70-300 + 28-70 or 24-240

[DrJohn]

I'm currently carrying the FE 70-300 and the FE 28-70 mm lenses on the A7RM4 for wildlife and nature photos. The other day, I was out hiking in the woods and found myself changing between the two lenses several times. And, I missed some shots while changing lenses.

I'm considering the FE 24-240, which is supposedly an inferior lens to the FE 70-300. I'm a stickler for resolution. So, I'm not sure what to do. Some reviews say the 24-240 is just ok. Others say it is sharp.

What are your opinions?

John

 

[Pieter]

Don't get the 24-240: it'll be a waste on your A7Riv. Especially if you value tack-sharp images. According to DXO-mark the 28-70 obliterates the 24-240 when it comes to sharpness.

If you really dislike swapping lenses a lot, I think an RX10 as a B-cam is a better option: covers a much wider range and the images arguably come out as nice as you'd have gotten with the 24-240.

Upgrading your 28-70 to a 24-105 might also solve some of your issues, plus you'd gain some wide angle, light gathering and the image quality would be as good if not better than with the 28-70.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Pieter

[DrJohn]

7 hours ago, Pieter said:

Don't get the 24-240: it'll be a waste on your A7Riv. Especially if you value tack-sharp images. According to DXO-mark the 28-70 obliterates the 24-240 when it comes to sharpness.

If you really dislike swapping lenses a lot, I think an RX10 as a B-cam is a better option: covers a much wider range and the images arguably come out as nice as you'd have gotten with the 24-240.

Upgrading your 28-70 to a 24-105 might also solve some of your issues, plus you'd gain some wide angle, light gathering and the image quality would be as good if not better than with the 28-70.

I already have the the 24-105. It doesn't have enough reach for wildlife. I need at least 200 mm.

John

[Pieter]

Tough luck then, what you want doesn't exist. It absolutely makes no sense to put the 24-240 on an A7Riv. On an A7iii maybe.

[Creativebush]

I'll second that, don't get the 24-240, you will be disappointed. I have the 24-240 and used it quite a bit as my carry around lens as the zoom range was handy. But what I found was I didn't have any keepers when using it. I just wasn't happy. I have since purchased the 24-105 and am much happier. But If I'm going to shoot wildlife I pretty much have the 100-400 on my camera or now the 200-600 I finally received.

[DrJohn]

3 minutes ago, Creativebush said:

I'll second that, don't get the 24-240, you will be disappointed. I have the 24-240 and used it quite a bit as my carry around lens as the zoom range was handy. But what I found was I didn't have any keepers when using it. I just wasn't happy. I have since purchased the 24-105 and am much happier. But If I'm going to shoot wildlife I pretty much have the 100-400 on my camera or now the 200-600 I finally received.

Ok. I will stick with the 70-300 and the 28-70. I also have the 100-400 with 1.4x and 2x TC, which is too heavy for hiking up and down hills at my age. I use that lens when I'm not hiking.

John