>>4396589Not really. The 24-50 f2.8 just feels pointless. It's only covers two focal lengths that are normal to most people. 24mm (iphone lensfov ) to 50mm (average camera). might as well get a common 50mm f1.8 and a 24mm f2.8 that would take up just as much space as the zoom. The other $1000ish compact sony G zooms are more exciting.
>16-35 f4 PZ16-35 f4s-types are always great lenses, the whole industry has these figured out. sony, canon, and nikon's are all amazing and it's a very useful lens that covers all 3 common wide angle prime focal lengths. 16-35 f2.8s are always fucking massive, and you probably won't care about the aperture because wide angle lenses can get away with slower shutter speeds and the bokeh is pretty similar. pair with a longer prime to cover more telephoto FOVs, the bokeys, and high shutter speeds in low light.
>20-70 f4ever so slightly bigger than the 16-25. a little less fast but you usually shoot f2.8s and f4-f8 anyways and the wider focal range is unique, like a mirrored 24-120. pair with a faster general purpose prime lens to make up for the huge low light difference, or, don't if it doesn't bother you.
>16-25 f2.8huge fucking cope but i'm not going to lie the 16-35 f2.8 is fucking massive and $1000 more, so there's an appeal to astrophotography hiking fags (comfy camera on strap, vs, can be used as a weapon) who mostly shoot at 16mm and 24-28mm (close enough)
>>4396591the 24-70 f2.8 gm ii is the smallest 24-70, but it still dwarfs the a7c. the handling/travel (and price) difference between it and the short range/f4 zooms is as noticeable as the feel difference between zooms and smaller primes.
