazingly sharp.

 

kazoo

Alright, just trying to be helpful. I felt you weren't really getting the performance you could be getting for your investment. I mean, buying an expensive camera body and then skimping on lenses is probably the most classical mistake in photography. You're much better off doing the other way around. Now that you show your full list of gear, including the OM stuff, I feel more strongly than before that you are spreading yourself thin and should sell the lot and replace them with two or three quality lenses for the A7R2.

[Oliver in New Zealand]

After several portrait sessions on the beach with the Tamron 28-75mm & the LA-EA4, I've had to use manual focus with magnify mode. The images are very sharp so it is a good quality lens in that regard. But boy do I hate the A-mount focus restrictions. Those very few little dots for focusing just don't cut it, especially when using a tripod. There is no way I want to using a focus and recompose method of old DSLR day. So I'm back to shopping.

 

I'm very interested in the new Sigma ART 24-70mm for Canon with the MC-11 adapter. But I guess it is so new that there are no real world reveiws of this combination yet (that I can find). Hopefully we'll see some in the next couple of weeks. That would be more palatable $$ wise than the G Master.

 

Hi,

I looked at that lens a while back too. In the end I bought the Sony version and put it on the LAEA3 as the lens has a motor in it and therefore the focus doesn't give problems as the camera not the adapter does the focusing. I have found that the LAEA4 and zooms don't play too well together as often it is hard to microadjust each  'end' of the zoom. One will always be slightly out. I only use primes on the LAEA4 now. 

 

Oliver