The best 70-200mm Lens for Sony
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 фев 2025
- Join our Photo Contest: www.fstoppers....
Buy Where Art Meets Architecture: fstoppers.com/...
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8: amzn.to/4bBZ3H8
Sony 70-200mm f/4: amzn.to/48qu3Ht
Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 G2: amzn.to/42Qq2L5
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 G1 refurbished: amzn.to/42NsAtx
In this video we compare the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II, to the Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 Macro G OSS II Lens, and the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 Di III VC VXD G2
0:00: intro
0:25 build quality and features
7:08 vignette
7:26 sharpness
7:54 Optical stabilization
8:55 Bokeh
9:46 Image Quality and Color
10:48 Autofocus
11:54 Conclusion
Join our Photo Contest: www.fstoppers.com/contests
Buy Where Art Meets Architecture: fstoppers.com/product/mike-kelleys-where-art-meets-architecture-1
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8: amzn.to/4bBZ3H8
Sony 70-200mm f/4: amzn.to/48qu3Ht
Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 G2: amzn.to/42Qq2L5
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 G1 refurbished: amzn.to/42NsAtx
Now that Tamron has added image stabilization to the 70-180, for me that's the clear choice. Overall I like that Tamron has great close focusing and uniform 67mm filter size.
You’re missing the sigma 70-200 2.8 that’s the happy medium
Ya I wish I had asked for that one too
@@FStoppers well that means there’s a part two possibly 👀I would love more content 💯
Might as well redo the video
thats my favourite brand
It's the happy hippo among these lenses : )
Chose the Sony f4 last fall and thought I would regret it. Turns out, the thing is magic.
I love mine. Compact plus macro
There ain't no magic, man. It's just a freakin' F4 zoom and half macro.
what lens do you use that compares with what this lens can do and features it has?@@hellolau
@@hellolau It has OSS, takes teleconverters, does macro, is small and light. What's the competition?
I'm torn between the tamron (newer version) and the sony f4. I think I'm going with the sony f4 too. It's compact for what it is and even lighter than the tamron. The build quality looks amazing and you can take casual macro shots with it. Not to mention you can carry a small teleconverter and extend its range even further, making it very versatile. I would miss f2.8 but if f4 isn't enough, then f2.8 likely won't be either.
i would problably go with the sigma 70-200mm! It's an incredible lens for it's price point!
I saw a comparison with the Tamron 70-180 G2. And I like Tamron better in terms of bokeh and depth of the picture, it gives depth and plasticity to the photos. The bokeh of Sigma is too crystalline like taken with an iPhone.
My Tamron 70-180 broke internally when I was taking off the lens hood. Just the pressure of twisting the hood off the barrel was enough to crack something inside it and not allow it to zoom properly. It was quoted as a $700 repair so I went out and bought the metal G Master. No issues with that one so far.
Was that the G2?
@@duvalpenny100 same happened to me on g1. i have 70-200/2.8 GM II now and it is way better in all aspects
@@tj4000aj nice. I've settled on getting the 70-200 GM ii. That paired with the 2x teleconverter will complete my lens collection.
It also happened to my 70-180. I initially bought the Tamron to save some money but in the end I ended up with the GM. The build quality of the Tamron is awful and the autofocus was slow and hunting a lot in comparison to the Sony. But now I am thinking about the Sony f4 because of the size and weight of the GM. At least in this area the Tamron is the best.
@@eyetronic1once again the adage “buy cheap buy twice” has been proven accurate. I kept the 70-180 as a beater lens but haven’t used it in 2 years. Time to send it to mpb.
Thanks!
This video is weird dude. The Tamron 70-180 g2 has been out for 6 months now and you choose the worst version to review. And you ignored the sigma which is very good in its own right. Strange choices.
A lot of people are saying the G2 Tamron only upgrade is the stabilization , and I heard it’s not good so the G1 bought used is the best bang for the buck !
The corners are much more sharper wide open 😉
Great analyses of the three. I bought the Sony 2.8 when it first arrived and have never looked back.
Tamron cut cost in areas that are less important to most photographers. So it will sacrifice premium build quality (its still good but not super good), special switch options that are seldom touched, OSS (but G2 has) because most people shoot at higher shutter speeds. Of course there is one thing more that is disadvantaged for third party lenses and that is software limiting to 15 fps. If you are a sports photographer using an A1 or A9 it will affect. However, I still went for the Tamron as it is just so much value for so much lesser cost. BTW the zoom throw for the tamron is very short so its very easy to zoom in and out. Its so light, we can reduce vibration by holding being able to hold it more steady.
I’m surprised the Tamron 35-150 F/2 - F/2.8 didn’t make a guest appearance.
Patrick has it back in the states :(
The Tamron G2 version is what I’d choose; excellent cost for the features and build. I’ve had my two other Tamron lenses (17-28, 28-75) for a year with great results.
The F4 can go 1:1 macro with the 2x adapter
When I switched to Sony from Nikon DSLR, f2.8 zooms became more of a nice to have than an absolute necessity. High ISO performance is crazy nowadays.
The 70-200 F4 Macro G OSS II also has a zoom lock button, although, I don’t find I really need to use it. Also, you center and corner comparison was at minimum aperture. I shoot mostly landscape, between f8 and f11, sometimes more. It is my understanding the F4 G II is as sharp or sharper in the corners than the GM in the smaller aperture range. Did you take any of those for comparison?
Yes I shot everything but didn't go into details to keep the video less than an hour. At f/8 at 70mm and at 200mm the f/4 lens looks the same if not even a little little sharper than Sony's f/2.8 lens in the center and edges of the frame. If you don't care about shooting at f/2.8 the f/4 version seems like the clear choice.
@@FStoppers thanks!
Sigma 500mm f5.6 seems like a better buy 😊
@@lewcehjitl3282 The Sigma 500mm does look like an awesome lens. Looks like the Sony 300 would have some competition if Sony allowed them to support a teleconverter. That said, the 500mm is just not as flexible as a 70-200.
maybe - one more option to consider: the weight ! if you are working the whole day with your equipment...
I absolutely LOVE my Sony 70-200mm f/4 lens. I have the original version and it suits me just fine. The price is great and the weight is easy to lug around. All-in-all it is a great lens. When I shot Canon, my standard travel outfit was the 70-200mm f/4L IS and 17-55mm f/2.8 and I carried this combination all over the world. I now match my Sony 70-200mm f/4 with a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 and that is also a great combination. I do wish however, that Sony could have included a tele extender capability with their 70-200mm f/4 lens.
Hi, what about 70-200 f4 mark 2 with 2x teleconverter compare with 50-400 tamron?
Personally, I love to use camera when going to trekking or hiking trips.
I am hesitated between these two. I would be appreciated, if I hear your thoughts.
Thank you.
Which one did you choose?
For photography I agree: the f2.8 is necessary, but for video especially with an FX3 or A7IV it's really not since you have dual ISO. The 70-200 f4 macro is better than the new Tamron G2's stabilization... the Tamron has a weird glitchy stabilization which is more visible over a 100mm... so I would say depends on your needs, the Tamron 70-180 G2 is an easy pick when it comes to photos only, but if you are a hybrid shooter I think the 70-200 f4 macro is better overall. Also when the OSS kicks in you can shoot at 200mm with a 1/100 (or even lower) shutter speed handheld (to compensate for the F4) and get a perfectly clean image.
This is the comment I was looking for! Thank you 🙏
You can't use f4 in low light, even 2.8 is pushing it
@@discgolfcrew702with a dual native ISO of 12,800 for Sony Full frame body I think there shouldn’t be any problem at f8 - f9
You forgot to mention size and weight. The Tamron is the clear winner in this category.
Thanks for this great review ! Very useful info.
I have original 70-180 and it was good before 70-200/2.8 GM II. However, even on A1 I had quite a few out of focus frames when tracking (4-6 out of 20) whereas with 70-200/2.8 GM II it's maybe 1 out of 20. Also, not sure if the Tamron can hit 30fps as the GM II. Also be careful when removing the lens hood as it snapped an internal part in the zoom mechanism and luckily it was under warranty and Tamron sent a new lens replacement. I would use the 70-180 as a burner and the 70-200 GMII for serious work. Actually planning on getting the f4 70-200 to save weight when travelling and selling the 70-180mm,.
Greetings, according to the SIGMA manual, the control of the diaphragm from the lens ring for this purpose, only works on compatible cameras and so far I have been unable to find a list with such cameras.
On my sony A6000 it does not work, please tell me the APSC or FF model in which the ring works?
This information will be very useful, I'm thinking of Sony a7C (when it has the price it should have) or A7III.
Thanks a lot 😎
Thank you. As an event, portrait, and sports shooter I’ve always bought the f2.8 best zoom in each lens family. So I have the GM II. But it’s also been around longer and available when the others were not. Now as I’m shooting landscape I’ve added the smaller and lighter f/4 Macro G II but I bought a mint used copy to save money. I’m getting convinced that for landscape you will not shoot a scene at f/2.8 but more lie f5.6 to f11. So why get the bigger, heavier, and more expensive one? Can you comment? Take care.
Well if you have $3K to blow and assuming no vast difference in wildlife/fast action perforance, the choice is clear. Get used versions of both the Tamron for the 2.8 and the sony f4 for macro. both are lighter/easier/more likely to be carried around, and both have 95%+ of the big boy's performance (and some things it can't do). lol
Son grow up so fast, lucky he have that great dad.
Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 G2 or Sony 70-200mm f/4 Macro??????
We need a new video about Sony 70-200mm ver2 Vs Sigma 70-200mm dg dn Sport Vs Tamron 70-180mm Version2 G2 (last version).
i m interested in which of the 4 monstertrucks is the best 🙂
Which Sony did you have?
The new Tamron lens is insane value for the price. Got it on sale for $1100 CAD, and it's a beast for the buck.
Can you please advise, I can't make my mind between this lens the Tamron 70-180 g2 and the new Sony 70*200 F4 macro lens. I'm thinking to get the Sony but the F4 is making me hesitated as I do a lot portrait as well. But I like the idea of getting sony glass as it performs much better with Sony camera of course.
How do you see it.
Thanks so much for helping me out.🙏
Get the 70-200F4 and just get a 85 1.8for portrait. That 85 is way better than those two lenses for portrait and only fraction of cost.
I upgraded from the Tamron 70-180 G1 to the G2 and despite the stabilization of the G2 I can't see much difference shooting video handheld. Perhaps the a7IV stabilization levels out any differences. The G1 was excellent but the G2, to my eye is subtly sharper.
Have been shooting the Sony 2.8 lens a few times.
Its insane, but youre right
If you dont know what a photo is shot with, you might not notice it 🎉
I want an f2.8gm that zooms externally like the f4gm for space savings in my bag for travel
Also my friend lend me his 70-200 GM 2 + A1 .. haha .. having so much fun with it. I will get the 70-200 GM2 over the others when I get the funds. :D
so the minimum focus distance on the Tamron and sony f4 "macro" are almost the same?
Geat video definately going for the tamron g2, but sadly I don't have 4 moster trucks tho.
IMHO, 70-200mm f/2.8 GM II for sports and fast action.
Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 for portraits and events.
Sigma 70 - 200mm f2.8 DG DN OS Sport lens is a great lens for the price.
Update on the ecotank 6months later?
I chose the F4 version from Sony because it is compact and therefore fits my Sony A7Cr wonderfully. In terms of quality, the optics are quite comparable to the 2.8 variant and the macro function is an addition that allows someone who only occasionally does macros to save money on a specialized lens.
Together with the Sony F4/20-70 it forms a wonderfully compact and visually appealing combination for all occasions without having to compromise on quality.
Similar story here, going to sell my Sigma 105 mm macro. Rocking the Sigma f2.8/24-70 though, but on A7c body would probably do the same as you.
quick question im new in wildlife photography do i need choice sony 70-200 GM lens v1 or 70-200 G lens v2
Much weight versión 1
70-200 is not a good range for wildlife. Better to get a 100-400, or a 200-600.
You can go for 70-200 G lens v2 with 1,4x or 2,0x teleconverters for a all-in-one portrait (sort of), medium to long telephoto (420 mm f/5,6 in APSC mode) and macro lens (1:1 with 2x TC). However if aiming specifically at wildlife/birding you are better off with a dedicated longer focal lengths like folks above said (topping at 400-500 mm around f/5,6). Sony 200-600 is a beast and cheap (same price) for the value it provides, but just look at the size of a thing!
Alternatively think about micro 4/3 system - much easier and cheaper to obtain longer reach.
13:22 Tamron G2 has IBIS inside!
As a wedding photographer, the tamron is a no brainer for me
I have both the f4 and the 2.8 gmiis they both are great but the f2.8 is killer at 200mm. But of you are using it for a hobby or smaller shoots then the f4 is the one to go for!
I agree it would have been nice is the Sigma was there, as well as the Tamron G2 as that does have IS.
Tamron 35-150 with the A1 or A7rV for the win.
20mp Apsc at 225 is perfect .
Or if need more reach - Sony 70-200 f4 G2 with 1,4 teleconverter, 420 mm in APSC. TC helps with macro as well.
I agree though that Tamron 35-150 is great all-arounder if you can't be bothered to carry around the 24-70.
How do you start this video without even mentioning the new Sigma 70-200...
I wonder if extending element means never shoot on a beach
The Sigma 70-200 kicks!
Should re-do this to include the Sigma 70-200.
A test with the SIGMA version missing does not make sense at all, it's probably the best option if you don't need >15 FPS and Extenders are not important for you .....
8:00 is misinformation, tamron has stabilization.
He is doing a comparison of the Tamron G1 which doesn't have VC. G2 has VC and he mentions this as an alternative option straight afterwards. 😂
Seems like you guys completely forgot about the Sigma 70-200mm DG DN.
Tamron needs a touch more magenta and saturation. Make a preset.
This comparison while interesting, is very much unfair for Tamron. You should be comparing both older versions of lenses (Sony SEL70200GM with older Tamron version) or both newer versions (SEL70200GM2 with latest Tamron). Older Sony lens is not that great as the latest one. And similarly latest Tamron lens is way better than the old version - it not only has the stabilization (VC) which is great alone but also is significantly sharper in some situations that older Tamron lens. But the price is also a huge factor - in image quality Sony and Tamron are almost the same (Sony is a little bit better but that's not a deal breaker in most situations) while Tamron is less than half the price of latest Sony SEL70200GM2 lens.
The Tamron is also not weather or dust sealed.
The Tamron MFD aint bad! Still buying the Sony... hahah
Why was this video even pushed out, guy didnt even have half of the competitor's cool lenses like the sigma 70-200, or the 70-180 g2, or the 35-150 f2-2.8, might as well just say buy the gmaster its the best lens here
Tamron all day!
why is your focus all wrong?, if you are a pro you should know where to put your f-stop at to get a wider depth of filed........?
if you have a foot difference between face and lens so you should be filming at, at least f6.5 and up...
On point. Which his focus is not 🤣
Missing Sigma 70-200 criminal 😮
❤
Hurts my ears everytime you say bokah instead of boKEH
The Sigma would be a great option too
Seems Sony sponsored
11:16 Wow, Col. Steve Austin watch out! Better. Stronger. Faster.
White lenses are so ugly. Tamron G2 all the way.
Too bad tamron only reach 180 and not 200
Lol ! 😅
There's something twisted in the average photographer's mind nowadays: for a sound mind photographer, a 200mm lens is NOT purchased for the sake of "boke"... it's bought because he needs that reach!
Your comment reflects a narrow perspective. Judging others without knowing them isn't fair. Maybe it's time to step down from that pedestal and consider that everyone has their own reasons for their choices. Calling someone else's mind "twisted" reveals more about your own mindset than theirs.