I have been shooting on my Sony A7IV for a little over a year now and I have mostly stuck to primes because I am a bit of a pixel peeper. I love my 35mm and 85mm setup but honestly it is getting exhausting. I am constantly swapping lenses in the middle of a shoot and missing shots while I am fumbling with rear caps, and my sensor is getting so much dust on it from all the changes. I am finally ready to admit I need a high-quality zoom.
I am planning a big trip to the Dolomites in about three weeks so the timeline is a bit tight and I have been doing a ton of research. My budget is capped at around 1500 dollars. I looked at the Sony 24-70mm GM II and it looks incredible but it is way out of my price range right now. I spent a few hours reading about the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art and while people say the optics are crazy sharp, I am seeing a lot of complaints about the weight and some weird issues with dust getting inside the lens barrel over time. Since I live in Seattle and shoot in a lot of damp, misty conditions, that kind of scares me off.
I have narrowed it down to a few things but I am still confused:
- The Tamron 28-75mm G2 seems great but is 28mm wide enough for huge mountains?
- The Sigma is heavy but has that 24mm wide end I think I need.
- Is the Sony 24-105mm f/4 sharp enough or will I regret the slower aperture?
I just want something that stays sharp even when shooting wide open because I do a lot of low light stuff too. I am really worried about getting something that feels soft in the corners when I am looking at those mountain peaks. Is the Sigma still the best bet for the money or am I overthinking the dust thing... what do you guys think?
> I am planning a big trip to the Dolomites in about three weeks so the timeline is a bit tight and I have been doing a ton of research. Dude, the Dolomites are gonna be absolutely amazing! Totally get the prime lens struggle tho. Honestly, if youre worried about weight while hiking those peaks, you have to look at the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 Di III VXD G2. It is a fantastic lens and way lighter than the Sigma. This thing stays super sharp even wide open... like, pixel peeper approved sharp! Tbh, I dont think youll miss the 4mm that much at the wide end because you can always just shoot a quick panorama if the mountain is too big for the frame. The Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art Sony E-Mount is sharp as hell but it definitely feels like a brick after a few miles of uphill hiking. Since you live in Seattle and deal with rain, the weather sealing on the Tamron G2 is top notch and dust hasnt been a problem at all. Go for the Tamron and save your back!
- Grab the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Contemporary!
- It saved me a bundle on my last trek.
- Way lighter than the Art and crazy sharp for the price.
Honestly, Im gonna disagree a bit with the idea that you absolutely need f/2.8 for a trip like the Dolomites. If youre shooting landscapes, youll be stopped down to f/8 most of the time anyway to keep those peaks sharp. Ive been shooting with the Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS for a while now and Im super satisfied with it. Here is why it works well:
- The 105mm reach is huge for compressing mountain ranges, which a 70mm lens just wont do.
- Its way lighter than the Sigma Art and the weather sealing is solid for that misty weather you mentioned.
- Built-in stabilization helps a ton for handheld blue hour shots. If you really want width for the scale of the mountains, the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G is also a killer choice. Its incredibly sharp wide open and that 20mm start is a lifesaver. Dont get hung up on the f/4 thing unless youre doing serious astro... for everything else, it is plenty.
Been thinking about your dilemma while I was out hiking today. I totally get the stress of worrying about gear, especially when you are heading somewhere as epic as the Dolomites. Honestly, I went through a phase where I obsessed over corner-to-corner sharpness and weather sealing because I was tired of cleaning my sensor after every hike. My current setup actually sits somewhere between those heavy pro lenses and the lighter glass, and I have found that for landscape work, the actual focal range ends up being way more important than that extra bit of light you get from a wider aperture. When I was in the mountains last year, I found that I was rarely shooting wide open anyway because I wanted that deep depth of field. I used to be terrified of dust getting into the barrel too, but eventually I just accepted that no lens is truly invincible. I ended up getting a decent weather-resistant bag and just being careful during lens swaps, which honestly saved me way more trouble than worrying about the construction of the lens itself. Just pick what feels best in your hand and dont overthink the specs too much, you are gonna have a blast regardless!