TL;DR: Check the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 DG DN Contemporary. Its 470g and budget-friendly. I used to carry heavy glass until my back gave out. I would suggest being careful with the 28mm wide end tho. Make sure to check your metadata to see if you shoot wider than 28mm often before committing to this lighter setup. It saves about 365g compared to the pro version. That is significant weight-to-cost value.

> I thought the 24-105 f4 was the move but it feels so heavy for my Cascades hiking trips. Coming back to this... you really gotta be careful with those heavy zooms when you're doing serious elevation. Carrying a tank like the 24-105 is fine for a city walk, but on a trail? No thanks. If you're on a budget and want to keep things light, I would suggest the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Contemporary. It is way cheaper than the Lumix 24-70 and honestly, the weight difference is night and day. Just make sure to keep in mind that you are losing 4mm on the wide end. 28mm is a bit tight for those massive mountain vistas, so you might find yourself wanting more. Also, it is not fully weather-sealed like the S Pro glass, so be careful if the weather turns nasty. Tbh, for the price you pay, it is a steal. I have seen them go for pretty cheap on the used market too. It is mostly high-quality plastic, which feels a bit weird if you're used to the heavy metal feel of L-mount glass, but your shoulders wont care after mile ten. Just something to think about before you drop a ton of cash on a lens you will end up leaving in the car because it is too bulky. Just watch out for that lack of a 24mm wide angle if you do a lot of tight landscape work.

I've been shooting L-mount since the original S1 launched and honestly, weight management is a safety issue when you're hiking the Cascades. Over the years, I've seen too many people compromise their footing because they're carrying top-heavy kits. The 24-105mm is a tank and that f2.8 pro zoom is just impractical for trail work. In my experience, you need to prioritize a balanced center of gravity if you're doing serious elevation. The middle ground you're looking for is the Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 DG DN Contemporary. Its the lightest f2.8 zoom for the system and the build quality has proven very reliable in my time with it. You give up that 4mm on the wide end, but your back will thank you after five miles. It doesnt feel like a brick hanging off your neck. If you can live with a slower lens, dont sleep on the Panasonic Lumix S 20-60mm f3.5-5.6. I know it looks like a cheap kit lens, but its weather sealing has held up for me in some pretty nasty conditions and the 20mm focal length is actually better for mountain shots than 24mm. Tbh, i usually bring the 20-60mm on long treks because it keeps the kit light and predictable. Going heavy just for the sake of specs usually leads to more frustration than better photos.

Thought about this for a moment... if you're struggling with the weight of the 24-105, I would suggest looking into the Panasonic Lumix S 28-200mm f/4-7.1 MACRO O.I.S.. It is exceptionally light for a zoom, weighing only about 413g, which is a massive relief when you're doing serious miles in the Cascades. Make sure to be careful with the aperture range tho. Starting at f/4 is okay, but it hits f/7.1 pretty fast as you zoom in. This might be a problem for those late golden hour shots if you dont have a tripod handy, tho the lens stabilization is quite reliable. You also lose that 24mm width which kinda hurts for wide landscapes, so you might want to consider if 28mm is wide enough for your style. I would also suggest being mindful of the weather sealing. It's built well, but it doesnt feel as beefy as the heavy tanks you're used to. For an all-arounder that wont break your back, it's basically the only lens that actually solves your weight complaint without dropping to a tiny kit zoom.

Huh interesting. I had no idea. The more you know I guess 🤷