Could this lens be good for landscape, portraits ? what else?

HAPPYGUY_45 wrote:Could this lens be good for landscape, portraits ? what else?If you are new to photography its a good first general purpose lens. The oss will help for video as well if that interests you. Its a good travel lens when you need the versatility of being able to go from 24mm all the way to 105mm instantly, add crop mode and you can go all the way to 157.5mm.

HAPPYGUY_45 wrote:Could this lens be good for landscape, portraits ? what else?Have you looked at reviews? This is exactly the sort of thing you can get from reviews. That's what reviews are for.You should have no troubles finding plenty of reviews for this lens.

You may also want to look at the Sony 20-70mm F4, which is in some ways optically superior.  Depends on the focal lengths you want.

I have found 170 good uses so far for this lens on my A7R IV. That's the number of images in my website's Collection dedicated specifically to this lens. If you would like to take a look to see if it may be right for you,you can find the Collection here. Any questions you may have are welcome.

Thank you

I don't have this one but was strongly considering it as my mid-range (or one of the same focal length on the right mount when still thinking dslrs). It has the advantage of the added focal length range over the 24-70s. I'd had aps-c lenses that went to the comparable -70mm, too. (I went with the 28-200/2.8-5.6 Tamron instead.)  Nor did the price difference go un-noticed.)What it doesn't provide is the shallower depth of field of an f2.8 and these days, with better low light performance and noise reduction software, the f4 is less an issue when it comes to dealing with lower light or needing faster shutter speeds.It's got a good portrait use range (unless you really need the f2.8 depth of field) and can be stitched for coverage of wider angles. It doesn't of course help for longer focal length needs beyond practical cropping. So, sports, wildlife isolating architectural or landscape features are limited, too.

Craig Gillette wrote:I don't have this one but was strongly considering it as my mid-range (or one of the same focal length on the right mount when still thinking dslrs). It has the advantage of the added focal length range over the 24-70s. I'd had aps-c lenses that went to the comparable -70mm, too. (I went with the 28-200/2.8-5.6 Tamron instead.) Nor did the price difference go un-noticed.)What it doesn't provide is the shallower depth of field of an f2.8 and these days, with better low light performance and noise reduction software, the f4 is less an issue when it comes to dealing with lower light or needing faster shutter speeds.It's got a good portrait use range (unless you really need the f2.8 depth of field) and can be stitched for coverage of wider angles. It doesn't of course help for longer focal length needs beyond practical cropping. So, sports, wildlife isolating architectural or landscape features are limited, too.are you talking about the 24-70 or the 105?

Euell wrote:You may also want to look at the Sony 20-70mm F4, which is in some ways optically superior. Depends on the focal lengths you want.i second this suggestion, if i was buying brand new i would go for the 20-70mm F4 instead

You asked about the 24-105/4.