Why a 70-200mm Lens Should Be In EVERY Photographer's Bag | Sony 70-200mm
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Get $50 off when you sign up for Motion Array ➡️ bit.ly/motiona...
The debate about prime lenses vs zoom lenses isn't exactly a new one, and most good photographers will have both in their bag. But if you asked me to choose ONE lens for my travel/adventure projects, the 70-200mm is a no-brainer for me. Let's talk about why!
Grab one for yourself, here -
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 GM - geni.us/70_200...
Thanks for watching, and as always - STAY NERDY!
To learn awesome photography knowledge like this in-person, sign up for a workshop! www.nateluebbe...
Social Media INTHEWILD -
Instagram - nateinthewild
FacesBook - nateinthewild
Threads - www.threads.ne...
If you love what you see, please help me continue my journey by using our no-cost-to-you affiliate links to B&H and Amazon.
All the junk in my trunk:
Cameras -
Sony A1 - geni.us/A1Sony
Sony a7R V - geni.us/a7RV
Lenses -
Sony 20mm f/1.8 G - geni.us/7r8eQ2
Sony 24-70 f/2.8 GM - geni.us/BFRM
Sony 70-200mm f/4 - geni.us/rSFHy
Tripod -
Vanguard VEO 2 265CB - www.natetripod.com
Memory Card -
Sony TOUGH UHS-II - geni.us/sNRU5DW
Card Case - geni.us/S2Y87nO
What do you think? Is the 70-200 worth the extra weight in your bag?
When I was shopping for a telephoto lens, I decided to go with a 100 - 400 instead. It's great for more intimate, tighter landscape scenes as well as for occasional wildlife. I shoot with an a7r4 so I can sacrifice some megapixels to get a bit tighter compositions for wildlife if needed. My most used lenses kit in pretty heavy, 16-35, 24-105, and 100-400.
For the times when weight is a concern, like backpacking trips, I found that a 20mm 1.8 prime is a perfect compromise (for landscapes that is), wide enough to capture most landscape and astro scenes (if not, I can always do a pano) and if I need to go a bit tighter, I can do so at the expense of the resolution. a7r4 in APS-C mode produces 26mp images which is still enough for most use cases.
I think a long telephoto is definitely essential for landscape! Which is also one of my favourite things about shooting apsc haha, I had a 70-300 when I shot Nikon dx and enjoyed that extra reach at '450mm', but I'm currently shooting a Canon FD 80-200 F4L on Fuji and love it. It's also surprisingly light and compact for a tele, so don't really mind carrying it.
my 3 most used lenses in order 200-600 G, 70-200 GM, 20 1.8 G
My two most used lenses at home are my 24-70 GM II and my 70-200 GM II. My two most used travel lenses are the 16-35 PZ and my 70-200 f4 G II. I always have a 70-200 in my bag.
The 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is by far my favorite lens I have ever used. A little heavy, but it is so worth it.
Big fan of the 70-200. I just got back from a trip and it was in my bag the whole time, along with the new 16-25 2.8 G and the 400 GM.
I'm dying to check out that new 16-25!
I’ve been using 70-200 f4 for landscape in canon for 10 years. Now I switched to sony (a7r V) and first lense I got is 70-200 f4 G II. I cannot think about landscape photography without that focal lenses. Next one of course is 16-35 GM II :)
I love Tele photos, used the 28-200 from Tamron for really light trips. Sold it a few weeks ago already missing it
Oooooo man you've gotta replace it!
Awesome video, nice work Nate. 100% agree, my 50-140 (aps-c) always delivers the goods. One of my lesser used lenses because of size/weight, but delivers the highest percentage of photos that I just love.
Nice video nate. I think I’m going to pick up the Sony f4 70-200. This video was instructive
Cheers, glad you liked it! Feel free to use my affiliate links above if you'd like to help support the channel 🙏🏼
I never liked wide lenses for landscape photography...in fact...I liked Olympus lenses the most, namely the Sigma 60 mm f 2.8 (equivalent to ff 120 mm) On the apsc I used the 35 mm focal length 1.4 and 90 mm f 2 with great results.Great review! Now it's time to switch to full frame..Thank you so much!
Great job
Nice pictures 👌
What are your thoughts on using a 70-200 versus Sony’s 100-400?
Absolutely LOVE that lens, and I think it's an awesome addition to your camera bag.
70-200 f/2.8 = low light, or bokeh
70-200 f/4 = ultra lightweight
100-400 = versatility and range, at the expense of aperture.
New Nateinthwild video!!! Nice! I've been going back and forth on whether or not to get the 70-200 GM2. The 16-35 GM2 is my only zoom lens, currently. One of my primes is the 135GM which gives me around 200mm in S35 Crop Mode (at 26MP on the A7RV). What do you think? Too much overlap? I could buy it with the teleconverter, but then I don't know if I'd be better off getting the 100-400 GM, in that case. 😐
I actually think in that case you should go with the 70-200 f/4 II. You can get the aperture from the 135 when you need it, and the portability and versatility from the 70-200 when you need that.
@@Nateinthewild Genius! Ordered the f4 version today. I'm hoping a 100-400 GM II is in our near future!
I have the S Pro 70-200mm f2.8 and I love the look but I don't bring it with me as much as I want to.
Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 Di III 👍