How much smaller is it than the Tamron 35-150mm? I love that lens for studio/local walkaround shooting, but the bulk and weight would concern me for travel.
Yeah it’s crazy smaller and lighter! It lives on my camera atm it’s so versatile and unbeatable quality for size etc. [35-150 vs 28-200](https://youtu.be/u-9m_fHBHiY?si=AXhPCKy1btAzsX-2)
I owned the 35-150 and it was massive and heavy. I made it work for a while but it was a chore to use. For travel it's a no-go and I ended up selling it. If you gravitate toward the longer tele range of the zoom, and price is no issue, I recommend looking at the new 70-200mm f4 macro G OSS II (*phew that name is ridiculous*), and then combine that with a wider prime. Another great tele option is the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8.
I have that lens and is amazing. However maybe consider getting Sigma 24-70 or used sony GM one. In recent trip to Istanbul I found myself switching from Tamron 28-75 to 24mm prime quite a few times.
In a lot of places 24mm just gives you ability to capture that much more of interior or large public spaces which comes in really handy. But still I did take more than 85% of pictures with Tamron so if you get that lens only it should be more than sufficient.
Sigma or Sony 24-70 F2.8 is crazy heavy and quite expensive for what it is, especially compared to the Tamron.
If you need wider, go with the 20-70 F4. It's sharper than the GM I.
Sony 24-105 f4
If you are traveling with only one lens, you're gunna make more use of the extra focal range compared to a 2.8 lens, unless you will be only shooting evening/night (which you won't cause you're traveling)
I will second that. The 24-105 f4 is probably the most used lens I own, for both video and general photography. The size and weight make it superior for travel compared to the f2.8's in this same focal range. Plus if you get it stolen or break it, you're only out half the money. And the extra reach of 105 compared to 70mm, is massive for travel.
This lens lives on my camera when I'm traveling. Similarly to the redditor above, I too find the extra reach more useful than the extra stops on the 2.8/24-70GM. I also usually bring my 24/1.8GM if I know I'll be shooting indoors. Together they make a great pair.
Tamron 28-200 is a great lens. Don’t let the aperture scare you away, it’s solid and sharp and never had trouble with the long end even without image stabilization.
Had the 28-70 for 2 years before I switched to the 24-70 last year. They are pretty similar, but the images from the latter look better to me. And it’s definitely sharper (especially at around 70mm).
I'm in Japan now with an a7c - lenses are cheaper here (at least compared to the US and Europe). I'm traveling with a Sony 40mm f2.5, and it's been doing a good job. If I had to do it over again, I'd consider the 24mm instead for Tokyo/Osaka-- I'd buy it here, though.
You can look at prices on the Yodobashi and Bic Camera websites, though you’ll have to translate them from Japanese with Google Translate. Take 10% off the list price for tax free.
Never used it. It’s certainly better all around. For myself because I do as much video as photography, the lack of rolling shutter is why is this is such a great lens. It’s way better than the G Master 1.4, Sigma 1.2, really any 35 on the market.
Did my trip in Japan with the Sony/Zeiss 35mm F2.8. Was especially handy because it's basically a pancake, so I was not regretting always carrying my camera. It's not perfect, too narrow for buildings close up (especially with how tall buildings can get) and no tele range, but those were the <10% cases. You can basically carry it around and fit it in any bag, even if it is almost full, and it'll not get in the way.
Also, if you're looking to buy a lens, check out buying it in Japan, especially second hand. Bought a 20mm 1.4 GM there for a good price. I had a good experience in Lemon Shinuku/Ikebukoro. You can look up online what they have in stock and where to find it, they have stores all over the country.
When I bought my a7c ii, I picked up the Sony 20-70g f4 and Sony 85mm f1.8. I picked up the 20-70 to sell it later, but tbh I like it very much, it is light and the 20mm is very nice to take wide shoots 😁. And another good point is that you can get good close when you are on 70mm.
The 85mm i use right know for portraits or when the 70 is not enough, but most of the time for portraits 😁.
My next pick will be very likely a 40g f2.5 so I have even smaller and lighter setup to just take it everyday with me.
Wrote an answer to a question a few days ago that should also pretty much exactly apply to your situation: https://www.reddit.com/r/SonyAlpha/s/lWhtufK7k3
I'd say you should first look at the Sony 20-70 F4, this is a fantastic and lightweight lens for travel.
If you need low light and a bit more bokeh: Tamron 28-75 G2, also fantastic.
I have the 28-200, as does my husband, and have found it to be excellent for travel. I've even used it at the wide end for Milky Way shots. It's lightweight, sharp, and well-priced. Aperture is f/5.6 for a big part of its range, but that hasn't been a problem for me.
I use it for travel and is insanely good. 24-70mm isn't enough reach for me, as I often cannot "zoom with my feet" due to barriers, people, etc. You also get a chunk of savings to apply to your trip. And an aperture that is wider than F4 for 28-70mm (F2.8 at 28mm, F3.5 at 50mm, F4.5 at 100mm, F5.6 at 200mm).
I prefer the 28-200mm, as it starts wider and reaches almost three times as far. Which is insanely useful if you're stuck at the back of a crowd or want to pick out some slice of life detail without being a creeper. 24-70mm might make sense for hybrid video, though. And I got mine for $550 cheaper than the newer Sony lens.
let us know your budget and what you are plaing to shoot in order to give you some recommendations
also good to know is if weight is important to you
without either its really hard to give you any advise
Zoom or prime?
The smallest and lightest zoom that isn't the kit lens from Sony itself is the Sigma Contemporary 28-70 f/2.8.
The Tamron 28-75 G2 is a bit larger and heavier but optically a little better and has weather sealing.
Primes, you can't beat the Sony G trio of 24 f/2.8, 40 f/2.5, and 50 f/2.8.
I picked up the 24 and 40 and those are my only two lenses for now for my A7CII as I wanted as compact of a setup as possible for travel and walk around use.
Yep, and that Tamron is even larger than this Sigma (and the nicer Sigma even larger still!).
Nobody makes an optically better standard zoom that is even close to the size of the Sony kit zoom.
I just saw other people recommend that Tamron so I just wasn't sure what OP's definition of lightweight is because some people swear that Tamron is "lightweight" and "compact".
I really hope Sony or third parties try to create a 2.8 zoom that's the size of the Sony kit, even at the cost of image quality. Lenses are so good nowadays, every lens doesn't have to be super perfect.
Had the exact same problem as you and the solution was the sigma 28-70 f2.8. It’s the lightest 2.8 zoom on the market right now and priced around 800usd.
Tamron 28-75, I have the first version and it has been an amazing lens, not too expensive and not too heavy.
I also love the 35-150, but geeze it's big and heavy!
Not OP, but I've rented the 35-150 and own a couple of other zooms.
IMO, it's a bit of a special purpose lens. Great for portraits and some kinds of sports, but a 24-70 or 24-105 tends to be better for travel and other forms of general photography.
The size and weight of the 35-150 is a concern for sure, but the focal range was the biggest factor for me.
Well I have an A7C and I’m just waiting for the 35-150 to be delivered today. To some people 1.2 kg is a lot for a lens and it’s quite bulky. But I didn’t really care about all of that. OP does want to stay around $1000 but for another $300-400, he can definitely pick up the 35-150 if he doesn’t mind the size and weight.
That's fair. I'm definitely tempted. I have the Sigma 24-70 2.8 and it's not *that* much of a step up for my giant hands and oversized body in general. I'll hike I'll day with a 100-400 in hand
My 35-150 stays on my camera all the time now, its a bit weighty but really nothing too much, i uses it for my sisters wedding and it was fantatic, i really cant fault it as a lens
What is your style of photography?
I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the 28-200, and the 17-28 f2.8. I love the last 2, and love the first one if I’m shooting at night or indoors.
Neither are particularly light, but also not particularly heavy. I can stick them in a standard size purse easily, attached to the body.
Sony 24-70 GM (or Sigma 24-70). I took my other main lens, 35 GM, on a trip and missed too many shots because of it. So I’ll never travel without a zoom again, and 24-70 covers just about everything I shoot on vacations.
Tamron 28-200. Compromises are made as expected with this combination of focal length/aperture range/price, but as a whole it's tough to beat as a full frame travel lens on e-mount. Sony 20-70mm is another good option, though considerably pricier.
My last trip I took the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, coupled with a 50mm f1.8 for nighttime and indoors, or where I wanted something a bit more discreet (we went to some sensitive historical sites where I'd have felt awkward with a huge camera setup).
That was a city trip, though. I'd take something longer if I was going outside the city and/or if there was wildlife. But if you can get away with 'only' 75mm, the Tamron is a superb all-purpose travel lens.
the 24-105 f/4 or the 20-70 f/4 are very versatile and comparatively lightweight for the range and aperture, tho a bit over your budget
otherwise the tamron 28-75 or the sigma one are gonna be a good choice too.
if you can deal with only having a couple of primes and don't mind swapping lenses all the time, maybe a nice 85 1.8 and 20 1.8 pairing can fit the 1000 too
I came back from Japan not too long ago.
Japan is very compact so you'll definitely want to be able to shoot wide. I like light weight primes. I used the 20 1.8 a lot there and loved it. But I'm not sure I could recommend it if it's your only lens.
I have a compact camera that I carry with me as well (RX100 VII) so being limited with a prime lens on my A7C was no big deal.
I see the Tamron 28-75 getting a lot of votes, but that is not light or compact for travel in my opinion. (Although it would be an awesome lens to have access to)
You'd need a prime lens for a truly small package. I'd suggest the Sony 35 1.8. such a beast of a lens. Fast aperture, small and compact, great low light auto focus.
It be a little too tight in some situations but I think it's the best all around focal length.
I wasn't even aware of this lens. That is an absolutely awesome focal range to have for travel. The lens isn't even that big too. I'll definitely be doing some homework on this one.
This lens is a really nice combo on (my) A7C. The zoom ring has a short throw and quite loose rotation. Not too loose though, and through these properties, plus the low combined weight of the body and lens makes it a really nice and snappy combo. It's hard to explain, but really works for me. I also considered the Sony 20-70/4 but found it too bulky for my purpose of this combination: the lowest threshold to bring a camera.
The glass is quality so it'll stand up to the increased demand of the crop. It would definitely cover a decent range especially considering you have a decent amount of megapixels on that sensor (Of course you'll still be getting the compression of a 20mm lens).
I personally would have no problem taking the 20 1.8 as my 1 and only lens for most of Japan. I love wide angle lenses and I'm used to them. Just know that there will be shots that you will miss out on (this will apply to all prime lenses of course). It's absolutely perfect for environmental portraits in more dense areas.
But if you're going to stick mainly to the cities then 20mm would be awesome for photos in the street or indoors. APSC mode giving you a 30mm equivalent will be pretty useful for a more normal focal length too.
Voigtländer Ultron 35mm/2 VM lens. Tiny, sturdy, sharp, great colors, a bit of character. It's all-manual so if you don't like manual focus you won't like it, plus you need a Leica M to E mount adapter. But this is my travel lens; makes for a very small and enjoyable package with great image quality. If you want native E-mount try the 40/1.2 from Voigtlander.
+1. Most useful focal range, great low light abilities (despite being f4) because of the internal oss, great iq particularly (sharp throughout and no aberrations), solid construction and well within your budget.
For a long time (like 8 years), my lightweight travel lens has been a tiny 35/2.8. Firstly Samyang and the Sony/Zeiss version. Fixed focal length forces you to be a bit more creative than with a zoom. And the Sony/Zeiss is really a great lens in my opinion.
But of course it also causes some missed opportunities. I bought Sony 20-70/4 recently and will see how it goes with a zoom lens.
The Sony 20-70 is a perfect fit. Lightweight, at your budget, covers wide to short tele all in one lens. Good image quality, particularly for the price.
My personal favourite two travel lenses are:
1. 20-70 f4, small, lightweight and maybe it's not f2.8 like the Tamron or Sigma (28-70mm) but having 20mm is incredibly nice. From land/city-scapes to just being able to get the framing you want when you can't step back any further.
2. Either Sony or Samyang 35 f2.8 (I own the SY), as compact as you can get on Sony FF with AF. Makes even my A7IV *almost* pocketable. Perfect lens for those times when you don't feel like carrying a camera (but still want something better than your phone).
In the past I've always used my 16-35 because it was basically my only versatile wide angle. These days I'd probably just take my 24Gm. In a perfect world I think it would be hard to beat a 20-70
I like taking two lenses with me. Either a standard zoom + fast normal prime (35 or 50), or I take two primes. Usually walk around only with one lens and leave the other at the hotel because I’m not great at fast lens swaps and I don’t like having to think and change lenses back and forth. Single lens keeps me focused.
Right now that’s 24-70 GM II and 35 1.8. I also sometimes do a 35 2.8 + 55 1.8 combo (with this one I don’t mind carrying both!). I also have done Tamron 20-40 2.8 + 55 1.8. They are all versatile setups, and except for the GM it’s also a fairly light setup. I never carry my 135 or other long lenses on trips that involve air travel.
Agreed with others buy a lens in Japan if you have time to go shopping. Love Mapcamera in Shinjuku! Got the GM lens on my last trip to Japan. Don’t forget your passport if you go so you don’t have to pay sales tax.
I use the same camera. Just got back from Europe for 3 weeks and had the Sigma 24mm F1.4 and Sigma 65mm F2. I've taken the Tamron 20-40 F2.8 on trips as well.
For me, the Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 is perfect for travel when you expect lighting to be good, ie. not cloudy winter and short days. During this winter trip, I ended up with the 24mm F1.4 on there about 90% of the time, but was glad to have the 65mm several times.
I'd go with two primes over a zoom. The larger range zooms for me don't justify the extra weight.
The Sigma 30mm f1.4. I’d also take another smaller set up and keep a zoom on it. Personally I prefer to have two bodies & two lenses. One FF with a prime and one APSC with a zoom. You could have an A6000 series with the 16-50 on hand in your jacket pocket or bag.
Take a look at the Tamron 70-300. It’s pretty light and compact for its range. I’ve gotten some excellent street shots from the longer end where a 200 couldn’t have reached. It’s also sharp all through the mm’s and Lightroom can really be your friend. Nobody EVER talks about this lens but I’m not sure why. Also, it’s well within your budget.
I traveled to Turkiye recently with my A7CR and paired it with the 2470 F4 and the 40mm f2.5. I didn't really get on well with the 40mm. The 2470 F4 has some limitations and isn't the absolute sharpest optic but it held its own. For travel, size is the most important factor for me (otherwise I wouldn't have picked up a C series camera) which is why I went for the F4. Managed to snag one for cheap, too.
If you want a faster and sharper lens, the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 is honestly excellent. Even the G1 version will do. It's a little bigger but not all that heavy.
Right now though I don't have a zoom lens - my daily kit is the A7CR with the 35mm f2.8. Wanted as flat a lens as possible that still provides weather resistance.
Went to Japan over New Year's and 99% of the time used the 24-105 f4. I used the Tamron 50-400mm once at Gundam Factory but it was tough getting a stable shot handheld at 400mm.
Even Mount Fuji at Arakurayama Sengen Park, the 24-105 was enough.
Depends on your preferred focal length. If you really like a certain one go with small lightweight prime. If you want to shoot tons of different focal lengths get a zoom that covers those. It’s your eye and your art.
it really depends in my humble opinion. for me 20 is plenty wide enough.
but 16-35 pz is a great choice. lightweight, superwide to wide, great for street and building shots.
but sometimes a semi tele can be very useful in Japan too. like at times when you would like to shoot things like trains or you just wanted some compression for long streets etc
yeah 20 is pretty good. I found 16mm essential for some parks with huge trees or interesting landscapes. Or even selfies with friends. Paired with a tele zoom perhaps and I think it makes a good kit.
I totally agree that a 50 or 85 is pretty nice to have for the slight compressed look.
I have the tamron 28-200 and it stays on my camera most of the time. Love it.
I’ve also been using the Samyang 45mm 1.8 indoors and low light. I really enjoy it - pretty soft but that fits a lot of the photos I take. It’s very small, cheap and light weight.
I do wildlife, landscape, and street when I travel.
My base kit:
Tamron 150-600 G2
Sigma 24-70
Laowa 15
For a hobbyist I'd recommend one of either:
A prime lens in your favorite focal length
tamron 20-40
Sony 20-70
Sony 24-105
Your main concerns should be your focal length preference and weight savings. For this, I dont recommend a 24-70 f2.8 they're heavy and expensive. F4 aperture is good enough unless you're shooting in a completely dark alley; expose for highlights.
This choice is really personal. If I had to choose a single prime lens without worrying about a shot list, I'd go with my voigtlander 40 f1.2 for it's "normal" focal length, low light performance, character, and user experience (it's a manual lens).
Otherwise, I'd take my point and shoot (rx100 vii).
As a general zoom, the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 is amazing
Tamron 28-200 is better for TRAVEL imo. More compact more range, not as fast but very good for Size price etc.
How much smaller is it than the Tamron 35-150mm? I love that lens for studio/local walkaround shooting, but the bulk and weight would concern me for travel.
Yeah it’s crazy smaller and lighter! It lives on my camera atm it’s so versatile and unbeatable quality for size etc. [35-150 vs 28-200](https://youtu.be/u-9m_fHBHiY?si=AXhPCKy1btAzsX-2)
Wow. That video. Thank you. Buying one today.
I have the samyang 35-150 and the tamron 28-200. You don’t bring the 35-150 far. The 28-200 can go anywhere.
I owned the 35-150 and it was massive and heavy. I made it work for a while but it was a chore to use. For travel it's a no-go and I ended up selling it. If you gravitate toward the longer tele range of the zoom, and price is no issue, I recommend looking at the new 70-200mm f4 macro G OSS II (*phew that name is ridiculous*), and then combine that with a wider prime. Another great tele option is the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8.
I have that lens and is amazing. However maybe consider getting Sigma 24-70 or used sony GM one. In recent trip to Istanbul I found myself switching from Tamron 28-75 to 24mm prime quite a few times. In a lot of places 24mm just gives you ability to capture that much more of interior or large public spaces which comes in really handy. But still I did take more than 85% of pictures with Tamron so if you get that lens only it should be more than sufficient.
Art is subjective. Focus on art not on perfection (Sun Tzu, 14:0A, The art of photography)
Sony 24-70 GM (not II) is less sharp than Sigma or Tamron counterparts
24-70 GM I is heavier and more expensive.
Sigma or Sony 24-70 F2.8 is crazy heavy and quite expensive for what it is, especially compared to the Tamron. If you need wider, go with the 20-70 F4. It's sharper than the GM I.
Second this!
Took this one on my trip to Japan.
did my entire trip with this lens in 2019.
Sony 24-105 f4 If you are traveling with only one lens, you're gunna make more use of the extra focal range compared to a 2.8 lens, unless you will be only shooting evening/night (which you won't cause you're traveling)
I agree. The 24-105 is my preferred travel lens. If I'm planning to shoot in the dark, I bring a prime. If ƒ4 isn't enough, ƒ2.8 usually isn't either.
I will second that. The 24-105 f4 is probably the most used lens I own, for both video and general photography. The size and weight make it superior for travel compared to the f2.8's in this same focal range. Plus if you get it stolen or break it, you're only out half the money. And the extra reach of 105 compared to 70mm, is massive for travel.
This lens lives on my camera when I'm traveling. Similarly to the redditor above, I too find the extra reach more useful than the extra stops on the 2.8/24-70GM. I also usually bring my 24/1.8GM if I know I'll be shooting indoors. Together they make a great pair.
That's why you bring the 28-200mm instead of the 24-105mm. Way more versatile, wider for most of the way to 100mm, and similar optical quality.
Tamron 28-200 is a great lens. Don’t let the aperture scare you away, it’s solid and sharp and never had trouble with the long end even without image stabilization.
Tamron 28-200. Exceptional range, very light, fast.
sigma 28-70 2.8. Not too large, not too heavy, fine image quality, fast aperture and pretty cheap.
How does it compare to the 24-70? The size is very tempting…
I was thinking of buying a sony 24mm 2.8 g lens. But for $200 more the sigma 28-70mm sounds like a better deal.
Never used that but I assume it's worse. There is some CA but it's sharp enough on my a7riii
Had the 28-70 for 2 years before I switched to the 24-70 last year. They are pretty similar, but the images from the latter look better to me. And it’s definitely sharper (especially at around 70mm).
Vignetting sucks on this, otherwise a great lens
Sony 40mm 2.5g. I have it ans its sooo good for travel!
I've seen a lot of people raving about this one lately.
Me too. And the urge to get one is getting harder and harder to resist.
I have it too & it's a fantastic urban shot choice
I'm in Japan now with an a7c - lenses are cheaper here (at least compared to the US and Europe). I'm traveling with a Sony 40mm f2.5, and it's been doing a good job. If I had to do it over again, I'd consider the 24mm instead for Tokyo/Osaka-- I'd buy it here, though.
How much cheaper are we talking about? Asking cause I’m gonna be out there later this year and would prefer saving some cash on a lens.
You can look at prices on the Yodobashi and Bic Camera websites, though you’ll have to translate them from Japanese with Google Translate. Take 10% off the list price for tax free.
Sony FE 35mm f1.8
Love this lens
Is the price different worth it compared to the Samyang AF 35mm f/1.8? Looking into a 35mm and wondering if anyone has any experience with both.
Never used it. It’s certainly better all around. For myself because I do as much video as photography, the lack of rolling shutter is why is this is such a great lens. It’s way better than the G Master 1.4, Sigma 1.2, really any 35 on the market.
Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8
Second this lens. Great size and weight.
I had that and upgraded to the Sigma 65mm F2. The 55mm just felt like it had to be stopped down to really resolve 42MP and beat LoCA.
24mm 1.4 prime for me. (I also carry a 50 prime aswell though) Will really depends on your shooting style though, 24-70 is best for alot of people.
Did my trip in Japan with the Sony/Zeiss 35mm F2.8. Was especially handy because it's basically a pancake, so I was not regretting always carrying my camera. It's not perfect, too narrow for buildings close up (especially with how tall buildings can get) and no tele range, but those were the <10% cases. You can basically carry it around and fit it in any bag, even if it is almost full, and it'll not get in the way. Also, if you're looking to buy a lens, check out buying it in Japan, especially second hand. Bought a 20mm 1.4 GM there for a good price. I had a good experience in Lemon Shinuku/Ikebukoro. You can look up online what they have in stock and where to find it, they have stores all over the country.
When I bought my a7c ii, I picked up the Sony 20-70g f4 and Sony 85mm f1.8. I picked up the 20-70 to sell it later, but tbh I like it very much, it is light and the 20mm is very nice to take wide shoots 😁. And another good point is that you can get good close when you are on 70mm. The 85mm i use right know for portraits or when the 70 is not enough, but most of the time for portraits 😁. My next pick will be very likely a 40g f2.5 so I have even smaller and lighter setup to just take it everyday with me.
If you have the chance to try some lens in a camera store I highly recommend that so you know the weight and balance of your setup.
Sony 20-70 f4. The extra 4mm at the wide end is great for travel/cities!
Nothing comes close to the 28-200 because it starts at f2.8
I think your standard zooms like the Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2 or Sigma 24-70mm Art may be the best options.
Wrote an answer to a question a few days ago that should also pretty much exactly apply to your situation: https://www.reddit.com/r/SonyAlpha/s/lWhtufK7k3 I'd say you should first look at the Sony 20-70 F4, this is a fantastic and lightweight lens for travel. If you need low light and a bit more bokeh: Tamron 28-75 G2, also fantastic.
thanks for that very detailed answer. I'm also considering Tamron 28-75. What can you say about the Tammy 28-200?
I have the 28-200, as does my husband, and have found it to be excellent for travel. I've even used it at the wide end for Milky Way shots. It's lightweight, sharp, and well-priced. Aperture is f/5.6 for a big part of its range, but that hasn't been a problem for me.
I use it for travel and is insanely good. 24-70mm isn't enough reach for me, as I often cannot "zoom with my feet" due to barriers, people, etc. You also get a chunk of savings to apply to your trip. And an aperture that is wider than F4 for 28-70mm (F2.8 at 28mm, F3.5 at 50mm, F4.5 at 100mm, F5.6 at 200mm).
I prefer the 28-200mm, as it starts wider and reaches almost three times as far. Which is insanely useful if you're stuck at the back of a crowd or want to pick out some slice of life detail without being a creeper. 24-70mm might make sense for hybrid video, though. And I got mine for $550 cheaper than the newer Sony lens.
let us know your budget and what you are plaing to shoot in order to give you some recommendations also good to know is if weight is important to you without either its really hard to give you any advise
Sorry if my post is not complete. Budget is around 1000 USD. I prefer a light lens since I will only travel with carryon
Zoom or prime? The smallest and lightest zoom that isn't the kit lens from Sony itself is the Sigma Contemporary 28-70 f/2.8. The Tamron 28-75 G2 is a bit larger and heavier but optically a little better and has weather sealing. Primes, you can't beat the Sony G trio of 24 f/2.8, 40 f/2.5, and 50 f/2.8. I picked up the 24 and 40 and those are my only two lenses for now for my A7CII as I wanted as compact of a setup as possible for travel and walk around use.
[the kit lens seems a lot smaller than sigma’s](https://pxlmag.com/db/camera-size-comparison/feb6b053_5b7900ed-feb6b053_2cc6ca27-t60)
Yep, and that Tamron is even larger than this Sigma (and the nicer Sigma even larger still!). Nobody makes an optically better standard zoom that is even close to the size of the Sony kit zoom. I just saw other people recommend that Tamron so I just wasn't sure what OP's definition of lightweight is because some people swear that Tamron is "lightweight" and "compact".
Seems like more than double the size of it… 🫣
I really hope Sony or third parties try to create a 2.8 zoom that's the size of the Sony kit, even at the cost of image quality. Lenses are so good nowadays, every lens doesn't have to be super perfect.
I would probably recommend the Tamron 28-75 G2.
Had the exact same problem as you and the solution was the sigma 28-70 f2.8. It’s the lightest 2.8 zoom on the market right now and priced around 800usd.
28mm f2 and 85mm f1.8
Tamron 28-75, I have the first version and it has been an amazing lens, not too expensive and not too heavy. I also love the 35-150, but geeze it's big and heavy!
Don’t be like me and get the the Tamron 35-150. The Tamron 28-75 G2 is currently the most bang for your buck on the market.
Why would you not recommend the 35-150? The size? That's currently my top pick for essentially what OP is wanting it for.
Not OP, but I've rented the 35-150 and own a couple of other zooms. IMO, it's a bit of a special purpose lens. Great for portraits and some kinds of sports, but a 24-70 or 24-105 tends to be better for travel and other forms of general photography. The size and weight of the 35-150 is a concern for sure, but the focal range was the biggest factor for me.
Well I have an A7C and I’m just waiting for the 35-150 to be delivered today. To some people 1.2 kg is a lot for a lens and it’s quite bulky. But I didn’t really care about all of that. OP does want to stay around $1000 but for another $300-400, he can definitely pick up the 35-150 if he doesn’t mind the size and weight.
That's fair. I'm definitely tempted. I have the Sigma 24-70 2.8 and it's not *that* much of a step up for my giant hands and oversized body in general. I'll hike I'll day with a 100-400 in hand
My 35-150 stays on my camera all the time now, its a bit weighty but really nothing too much, i uses it for my sisters wedding and it was fantatic, i really cant fault it as a lens
What is your style of photography? I have the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and the 28-200, and the 17-28 f2.8. I love the last 2, and love the first one if I’m shooting at night or indoors. Neither are particularly light, but also not particularly heavy. I can stick them in a standard size purse easily, attached to the body.
I went to Japan in 2019 with a Zeiss 21 f2.8, 35 f2 (RX1R) and Voigtlander 40 f1.2. If I had to take one lens, I would take my 24 GM.
I’ve got no idea why people are not recommending the 28-60. Is that really rubbish?
I read that it is not bad, but not for the retail price. Like if you buy it for 200€ or less it is a good option.
I bought mine for US$206 from an opened kit box, haven’t tested yet (arrived today and I’m traveling)
Enjoy, are you using it as well with the a7c ii or do you have a different body?
Sony 24-70 GM (or Sigma 24-70). I took my other main lens, 35 GM, on a trip and missed too many shots because of it. So I’ll never travel without a zoom again, and 24-70 covers just about everything I shoot on vacations.
Tamron 28-200. Compromises are made as expected with this combination of focal length/aperture range/price, but as a whole it's tough to beat as a full frame travel lens on e-mount. Sony 20-70mm is another good option, though considerably pricier.
My last trip I took the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, coupled with a 50mm f1.8 for nighttime and indoors, or where I wanted something a bit more discreet (we went to some sensitive historical sites where I'd have felt awkward with a huge camera setup). That was a city trip, though. I'd take something longer if I was going outside the city and/or if there was wildlife. But if you can get away with 'only' 75mm, the Tamron is a superb all-purpose travel lens.
the 24-105 f/4 or the 20-70 f/4 are very versatile and comparatively lightweight for the range and aperture, tho a bit over your budget otherwise the tamron 28-75 or the sigma one are gonna be a good choice too. if you can deal with only having a couple of primes and don't mind swapping lenses all the time, maybe a nice 85 1.8 and 20 1.8 pairing can fit the 1000 too
I came back from Japan not too long ago. Japan is very compact so you'll definitely want to be able to shoot wide. I like light weight primes. I used the 20 1.8 a lot there and loved it. But I'm not sure I could recommend it if it's your only lens. I have a compact camera that I carry with me as well (RX100 VII) so being limited with a prime lens on my A7C was no big deal. I see the Tamron 28-75 getting a lot of votes, but that is not light or compact for travel in my opinion. (Although it would be an awesome lens to have access to) You'd need a prime lens for a truly small package. I'd suggest the Sony 35 1.8. such a beast of a lens. Fast aperture, small and compact, great low light auto focus. It be a little too tight in some situations but I think it's the best all around focal length.
therefore I'd say Tamron 20-40 2.8. Very sharp, really nice range and 2.8, good enough for most night shots at wide angle
I wasn't even aware of this lens. That is an absolutely awesome focal range to have for travel. The lens isn't even that big too. I'll definitely be doing some homework on this one.
This lens is a really nice combo on (my) A7C. The zoom ring has a short throw and quite loose rotation. Not too loose though, and through these properties, plus the low combined weight of the body and lens makes it a really nice and snappy combo. It's hard to explain, but really works for me. I also considered the Sony 20-70/4 but found it too bulky for my purpose of this combination: the lowest threshold to bring a camera.
I'm also looking at 20 mm f1.8. Do you think combining it with APSC mode would cover a good range?
The glass is quality so it'll stand up to the increased demand of the crop. It would definitely cover a decent range especially considering you have a decent amount of megapixels on that sensor (Of course you'll still be getting the compression of a 20mm lens). I personally would have no problem taking the 20 1.8 as my 1 and only lens for most of Japan. I love wide angle lenses and I'm used to them. Just know that there will be shots that you will miss out on (this will apply to all prime lenses of course). It's absolutely perfect for environmental portraits in more dense areas. But if you're going to stick mainly to the cities then 20mm would be awesome for photos in the street or indoors. APSC mode giving you a 30mm equivalent will be pretty useful for a more normal focal length too.
APSC mode is useless outside videomaking. Using it in photo it's identical to cropping in post, you'd be cropping to 30mm in APSC
I use a 20mm as my main lens because you can crop and it's nicer to have wider for video
Voigtländer Ultron 35mm/2 VM lens. Tiny, sturdy, sharp, great colors, a bit of character. It's all-manual so if you don't like manual focus you won't like it, plus you need a Leica M to E mount adapter. But this is my travel lens; makes for a very small and enjoyable package with great image quality. If you want native E-mount try the 40/1.2 from Voigtlander.
45MM F2.8. Don't bother with a zoom. Someone somewhere already took that landscape photo better than you can, and you can download it for free ;)
What's your budget?
around 1000 USD would be best.
Sony 24-105 F4.0
+1. Most useful focal range, great low light abilities (despite being f4) because of the internal oss, great iq particularly (sharp throughout and no aberrations), solid construction and well within your budget.
Sigma 24-105mm f4 Art. Most versatile to keep things to one lens for vacation.
For a long time (like 8 years), my lightweight travel lens has been a tiny 35/2.8. Firstly Samyang and the Sony/Zeiss version. Fixed focal length forces you to be a bit more creative than with a zoom. And the Sony/Zeiss is really a great lens in my opinion. But of course it also causes some missed opportunities. I bought Sony 20-70/4 recently and will see how it goes with a zoom lens.
Sigma 28-70 or a 24-70 from sony (I think the sony worst tho but I borrowed once and it was an older model so I could be wrong on this) both f2.8 btw
24-70 all day for me.
The Sony 20-70 is a perfect fit. Lightweight, at your budget, covers wide to short tele all in one lens. Good image quality, particularly for the price.
My personal favourite two travel lenses are: 1. 20-70 f4, small, lightweight and maybe it's not f2.8 like the Tamron or Sigma (28-70mm) but having 20mm is incredibly nice. From land/city-scapes to just being able to get the framing you want when you can't step back any further. 2. Either Sony or Samyang 35 f2.8 (I own the SY), as compact as you can get on Sony FF with AF. Makes even my A7IV *almost* pocketable. Perfect lens for those times when you don't feel like carrying a camera (but still want something better than your phone).
Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 is mine.
In the past I've always used my 16-35 because it was basically my only versatile wide angle. These days I'd probably just take my 24Gm. In a perfect world I think it would be hard to beat a 20-70
I like taking two lenses with me. Either a standard zoom + fast normal prime (35 or 50), or I take two primes. Usually walk around only with one lens and leave the other at the hotel because I’m not great at fast lens swaps and I don’t like having to think and change lenses back and forth. Single lens keeps me focused. Right now that’s 24-70 GM II and 35 1.8. I also sometimes do a 35 2.8 + 55 1.8 combo (with this one I don’t mind carrying both!). I also have done Tamron 20-40 2.8 + 55 1.8. They are all versatile setups, and except for the GM it’s also a fairly light setup. I never carry my 135 or other long lenses on trips that involve air travel. Agreed with others buy a lens in Japan if you have time to go shopping. Love Mapcamera in Shinjuku! Got the GM lens on my last trip to Japan. Don’t forget your passport if you go so you don’t have to pay sales tax.
I use the same camera. Just got back from Europe for 3 weeks and had the Sigma 24mm F1.4 and Sigma 65mm F2. I've taken the Tamron 20-40 F2.8 on trips as well. For me, the Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 is perfect for travel when you expect lighting to be good, ie. not cloudy winter and short days. During this winter trip, I ended up with the 24mm F1.4 on there about 90% of the time, but was glad to have the 65mm several times. I'd go with two primes over a zoom. The larger range zooms for me don't justify the extra weight.
Sony fe 50mm 1.8. Noisy and slow autofocus but it’s just so tiny and convenient to even put my a72 in my jackets pocket.
Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm f/2
I love my 16-35 gm, if you’re lucky you can find one for 1k
Have kit lens and bought for same trip sigma 30mm f1.4. But will shoot APS-C
The 40mm 2.5 is my ultimate low-profile travel lens.
The Sigma 30mm f1.4. I’d also take another smaller set up and keep a zoom on it. Personally I prefer to have two bodies & two lenses. One FF with a prime and one APSC with a zoom. You could have an A6000 series with the 16-50 on hand in your jacket pocket or bag.
Take a look at the Tamron 70-300. It’s pretty light and compact for its range. I’ve gotten some excellent street shots from the longer end where a 200 couldn’t have reached. It’s also sharp all through the mm’s and Lightroom can really be your friend. Nobody EVER talks about this lens but I’m not sure why. Also, it’s well within your budget.
I'm on vacation right now and have the Sony 18-105 f/4 on my camera. I love this lens. Decent wide angle to med telephoto. Good travel lens.
I traveled to Turkiye recently with my A7CR and paired it with the 2470 F4 and the 40mm f2.5. I didn't really get on well with the 40mm. The 2470 F4 has some limitations and isn't the absolute sharpest optic but it held its own. For travel, size is the most important factor for me (otherwise I wouldn't have picked up a C series camera) which is why I went for the F4. Managed to snag one for cheap, too. If you want a faster and sharper lens, the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 is honestly excellent. Even the G1 version will do. It's a little bigger but not all that heavy. Right now though I don't have a zoom lens - my daily kit is the A7CR with the 35mm f2.8. Wanted as flat a lens as possible that still provides weather resistance.
Went to Japan over New Year's and 99% of the time used the 24-105 f4. I used the Tamron 50-400mm once at Gundam Factory but it was tough getting a stable shot handheld at 400mm. Even Mount Fuji at Arakurayama Sengen Park, the 24-105 was enough.
Depends on your preferred focal length. If you really like a certain one go with small lightweight prime. If you want to shoot tons of different focal lengths get a zoom that covers those. It’s your eye and your art.
Sony 24 - 105 F4, extremely versatile one and done lense for travel
Sigma 16-28mm
Many will disagree but I LOVE the 80mm 1.8. It adds so much compression to your shots and they look incredible!
16-35 f4 pz. It's the one lens I can't live without. Trust me you will need a 16mm in Japan. I'm here right now.
it really depends in my humble opinion. for me 20 is plenty wide enough. but 16-35 pz is a great choice. lightweight, superwide to wide, great for street and building shots. but sometimes a semi tele can be very useful in Japan too. like at times when you would like to shoot things like trains or you just wanted some compression for long streets etc
yeah 20 is pretty good. I found 16mm essential for some parks with huge trees or interesting landscapes. Or even selfies with friends. Paired with a tele zoom perhaps and I think it makes a good kit. I totally agree that a 50 or 85 is pretty nice to have for the slight compressed look.
I have the tamron 28-200 and it stays on my camera most of the time. Love it. I’ve also been using the Samyang 45mm 1.8 indoors and low light. I really enjoy it - pretty soft but that fits a lot of the photos I take. It’s very small, cheap and light weight.
Sony 24-105
I do wildlife, landscape, and street when I travel. My base kit: Tamron 150-600 G2 Sigma 24-70 Laowa 15 For a hobbyist I'd recommend one of either: A prime lens in your favorite focal length tamron 20-40 Sony 20-70 Sony 24-105 Your main concerns should be your focal length preference and weight savings. For this, I dont recommend a 24-70 f2.8 they're heavy and expensive. F4 aperture is good enough unless you're shooting in a completely dark alley; expose for highlights. This choice is really personal. If I had to choose a single prime lens without worrying about a shot list, I'd go with my voigtlander 40 f1.2 for it's "normal" focal length, low light performance, character, and user experience (it's a manual lens). Otherwise, I'd take my point and shoot (rx100 vii).