During the time of use, I never thought about selling it. As if I myself tried to find cons in it. I tried and found it. But each time I stopped and objectively evaluated it. And each time I came to the conclusion that I needed it. very convenient focal lengths for me. Itβs good for reportage shooting. Personally, this is important to me. "razor" sharpness and "juiciness" of the picture. And all because there is no Photoshop there. (Although now, unfortunately, there is). But everything is done there with top-end technology. It seems to me that this lens was created for efficiency and reliability in the first place. those who believe that there is no difference in the picture between 24-105 and non-L lenses are also right. There is a difference. Of course, fixes are better in terms of picture quality. And if you donβt plan to shoot anything other than portraits, then of course take 13 5 mm L. They cost approximately the same. But the efficiency of this lens is important to me, and it is from these positions that I evaluate it. People obsessed with sharpness and colors did a bad service. if you evaluate it as a tool. If you have seen enough of sites with photographs where there is nothing but photoshop, you will begin to evaluate his work . Then you will not like 135 mm L either.
Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art Lens for Sony E: Unleash Creativity with Unprecedented Quality
6 Review
π· Canon RF 50mm F1.8 STM Lens for Full Frame Mirrorless RF Mount Cameras [EOS R, EOS RP, EOS R5, EOS R6] (4515C002)
8 Review
Sigma 16Mm Contemporary Lens Sony
15 Review
Sigma 30mm F1.4 Contemporary DC DN Lens: A High-Performance Sony E-Mount Lens
17 Review