Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG DN Art or Sony 50mm 1.2 GM for walk about/everyday use?

[jgerrish]

Hi everyone. Please help me decide. I bought the Sigma 24-70 thinking it would be my travel, walk-about, default lens on my camera. It’s a fantastic lens! Recently I’ve been reviewing the Sony 50mm 1.2 and all the amazing reviews. I’m wondering if the wider aperture (more light), sharpness, and image quality/bokeh on the 50 would be more appreciated than the convenient Sigma zoom flexibility. Should I have both? If I had both, I don’t know when I’d pick which one to use. Thanks all!

 

[Brownie]

Hi everyone. Please help me decide. I bought the Sigma 24-70 thinking it would be my travel, walk-about, default lens on my camera. It’s a fantastic lens! Recently I’ve been reviewing the Sony 50mm 1.2 and all the amazing reviews. I’m wondering if the wider aperture (more light), sharpness, and image quality/bokeh on the 50 would be more appreciated than the convenient Sigma zoom flexibility. Should I have both? If I had both, I don’t know when I’d pick which one to use. Thanks all!

As someone who is decidedly not a prime shooter, I say absolutely yes. I use two regularly. A 35 and an 85. I only use them when a fast lens is required, both are f/1.4.

With a subject 10' from you, the 35 requires one step (literally, 3') closer for the same Field of View, and the 85 requires 6-1/2' back.

Bear in mind it's unlikely you will use it at 1.2 very often, the DOF is very thin.

Lastly, everyone should have at least one good, fast prime.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I'm probably in a reasonable position to have an opinion on this as I had the Sigma 24-70mm for a year. In regards to it's aperture and image quality it was fantastic as a walk about lens. What isn't fantastic is that it's a very solid chunk of a lens as a walk about so trekking around with it in the city or what not was always a bit of an issue. I recently bought the GMII to replace it and I've noticed that small weight and size reduction is enough for it to feel a lot more comfortable in crowded places, I don't feel as though it will get knocked and hit. So what I'm finding now is where before I'd have to sort of force myself to take the 24-70mm Sigma out, I'm now defaulting to wanting to bring my new one and use it over my other lenses. The Sigma on camera feels like you have a good amount of weight in your hand, the Sony feels so much better and the balance of it only enhances that feeling.

My opinion, just sell the Sigma and buy the GMII if a general purpose lens is what you really want here. But I don't oppose having a prime to suit your need either. Personally I have the 40mm f2.5 G which I absolutely love and adore for when I feel like going ultra light on the day. I think the 50mm version of that lens would make better sense as a general purpose prime than the 50mm f1.2, but hey that's the beauty of the current climate, whichever decision you make will still be a good one. I think even if you done a lucky dip with E Mount lenses at this point you still wouldn't be able to disappoint yourself...

One thing's for sure though, you definitely need both. Definitely need to extinguish these types of concerns from your mind..!

 

[jgerrish]

As someone who is decidedly not a prime shooter, I say absolutely yes. I use two regularly. A 35 and an 85. I only use them when a fast lens is required, both are f/1.4.

With a subject 10' from you, the 35 requires one step (literally, 3') closer for the same Field of View, and the 85 requires 6-1/2' back.

Bear in mind it's unlikely you will use it at 1.2 very often, the DOF is very thin.

Lastly, everyone should have at least one good, fast prime.

Thank you Brownie! The reviews on that 50 are making me drool

 

[jgerrish]

I'm probably in a reasonable position to have an opinion on this as I had the Sigma 24-70mm for a year. In regards to it's aperture and image quality it was fantastic as a walk about lens. What isn't fantastic is that it's a very solid chunk of a lens as a walk about so trekking around with it in the city or what not was always a bit of an issue. I recently bought the GMII to replace it and I've noticed that small weight and size reduction is enough for it to feel a lot more comfortable in crowded places, I don't feel as though it will get knocked and hit. So what I'm finding now is where before I'd have to sort of force myself to take the 24-70mm Sigma out, I'm now defaulting to wanting to bring my new one and use it over my other lenses. The Sigma on camera feels like you have a good amount of weight in your hand, the Sony feels so much better and the balance of it only enhances that feeling.

My opinion, just sell the Sigma and buy the GMII if a general purpose lens is what you really want here. But I don't oppose having a prime to suit your need either. Personally I have the 40mm f2.5 G which I absolutely love and adore for when I feel like going ultra light on the day. I think the 50mm version of that lens would make better sense as a general purpose prime than the 50mm f1.2, but hey that's the beauty of the current climate, whichever decision you make will still be a good one. I think even if you done a lucky dip with E Mount lenses at this point you still wouldn't be able to disappoint yourself...

One thing's for sure though, you definitely need both. Definitely need to extinguish these types of concerns from your mind..!

Thank you Maskless Crusader. The Sony 24-70 looks like a sweet lens. The reason I grabbed the Sigma over that was after watching FroKnowsPhoto’s comparison of the two lenses. I’m so conflicted on getting the 50 1.2. It looks so nice

 

[Gaz]

I love the prime lenses. If I only had that zoom, my next lens would be 135GM. The extra reach is delightful, and F1.8 makes it helpful when your zoom struggles with the light.

I wouldn’t get the 50 unless you’re thinking of flogging the zoom- 50 is already in the middle of your current capacity.

I’d be buying 35gm and 85 F1.8 primes to replace the zoom. -both excellent walking lenses…. And35mm with clear image zoom reaches to 70mm

 

[Brownie]

I’d be buying 35gm and 85 F1.8 primes to replace the zoom. -both excellent walking lenses…. And35mm with clear image zoom reaches to 70mm

This is a good point. That 50 is big and heavy. Something slower, like a 1.4 or 1.8 would save size/weight/cost.

 

[jgerrish]

I love the prime lenses. If I only had that zoom, my next lens would be 135GM. The extra reach is delightful, and F1.8 makes it helpful when your zoom struggles with the light.

I wouldn’t get the 50 unless you’re thinking of flogging the zoom- 50 is already in the middle of your current capacity.

I’d be buying 35gm and 85 F1.8 primes to replace the zoom. -both excellent walking lenses…. And35mm with clear image zoom reaches to 70mm

I'm so torn as I do already have the Sony 16-35 GM and the Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN Art. So I have the wide/landscape and portraits covered. I bought the 24-70 for my "if I go out waling with one lens" needs. Maybe I just stick with it. I just keep reading how amazing that 50 is and my Gear Acquisition Syndrome is triggered. Maybe I need to get it and use it to decide. Then...I'll be able to make the call on which (if not both) to keep/use.

 

[jgerrish]

This is a good point. That 50 is big and heavy. Something slower, like a 1.4 or 1.8 would save size/weight/cost.

This is a good point too. The 50 1.2 is big and heavy compared to the 1.4 or 1.8 equivalents. Although not much different than the 24-70 Sigma.

 

[Brownie]

This is a good point too. The 50 1.2 is big and heavy compared to the 1.4 or 1.8 equivalents. Although not much different than the 24-70 Sigma.

Right, the difference is two stops of light. The problem is putting that 1.2 into application as a walk around lens. Odds are you'd find the DOF too thin.

I still think you need a fast prime, maybe just not that one! Since you have an 85, look at the 35-40 lenses.

 

[Gaz]

I'm so torn as I do already have the Sony 16-35 GM and the Sigma 85mm 1.4 DG DN Art. So I have the wide/landscape and portraits covered. I bought the 24-70 for my "if I go out waling with one lens" needs. Maybe I just stick with it. I just keep reading how amazing that 50 is and my Gear Acquisition Syndrome is triggered. Maybe I need to get it and use it to decide. Then...I'll be able to make the call on which (if not both) to keep/use.

It’s easier to beg for forgiveness than it is to obtain permission . That 50 is a wonderful object. I didn’t need the 55z lens but I bought it all the same this week!
As for walk around… I walk every day and just pick a prime at random. There’s always something to shoot.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I walk every day and just pick a prime at random. There’s always something to shoot.

Exactly, you can make lovely images with whatever you throw on your camera. Just chuck something on and start creating.

 

[jgerrish]

Exactly, you can make lovely images with whatever you throw on your camera. Just chuck something on and start creating.

Well said

 

[jgerrish]

It’s easier to beg for forgiveness than it is to obtain permission . That 50 is a wonderful object. I didn’t need the 55z lens but I bought it all the same this week!
As for walk around… I walk every day and just pick a prime at random. There’s always something to shoot.

Agreed...and I've been asking for forgiveness a lot lately

 

[TerryL]

Hi everyone. Please help me decide. I bought the Sigma 24-70 thinking it would be my travel, walk-about, default lens on my camera. It’s a fantastic lens! Recently I’ve been reviewing the Sony 50mm 1.2 and all the amazing reviews. I’m wondering if the wider aperture (more light), sharpness, and image quality/bokeh on the 50 would be more appreciated than the convenient Sigma zoom flexibility. Should I have both? If I had both, I don’t know when I’d pick which one to use. Thanks all!

The 50 is my favorite and goes with me most of the time.