Best 24-70mm Lens 2026: 9 Ranked, Aperture Claims Checked

It takes first place on consistency as much as score: 4.7 from 335 ratings, with 87% at five stars and 4% at one star. In practice that matches the Sigma 28-70mm for the lowest one-star share among the Sony-fit lenses here, and it comes at the highest price in the ranking, £1,525.

The headline claim is weight. Sony quotes 695g, over 20% less than the previous model, a barrel 16mm shorter and overall volume down roughly 18%. Inside there are four XD linear motors, a floating focus mechanism and a 9-blade aperture closing to f/22. At the same time Sony quotes up to 30 frames per second and 4K 120p on a compatible body, and the spec table lists a Nano AR Coating.

However, £1,525 is £126 more than Sony's own original 24-70mm f/2.8 G Master, and the 82mm filter thread costs more to feed than the 67mm and 72mm alternatives below. Worth noting too: the spec table lists 'Fixed Focal Length: 70 Millimetres' and a 'Screen Size' of 70 Millimetres on a lens with no screen. If you rarely shoot wider than f/4, the f/4 zooms here save you about £900.

It takes second on sample size: 376 ratings at 4.7, with 88% at five stars and 5% at one star. By contrast the Sony GM II above has 335 ratings and 4% one-star. The price is £1,169 — £356 below the Sony and £537 above the Sigma 28-70mm further down.

On paper this is the best 24-70mm lens for Sony E mount in the group. The spec table highlights six FLD glass elements, a 9-blade aperture, a minimum aperture of f/22, an 82mm filter thread and a 2.92:1 zoom ratio. Those FLD elements are there to control colour fringing at the edges of the frame.

The catch is the listing itself. Sigma's only bullets are 'Sigma', 'Image & Sound Accessory' and a packing list of front and rear caps and a sun visor. The spec table says 'Focus Type: Fixed Focus' and 'Fixed Focal Length: 24 Millimetres' on a zoom lens, and stabilisation is listed as 'No'. Even so, 4.7 from 376 buyers is hard to argue with. If you need stabilisation built into the lens, look elsewhere.

It sits third because 889 buyers have rated it 4.6, with 86% at five stars and 5% at one star. Only the Nikon F-mount zoom below has more ratings. Crucially, this Canon 24-70mm lens is the f/2.8 version; the f/4L IS USM further down costs £625.48 and adds stabilisation.

The optical formula uses a ring USM motor with a high-speed CPU and image-optimised AF algorithms, plus fluorine coatings on the front and rear elements to shed smears and fingerprints. The spec table gives a 9-blade aperture, a minimum aperture of f/22, an 82mm filter thread and a 3:1 zoom ratio.

That said, there is no image stabilisation, which the Canon RF version below does list. The price, £1,572, is the second highest here and £946 more than the Canon f/4L IS USM. As a result it only makes sense if you need f/2.8 on an EF body. The spec table also lists 'Screen Size: 1 Inches', which means nothing on a lens. If you shoot RF mount, this will not fit without an adapter.

It scores well — 4.7 from 159 ratings, 85% at five stars and just 2% at one star, the lowest one-star share of the nine. The catch is the price: £1,871.97, which is £300 more than the next dearest lens, the Canon EF f/2.8L II USM at £1,572.

On features it is the best 24-70mm f/2.8 lens here for RF bodies: 5-stop image stabilisation, a Nano USM motor for silent AF, three glass-moulded aspherical elements, three UD elements, a 9-blade aperture, and weather sealing with fluorine coatings front and rear. Minimum focus is 21cm, the filter thread is 82mm, and the lens control ring is assignable.

However, the aperture data on the page does not agree with itself. Maximum aperture is listed as '2.8 Millimetres' — millimetres measure length — and the minimum aperture is listed as 2.8, the same number. Lens Type is given as 'Macro' rather than standard. None of that changes the optics, but it is worth noting before you trust the rest of the table.

It starts at 28mm, not 24mm, so it is not strictly a 24-70mm — that is why it sits fifth. In practice it still delivers f/2.8 across the range for £631.39, which is £537 less than the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 lens above it. The review base is strong: 677 ratings at 4.6.

The body is built around internal focusing, and the spec table lists a focus mode switch, Nano Porous Coating and optical stabilisation. The filter thread is 67mm, the smallest here; the Nikon Z uses 72mm and the rest use 77mm or 82mm. The aperture has 9 blades closing to f/22, and the zoom ratio is listed as '2,5:1', comma and all.

Three lines of data disagree with each other, though. Lens Type is given as 'Telephoto' for a 28-70mm standard zoom, maximum aperture as '2.8 Millimetres', and minimum aperture as 2.8 — the same figure again. Screen Size is listed as 72.2 Millimetres, which no lens has. Even so, at this price the arithmetic is hard to beat. If you need 24mm at the wide end, this is not the lens.

It lands sixth on price and honesty rather than optics. The spec table reads 'Maximum Aperture: 4 f', the name says f/4, and a bullet on the same £625.48 page promises 'Fast f/2.8 max. aperture'. Two of those three cannot be right. The ratings are the weakest of the Canon zooms here: 4.4 from 419, with 6% at one star and 3% at two stars.

Optically it is a constant f/4 zoom with optical image stabilisation, a 9-blade aperture closing to f/22, a 77mm filter thread and a 0.38m close focus. It uses UD and super UD elements and an ultrasonic AF motor, which Canon describes as near-silent.

This is the lens to weigh up if you are deciding on a 24-70mm f/4 vs f/2.8 lens and mostly shoot stopped down or in good light: it costs £946 less than the f/2.8L II USM and adds stabilisation the f/2.8 lacks. That said, f/4 will not do the low-light work of the f/2.8 zooms, and the page's own contradiction is a reason to confirm the specification before buying. 'Fixed Focal Length' is listed as 50 Angstrom, a unit used to measure atoms.

It has the biggest sample of the nine: 936 ratings. The score is 4.4, with 76% at five stars, 12% at four and 7% at one, which means nearly a quarter of its ratings sit below five stars. Crucially, the price is £513.96 — the second lowest here and the cheapest constant f/2.8 lens on the list. So why seventh? Because of that rating spread and the missing stabilisation.

The design is a constant f/2.8 zoom with ED glass, a nanocrystal coating and a 77mm filter thread. Minimum focus distance is 0.38m. The diaphragm has 7 blades, the fewest here alongside the Nikon Z f/4, and minimum aperture is f/22.

That said, there is no VR: stabilisation is listed as 'no' in the spec table, while both Canon RF and EF options above offer it. The 7-blade aperture also gives less round out-of-focus highlights than the 9-blade designs. If you shoot a Nikon F body and want a Nikon 24-70mm lens for under £550, this is the one; if you have moved to Z mount, the f/4 S below is £50 cheaper and scores 4.6.

It is £126 cheaper than the GM II at the top: £1,399 against £1,525. Meanwhile its rating profile is the weakest of the nine. The score is 4.3 from 275 ratings, and 10% of those are one star against 4% for the newer lens — ten one-star ratings in every hundred, more than double the GM II's rate.

It is still a serious lens. The spec table lists XA, ED and Super ED elements, a circular 9-blade aperture, Nano AR Coating, optical SteadyShot stabilisation and a dust- and moisture-resistant design. The zoom is internal, so overall length stays constant, and the filter thread is 82mm with a minimum aperture of f/22.

However, it is no longer the best 24-70mm lens Sony sells — the GM II is, on both score and sample. As a result the case for the original rests entirely on that £126 saving, which is roughly 9% of the price. If the saving matters more than the ratings gap, it is defensible. At full price, the newer lens wins.