I finally pulled the trigger on an a7iv and im so pumped to actually use it for my trip to Iceland next month!! But man choosing a zoom lens is way harder than I thought it would be. I've been looking at the Sony 24-70 GM II and everyone says its the king but that price tag is just insane for me right now. I also saw people raving about the Sigma 24-70 Art because its cheaper but then some forum posts say the older version had dust issues and the new Mark II is better but also heavier? I just dont want to carry a brick around while hiking near waterfalls you know?
I need something that hits these points:
- Budget: tryin to stay under $1500 if possible maybe a bit more if its worth it
- Weight: needs to be manageable for 6-8 hour hikes
- Range: something versatile like a standard zoom
- Quality: must be sharp enough for landscape prints
Should I just go with the Tamron 28-75 G2 instead? I heard it lacks the wide end at 24mm which might be a bummer for those big glacier shots. What are you guys actually using day to day that doesnt break the bank or my back...
Unfortunately, skipping 24mm is a huge mistake for Iceland. I had issues with the 28mm range being way too tight for those big landscapes.
- Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art is sharp but heavy at 735g.
- Sony FE 20-70mm F4 G weighs only 488g and gives you 20mm. Losing F2.8 is disappointing for low light, but 20mm is way more valuable for those glaciers.
Just jumping in because I had a similar struggle before my last big trip. You might want to consider the Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS instead of the heavier 2.8 options. It is super sharp for prints and fits right in your budget, especially if you look at used copies. Be careful with that 28mm start on the Tamron tho, I really think you will regret not having 24mm for those massive scale shots. Also, a quick tip: make sure to get a decent rain cover or at least a dry bag for the hikes. The mist from those waterfalls is no joke and can get everywhere. I would suggest checking if your insurance covers water damage too just in case. You are gonna love that camera though, it is such a fun setup to use!
Coming in a bit late but seen this dilemma a dozen times. Iceland is brutal on gear and your legs so you really gotta balance the weight carefully. Tbh, if you're doing mostly landscapes, you might want to consider if you actually need f2.8. Most of those big glacier shots are gonna be shot at f8 or f11 anyway for depth of field. I would suggest these options:
- Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS: This is basically the king of travel lenses. It hits 24mm which you definitely need for scale, and that extra reach to 105mm is killer for compressing mountain peaks. Its about 663g, which is much easier on the neck than the big f2.8 zooms during an 8-hour hike. Plus, the price is usually around $1,100-1,200.
- Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art: If you're worried about weight, the Mark II is actually lighter than the original (around 735g), not heavier. Its still a bit of a brick tho, so maybe try holding it in a shop first if you can. Just make sure to watch out for the mist. Iceland is basically a giant pressure washer near places like Skogafoss. The weather sealing on the G series Sony glass is usually pretty reliable but I'd still be careful. Just dont forget a good strap to save your neck. You're gonna love the a7iv shots regardless!
Bookmarked, thanks!
Just saw this and had to chime in because I went through this exact same headache before a big trip to the Dolomites last year. In my experience, the battle between Sigma, Tamron, and Sony usually boils down to how much you value ergonomics over f-stops. Over the years, I've tried many combinations and for long hiking days, native glass often wins just because the balance is better on the a7iv body.
- Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN II Art is optically stunning but my neck definitely felt it after five hours on the trail.
- Sony FE 24-105mm F4 G OSS is the one I keep going back to because the focus is snappy and it just feels rugged enough for harsh weather.
- Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 Di III VXD G2 is the lightest of the bunch, but skipping 24mm for landscapes is a move you will likely regret when you get home to print. I eventually realized that for landscape prints, having that extra range is way more useful than having f2.8. When youre out there in the Icelandic wind, you really dont want to be swapping lenses and getting dust on your sensor... trust me on that one. The 24-105mm is basically the perfect middle ground for what you need.
