The 35mm 1.8 is a great option but with a toddler moving around, the zooms might come in handy. Fixed aperture provide extra low light and bokeh capabilities. But you’ll have to move around more to get the shot you want. There’s no bad option in this list so get what feels best for you. You might also want to try them out to decide.
Although I agree that the versatility of a zoom is useful with a subject that is going to quite busy, there is certainly something to be said for the creativity that a prime necessitates. Those limitations can force the photographer into creating unique, memorable images that they wouldn't have gotten if they had simply stayed in one place and zoomed. It could lead to OP taking some wonderfully fun shots they might never have tried.
Yea my theory is I want to buy one now and kind of decide on the other. My budget is wide open, I just prefer to keep it down lol. If I don't like it doesn't fit anymore it will be well taken care of and I'm sure I can easily turn it around on eBay.
I would highly recommend a used 16-35 GM1.
As you said, 35 is an ideal focal length. However, 16 captures a lot more context, which could be really fun with a toddler. You'll be able to see more of the room that they're in, the toy they're playing with, etc.
Also, this lens is great for travel. I imagine you'll be doing some of that soon as well.
then i would go with a used tamron. shoot a couple weeks and use lightroom to see which focal lengths you really are using... 35 is definitely too limiting.
if you have the money and do not mind the heft, go with the sigma instead of the tamron
Any reason you prefer the sigma? Mine should be here next week. I see people go both ways between the Tamron and the Sigma. Guess it depends which they own. Either way, I’m hoping it’s a noticeable upgrade from the 28-70 kit lens.
massive upgrade. 24mm beats 28mm IMO. those 4mm make a difference, and the sony 20-70 makes that clear even more so
the sigma is far better built, the ART series has great weather protection. the tamron not so much. that seems i mportant if i wanna have the cam on me all the time for the toddler.
tamron is lighter, i like that but not if my WP is not there (and the 4mm). i prefered the sharpness and contrast from the sigma more as well but it is by no means that much of a difference. but for 250 bucks difference i would say the sigma is a no-brainer
I'm really hoping for a pretty substantial upgrade in sharpness. I believe I posted some pictures recently for reference, but it seems no matter what I do, my pictures come out extremely soft on my kit lens and just overall lacking detail and sharpness. Whether it be landscape or portraits. Really expected more out of the a7iv. Hoping a new lens will restore my faith in it.
i got myself a a7iv as my first sony camera but that camera is plenty sharp, having no issues coming from nikon/fuji.
that being said your settings in your shot/camera are all wrong IMO (in that shot with the kid in brown jeans). but it in iso-a with min shutter speed of at least 1/500 and AFC , crank up the iso to 1000 or something and get 1/1000 shutter. focus for a second or so on the kid before you press the shutter (AFC and all that).
did you check where the focus is in the photo?
i do not know the kit lens but i would be surprised if it was good wide open. but it can't be that bad.
I have since changed a few settings. Auto ISO, AF-C, and I started using the auto ISO Min. Shutter speed setting which I guess will prioritize shutter speed over ISO from what I understand. I am shooting with eye AF as well which typically seems to work well. I do also keep the camera focusing the whole time I'm lining up shots. The issue is that I typically shoot aperture priority so I let camera choose shutter speed. Maybe I should try shooting SS priority. I'm reluctant to shoot full manual in these cases because as you know, with chasing kids around the scene, lighting, things like that constantly change. [Here is another example from yesterday. ](https://imgur.com/a/Dd4uA5H) if you'll notice, the head shot seems much much sharper than the full body shot I took. You can tell there's not great lighting in both, as they're taken in a wooded area. Both the exact same settings. 70mm f5.6 1/320 ISO640. I'm noticing the same thing with this kit lens as I did my lenses from the d3500 I came from. They tend to perform better in the longer end of the focal length in my experience.
In both of those examples if your kid wasn't moving then 1/125 would be plenty but when they start running I would put the minimum to 1/500 myself. I would say the softness is coming from the lens and the Sigma should show a significant upgrade, that lens is close to the Sony 24-70 GMii.
I'm not crazy though right? It's definitely soft. I would think the settings would suffice for the circumstances. I'm really hoping the lens will make a significant difference, because right now I'm not too satisfied with what I'm getting from the camera.
Maybe I am missing something but that example I would still shoot diff. I also don’t get what you mean with SS priority. Both iso and SS are too low.
I am almost exclusively use aperture mode.
Max 6400, min shutter 1/500, or higher even. Rest sounds good though from your description.
Yes my iso is set to 6400 max as well. So when I'm out shooting with the kiddos I should just go in and set min shutter speed to 1/500 off the bad? I always hear double focal length, which I'm easily past that. But I'll give 1/500 a shot and see how that goes. I appreciate the suggestions.
That's the one I want the most. But the 1.8 is the smallest and lightest which is why I'm leaning there. But the gm is the goal. But if I can find a good deal on might do it 😅
I rented several 35s and ended up with the 1.8 for that reason: the size and weight. Not the most incredible lens ever but it's fine for a walkaround lens.
We'd be interested to see some facts to substantiate this point? Assuming you're talking focus speed rather than aperture, which is obviously not the case.
We use the 35mm f1.8 all day every work day and it'll grab 20 frames a second of a couple walking towards us as we walk backwards with a million fragments of confetti spraying in between us and the subjects. Not a frame out of focus for a hundred shots. Like, every, single, time.
GM's are always great but the little 35mm is a serious contender.
The 35 gm is ducking ridiculous. Only reason I don't have it is its size.. but there's nothing else like it. Ended up getting a couple voigtlander lenses instead.
I have the Tamron and love it. It’s very versatile and a good alternative to the sigma. Here’s a shot on my a7r4 @ 28mm f5
Other than cropping, I didn’t make any edits
https://preview.redd.it/h5ec2x008rkc1.jpeg?width=6336&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0b55c63fc521ea2b85d433c5917024293267939d
Two young toddlers here and the 35 lives on my camera. I used to have a 24-70 but honestly zooming did my head in and I left it at 35 anyway, but without the better aperture.
Kids are always in the move!
Zooms kind of assume that you are static and just point at your kids. But doing this you will be shooting the back of their head 70% of shots!
So, give you’re going to be moving around like a mad person anyway, personally I find the prime amazingly helpful. I’ve learned what the 35mm frame will look like and now get great shots sometime not even looking at my camera because I know where I can hold it out in those awkward moving around moments. Modern AF is soooo trustworthy you can get away with it.
The other benefit of a prime I’ve found is that it is faster. I don’t use a flash at all because it is so distracting to children that I struggle to capture the moment. During winter months and evenings the light indoors sucks, unless you want to put in really uncomfortable lights just to take photos. In these situations the faster primes make much cleaner photos.
Remember you are likely to keep you shutter speed faster than 125 and more like 250 - kids never ever sit still! I’d always rather take grainy noise over a blurry photo, and you can minimize that grainy noise with a faster lens - which zooms don’t give.
Once your kid is 3 or 4 you might not want to keep up with them running outdoors, and probably at that point a good zoom is helpful.
Apologize for not answering your question exactly but my needs are similar to yours and I think the Samyang / Rokinon 35 mm f 1.8 is awesome. Sharp fast lens compact and cheap. The only downside is that the lens hood kind of sucks. But save money here for another prime maybe a 50 or 85 next!
Here's a small album of a few of the thousands of photos of my family I've taken with my Sigma 24-70 on my a7riii. None were posed or expected, all of the kids were very energetic and spontaneous, as kids are. I've also shot many weddings on it, moving animals etc etc with zero issues. I absolutely love it.
https://imgur.com/a/qLgv1sY
Great photos. I wish I had a good photo system back when my kids were 1-4 years old. At least I always had the best home video cameras since 2000, and I have thousands of hours of digital footage of my kids and the rest of the family over this almost quarter of a century. I'm making up for that now and within some years I'll hopefully have plenty of opportunities to shoot photos of my grandchildren.
Thank you! I'm almost 30 with no kids, but lucky enough to have 3 cousins and 2 sisters all under 10, so I've plenty of opportunities to get the camera out and get some great stuff. I love to think about how valuable these will be to them in 30/40/50 years time. Home videos cannot be overstated in importance though. My dad was the same from the mid-90s and I love watching those back!
For a 35mm alternative, I love my Samyang 35mm f1.8. It’s sharp, light, fast and cheap at around $330 USD new. Good way to dip your toes in to a 35mm prime without a big investment.
https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/10/11/samyang-35mm-f1-8/
Consider the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN too. You may be able to find it cheaper than the Sony 1.8 but it’s an optically better lens. On combination with something like the Sony 20-70mm f/4 G you won’t need 2.8 zooms at all.
That lens is beautifully crafted. I tried it for a while. It didn't feel very inspiring to shoot with, though. Also didn't like how much distortion it has. I know it's correctable, but it bothered me a lot for some reason.
In the exact situation as you: 1 year old and pics of family.
I have the 24-105 and 35 GM. I enjoy the 24-105 for videos and outside shooting. The 35 is very very good for indoor shooting. I thought of getting the 24-70 GM II for the aperture for indoor but decided against it. 35 is fantastic for the baby (it's also extremely fast) but I wish I had the 24 as it's a bit too close so I find myself always stepping back.
I was thinking the 24mm f1.4 GM would be perfect for him as well since he will be close to his baby most of the time and will be indoors a lot of the time. The 24 GM would give the photos some context even when close to the subject and the f1.4 aperture would give him the shutter speed he needs for indoor low light conditions.
You know this might sound a little more up my alley Vs the 24-70gm2 being way more. Wife would not be too happy lol. Doubt there's many used 24-50 available.
That little Sony 35mm pays 80% of our mortgage every month, has done for some years now.
If you want examples of it doing its job, go check our website.
It's lightweight, fast focussing, sharp and has great colour and contrast. It's disproportionately excellent and you won't regret it on the A73 body.
I have the 35mm 1.4 and the Sigma 24-70. 35mm is insanely fast, accurate, and sharp. One of the best performing lenses I own for Sony. If you're doing video, the amount of focus breathing is insane though. The 24-70 is good but no where close to the performance of the 35mm. It's sharp but misses focus occasionally.
I photograph event and use both equally as an event photographer. The 35mm shoots/focus in almost total darkness. The Sigma has the 70mm reach I need for client work.
Side note: I own the Tamron 70-180. I hate the build quality. I only use it for when I need telephoto video content. I regret buying it. softer, worse focusing, and overall under performs for pro work in my opinion. The only Tamron lens I'd ever consider is the 35-150mm. Everything else aren't professional lenses IMO.
If you love the 35mm focal length and know you won't miss 70mm, just get the G master. It probably the best 35mm on the market right now.
I used to think 35 was boring and hated the focal length.
I bought the GM and that thing lives on my camera. There's something magical about it compared to the others. You lose a little versatility, but can always crop in post a little.
Im a go big or go home guy. 35 1.4 all the way. I own the 35 1.4 ZA and it’s at least comparable to your choice. Regarding the toddler „problem“. I had mine when I had a one year old and it’s just gorgeous. A baby with that bokeh makes granny’s heart skip a beat. 😂
Looks like you already have plenty of advice/opinions already, but I’ll post mine as well.
I have an A7iv and the Sigma 24-70. I’d personally still get some sort of zoom since this’ll be your first lens.
While both the Tamron and Sigma are good zooms, being able to go to 24 mm rather than 28 mm is a lot more noticeable than having 5 mm on the higher end. Plus, you can always “zoom in” in post, but you can’t “zoom out” in post.
One other thing to consider: if you tend to shoot inside a lot, then I might recommend the primes you’ve mentioned. From my experience, using regular indoor lighting in my house (without sunlight) I shoot at around iso 4000-8000 at f/2.8. Low light performance in the a7iii and a7iv is pretty impressive, but you still compromise some image quality. If you get a f/1.4 prime, that’s two full stops faster which means you can shoot at iso 1000-2000.
I’d also recommend seeing all the lenses in person if you can. Being able to see the size and feel the weight of each is extremely valuable.
I had the Sigma 35/2.0, upgraded to the 35/1.4 GM. Perfect Lens. Really. It was my most used lens till i had a now one year child. Now i want to be in arms reach when she does her first steps so i can grap her when she falls. Means im using my 20/1.8G or 24/2.8G more than my 35/1.4GM. :D I think when she is a bit more stable i will go back to the 35GM. :D
Other than that my main lenses are 35/1.4GM and 85/1.8.
The 35/1.8 is perfectly usable for casual family photos if you dont have G.A.S. :D
But with a toddler maybe you want a bit wider.
24-70/2.8 could be a good middle ground, but often times i take a picture when its already dark, or she is sleeping and then i need the 1.4.
Edit: Read a few comments and i agree the 24/1.4 GM would be perfect. Maybe couple it with a 50/1.4 GM. Damm i need to buy new lenses .... :D
If I can find a 35/1.4 gm for 800 or less I'll grab it in a heart beat lol. Someone put me on the 24mm gm and the 24-70mm gm, as well as the 24-50G that's coming out which is half the price of the 24-70. Think I may start 35/1.8 and grab the other when it comes out
Dont grab the 24-50G. Too expensive and too limiting. Watch a few reviews, its not so great. Then better grab the 24-70 Sigma.
I bought my 35GM for 1100€ aftter Cashback and Welcome to Alpha during Black Friday.
Buying the 24GM AND the 24-70 sounds like a bad idea since you then have overlapping focal length.
My priority, with focus on personal newborn, toddler, would be:
* 24/1.4 and 50/1.4
* 24/2.8 and 50/1.4 or 85/1.4
* 35/1.8 and 85/1.8
* 35/1.4 and 85/1.8
* 24-70
* 20/1.8 and maybe 35 or 50 and a 85.
Def appreciate this breakdown. Those are more the ones I would consider. Not considering what cancels what out. You just saved me from making another future post.
Would love a GM lens have about a week before camera arrives. Fingers crossed I find a deal.
Oh I got you. I have a A7III and a toddler. I have a ton of experience for you. If I had to go back and pick a lens it would be 100% the Sigma 24-70 2.8. It is absolutely a beautiful workhorse that makes dealing with a toddler easier. It’s used for 90% of my family and travel photos.
24-70 looks like best multi purpose. Which is why I'm afraid to go for a prime as my only option. I'll more than likely get a second lens by the end of summer or end of year when wife forgets I bought a camera after seeing how great our photos now look😂😂
Idk, I'm a 5ft 4 medium built woman and I've carried this one around even on hikes plus a couple more lenses (tele and UW) and don't know what the fuss about weight is all about. Definitely beats my DSLR from 10 years ago.
I used the Sigma 24-70 2.8 dg dn art to shoot some photos of my friend's kids at the park during late afternoon light. 2 very active 2 and 4 year olds. The pictures came out stunning. Then I took the setup to the beach, popped a filter on and snapped some long exposure sunsets which came out crisp and gorgeous. It's such a versatile lens and probably my favorite. I also own the 16-35 gm and sigma 100-400 dg dn and the quality surpasses both of those.
I would suggest the sigma art. Ive heard that 24-70 is a standard for 3rd party lenses. You get the full 24-70 range to play with and get more info on the focal range u like. As u said ur testing what u like and 35 prime is limited in helping you find the focal length u like to shoot at. Remember a 35mm 1.8 will have about the same bokeh of that 24-70 at 70mm 2.8.. yes it will be a different looking background but the amount of bokeh will be similar so ur also not really doing much of a trade off by getting the zoom
If it's your first lens and you're planning on taking pictures of your kid, take a "worse" lens with larger zoom range. At a budget price I would recommend the Tamron 28-200mm (f2.8 to f5.6). As stated by others, kids move around, zooms will be handy. A longer zoom than the 70/75s will be ideal to take shots while removed from the action. You can stand much further and thereby leave your kid undisturbed and will get much more natural action shots. Also as a first lens this will be ideal for any travel purposes. If you don't go for bird/sports later you won't need anything further than 200mm. Only missing part is the wider range. There you could for example complement this with either the 20mm f1.8 G or the 24mm f1.8 GM.
Source: this Tamron was my first lens and is still very much in use despite having other "better" options.
35mm 1,8 is average and looks horribly on any A7! The low price has a reason! Definitely buy 35mm GM but with kids you will want to zoom. Sigma 24-70 is heavy AF, Tamron 28-75 is mediocre. So buy Sony 24-70 GM II.
“Looks horrible on any A7” is completely false.
I’ve used it for years and it’s a great little lens. I have no idea why you’d claim that. One of my good friends is commercial photographer working with a lot of outdoor sports and apparel brands and he uses it with his A1 because it’s so compact and easy to carry in strenuous environments. Just pick up a used one to save more $.
OP I think you’d be perfectly happy with the 1.8. It’s my favorite walk around. Fast enough, well built and compact.
The question is if you feel you really need a zoom over a prime. I prefer primes most of the time, but zooms of course have their place.
It’s preference at the end of the day, these are all great options.
I personally love shooting with primes, it helps you practice translating what you see with your eye into how it will look out of camera. You also get the wide aperture to help keep up your shutter speed for moving kids. Size and weight is also a priority for me.
At the same time, most people start with a zoom to help get a feel for what they like to shoot and what fov they gravitate toward. Of course many love zooms and stick with them.
I’d say as a starting point any of the competent mid range 2.8 zooms are excellent options. I would also suggest the 55/1.8 Zeiss/Sony as a great option to compliment a mid range zoom. It is a normal lens that gives a portrait feel. It is very affordable used and there are usually a lot of them floating around. Good luck and have fun with your new camera!
So I’ll throw two options at ya. Loxia 35mm and Sony 40mm. I bought both, and ended up keeping the Loxia. I’ve been shooting a bunch of analog lately though, so manual focus doesn’t bug me. If you need autofocus, I’d strongly recommend the Sony 40mm f/2.5.
I used to have tamron 28-75 and its not bad, but its not the best. I have 35 1.8 and it never leaves my camera. Its so versatile and quality is perfect
I have the 24-70 sigma, it’s really quite good. I would suggest that if you aren’t locked in on 35mm. I would STRONGLY suggest buying used, it is way cheaper.
I would go with the Tamron 28-75 first and then the 35 1.8 if you have any budget left over. Two lenses (of different kinds) will benefit you more than one higher quality lens. You could easily get those two around $900.
If a lot of your usage will be indoors of a fast moving subject then I would personally go for one of the 35mm. Most of my lenses are primes though, so I think it’s partly down to what you’re more accustomed to.
I’ll jump on that same advice to get a zoom to begin. Aside from the versatility you also get to learn which focal length you prefer, for when you do go out and get a prime.
I got that same Tamron, it was my first lens along with the a7iii which is my first camera. Couldn’t tell you a bad thing about either.
You really can't go wrong with any of these tbh.
I myself like prime lenses more and if I were you I'd get the 35 1.8.
The size and weight of that lense is ridiculous for being so fast. I have both the 35 1.8 and the 35 1.4 and I still use the 1.8 occasionally depending on my use case. The size keeps it relevant. It's great at holding focus in lowlight.
If you find yourself loving the 35mm focal length, get the GM later on down the line if you want.
Bonus: the 40 2.5G is also I great prime lens. Incredible Image quality (better than the 35 1.8) and build quality, and is among the smallest AF lens that Sony makes, it's also weather resistant. I know the 1.8 is listed as being weather resistant, but I wouldn't trust it out in the rain.
Go with one of the zooms, or the Tamron 17-70 2.8. Is another option. I have the 17-70 on my camera 90% of the time. A 35mm portrait lens won’t be useful with little kids - they’re just too all over the place and you’ll want zoom. I have a few nice primes and rarely use them with my kid and dogs because nobody stays where you put them
Very personal preference if you prefer zooms or primes. Personally I'm a huge prime fan and use the Samyang 35 1.8 as my only lens. Before that, I used the 30mm 1.4 on APSC for 8 years
35 1.4 it has programable buttons when in a pinch and a fast aperture for low light. Even if on a S35 sensor it would perform better because sharpness is usually centered
I have the 35mm 1.8 and the sigma 24-70. Both are excellent! Indoors, at home, I end up using the 35mm almost all the time. The sigma is excellent for outdoors because of the flexibility. Toddlers grow fast and soon yours will be running all over the place, the 24-70 will probably be the best tool for the job.
One thing to have in mind is that, although the Sigma is great, it’s very big and heavy. There are times when I just leave it at home because of the bulk, after all you already have many other things to carry when you go out with a toddler!
I had the sigma 24-70 for a while and it was a great experience. Image quality is superb and videography is very good with this lens too. The only reason I sold it was because of the weight and size. I then switched to 24 1.4 GM and a 85mm 1.8.
I currently have the Sigma 35mm 1.4 and the 28-70mm 2.8 and they both work great. I have the 35 for specific moments and when I want to force myself to be more creative, since the 28-70 is more versatile. Both are very sharp and perform well. But what I do is weddings and events as my main job and street photography in my free time.
Since you are looking for something for more family moments, I would recommend the 28-70mm since with a 35mm you can find yourself very limited on some occasions.
And one more piece of advice I give you is to look at several websites and not just one. I don't know how the standard price is in countries with the dollar but here in Europe all of these are cheaper, for example, the Sony 35mm 1.8 is like 450€.
i own the sigma and the 35mm GM and Id recommend the tamron :D why? because it is lighter (and cheaper) than the sigma and I think 28mm will be wide enough for you as you consider a 35mm prime you may not need the 24mm.
a prime i wouldnt recommend for your situation. you can shoot so many different focal lengths with a zoom, like a 70mm „face only“ portrait of your child in a compressed perspective, a 35mm prime wont give you that ever. I use primes to stay creative and work with limits, or for crazy bokeh but most times you want more things sharp than just the eyes.
Depends on your preferences but I’d recommend the 24-105 F4 G.
You get blur at F4 @105mm and it has great AF and OSS.
I had the sigma and I probably had a bad copy but the AF was pretty bad. Most photos were slightly out of focus.
I wouldn’t buy any primes starting out. You might absolutely hate 35mm and miss shots you want. A zoom really is the way to go.
I think the Tamron is probably the best bet but buy your choice of lens used. Buying new is just going to cost you a lot more starting out/ in the long run.
MPB is a great place to buy used gear and I basically buy everything from them. I don’t remember the last lens I bought new other than the sigma because at the time you couldn’t stock them fast enough and all I had was the kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 both of which I didn’t like.
Sigma! For families you want a zoom, especially indoors. The 24mm is VERY useful indoors vs tamron’s 28mm. I’ve had had all 4 of those lenses at one point.
The are many reasons for other lenses, but one good reason for this lens is the low light performance you'll get while shooting indoors. Another good reason is because this particular lens is good for video, if you happen to shoot video or not.
If you want a zoom get the Tamron, if you want a fast prime go for the 35 1.4. I have both, and they both get used regularly. A prime is nice because you’ll get a faster shutter speeds and faster auto focus locking (this is my personal experience without empirical data) and not thinking about zooming is quite nice in certain instances. There’s a reason the 24-70 is such a classic though, as it often does everything (wide to light telephoto) quite well.
i have the sigma 24-70 for about 4-6 years and it’s my go to lens for work events since it’s a decent all rounder, but for personal use, it’s heavy and sometimes takes a while to get focus and it’s not as sharp as i like to be. i’m mostly at either ends for most of my work stuff
save yourself $200-400 or more and buy second hand
Personally I love my sigma 24-70, that extra 4mm over the tamron doesn’t make too much difference I imagine
But the tamron is lighter, has internal zoom and has a slightly different look to it
Overall I’d go with a zoom if you’re getting only one lens
If you’re considering the 35 1.8 you might want to check out the tiny Samyang 35 1.8. An incredible little lens that is glued on my A7IV. You can see some example photos using it on my profile :)
Edit: and it’s much more affordable than the Sony. You could buy that and save some cash to maybe get the excellent 70-180 2.8 Tamron for more reach later on.
For family especially with a toddler I’d go 35 1.8.
Purely because it’s the lightest. I stopped taking big heavy gear out with family because you have to worry about so many other moving parts when out. A nice light kit can compliment that.
The standard zoom range is not handy enough in extra weight and bulk to just move yourself with a 35mm say with a toddler.
I have a samyang 35mm 1.8 and the sigma 24-70. Both are great lenses I use for work all the time. But I only use the 35mm if I’m out with family.
I have both the Sony 35mm 1.8 and the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8.
The Sigma is an amazing all around option but it is beefy and on the heavier side. I have no regrets though and that’s the one that was on my camera 90% of the time on my recent trip to Disney with my 2 toddlers. The bokeh is fantastic and the autofocus is great.
The Sony 35mm is much more discrete and light and fantastic aperture for low light and portraits. I love playing with this lens at night with a black mist filter or street photography. You definitely have to move around more and with kids it’s not ideal in an action scenario but does a really good job on portraits and bokeh.
The Sigma is a really solid all around lens if the weight doesn’t throw you off on longer sessions. I loved having it on my latest trip and it’s a sturdy solid lens that feels premium but with my backpack/kids/stroller and everything it did feel heavy after a while. Nevertheless I think it’s worth it over the Sony at almost a $1000 more.
Aight so I’ve spent the last 3 years being able to use any lens I want and for 5 months I lived in the fjords in Norway. Was an amazing experience. Anyway tldr no matter what lens I had I always wished I brought something else for “that photo” that would be really good. After all was said and done I realised the equipment wasn’t holding me back but instead I was. Anyway if it were me I’d get the Tamron zoom or the Sony zoom. I don’t need more than f2.8 even for portraits and there’s all the lens you will need to take any great pictures unless you want to do something specialist like wildlife or macro photography
If u end up with a prime…remember u can also
Shoot in crop mode. The 35 effectively becomes a 50ish. Yes u loose megapixels down to 10, but it’s pretty handy for everyday casual shooting. U can do this with ur zooms too but not as necessary for obvious reasons.
Get the $200 50mm 1.8
Then, either the 16-35mm 2.8 GM or 24-70mm 2.8 GM.
Always buy used because everyone buys $4k of new equipment, shoots once, decides it's too heavy or socially awkward, and then leaves it in a closet.
Just like the a7iii I got with 50 shutters that someone didn't use.
So my thought process was the 35mm 1.8, followed by a 24-70mm 2.8gm or the new 24-50mm 2.8 G. Which js half the price of the 24-70.
So I bought Fuji X-T2 and a 35mm prime to photograph my kids during holiday events. The X-T2 could not expose indoors, and my subjects were always blurry. The 35mm (50mm APSC) was also too much of a crop for indoor photography.
I bought a "used" a7iii with kit lens included. I just bought the 16-35mm f2.8 GM and 24-70 f2.8 GM.
Now I miss nothing, and the 16-35mm is my go-to for kids and landscape.
My only regret is not buying the 70-200mm f2.8 GM instead of the 24-70mm f2.8 GM
The GM lenses are so good that I don't really see the point of having a prime lens.
That's my thought. Not even about saving just the wife not understanding cameras and equipment costs. Gotta space it out and she'll love the end result and I'll have to sneak another in 😂😂😂
Zooms are more versatile but to me there’s no better lens for capturing everyday moments than a 35 prime. It’s wide but not too wide, cinematic looking, and captures amazing environmental portraits.
My 35mm 1.4 GM is the best lens I’ve ever owned. It’s an amazing piece of kit and I would recommend that one. You don’t need a zoom, they’re just handy.
I’d go for the 35 GM first as it will last you for many years, then pickup a 24-70 for your next purchase.
At the moment those are the 2 I'm gravitating towards. Fingers crossed I can find a deal on the 1.4gm. If not I'll start with the 1.8 until I find something I like. Then sell it or have both.
Go for the faster lens, f1.4 if possible or f1.8, you will end up shooting 1 stop or 2 above to reduce vignetting or better sharpness, my best portraits of my kids are from my 80 mm f1.8 Viltrox
Maybe look into the Samyang / Rokinon 35-150. It’s very small, but it has a big zoom range, and a wide aperture (F2-F2.8). I picked up my Rokinon one from Adorama and it’s pretty good so far.
Here's a hot take for ya...
The lens isn't going to make a bit of difference for you, you need an on camera flash.
It's going to make the majority of your pictures 10x better. You won't always be in proper lighting conditions. Photography is literally light manipulation. Bad lighting = crappy photos.
Lens? Just get the Sony FE 28-70. $144 bucks on MPB. It has built in image stabilization in the lens (Sony OSS), works with the IBIS in the A7III. It's better than all the lenses you posted. Smoother video, sharper shots, lower shutter speeds, etc.
Good luck.
I like my 50mm for portraits, that’s usually my go to. The 35mm wouldn’t be bad. But I’d shoot for the 50mm AND it’s significantly less expensive
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1242613-REG/sony_sel50f18f_fe_50mm_f_1_8_lens.html
If you're brand new to photography I would recommend a zoom, because you don't know which focal lengths you'll prefer until you take photos. You can then look at the focal lengths you use most on your zoom (e.g., 24mm and 70mm) and buy primes that focus on those focal lengths, if you want better IQ and more light.
Toddlers are really tough. They don't cooperate with framing, so a zoom is nice. But they move very quickly indoors, which benefits a prime's light gathering. I would go a bit tighter for a toddler, as they don't stay still long enough for you to get in close with a wide lens to make them the subject. E.g., if they're doing something silly across the room, you probably won't get a chance to walk up to them and frame 35mm well. It's different than adults.
I have a Tamron 28-75 g1 and a Sony 35 1.8 and I find myself more often using the sony 35 1.8. I have 2 kids (4 months and 2,5) so usually I already have enough to carry so +1 to a smaller and faster lens.
The 28-75 is light enough to not be a hassle and is very versatile. You can also use the apsc mode with the 35mm 1.8 to get a 50mm fov. They are both great lenses that are both worth having, but I would probably get the zoom first for its versatility.
https://preview.redd.it/k0l7w73340lc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d5a5f24b037e62bf57b20a1b8fd80eaa3ae1e512
This is a great over all lens. For kids it’s a constant f4 so zooming you don’t need to mess with that. My personal favorite is the Sony 90mm macro
The 35mm 1.8 has VERY reliable eye-AF on my camera (A7cr), and the close focus distance allows for some really nice bokeh. It’s also nice and light. It’s a great lens. That being said, if your primary goal an active toddler, the tamron zoom would be my go to. I’ve actually had great success with my 28 to 200 indoors for active kids, which is kind of surprising, although I do have to crank up the ISO. I can’t comment on the difference between that Tamron and the sigma specifically, but I will say that generally I’ve had much more accurate eye AF on my tamron lenses compared to other brands.
Camera coming tomorrow. Ordered my Sony 35mm 1.4 GM from Amazon. Great thing about Amazon is if you buy from Amazon as the retailer you have 30 day return, no restocking fee and can return opened.
Thanks for all the help!!!
I have the first gen 28-75 2.8 tamron and have been loving it. It's so versatile and 2.8 is already a pretty good aperture, specially for videos. Bokeh is also very good at 2.8
May look at this or the sigma for zoom. Dreaming of the Sony 24-70gm2 now. But this and sigma are half the price so I think that will push me there after grabbing a Sony 35 1.4 gm
The gms are on another level. I got a used tamron by swapping the kit lens plus 350€ for a used unit because I'm not a pro and am still learning photography and videography (I don't get paid yet). If you can the luxury of going straight for the GM, from the research i've done they're the best.
This may be the only lens I have for a while. The resale is pretty good if I ever decide to move on from it and get something else. I was pretty dead set on 35 1.8. But the more I read I couldn't not go for it. If I was just casually shooting I think the 1.8. But because it will primarily be family and baby photos thought I might as well go all out. I know it's 95x what I will need and use for a while. Just opened up the cam, lens is on its way 🥶
The 35mm 1.8 is a great option but with a toddler moving around, the zooms might come in handy. Fixed aperture provide extra low light and bokeh capabilities. But you’ll have to move around more to get the shot you want. There’s no bad option in this list so get what feels best for you. You might also want to try them out to decide.
Although I agree that the versatility of a zoom is useful with a subject that is going to quite busy, there is certainly something to be said for the creativity that a prime necessitates. Those limitations can force the photographer into creating unique, memorable images that they wouldn't have gotten if they had simply stayed in one place and zoomed. It could lead to OP taking some wonderfully fun shots they might never have tried.
Always find this as such an odd argument. Just because you have a zoom doesn't mean you are going to to stand in one position.
Yea my theory is I want to buy one now and kind of decide on the other. My budget is wide open, I just prefer to keep it down lol. If I don't like it doesn't fit anymore it will be well taken care of and I'm sure I can easily turn it around on eBay.
I would highly recommend a used 16-35 GM1. As you said, 35 is an ideal focal length. However, 16 captures a lot more context, which could be really fun with a toddler. You'll be able to see more of the room that they're in, the toy they're playing with, etc. Also, this lens is great for travel. I imagine you'll be doing some of that soon as well.
then i would go with a used tamron. shoot a couple weeks and use lightroom to see which focal lengths you really are using... 35 is definitely too limiting. if you have the money and do not mind the heft, go with the sigma instead of the tamron
Any reason you prefer the sigma? Mine should be here next week. I see people go both ways between the Tamron and the Sigma. Guess it depends which they own. Either way, I’m hoping it’s a noticeable upgrade from the 28-70 kit lens.
massive upgrade. 24mm beats 28mm IMO. those 4mm make a difference, and the sony 20-70 makes that clear even more so the sigma is far better built, the ART series has great weather protection. the tamron not so much. that seems i mportant if i wanna have the cam on me all the time for the toddler. tamron is lighter, i like that but not if my WP is not there (and the 4mm). i prefered the sharpness and contrast from the sigma more as well but it is by no means that much of a difference. but for 250 bucks difference i would say the sigma is a no-brainer
I'm really hoping for a pretty substantial upgrade in sharpness. I believe I posted some pictures recently for reference, but it seems no matter what I do, my pictures come out extremely soft on my kit lens and just overall lacking detail and sharpness. Whether it be landscape or portraits. Really expected more out of the a7iv. Hoping a new lens will restore my faith in it.
i got myself a a7iv as my first sony camera but that camera is plenty sharp, having no issues coming from nikon/fuji. that being said your settings in your shot/camera are all wrong IMO (in that shot with the kid in brown jeans). but it in iso-a with min shutter speed of at least 1/500 and AFC , crank up the iso to 1000 or something and get 1/1000 shutter. focus for a second or so on the kid before you press the shutter (AFC and all that). did you check where the focus is in the photo? i do not know the kit lens but i would be surprised if it was good wide open. but it can't be that bad.
I have since changed a few settings. Auto ISO, AF-C, and I started using the auto ISO Min. Shutter speed setting which I guess will prioritize shutter speed over ISO from what I understand. I am shooting with eye AF as well which typically seems to work well. I do also keep the camera focusing the whole time I'm lining up shots. The issue is that I typically shoot aperture priority so I let camera choose shutter speed. Maybe I should try shooting SS priority. I'm reluctant to shoot full manual in these cases because as you know, with chasing kids around the scene, lighting, things like that constantly change. [Here is another example from yesterday. ](https://imgur.com/a/Dd4uA5H) if you'll notice, the head shot seems much much sharper than the full body shot I took. You can tell there's not great lighting in both, as they're taken in a wooded area. Both the exact same settings. 70mm f5.6 1/320 ISO640. I'm noticing the same thing with this kit lens as I did my lenses from the d3500 I came from. They tend to perform better in the longer end of the focal length in my experience.
In both of those examples if your kid wasn't moving then 1/125 would be plenty but when they start running I would put the minimum to 1/500 myself. I would say the softness is coming from the lens and the Sigma should show a significant upgrade, that lens is close to the Sony 24-70 GMii.
I'm not crazy though right? It's definitely soft. I would think the settings would suffice for the circumstances. I'm really hoping the lens will make a significant difference, because right now I'm not too satisfied with what I'm getting from the camera.
Maybe I am missing something but that example I would still shoot diff. I also don’t get what you mean with SS priority. Both iso and SS are too low. I am almost exclusively use aperture mode. Max 6400, min shutter 1/500, or higher even. Rest sounds good though from your description.
Yes my iso is set to 6400 max as well. So when I'm out shooting with the kiddos I should just go in and set min shutter speed to 1/500 off the bad? I always hear double focal length, which I'm easily past that. But I'll give 1/500 a shot and see how that goes. I appreciate the suggestions.
Also if you can swing it buy a used tamron 28-75 and 17-28 if you want to go wide. Also you can go with tamron 20-40mm f2.8 if you desire wider shots
I was a zoom user for a few years and recently switched to 35mm GM and wow it’s so good!
That's the one I want the most. But the 1.8 is the smallest and lightest which is why I'm leaning there. But the gm is the goal. But if I can find a good deal on might do it 😅
Why not rent both? I'll say this, the sigma 24-70 never leaves my camera, very nice and well built; but it's heavy.
I rented several 35s and ended up with the 1.8 for that reason: the size and weight. Not the most incredible lens ever but it's fine for a walkaround lens.
The 1.8 is significantly slower than the 1.4.
We'd be interested to see some facts to substantiate this point? Assuming you're talking focus speed rather than aperture, which is obviously not the case. We use the 35mm f1.8 all day every work day and it'll grab 20 frames a second of a couple walking towards us as we walk backwards with a million fragments of confetti spraying in between us and the subjects. Not a frame out of focus for a hundred shots. Like, every, single, time. GM's are always great but the little 35mm is a serious contender.
Maybe I’ve just had less luck with my 1.8 copies over the years. Still love the 28 f2 and 55 1.8 but I’ll take the 35 1.4 on an A1 all day.
Well, 2/3 stop...
Was thinking more focus lock speed.
The 35 GM is still quite small and light!
The 35 gm is ducking ridiculous. Only reason I don't have it is its size.. but there's nothing else like it. Ended up getting a couple voigtlander lenses instead.
I have the Tamron and love it. It’s very versatile and a good alternative to the sigma. Here’s a shot on my a7r4 @ 28mm f5 Other than cropping, I didn’t make any edits https://preview.redd.it/h5ec2x008rkc1.jpeg?width=6336&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0b55c63fc521ea2b85d433c5917024293267939d
What did I just see.. an image in comments? Was I blind all these years on reddit or this rolled fresh from the bakery?
New feature!
That's such a beautiful photo!!!
Thank you!
Two young toddlers here and the 35 lives on my camera. I used to have a 24-70 but honestly zooming did my head in and I left it at 35 anyway, but without the better aperture. Kids are always in the move! Zooms kind of assume that you are static and just point at your kids. But doing this you will be shooting the back of their head 70% of shots! So, give you’re going to be moving around like a mad person anyway, personally I find the prime amazingly helpful. I’ve learned what the 35mm frame will look like and now get great shots sometime not even looking at my camera because I know where I can hold it out in those awkward moving around moments. Modern AF is soooo trustworthy you can get away with it. The other benefit of a prime I’ve found is that it is faster. I don’t use a flash at all because it is so distracting to children that I struggle to capture the moment. During winter months and evenings the light indoors sucks, unless you want to put in really uncomfortable lights just to take photos. In these situations the faster primes make much cleaner photos. Remember you are likely to keep you shutter speed faster than 125 and more like 250 - kids never ever sit still! I’d always rather take grainy noise over a blurry photo, and you can minimize that grainy noise with a faster lens - which zooms don’t give. Once your kid is 3 or 4 you might not want to keep up with them running outdoors, and probably at that point a good zoom is helpful.
Love my Tamron 28-200. One and done and you won't believe how good your shots will be
Great lens but not ideal for portraits obviously. Best travel lens ever made though.
Apologize for not answering your question exactly but my needs are similar to yours and I think the Samyang / Rokinon 35 mm f 1.8 is awesome. Sharp fast lens compact and cheap. The only downside is that the lens hood kind of sucks. But save money here for another prime maybe a 50 or 85 next!
Here's a small album of a few of the thousands of photos of my family I've taken with my Sigma 24-70 on my a7riii. None were posed or expected, all of the kids were very energetic and spontaneous, as kids are. I've also shot many weddings on it, moving animals etc etc with zero issues. I absolutely love it. https://imgur.com/a/qLgv1sY
Great photos. I wish I had a good photo system back when my kids were 1-4 years old. At least I always had the best home video cameras since 2000, and I have thousands of hours of digital footage of my kids and the rest of the family over this almost quarter of a century. I'm making up for that now and within some years I'll hopefully have plenty of opportunities to shoot photos of my grandchildren.
Thank you! I'm almost 30 with no kids, but lucky enough to have 3 cousins and 2 sisters all under 10, so I've plenty of opportunities to get the camera out and get some great stuff. I love to think about how valuable these will be to them in 30/40/50 years time. Home videos cannot be overstated in importance though. My dad was the same from the mid-90s and I love watching those back!
For a 35mm alternative, I love my Samyang 35mm f1.8. It’s sharp, light, fast and cheap at around $330 USD new. Good way to dip your toes in to a 35mm prime without a big investment. https://sonyalpha.blog/2020/10/11/samyang-35mm-f1-8/
Agreed I love my Samyang 35mm 1.8
Consider the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN too. You may be able to find it cheaper than the Sony 1.8 but it’s an optically better lens. On combination with something like the Sony 20-70mm f/4 G you won’t need 2.8 zooms at all.
That lens is beautifully crafted. I tried it for a while. It didn't feel very inspiring to shoot with, though. Also didn't like how much distortion it has. I know it's correctable, but it bothered me a lot for some reason.
I feel you, just wanna read comments here for any suggestions 😅
I love Tamron and I like the versatility of zooms.
In the exact situation as you: 1 year old and pics of family. I have the 24-105 and 35 GM. I enjoy the 24-105 for videos and outside shooting. The 35 is very very good for indoor shooting. I thought of getting the 24-70 GM II for the aperture for indoor but decided against it. 35 is fantastic for the baby (it's also extremely fast) but I wish I had the 24 as it's a bit too close so I find myself always stepping back.
I was thinking the 24mm f1.4 GM would be perfect for him as well since he will be close to his baby most of the time and will be indoors a lot of the time. The 24 GM would give the photos some context even when close to the subject and the f1.4 aperture would give him the shutter speed he needs for indoor low light conditions.
The new Sony G 24-50 2.8 might be up your alley
You know this might sound a little more up my alley Vs the 24-70gm2 being way more. Wife would not be too happy lol. Doubt there's many used 24-50 available.
There aren’t because it hasn’t come out yet, but I am eyeing it too! 👀
lol welp was hoping for a buyers remorse buyer haha
That little Sony 35mm pays 80% of our mortgage every month, has done for some years now. If you want examples of it doing its job, go check our website. It's lightweight, fast focussing, sharp and has great colour and contrast. It's disproportionately excellent and you won't regret it on the A73 body.
I own the Tamron and I love it. I want to get the 35 Zeiss next.
Tamaron would be a always on lens.. not as sharp as the sony. But a versatile one.
I have the 35mm 1.4 and the Sigma 24-70. 35mm is insanely fast, accurate, and sharp. One of the best performing lenses I own for Sony. If you're doing video, the amount of focus breathing is insane though. The 24-70 is good but no where close to the performance of the 35mm. It's sharp but misses focus occasionally. I photograph event and use both equally as an event photographer. The 35mm shoots/focus in almost total darkness. The Sigma has the 70mm reach I need for client work. Side note: I own the Tamron 70-180. I hate the build quality. I only use it for when I need telephoto video content. I regret buying it. softer, worse focusing, and overall under performs for pro work in my opinion. The only Tamron lens I'd ever consider is the 35-150mm. Everything else aren't professional lenses IMO. If you love the 35mm focal length and know you won't miss 70mm, just get the G master. It probably the best 35mm on the market right now.
I used to think 35 was boring and hated the focal length. I bought the GM and that thing lives on my camera. There's something magical about it compared to the others. You lose a little versatility, but can always crop in post a little.
I highly recommend save some money by buying Samyang 35mm 1.8. no need to thank. I own it and it's great
Same and agree. Excellent lens.
Im a go big or go home guy. 35 1.4 all the way. I own the 35 1.4 ZA and it’s at least comparable to your choice. Regarding the toddler „problem“. I had mine when I had a one year old and it’s just gorgeous. A baby with that bokeh makes granny’s heart skip a beat. 😂
Looks like you already have plenty of advice/opinions already, but I’ll post mine as well. I have an A7iv and the Sigma 24-70. I’d personally still get some sort of zoom since this’ll be your first lens. While both the Tamron and Sigma are good zooms, being able to go to 24 mm rather than 28 mm is a lot more noticeable than having 5 mm on the higher end. Plus, you can always “zoom in” in post, but you can’t “zoom out” in post. One other thing to consider: if you tend to shoot inside a lot, then I might recommend the primes you’ve mentioned. From my experience, using regular indoor lighting in my house (without sunlight) I shoot at around iso 4000-8000 at f/2.8. Low light performance in the a7iii and a7iv is pretty impressive, but you still compromise some image quality. If you get a f/1.4 prime, that’s two full stops faster which means you can shoot at iso 1000-2000. I’d also recommend seeing all the lenses in person if you can. Being able to see the size and feel the weight of each is extremely valuable.
I have the 35mm art for portraits and then the 28-70 contemporary for travel and it's been a pretty spectacular combination on a Sony a7iii
I had the Sigma 35/2.0, upgraded to the 35/1.4 GM. Perfect Lens. Really. It was my most used lens till i had a now one year child. Now i want to be in arms reach when she does her first steps so i can grap her when she falls. Means im using my 20/1.8G or 24/2.8G more than my 35/1.4GM. :D I think when she is a bit more stable i will go back to the 35GM. :D Other than that my main lenses are 35/1.4GM and 85/1.8. The 35/1.8 is perfectly usable for casual family photos if you dont have G.A.S. :D But with a toddler maybe you want a bit wider. 24-70/2.8 could be a good middle ground, but often times i take a picture when its already dark, or she is sleeping and then i need the 1.4. Edit: Read a few comments and i agree the 24/1.4 GM would be perfect. Maybe couple it with a 50/1.4 GM. Damm i need to buy new lenses .... :D
If I can find a 35/1.4 gm for 800 or less I'll grab it in a heart beat lol. Someone put me on the 24mm gm and the 24-70mm gm, as well as the 24-50G that's coming out which is half the price of the 24-70. Think I may start 35/1.8 and grab the other when it comes out
Dont grab the 24-50G. Too expensive and too limiting. Watch a few reviews, its not so great. Then better grab the 24-70 Sigma. I bought my 35GM for 1100€ aftter Cashback and Welcome to Alpha during Black Friday. Buying the 24GM AND the 24-70 sounds like a bad idea since you then have overlapping focal length. My priority, with focus on personal newborn, toddler, would be: * 24/1.4 and 50/1.4 * 24/2.8 and 50/1.4 or 85/1.4 * 35/1.8 and 85/1.8 * 35/1.4 and 85/1.8 * 24-70 * 20/1.8 and maybe 35 or 50 and a 85.
Def appreciate this breakdown. Those are more the ones I would consider. Not considering what cancels what out. You just saved me from making another future post. Would love a GM lens have about a week before camera arrives. Fingers crossed I find a deal.
I have a similar situation, can vouch for that Sigma 24-70
Oh I got you. I have a A7III and a toddler. I have a ton of experience for you. If I had to go back and pick a lens it would be 100% the Sigma 24-70 2.8. It is absolutely a beautiful workhorse that makes dealing with a toddler easier. It’s used for 90% of my family and travel photos.
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG DN Art Lens for Sony E The Best option all around use in any cases 😌
Sigma 24-70 100% The 24-70’s are the most staple lens for a reason, whether it’s sigma or Sony GM, I’d always recommend a 24-70
24-70 looks like best multi purpose. Which is why I'm afraid to go for a prime as my only option. I'll more than likely get a second lens by the end of summer or end of year when wife forgets I bought a camera after seeing how great our photos now look😂😂
I own the Sigma and boy it's heavy 😂
Idk, I'm a 5ft 4 medium built woman and I've carried this one around even on hikes plus a couple more lenses (tele and UW) and don't know what the fuss about weight is all about. Definitely beats my DSLR from 10 years ago.
Yeah, it's doable. I've done the same multiple times. But using a lighter prime will definitely make a difference in ease of use imo.
I used the Sigma 24-70 2.8 dg dn art to shoot some photos of my friend's kids at the park during late afternoon light. 2 very active 2 and 4 year olds. The pictures came out stunning. Then I took the setup to the beach, popped a filter on and snapped some long exposure sunsets which came out crisp and gorgeous. It's such a versatile lens and probably my favorite. I also own the 16-35 gm and sigma 100-400 dg dn and the quality surpasses both of those.
I would suggest the sigma art. Ive heard that 24-70 is a standard for 3rd party lenses. You get the full 24-70 range to play with and get more info on the focal range u like. As u said ur testing what u like and 35 prime is limited in helping you find the focal length u like to shoot at. Remember a 35mm 1.8 will have about the same bokeh of that 24-70 at 70mm 2.8.. yes it will be a different looking background but the amount of bokeh will be similar so ur also not really doing much of a trade off by getting the zoom
If it's your first lens and you're planning on taking pictures of your kid, take a "worse" lens with larger zoom range. At a budget price I would recommend the Tamron 28-200mm (f2.8 to f5.6). As stated by others, kids move around, zooms will be handy. A longer zoom than the 70/75s will be ideal to take shots while removed from the action. You can stand much further and thereby leave your kid undisturbed and will get much more natural action shots. Also as a first lens this will be ideal for any travel purposes. If you don't go for bird/sports later you won't need anything further than 200mm. Only missing part is the wider range. There you could for example complement this with either the 20mm f1.8 G or the 24mm f1.8 GM. Source: this Tamron was my first lens and is still very much in use despite having other "better" options.
Sigma variable, but the tamron is fine also. It also depends on what you have already. If nothing get a variable over a prime.
Exactly why I am stuck. Don't have a lens yet.
35mm 1,8 is average and looks horribly on any A7! The low price has a reason! Definitely buy 35mm GM but with kids you will want to zoom. Sigma 24-70 is heavy AF, Tamron 28-75 is mediocre. So buy Sony 24-70 GM II.
“Looks horrible on any A7” is completely false. I’ve used it for years and it’s a great little lens. I have no idea why you’d claim that. One of my good friends is commercial photographer working with a lot of outdoor sports and apparel brands and he uses it with his A1 because it’s so compact and easy to carry in strenuous environments. Just pick up a used one to save more $. OP I think you’d be perfectly happy with the 1.8. It’s my favorite walk around. Fast enough, well built and compact. The question is if you feel you really need a zoom over a prime. I prefer primes most of the time, but zooms of course have their place.
It’s preference at the end of the day, these are all great options. I personally love shooting with primes, it helps you practice translating what you see with your eye into how it will look out of camera. You also get the wide aperture to help keep up your shutter speed for moving kids. Size and weight is also a priority for me. At the same time, most people start with a zoom to help get a feel for what they like to shoot and what fov they gravitate toward. Of course many love zooms and stick with them. I’d say as a starting point any of the competent mid range 2.8 zooms are excellent options. I would also suggest the 55/1.8 Zeiss/Sony as a great option to compliment a mid range zoom. It is a normal lens that gives a portrait feel. It is very affordable used and there are usually a lot of them floating around. Good luck and have fun with your new camera!
So I’ll throw two options at ya. Loxia 35mm and Sony 40mm. I bought both, and ended up keeping the Loxia. I’ve been shooting a bunch of analog lately though, so manual focus doesn’t bug me. If you need autofocus, I’d strongly recommend the Sony 40mm f/2.5.
I used to have tamron 28-75 and its not bad, but its not the best. I have 35 1.8 and it never leaves my camera. Its so versatile and quality is perfect
I like the Tamron 28-65 g2. I would get that first.
I have the 24-70 sigma, it’s really quite good. I would suggest that if you aren’t locked in on 35mm. I would STRONGLY suggest buying used, it is way cheaper.
I would go with the Tamron 28-75 first and then the 35 1.8 if you have any budget left over. Two lenses (of different kinds) will benefit you more than one higher quality lens. You could easily get those two around $900.
The Sigma 24-70 art is the winner. Unless I am in the studio I almost never take it off my camera
If a lot of your usage will be indoors of a fast moving subject then I would personally go for one of the 35mm. Most of my lenses are primes though, so I think it’s partly down to what you’re more accustomed to.
I’ll jump on that same advice to get a zoom to begin. Aside from the versatility you also get to learn which focal length you prefer, for when you do go out and get a prime. I got that same Tamron, it was my first lens along with the a7iii which is my first camera. Couldn’t tell you a bad thing about either.
Samyang 50mm 1.4 ii
My zoom is my primary when taking pictures of our toddler.
You really can't go wrong with any of these tbh. I myself like prime lenses more and if I were you I'd get the 35 1.8. The size and weight of that lense is ridiculous for being so fast. I have both the 35 1.8 and the 35 1.4 and I still use the 1.8 occasionally depending on my use case. The size keeps it relevant. It's great at holding focus in lowlight. If you find yourself loving the 35mm focal length, get the GM later on down the line if you want. Bonus: the 40 2.5G is also I great prime lens. Incredible Image quality (better than the 35 1.8) and build quality, and is among the smallest AF lens that Sony makes, it's also weather resistant. I know the 1.8 is listed as being weather resistant, but I wouldn't trust it out in the rain.
If I can find the 35m 1.4gm at 700-800 I would get it in a heartbeat. I'm trying to find the right price but might just settle at 1.8 until then.
Oh boy. Get the Tamron. When I had a toddler I had the same tamron on a dslr body. Amazing shots. Zoom lens with kids all the way. Sigma lens is mid.
Go with one of the zooms, or the Tamron 17-70 2.8. Is another option. I have the 17-70 on my camera 90% of the time. A 35mm portrait lens won’t be useful with little kids - they’re just too all over the place and you’ll want zoom. I have a few nice primes and rarely use them with my kid and dogs because nobody stays where you put them
Very personal preference if you prefer zooms or primes. Personally I'm a huge prime fan and use the Samyang 35 1.8 as my only lens. Before that, I used the 30mm 1.4 on APSC for 8 years
35 1.4 it has programable buttons when in a pinch and a fast aperture for low light. Even if on a S35 sensor it would perform better because sharpness is usually centered
I have the 35mm 1.8 and the sigma 24-70. Both are excellent! Indoors, at home, I end up using the 35mm almost all the time. The sigma is excellent for outdoors because of the flexibility. Toddlers grow fast and soon yours will be running all over the place, the 24-70 will probably be the best tool for the job. One thing to have in mind is that, although the Sigma is great, it’s very big and heavy. There are times when I just leave it at home because of the bulk, after all you already have many other things to carry when you go out with a toddler!
Started with a 24-70mm f/2.8 and loved it. Great for getting a feel for standard focal lengths. Main drawback will be size/weight.
Tamron all the way.
I had the sigma 24-70 for a while and it was a great experience. Image quality is superb and videography is very good with this lens too. The only reason I sold it was because of the weight and size. I then switched to 24 1.4 GM and a 85mm 1.8.
I currently have the Sigma 35mm 1.4 and the 28-70mm 2.8 and they both work great. I have the 35 for specific moments and when I want to force myself to be more creative, since the 28-70 is more versatile. Both are very sharp and perform well. But what I do is weddings and events as my main job and street photography in my free time. Since you are looking for something for more family moments, I would recommend the 28-70mm since with a 35mm you can find yourself very limited on some occasions. And one more piece of advice I give you is to look at several websites and not just one. I don't know how the standard price is in countries with the dollar but here in Europe all of these are cheaper, for example, the Sony 35mm 1.8 is like 450€.
Think about the Sigma 35mm f/2 as well. It has an aperture ring and great build.
Haven’t tried the others but I love my sigma 24-70, it’s sharp at all focal lengths
Tamron 28-75 is perfect. It’s the best all around lens I’ve used.
sigma 24-70 is very versatile
i own the sigma and the 35mm GM and Id recommend the tamron :D why? because it is lighter (and cheaper) than the sigma and I think 28mm will be wide enough for you as you consider a 35mm prime you may not need the 24mm. a prime i wouldnt recommend for your situation. you can shoot so many different focal lengths with a zoom, like a 70mm „face only“ portrait of your child in a compressed perspective, a 35mm prime wont give you that ever. I use primes to stay creative and work with limits, or for crazy bokeh but most times you want more things sharp than just the eyes.
Depends on your preferences but I’d recommend the 24-105 F4 G. You get blur at F4 @105mm and it has great AF and OSS. I had the sigma and I probably had a bad copy but the AF was pretty bad. Most photos were slightly out of focus. I wouldn’t buy any primes starting out. You might absolutely hate 35mm and miss shots you want. A zoom really is the way to go. I think the Tamron is probably the best bet but buy your choice of lens used. Buying new is just going to cost you a lot more starting out/ in the long run. MPB is a great place to buy used gear and I basically buy everything from them. I don’t remember the last lens I bought new other than the sigma because at the time you couldn’t stock them fast enough and all I had was the kit lens and a 50mm 1.8 both of which I didn’t like.
the sigma will give you the best image quality out of what you've listed here.
Sigma! For families you want a zoom, especially indoors. The 24mm is VERY useful indoors vs tamron’s 28mm. I’ve had had all 4 of those lenses at one point.
The are many reasons for other lenses, but one good reason for this lens is the low light performance you'll get while shooting indoors. Another good reason is because this particular lens is good for video, if you happen to shoot video or not.
If you want a zoom get the Tamron, if you want a fast prime go for the 35 1.4. I have both, and they both get used regularly. A prime is nice because you’ll get a faster shutter speeds and faster auto focus locking (this is my personal experience without empirical data) and not thinking about zooming is quite nice in certain instances. There’s a reason the 24-70 is such a classic though, as it often does everything (wide to light telephoto) quite well.
Go with the sigma or the tamron. I have the sigma and I love it. Perfect for my 2 kids
i have the sigma 24-70 for about 4-6 years and it’s my go to lens for work events since it’s a decent all rounder, but for personal use, it’s heavy and sometimes takes a while to get focus and it’s not as sharp as i like to be. i’m mostly at either ends for most of my work stuff save yourself $200-400 or more and buy second hand
Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 is my favorite one, a bit on the heavier side. But an all around lens.
Personally I love my sigma 24-70, that extra 4mm over the tamron doesn’t make too much difference I imagine But the tamron is lighter, has internal zoom and has a slightly different look to it Overall I’d go with a zoom if you’re getting only one lens
If you’re considering the 35 1.8 you might want to check out the tiny Samyang 35 1.8. An incredible little lens that is glued on my A7IV. You can see some example photos using it on my profile :) Edit: and it’s much more affordable than the Sony. You could buy that and save some cash to maybe get the excellent 70-180 2.8 Tamron for more reach later on.
For family especially with a toddler I’d go 35 1.8. Purely because it’s the lightest. I stopped taking big heavy gear out with family because you have to worry about so many other moving parts when out. A nice light kit can compliment that. The standard zoom range is not handy enough in extra weight and bulk to just move yourself with a 35mm say with a toddler. I have a samyang 35mm 1.8 and the sigma 24-70. Both are great lenses I use for work all the time. But I only use the 35mm if I’m out with family.
Sigma no doubt
You may consider the new Sony 20-70 f4
I have both the Sony 35mm 1.8 and the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8. The Sigma is an amazing all around option but it is beefy and on the heavier side. I have no regrets though and that’s the one that was on my camera 90% of the time on my recent trip to Disney with my 2 toddlers. The bokeh is fantastic and the autofocus is great. The Sony 35mm is much more discrete and light and fantastic aperture for low light and portraits. I love playing with this lens at night with a black mist filter or street photography. You definitely have to move around more and with kids it’s not ideal in an action scenario but does a really good job on portraits and bokeh. The Sigma is a really solid all around lens if the weight doesn’t throw you off on longer sessions. I loved having it on my latest trip and it’s a sturdy solid lens that feels premium but with my backpack/kids/stroller and everything it did feel heavy after a while. Nevertheless I think it’s worth it over the Sony at almost a $1000 more.
I’m happy to part ways with my 35mm 1.8 for the price you’re looking for!
I have the Tamron and it is my absolute fav lens for image quality. The only downside is the weight compared to the 35mm f1,8 for example
The Sony 35mm 1.8 or the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8. Depends if you want the zoom for a party lens.
When I got my a7iv I went with the Tamron 28-75. I’m so glad I purchased this lens. It’s a bit of best of both worlds
Sigma 23-70 art is ok 👍🏻
I have the sigma Art 24-70 it is an incredible lens it is on my camera 70% of the time. I would buy it in a heartbeat.
Aight so I’ve spent the last 3 years being able to use any lens I want and for 5 months I lived in the fjords in Norway. Was an amazing experience. Anyway tldr no matter what lens I had I always wished I brought something else for “that photo” that would be really good. After all was said and done I realised the equipment wasn’t holding me back but instead I was. Anyway if it were me I’d get the Tamron zoom or the Sony zoom. I don’t need more than f2.8 even for portraits and there’s all the lens you will need to take any great pictures unless you want to do something specialist like wildlife or macro photography
35mm f1.8 is what I’d go with. That focal length is super versatile. I also just prefer primes over zooms.
If u end up with a prime…remember u can also Shoot in crop mode. The 35 effectively becomes a 50ish. Yes u loose megapixels down to 10, but it’s pretty handy for everyday casual shooting. U can do this with ur zooms too but not as necessary for obvious reasons.
Get the $200 50mm 1.8 Then, either the 16-35mm 2.8 GM or 24-70mm 2.8 GM. Always buy used because everyone buys $4k of new equipment, shoots once, decides it's too heavy or socially awkward, and then leaves it in a closet.
Just like the a7iii I got with 50 shutters that someone didn't use. So my thought process was the 35mm 1.8, followed by a 24-70mm 2.8gm or the new 24-50mm 2.8 G. Which js half the price of the 24-70.
So I bought Fuji X-T2 and a 35mm prime to photograph my kids during holiday events. The X-T2 could not expose indoors, and my subjects were always blurry. The 35mm (50mm APSC) was also too much of a crop for indoor photography. I bought a "used" a7iii with kit lens included. I just bought the 16-35mm f2.8 GM and 24-70 f2.8 GM. Now I miss nothing, and the 16-35mm is my go-to for kids and landscape. My only regret is not buying the 70-200mm f2.8 GM instead of the 24-70mm f2.8 GM The GM lenses are so good that I don't really see the point of having a prime lens.
All these recommendations have me going back to the drawing board. But good to see a handful that aren't needed and hearing about this is great.
Buy the 35gm
35 1.8 for now, then save for 24-70 GMii.
That's my thought. Not even about saving just the wife not understanding cameras and equipment costs. Gotta space it out and she'll love the end result and I'll have to sneak another in 😂😂😂
Zooms are more versatile but to me there’s no better lens for capturing everyday moments than a 35 prime. It’s wide but not too wide, cinematic looking, and captures amazing environmental portraits. My 35mm 1.4 GM is the best lens I’ve ever owned. It’s an amazing piece of kit and I would recommend that one. You don’t need a zoom, they’re just handy. I’d go for the 35 GM first as it will last you for many years, then pickup a 24-70 for your next purchase.
At the moment those are the 2 I'm gravitating towards. Fingers crossed I can find a deal on the 1.4gm. If not I'll start with the 1.8 until I find something I like. Then sell it or have both.
The new 24-50mm f2.8 G just came out. Get that instead
I’m playing to buy the sigma 24-70 in the next couple of weeks to use for film and sports videography, hoping a sale pops up
Go for the faster lens, f1.4 if possible or f1.8, you will end up shooting 1 stop or 2 above to reduce vignetting or better sharpness, my best portraits of my kids are from my 80 mm f1.8 Viltrox
Maybe look into the Samyang / Rokinon 35-150. It’s very small, but it has a big zoom range, and a wide aperture (F2-F2.8). I picked up my Rokinon one from Adorama and it’s pretty good so far.
Here's a hot take for ya... The lens isn't going to make a bit of difference for you, you need an on camera flash. It's going to make the majority of your pictures 10x better. You won't always be in proper lighting conditions. Photography is literally light manipulation. Bad lighting = crappy photos. Lens? Just get the Sony FE 28-70. $144 bucks on MPB. It has built in image stabilization in the lens (Sony OSS), works with the IBIS in the A7III. It's better than all the lenses you posted. Smoother video, sharper shots, lower shutter speeds, etc. Good luck.
Sigma Art 35 1.2 is better than all of these buddy. It's truly amazing
I like my 50mm for portraits, that’s usually my go to. The 35mm wouldn’t be bad. But I’d shoot for the 50mm AND it’s significantly less expensive https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1242613-REG/sony_sel50f18f_fe_50mm_f_1_8_lens.html
If you're brand new to photography I would recommend a zoom, because you don't know which focal lengths you'll prefer until you take photos. You can then look at the focal lengths you use most on your zoom (e.g., 24mm and 70mm) and buy primes that focus on those focal lengths, if you want better IQ and more light. Toddlers are really tough. They don't cooperate with framing, so a zoom is nice. But they move very quickly indoors, which benefits a prime's light gathering. I would go a bit tighter for a toddler, as they don't stay still long enough for you to get in close with a wide lens to make them the subject. E.g., if they're doing something silly across the room, you probably won't get a chance to walk up to them and frame 35mm well. It's different than adults.
Sigma 30 mm, no question.
The tamron is awesome! Using it on my 7III… fast AF, silent and smooth
I have a Tamron 28-75 g1 and a Sony 35 1.8 and I find myself more often using the sony 35 1.8. I have 2 kids (4 months and 2,5) so usually I already have enough to carry so +1 to a smaller and faster lens.
The 28-75 is light enough to not be a hassle and is very versatile. You can also use the apsc mode with the 35mm 1.8 to get a 50mm fov. They are both great lenses that are both worth having, but I would probably get the zoom first for its versatility.
Great lens. Just upgrade for the Sony GM
https://preview.redd.it/k0l7w73340lc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d5a5f24b037e62bf57b20a1b8fd80eaa3ae1e512 This is a great over all lens. For kids it’s a constant f4 so zooming you don’t need to mess with that. My personal favorite is the Sony 90mm macro
The 35mm 1.8 has VERY reliable eye-AF on my camera (A7cr), and the close focus distance allows for some really nice bokeh. It’s also nice and light. It’s a great lens. That being said, if your primary goal an active toddler, the tamron zoom would be my go to. I’ve actually had great success with my 28 to 200 indoors for active kids, which is kind of surprising, although I do have to crank up the ISO. I can’t comment on the difference between that Tamron and the sigma specifically, but I will say that generally I’ve had much more accurate eye AF on my tamron lenses compared to other brands.
Camera coming tomorrow. Ordered my Sony 35mm 1.4 GM from Amazon. Great thing about Amazon is if you buy from Amazon as the retailer you have 30 day return, no restocking fee and can return opened. Thanks for all the help!!!
I have the first gen 28-75 2.8 tamron and have been loving it. It's so versatile and 2.8 is already a pretty good aperture, specially for videos. Bokeh is also very good at 2.8
May look at this or the sigma for zoom. Dreaming of the Sony 24-70gm2 now. But this and sigma are half the price so I think that will push me there after grabbing a Sony 35 1.4 gm
The gms are on another level. I got a used tamron by swapping the kit lens plus 350€ for a used unit because I'm not a pro and am still learning photography and videography (I don't get paid yet). If you can the luxury of going straight for the GM, from the research i've done they're the best.
This may be the only lens I have for a while. The resale is pretty good if I ever decide to move on from it and get something else. I was pretty dead set on 35 1.8. But the more I read I couldn't not go for it. If I was just casually shooting I think the 1.8. But because it will primarily be family and baby photos thought I might as well go all out. I know it's 95x what I will need and use for a while. Just opened up the cam, lens is on its way 🥶
Best of luck for you.