I was concerned to buy the Tamron f2.8 (70/180) but because I can use converters, weight, form factor and macro not to forget image quality I decided to buy the 70/200 f4 Macro OSS II and even if 1600 EUR is very expensive for a 70/200 is expensive I don't regret it and I did not think that I use macro so often- buy the way on the tripod I love the ring because I can switch from landscape to portrait very quick. But you're right - outside I don't use it!
I also had that Canon 70-200 F4 on a Canon APSC. It was a great lens. I moved long ago to F2.8 lenes. I’m purchasing my first Sony and this lens is at the top of my list.
Great video! I saw your previous 2 lens recommendation which is this 70-200 f4 lens and the Sony 20-70mm f4 G. I do think that that’s a great combo. I wonder how that might compare to a 2 lens combo with the Tamron 17-50mm f4 and the Tamron 50-400mm f4.5-6.3 for landscape?
I’m so close to pulling the trigger on this one. I really wanna see someone use the 2x teleconverter on it because I’d love to sell my 200-600 to make a lighter pack out.
I was concerned to buy the Tamron f2.8 (70/180) but because I can use converters, weight, form factor and macro not to forget image quality I decided to buy the 70/200 f4 Macro OSS II and even if 1600 EUR is very expensive for a 70/200 is expensive I don't regret it and I did not think that I use macro so often- buy the way on the tripod I love the ring because I can switch from landscape to portrait very quick. But you're right - outside I don't use it!
That’s a good point about the ring. I actually used a mount on the camera the effectively does the same thing
I also had that Canon 70-200 F4 on a Canon APSC. It was a great lens. I moved long ago to F2.8 lenes. I’m purchasing my first Sony and this lens is at the top of my list.
I have fond memories of that canon 70-200 f4. Just was looking at a print of a shot I took with it and it was underrated even at the time.
Great video! I saw your previous 2 lens recommendation which is this 70-200 f4 lens and the Sony 20-70mm f4 G. I do think that that’s a great combo. I wonder how that might compare to a 2 lens combo with the Tamron 17-50mm f4 and the Tamron 50-400mm f4.5-6.3 for landscape?
The Tamron 17-50 looks great, but a bit soft in the corners. If ultimate sharpness is key, the Sony 16-35 f4 PZ will be a better lens.
I’m so close to pulling the trigger on this one. I really wanna see someone use the 2x teleconverter on it because I’d love to sell my 200-600 to make a lighter pack out.
Got the 20-70 and this 70-200 would complete it very well.
Kemper: did you discuss your tripod/head setup in a video? Looks like an Acratech panorama head, but what legs?
Thats for the wonderful review. Is the 70 to 200 F2.8 sharp at 70mm and when fully extended at 200mm. Thanks
The 2.8 is razor sharp at all focal lengths!
@@summitbidglad to know, Thank you 😊
@@summitbid that's great to know, thanks 👍
what about sigma 2.8?
so for astrophotography get the 2.8 right ?
1.4
F4 vs F2.8 is just 1 stop of light, so you won't notice any real difference, you would have to go at least F1.8 to have a sustancial light advantage
Dust issues?