Following this thread

> I’m trying to pick a solid 24-70mm zoom for my L-mount setup… travel and casual portraits… sharpness and good AF… not too heavy.

Oh man, been there — when I first went L-mount I spent waaay too long doomscrolling lens charts lol. For your situation, I’d suggest narrowing it with two quick questions first: 1) which body are you on (Panasonic vs Sigma vs Leica)? AF feel can be kinda different depending on there. 2) Do you care more about low-light/blur (2.8 vibe) or size/weight for travel?

Once you answer that, I can tell you whether you should prioritize the “fast and chunky” style zoom or the lighter “travel” zoom. Lesson learned for me: the lens you’ll actually carry wins, even if it’s not the absolute sharpest on paper. cheers!

- For ur use (travel + casual portraits), I’d prioritize a 24-70 that nails AF consistency and doesn’t breathe/shift focus like crazy when you reframe.
- I went through the same spiral… tried a couple copies and learned weight matters way more than I expected. A “good on paper” zoom that’s chunky just stays in the bag, idk.
- What helped: check how it behaves at 70mm wide open (faces) + corner sharpness at 24mm (travel). Also pay attention to zoom creep + close-focus feel. good luck!

Quick question before I steer you wrong: which L-mount body are you on (Panasonic S5/S5II, Leica SL, Sigma fp, etc), and do you care more about AF-C for people or mostly AF-S? The “best value” 24-70 kinda depends on that.

Budget-wise, used pricing is your friend here. If you want max bang-for-buck and solid AF, Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art (L-Mount) often shows up around like $850–$1,050 used and it’s stupid sharp… but yeah it’s not exactly light. If weight’s the BIG deal, Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm F4 Macro O.I.S. (L-Mount) is usually $600–$900 used and travels way nicer. Also, be careful buying used—check for zoom creep + decentering with a quick brick wall test. cheers

> weight matters way more than I expected. A “good on paper” zoom that’s chunky just stays in the bag Tbh I totally agree with that. I learned that lesson the HARD way after lugging a massive zoom through Japan last year—my neck was basically dead by day three. One thing I’d add from a practical side is the maintenance aspect if you're buying used. With my current setup, I actually ran into some weird zooming friction and internal dust a few months in. Instead of paying for a professional service (which can be SO expensive), I looked up some teardown guides and tried some DIY cleaning. It was honestly a bit terrifying opening it up, and I’m still not totally sure if I compromised the weather sealing, but it saved me a few hundred bucks. If you’re hunting for a deal, maybe check if the one you're eyeing is known for being easy to "self-service" or if it’s a total nightmare to open. Some of these modern zooms are basically computers with glass inside, so just something to keep in mind for the long run!

To add to the point above: I have to politely disagree with the push for f2.8 zooms for travel. Over the years, I've found that the weight penalty usually outweighs the aperture benefit when you're walking ten miles a day.

• Check out the Panasonic Lumix S 24-105mm F4 Macro OIS. In my experience, the Dual IS makes up for the slower aperture in most travel scenarios, and the extra reach to 105mm is a lifesaver for casual portraits. It's basically the gold standard for versatility on this mount.
• If you're dead set on the 24-70 range, look for the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art used. It is lighter than the version 1 and they finally fixed those weather sealing issues that used to cause internal dust build-up over time.
• DIY tip: Since you're buying used, do a thorough decentering test as soon as it arrives. Put your camera on a tripod and shoot a flat subject like a distant brick wall. If one corner is noticeably softer than the others at 24mm, the internal elements are likely misaligned from a previous drop. I've tried many of these and the 24-105mm is usually the more pragmatic tool. You can always grab a cheap used Panasonic Lumix S 50mm F1.8 later if you really need that ultra-thin depth of field for specific shots.

To add to the point above: I have to disagree with the 24-105mm suggestion. The f4 aperture is unfortunately just not as good as expected for isolating subjects, and the light transmission is disappointing for anything but bright daylight. If you are doing portraits, you will definitely regret the lack of depth. Also, the first gen Sigma Art 24-70mm was a total letdown long-term because of the well-documented dust ingestion issues behind the front element. Since you want sharpness without the massive weight, look at these specs:

• Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN Contemporary: It weighs only 470g. The MTF data shows center sharpness that rivals the Art series, though you lose that 4mm at the wide end.
• Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art: This newer version finally fixed the sealing issues and swapped in HLA linear motors for much faster AF. It is also about 10 percent lighter than the original. Honestly, the original Sigma Art is just too chunky and prone to mechanical wear for a travel lens. If you can find the Mark II used within your 1200 dollar budget, grab it. If not, the 28-70mm Contemporary is the smarter technical choice for a walking-around lens despite the slightly narrower field of view. Dont settle for the old version just because the price looks good on paper...

Any updates on this?

Same here!

> I’m trying to pick a solid 24-70mm zoom for my L-mount setup and I’m a bit overwhelmed by the options. Saw this earlier and had to chime in because I'm in the exact same boat and it's driving me crazy. I've been shooting professionally for over fifteen years and have handled almost every piece of glass out there, yet I've been stuck in this same 24-70mm decision loop for months now without finding a real winner. It's honestly so frustrating when you know exactly what performance you need but every option feels like a massive compromise in one way or another... basically still no closer to a decision than when I started.

^ This. Also, I stumbled upon this today and felt the need to weigh in on the compatibility side of things. I actually disagree with the heavy focus on just weight and aperture in this thread. In my experience over the years, even within an alliance, sticking to one brand for both body and glass is often more reliable for AF-C than people admit. Honestly tho, if youre feeling overwhelmed by the options, you should probably just head over to YouTube or check the specialized forums. There are some incredibly thorough reviews that do side-by-side comparisons for travel and portraits. Methodologically, I would suggest doing this:

• Search for L-mount 24-70 comparison shootout on YouTube
• Check the L-mount subreddits for specific firmware compatibility charts
• Review the manufacturer mount alliance compatibility lists The top results there will show you the AF speed and size way better than we can describe here. Those communities are also much more detailed about the specific firmware quirks between brands... definitely worth a quick search before you buy anything.

Saving this whole thread. So much good info here you guys are awesome.