35 1.4 GM vs. 24-70 GMII?

[Ant]

I'm in the market for either the 35mm 1.4 G master or the new 24-70 GMii.  I have previously used primes (a 28 and a 55) and was dead-set on the new 24-70, but am now having doubts.  I've never owned a zoom lens before and I like the versatility it would bring, but am wondering whether the additional 24-35 and 35-70 would be worth the additional weight.  I know that lens choice can be very personal but I would love to hear opinions on both sides of the fence.  I'm a hobbyist and shoot just about everything on my A7IV, and I often take the camera on long hikes / ski tours.

I’m looking to more or less replace the other lenses I’m using and use this new G master as my workhorse that generally doesn’t leave the body.

Cheers.

Edited January 31, 2023 by Ant

[Jeffreykmd]

Definitely, would get the 24-70 gm. Extremely versatile. Since you are a hobbyist and shoot everything another option would be the 24-105.

[DenverSteve]

I agree with Jeffrey about the 24-105.  It's not only a great lens but it's shorter, thinner, lighter and almost half the cost of the 24-70 GM II.  If the one stop matters to you, it doesn't to me, then grab the 70.  I shot documentaries, for years, with the 24-105.  Then I grabbed some more primes to use and sold my 24-105.  Very quickly, I missed that lens so much that I bought a new one and it remains my most-used Sony lens.  I would never give up 35mm of reach for one stop of light that is insignificant due to the OSS and IBIS capabilities of todays equipment. 

[XKAES]

Primes are great for image quality, size, cost, speed.  The list goes on.  But if you don't want to be stuck with one focal length then you have to deal with extra lenses -- more weight, cost and needing to change lenses.

As a hiker myself (for Winter activities I don't use electronic gear), when I can only bring one lens it's a 24-200mm 3.5/5.6.  It's fast enough and covers almost everything.

[FunWithCameras]

Given others have suggested alternatives, allow me to throw in the new 20-70mm f/4, too.

The 20mm end might be quite useful, and the close focus at the 70mm end can be handy, too.

 

[thebeardedgroundsman]

I have to say that when I have been ski touring, I like a zoom lens that stays on my camera (I don't like the idea of changing lenses in sub zero temperatures.

As you already have the discipline that comes from using prime lenses, I think you will probably use a zoom lens really well. (a lot of people who start with zooms don't get into the habit of looking for better framing and composition - many do of course).

I'm not sure how beneficial a lens as fast as f/1.4 would be for your type of photography, even the f/2.8 is fast in snowy conditions.

I have opted for the 24-105 f/4 G for my hikes and ski tours.

[Qqphot]

Those are very different lenses for different uses, but if a fast 35mm is you want that's a good candidate.  A zoom is more versatile of course but if you need speed you have fewer options.  I haven't looked at the new 24-70GM II, but the original 24-70GM feels to me like a very good F4 lens that has F2.8 available in a pinch if you're willing to put up with weaker image quality. Hopefully the II is better in that regard.