I have one on order, but I tend to doubt I will keep it unless Sigma has worked a big surprise into this optical formula. If focus breathing is controlled, then I will get use out of it, but most of the time these Sport lenses are not built with video in mind. The aperture ring *maybe* suggests it will be a video capable lens, and it does look like Sigma has included the de-click switch on the far side. Hopefully so. I guess I’ll know in about 8 weeks.
Hi. Nice video. I like the way you described both the Sony's GM 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 to be prohibitively expensive and thus not an option, because I relate to this fully, had the same dilemma when choosing my 70-200 lens, but I ended up with the 70-180 2.8 Tamron, although I give you credit on the built quality of the Sony 70-200 f4 I was more convinced by better quality pics the Tamron would give me. Have been flirting with the G2 version of the Tamron, but I'll definitely wait the Sigma first. In terms of overall quality for built and image, I'd still say Sigma is above Tamron (although is pushing hard to change that with their latest G2 lenses). Owning the 105mm 2.8 Sigma Macro lens which is completely love for how solid and professional it feels, the dedicated aperture ring, and the quality of the images it produces, I expect the new 70-200 Sigma to float on that same level of quality. Now for the pricing, if the Tamron G2 version is already at roughly 1500 EUR, the Sony GM 70-200 at 2800 EUR, I could expect the Sigma easily to be around 2000 EUR. To seriously challenge Sony it has to be a certain amount below the GM, but in order to mark a certain (quality) distinction from Tamron it needs to be somewhat more expensive, otherwise for me, if the Sigma is at the same price as the Tamron it would be an awesome steal !!!! ;))
The main concern is the weigh. Existing 70-200mm F2.8 from Sigma is 1.8kg which is significantly heavier than Sony 70-280 (1kg) and Tamron 70-180 (810g). I am a big Sigma fan and using their 24-70 Art as my primary lens, but some of their lenses are just too bulky (another example is 14mm F1.8 Art which is ~3 times as heavy as Sony one)
@@2000sidhupunjab IKR. Wish its an exception. Looks how Sony marketed theirs 70-200 as GMaster. Its about perspective. People will perceive it more in Art moniker.
I have the Sigma 14-24, the Sony 24-105 f4, which I absolutely love, and am looking to get a third lens with more reach. Not sure if the 95 mm extra reach is really with it or if I should go with the 100-400. I know I'll be losing that wide open bokeh of the 2.8 but that's my quandary.
I see 100-400 mm as more of a specialty lens for wildlife and sports photographers. Expensive and not very fast. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the range of a 70-200 at f/2.8. If you think you need the range, another option would be the new Sony 70-200mm f/4.0 with a teleconverter. This could be a versatile compromise.
I thought they already made one in 2019. The Sigma 70-200mmF/2.8 DG OS HSM. It looks very similar to this one actually. But I've not been able to find any comparisons of that one to this one. Was it so bad that everyone buried it under it's then competitors? 😂
HSM models are effectively older lenses made for DSLRs with mirrorless adapters built in. This new lens has been designed for E-mount and has a number of advantages.
Incomprehensible for me how one can choose Sony 70-200 f4 over Tamron 70-180 f2.8. Tamron is a fantastic lens, and 2.8 over 4 is a huge difference for portraits and low light. Tamron is even much sharper than the first generation Sony G master 70-200 2.8, to say nothing about 70-200 f4, and one cannot use TCs with the old f4, so I just cannot think of any important advantages of this lens. I changed eventually the Tamron 70-180 for 35-150 which is also fantastic, but I miss sometimes the compactness, and the additional reach and 3D bite of the 70-180 lens. Of course, the new Sony 70-200 f4 is another story with its macro capabilities, but I assume you got the old one since it was 3-4 years ago...
They didn't mention a price. My assumption based on the prices of its competitors is that it will come in between $1799.99 and $2199.99. That's just a guess, though!
I think I mentioned it a few times. Great lens. Love the price. Don't love the build quality and the Tamron quirks. I think the Sigma will be a compelling option.
@@traenardsconyers6804 Please look at video time stamps 019 - 023. This is why I asked the question. Also, Samyang/Rokinon produce a 35 - 150mm f2 - f2.8
That would've been crazy but also probably canabalised Sigmas sales in longer telephotos and would be much more expensive. I like Sigma when they make a cheaper version of a great lens. I don't necessarily expect them to innovate in this range.
I think a lot of video and photo people idealize owning the standard zoom set. 14-24 24-70 70-200 has long been the most common trio. That Tameron lens is super cool, and I certainly want to try one out. Maybe if you were looking for one lens instead of multiple and could deal with zooming aperture changes, then it could be a great value!
focus breathing, 1400g, bulky, ugly, low light hunting AF as every sigma glass, restricted to 15fps, no teleconverter, not faster and accurate AF than GM2, so no thank you sigma
I have one on order, but I tend to doubt I will keep it unless Sigma has worked a big surprise into this optical formula. If focus breathing is controlled, then I will get use out of it, but most of the time these Sport lenses are not built with video in mind. The aperture ring *maybe* suggests it will be a video capable lens, and it does look like Sigma has included the de-click switch on the far side. Hopefully so. I guess I’ll know in about 8 weeks.
Hi. Nice video. I like the way you described both the Sony's GM 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 to be prohibitively expensive and thus not an option, because I relate to this fully, had the same dilemma when choosing my 70-200 lens, but I ended up with the 70-180 2.8 Tamron, although I give you credit on the built quality of the Sony 70-200 f4 I was more convinced by better quality pics the Tamron would give me. Have been flirting with the G2 version of the Tamron, but I'll definitely wait the Sigma first. In terms of overall quality for built and image, I'd still say Sigma is above Tamron (although is pushing hard to change that with their latest G2 lenses). Owning the 105mm 2.8 Sigma Macro lens which is completely love for how solid and professional it feels, the dedicated aperture ring, and the quality of the images it produces, I expect the new 70-200 Sigma to float on that same level of quality. Now for the pricing, if the Tamron G2 version is already at roughly 1500 EUR, the Sony GM 70-200 at 2800 EUR, I could expect the Sigma easily to be around 2000 EUR. To seriously challenge Sony it has to be a certain amount below the GM, but in order to mark a certain (quality) distinction from Tamron it needs to be somewhat more expensive, otherwise for me, if the Sigma is at the same price as the Tamron it would be an awesome steal !!!! ;))
The main concern is the weigh. Existing 70-200mm F2.8 from Sigma is 1.8kg which is significantly heavier than Sony 70-280 (1kg) and Tamron 70-180 (810g).
I am a big Sigma fan and using their 24-70 Art as my primary lens, but some of their lenses are just too bulky (another example is 14mm F1.8 Art which is ~3 times as heavy as Sony one)
About freaking time!!! Panasonic's 70-200 f2.8 L mount is OVER-PRICED
Sigma is a friend of wallets everywhere.
I was about to buy a used Panasonic S Pro 70-200 f2.8 but Im gonna wait for it
Me too
somehow I wish they branded it as Art lens, rather than Sport... since we all know Art is their top of the line lens.
Do you wish they BRANDED it an art lens, or built it to the spec of the A series. One does not mean anything at all, another does.
@@dubenick built to spec of Art & also branded it as Art. Looks how Sony branded their 70-200 as G master. & less expensive as G, or FE
Sport and Art seem to be optically equivalent. They just apply the Sport tag to longer focal lengths.
They don’t use Art moniker for telephoto lenses
@@2000sidhupunjab IKR. Wish its an exception. Looks how Sony marketed theirs 70-200 as GMaster. Its about perspective. People will perceive it more in Art moniker.
I have the Sigma 14-24, the Sony 24-105 f4, which I absolutely love, and am looking to get a third lens with more reach. Not sure if the 95 mm extra reach is really with it or if I should go with the 100-400. I know I'll be losing that wide open bokeh of the 2.8 but that's my quandary.
I see 100-400 mm as more of a specialty lens for wildlife and sports photographers. Expensive and not very fast. I don't think you'll be disappointed with the range of a 70-200 at f/2.8.
If you think you need the range, another option would be the new Sony 70-200mm f/4.0 with a teleconverter. This could be a versatile compromise.
Will be a great addition to the Lmount.
I thought they already made one in 2019. The Sigma 70-200mmF/2.8 DG OS HSM. It looks very similar to this one actually. But I've not been able to find any comparisons of that one to this one. Was it so bad that everyone buried it under it's then competitors? 😂
HSM models are effectively older lenses made for DSLRs with mirrorless adapters built in. This new lens has been designed for E-mount and has a number of advantages.
Incomprehensible for me how one can choose Sony 70-200 f4 over Tamron 70-180 f2.8. Tamron is a fantastic lens, and 2.8 over 4 is a huge difference for portraits and low light. Tamron is even much sharper than the first generation Sony G master 70-200 2.8, to say nothing about 70-200 f4, and one cannot use TCs with the old f4, so I just cannot think of any important advantages of this lens. I changed eventually the Tamron 70-180 for 35-150 which is also fantastic, but I miss sometimes the compactness, and the additional reach and 3D bite of the 70-180 lens. Of course, the new Sony 70-200 f4 is another story with its macro capabilities, but I assume you got the old one since it was 3-4 years ago...
There was even a news that it's going to have an internal zoom...which was so interesting to hear... let's see
Did you see the approximate size pics that leaked? This could be a BIG lens. Like twice the size of the Tameron.
Was hoping they would stay with sigma's trend toward smaller lenses.
Apologies if I missed it, and accidentally skipped over a part of the video, but did they mention a price on this?
They didn't mention a price. My assumption based on the prices of its competitors is that it will come in between $1799.99 and $2199.99. That's just a guess, though!
I was so excited for this lens until I saw that the zoom ring is on the wrong side, and also turns the wrong way for Sony
What about the Tamron 70-180 mm 2,8 ??
I think I mentioned it a few times. Great lens. Love the price. Don't love the build quality and the Tamron quirks. I think the Sigma will be a compelling option.
lol that edit at 6:11 mustve said the wrong number
Hard edit. I forget what I said, but it was just the wrong number. I knew what I meant, tho!
Will Sigma make a comparable aps-c lens?
I believe that's where the Sigma 50-100mm Art lens comes in.
Did I see an F2 in your intro? What lens was that, perhaps a 35 - 150mm f2 from Sigma? Thanks for the heads up video.
The tamron 35-150 is F2-F2.8
@@traenardsconyers6804 Please look at video time stamps 019 - 023. This is why I asked the question. Also, Samyang/Rokinon produce a 35 - 150mm f2 - f2.8
Hey, any info about pricing?
Not yet.
Only 200… hey we have 2023!
They should made it 70-300 f2.8
That would've been crazy but also probably canabalised Sigmas sales in longer telephotos and would be much more expensive.
I like Sigma when they make a cheaper version of a great lens. I don't necessarily expect them to innovate in this range.
Sony e mount Available
Soon!
Everything about this is exactly how I felt about the Tamron. I wish I had gotten the Sony over the Tamron.
The Tamron still produces great images! Personal preference mostly.
😍😍😍😍😍
why you need it if there is Tamron 35-150 lol
I think a lot of video and photo people idealize owning the standard zoom set. 14-24 24-70 70-200 has long been the most common trio. That Tameron lens is super cool, and I certainly want to try one out. Maybe if you were looking for one lens instead of multiple and could deal with zooming aperture changes, then it could be a great value!
focus breathing, 1400g, bulky, ugly, low light hunting AF as every sigma glass, restricted to 15fps, no teleconverter, not faster and accurate AF than GM2, so no thank you sigma
I'm no expert, but that's probably why it's going to cost half the price.
@@DOPJoshDiazhalf the price of what?
@@oldmanhendo7183 The 70-200 GM M2.
@@DOPJoshDiaz ahh ok gotcha