Honestly im just so frustrated with my current setup right now. I spent all this money on the 24-70mm GM II because everyone said it was the gold standard but my god it is just so heavy to carry around all day. I'm going to Iceland in literally two weeks and the thought of hiking with that brick around my neck is actually giving me anxiety. My logic was that if I spent the big bucks I wouldnt need anything else but now im thinking I made a huge mistake and should have looked at something more all around and light.
Maybe the Tamron 28-200? Or the Sony 24-105? But then I worry about losing that f2.8 aperture for low light stuff and I dont want to regret it later. I have about $1500 left in my gear budget after selling some old stuff and I need to figure this out fast before the flight. I just want one lens that stays on the camera 90% of the time and doesnt make me want to go to a chiropractor after every shoot. Is the 20-70mm G actually good enough for landscapes or is the range too weird? Im staring at reviews and my head is spinning because every single person says something different and its driving me crazy. I just need something reliable and not insanely bulky for this trip...
Late to the party but I used the Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD for years.
I survived a storm in the Alps with Sony FE 24-105mm f/4 G OSS and it didnt blink.
This thread is gold. Bookmarking for future reference 🔖
Honestly, I moved to the Sony FE 20-70mm f4 G for my travel kit and havent looked back. Its way lighter than that GM brick and that extra width at 20mm is a total game changer for Iceland.