I bought one to add to my travel kit and I’m using it on my compact C bodies like the A7CR and A7CII. I’ve always owned a f/2.8 70-200 and have the GM II since it came out but size, weight, and versatility convinced me to get the f/4 G and I found a mint used copy to save some money. Also can leave my FE 90/2.8 G MACRO at home now so it really lightens my load when low light is not a must. Thank you for your video and take care.
Nice video. I consider one benefit it has over the Tamron being its tripod collar and foot for shooting on a tripod. For stills it's handy for both landscape type shots with longer exposure times and potentially for some macro shots. I wouldn't want to put my A7Cii on a tripod with the Tamron 70-180/2,8 attached..even if it's probably fine mechanically it'll be more sensitive to wind and movement. The foot provides a better point of balance (even if it moves slightly with the zoom action extension). For all handheld photography I'd go with the Tamron, both for the fiscal savings as well as for the low light & blur capabilities of f/2,8 vs f/4.
Bud, you have some of the most concise and relevant reviews - all with no wasted words. Plus, you ask and answer all the relevant questions. You should have thousands of subscribers. Keep at it!
Yeah... I think it can be a hard sell at the price with the other options around it. If I didn't physically get my hands on it, I don't think I could be convinced LOL. Lot of competition around it.
A classic clean, sharp, Sony news-footage-worthy, editorial gathering lens that, as long as you have your exposure correct, tells it like it is with no "character coloring": very important in news gathering. Any of the footage you got here could have been shown on any evening news channel. I admit, I might not have considered it before your review. Well done. PS: Keep plugging; I knew your channel would grow!
im looking at picking this up paired with a 20-70 f/4 for my trip to thailand next year. pair it with an fx3 or zve1 & that f4 light problem is non existent
f/2.8 to f/4 is actually a full stop of light difference, and it certainly makes a difference indoors in dimly lit scenarios. Couple of examples: Photographing college basketball indoors, I was able to shoot at ISO 1000 at f/4 with a 1/400s shutter. That's probably a tad slow, but it did freeze motion well and noise was well-controlled. You could certainly go higher on ISO. Photographing event speakers on stage indoors, even with some stage lighting, I was at ISO 2500 at f/2.8 with 1/160s shutter speed. That's the slowest I'd go. If it were an f/4 lens in that situation, I'd be probably be at ISO 4000 or 5000. If you're comfortable shooting in that range, save your money and go f/4. But if you're shooting events without flash, I'd go f/2.8. The GMII is incredible and a big step up from the original, just not as compact.
I haven't used it personally, but it looks like another great contender. It's heavier than Sony and Tamron's latest options, but if you're fine with that, Sigma often makes lenses optically just as good as Sony. Just won't shoot faster than 15 fps, if that matters to you.
Pros choose rather brighter lenses and that's nothing weird because they make a living from photography. But the f/4 like this one should be good enough for most shooters 👌If it's too expensive there are still great third party alternatives.
I bought one to add to my travel kit and I’m using it on my compact C bodies like the A7CR and A7CII. I’ve always owned a f/2.8 70-200 and have the GM II since it came out but size, weight, and versatility convinced me to get the f/4 G and I found a mint used copy to save some money. Also can leave my FE 90/2.8 G MACRO at home now so it really lightens my load when low light is not a must. Thank you for your video and take care.
Nice video. I consider one benefit it has over the Tamron being its tripod collar and foot for shooting on a tripod. For stills it's handy for both landscape type shots with longer exposure times and potentially for some macro shots. I wouldn't want to put my A7Cii on a tripod with the Tamron 70-180/2,8 attached..even if it's probably fine mechanically it'll be more sensitive to wind and movement. The foot provides a better point of balance (even if it moves slightly with the zoom action extension).
For all handheld photography I'd go with the Tamron, both for the fiscal savings as well as for the low light & blur capabilities of f/2,8 vs f/4.
Bud, you have some of the most concise and relevant reviews - all with no wasted words. Plus, you ask and answer all the relevant questions. You should have thousands of subscribers. Keep at it!
Solid work. Thanks Chris!
Great review, I got mine 2 weeks ago & it very quickly became 1 of my fav lenses, due to it's size, weight & versatility.
Thanks for the awesome video. This does sound like a great lens. I'd still love to get the GM for lower light situations. Keep up the good work.
You're totally right, Chris! Got it a few weeks ago and it kicks a$$... Love the versatility! 👌
For sure! One of the few times we can say it's easy to carry around a 70-200.
Good video brother. I just picked up this lens for my food videos and I'm excited to use it!
Recently bought this lens when I upgraded to the Sony A7, it takes great photos and videos. Enjoyed your review.
Great video, Chris. I like the integration of storytelling into the video, i.e. your sister-in-law’s marathon shots. You deserve more subscribers!
Thank you! I try to add a level of storytelling to the videos where I can and will try to do more in the future. Glad it doesn't go unnoticed!
One of the better reviews of this lens ... subscribed!
Thank you! All of my favorite reviewers give at least some real world use so I always try to do the same.
Love the look of this thing. Excited to see if it becomes more popular than it has in the past.
Yeah... I think it can be a hard sell at the price with the other options around it. If I didn't physically get my hands on it, I don't think I could be convinced LOL. Lot of competition around it.
I have the a9iii and it keeps up very well. I enjoy it and the half maro is very nice
A classic clean, sharp, Sony news-footage-worthy, editorial gathering lens that, as long as you have your exposure correct, tells it like it is with no "character coloring": very important in news gathering. Any of the footage you got here could have been shown on any evening news channel. I admit, I might not have considered it before your review. Well done. PS: Keep plugging; I knew your channel would grow!
Thanks! I'm sure the video stems from the sports reporter background in me.
im looking at picking this up paired with a 20-70 f/4 for my trip to thailand next year. pair it with an fx3 or zve1 & that f4 light problem is non existent
Yeah the f4 is great for video. That'll be a killer combo!
You would love the first version even more. Especially that internal zoom. Such a shame Sony didn't implement it on this lens.
I am thinking of going for the 70-200mm f2.8 GMII is there a huge difference or is the extra 1/3rd of an F Stop of light worth it?
f/2.8 to f/4 is actually a full stop of light difference, and it certainly makes a difference indoors in dimly lit scenarios. Couple of examples:
Photographing college basketball indoors, I was able to shoot at ISO 1000 at f/4 with a 1/400s shutter. That's probably a tad slow, but it did freeze motion well and noise was well-controlled. You could certainly go higher on ISO.
Photographing event speakers on stage indoors, even with some stage lighting, I was at ISO 2500 at f/2.8 with 1/160s shutter speed. That's the slowest I'd go. If it were an f/4 lens in that situation, I'd be probably be at ISO 4000 or 5000. If you're comfortable shooting in that range, save your money and go f/4. But if you're shooting events without flash, I'd go f/2.8. The GMII is incredible and a big step up from the original, just not as compact.
Great video thanks!
what do you think about sigma 70-200mm f2.8? price range is around sony f4 ii lens.
I haven't used it personally, but it looks like another great contender. It's heavier than Sony and Tamron's latest options, but if you're fine with that, Sigma often makes lenses optically just as good as Sony. Just won't shoot faster than 15 fps, if that matters to you.
Nice video man
Thank you!
I bought this lens. It doesn’t take the most stunning images but it’s really good. It’s light and focuses so close for 70-200.
What's the downsides with the image quality would you say?
@@ush45none…. It’s a pretty sharp lens… maybe if you compare with prime lens or super expensive zoom lens you can see the difference.
Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 G2 or Sony 70-200mm f/4 Macro??????
I like the build and features of the Sony better. But if you gotta have f/2.8, Tamron.
i love mine ;) paired with a6700
Love it. Got some extra reach on the APS-C sensor too!
Pros choose rather brighter lenses and that's nothing weird because they make a living from photography. But the f/4 like this one should be good enough for most shooters 👌If it's too expensive there are still great third party alternatives.
Not really. This lens focuses insanely close. Others can’t focus less than 4 feet