Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/4, which one would you pick? Also not sure if you notice but I've tried a few new things in this video, let me know what do you think about the video?
both are great! usually I only need f2.8 for standard and wide shots (like night landscape and astro), so f4 for daily zoom stuff is fine! Also, much lighter!
Finally a comprehensive review of this lens! And great to have a comparison with the f4 version. So far some reviewers have suggested that the f2.8 isn‘t worth the extra investment, some people even saying the f4 is sharper. Which does not seem to be the case based on your comparisons. So thanks, Richard, for a very helpful review. As for the dislikes? This is totally beyond me! Hopefully this does not demotivate you from doing more fab reviews!
Just adding: crazy times and especially now this lens financially is out of reach for many people, including myself. Should that stop you making reviews? No! Should that stop peps watching such reviews? Heck, no, we need some distraction!
Thank you Sheik! I haven't really watch other reviews. Usually try not to do that so I don't get affected by other people's opinion. Quite often I would repeat the same test a few times to make sure the result I present is as accurate as possible. As for the dislikes, that doesn't bother me at all anymore. Most of them are from another RUclips channel in my country. A lot of people know who he is but I won't mention his name here :)
And I was actually wondering if I should continue create and publish more reviews during this crazy time. Should I stop until everything is back to normal
Who cares about sharpness. All modern lenses are sharp enough for their intended applications, what matters is image characteristics, and of course ergonomics, build quality, af and so on.
Thanks for this review. I have the S5 with the Pro 50mm and the Pro 24-70mm. I would like to add this 70-200mm 2.8 but I have two questions. Is the lens too large and heavy for the S5 compared to the S1 ? And how good is the stabilization of this lens for video with the S5 ? Thank you very much.
I am currently trying to work out if I should get the 70-200mm f/4 or not. I have just bought the Panasonic S1R, as my 4th camera system, mainly to use my Zeiss manual lenses, but it would be nice to have 1 native L mount lens for studio portrait photography. The 70-200 f/2.8 look like a lovely lens, but it also looks rather heavy and generally for studio, I do not need f/2.8 or even f/4. So the 70-200mm f/4 is very tempting, though the 24-105mm also covers much of what I will need.
Very good and useful comparison. Thank you. I would be interested in better understanding where the Lumix S 70-300mm (non-Pro) compares with these lenses at up to 200mm.
Very helpful review, thank you. I’m thinking that due to the weight of the f/2.8 I will go for the F/4 on my S5. It will do a fine job for me! Your review is very comprehensive and I can’t thank you enough for answering all my questions!
Great video. Thanks for all the info. I love, love, love my S1 but am worried about investing too much into the system as there seems to be a strange lack of reviews online about the L Mount lenses. All I have now is the kit 24-105 and it's amazing. I want one of these 70-200 but I may wait to see how things shake out over the next year.
A lot of reviewers choose/priortise to do or reviews on system with large existing user base, which is something L-mount lacking at the moment. There are certainly things the L mount system need to improve but overall i think all the L-mount alliance members have created some very impressive camera/lens within a short period of time and still what I said is 1st generation products. I would expect the system would be more popular in the next 12-18 months.
Thanks for the review, Richard. Can't even think of buying new equipment at this time, but it was a good watch, none the less. Just curious if you noticed how parfocal the lens might be.
yes i still have the lens on my desk. New Zealand is locking down the whole country so I have an excuse to keep all the loan gear with me for a bit longer. I will do some test re parfocal and get back to you soon!
I did a few tests last night, Zoom in/out at f/2.8 from 200 70 doesn't seem to affect the focus, if there is any change in focus, it's not visible to my eyes.
Richard Wong Thanks! Here is a great example how to check it ruclips.net/video/B0i0fQvviBg/видео.html I’m not sure if you have focus peaking (I have the S1H, which have) on your camera, but it shows easily if it stays in focus 😉
The weight is a big concern to me. I used to have an Olympus 35-100 F2.0 zoom from my Olympus E-5, I used it with an adapter for E-M1 as well. It's a great lens, but it was so heavy (it actually weighs more than the Lumix 70-200 F2.8), I eventually sold it. I picked up the F4.0 over F2.8 of Lumix 70-200, mainly because of the weight. Another factor is that I barely used aperture bigger than F2.8 for portraits, most of time I found F4.0 is the ideal aperture to keep enough DoF for eyes, nose, ears.
@@majos1946 I do. I live in the far north and i shoot concerts in small clubs. Even if i shoot landscapes i wait until the light is falling. I can't really think of a situation where i'd want to take a photo in strong light. Headshots or product shots in a controlled studio maybe?
With exception of price and weight, the f2.8 is better at all points of comparison. I have the f2.8 and its is heavenly good. And in low light conditions I am super super super happy to have it.
Hi,Richard I really enjoy watching your review. Your review is best!! Do you have a plan to make a review of sigma 70-200mm f2.8 dg dn os sports? I’m looking forward to see your comparsion review of LUMIX S PRO 70-200mm f2.8 vs SIGMA 70-200mm f2.8 dg dn os sports😊
Notsure what you were looking at. But they appeared identical. In fact in corners it looked like F/4 lens was better. Trying to justify price difference?
Hi Mr Wong. I'm happy with my M4/3 (G80) set up for most of my needs. But last year my youngest son started playing football/soccer in a local team and after an entire season I started wandering about better AF tracking and subject separation. YT search made me land here😉. Not a fair comparison but a G9 II or OM 1 with 40-150 f2.8 is very similar in price size and weight to Lumix S5 II or A7 III with 70-300mm f5.6 or a premium 70-200mm f4 but better in light challenging situations. Can you share your thoughts please, or maybe this could be a video idea. Thank you for your time. Ant+onio from Portugal
Hi ant+onio if you want the latest autofocus, camera like gh7 and g9ii or om1ii would be a huge improvement compare to your g80, and similar to the s5ii. If you want shallow DOF, it is much easier with a full frame system with a fast lens. But full frame system esp the lens is usually much bigger and heavier as well so it's something you really need to consider. If it's a7iii vs s5ii, I definitely choose s5ii. I had a a7iii previously too, it's a great camera but at the same time it's really quite old and not quite the same performance as the latest camera like the s5ii
Hi, thanks for the comparison but honestly, do you think everyone do these zoom in corners and check sharpen like that ? I shoot (very) old cameras and lenses and cameras and new one with 100M pixels cameras and no one looks every details. You’ve done a great job, again, thank you so much.
Hi GAM, i don't think everyone do zoom in corner and check like that. To be honest I don't with my own photos. But then there are lots of people do like to compare the corner, part of the reason is that most lenses are so good with center sharpness so the main difference in terms of sharpness is really the corner.
My last real camera was a Nikon FE2 in 1983. It's April 2023 and I just bought a S5ii camera with a 20-60mm f3.5 kit lens. I haven't touched photography for over 30 years so I'm practically a newbie again. I have a chance to buy a brand new 70-200 f2.8 for $1600 or a 70-200 f4 for $800. Considering the discount, would you go ahead and go with the f2.8? Of course there's still the size and weight difference!
Hi Hien! I think both lens are good choice and there is no "better" choice. So I would ask you the following questions: Do you shoot under low light? do you want the more shallow DOF look? Are you ok carrying slightly heavier lens?
@@TheRealRichardWong Thank you for the reply. I'm retired, have 2 torn rotator cuffs and arthritis so the weight of the 2.8 may become a problem down the road.
@@TheRealRichardWong Thanks for the advice. I kept talking myself into the f2.8 mostly because I didn't to regret later but you're right, it won't do me much good to have the nicer lense if I don't end up using it :) A 24-70mm f2.8 and a 70-200 f4 should cover almost every situation for me.
Richard, the difference is just ONE STOP between both lenses, so one stop higher ISOe.g from 1600 to 3200 ISO! I can see no difference with my S1, do yuo think the same way?
it depends. When shooting under bright/reasonably good light, it doesn't make that much difference. S1 has good high ISO performance. But when because it is a telephoto lens, quite often you need to maintain the shutter speed reasonably fast, so when the light is low, especially if you want to use it with a teleconverter, then that last 1 stop can make a huge difference. e.g. ISO 51200 vs ISO 102400. The other thing is the depth of field for people who want to isolate the subject from the background.
@@TheRealRichardWong Richard, the difference between ISO 51200 and 102400 is the same difference between the Pan S1 and the Pan S1R i think! In reasonably light and some what darker light it is hard to to reach 12800/25600. If my thoughts are true than the better ISO of the S1 equalize the differences? Richard am I right?
@@kennethlowe7330 and Richard and any body else. The S1 is the best on ISO please understand that. And that is why the F4 equels the F 2.8 on any other Pan or other camera. In the end the results counts.
Classic Richard very detailed review. like it . BTW I bought s1 & s1H without any lenses at the moment lol.now only need 1 more S1H then good to go . been trying to pull some strength to get a massive discount otherwise have to rob bank. omg
Hi Richard thanks for the review! Very helpful. As a landscape pohotog, those sunstars on the 2.8 sure do look good, but the thought of carrying that weight.. yikes. Quick Q: How do you think the OIS of the F4 lens compares to the F2.8? Thanks!
I did some test of the 70-200 f/4 in my s5ii review. But for a special test of just these two lenses autofocus performance, maybe not at this stage. However if there is a chance to do that for some other reason as well I would love to do that
I have Panasonic GH5 micro four third camera and using Lumix lenses like 12-35 mm 2.8, 35-100 mm 2.8. Please suggest me the best booster I can use to maintain same focal (1.7/2 times wider) 12-35 mm & 35-100 mm just like full frame camera.
Yes you can, you need to enable the touch tap setting... Then from the right side of the screen there is a finger icon that you can toggle to a state to enable touch shutter
Just tell me this, is it worth the 1300 dollar difference for an additional stop of light and a little shallower depth of field? If yes, I still can't afford it but I'll go with a Canon f2.8 with the mc-21. If no, I'll go with the native f4. What would you do if you were in my shoes?
Wow f2.8 lens with 2x teleconverter was not as sharp as the f4. Very interesting. I wonder if the f4 is a better value if one plans to use 2x converter.
From all the reviews I've read from buyers on various sites, the f/4 version is heavily preferred due to the 2 lenses being virtually identical in quality at f/4 and beyond. Then there's lighter build and most importantly, it's significantly lower price. At the time of writing this, the f/2.8 is $2,500 and the f/4 is $1500 new. Both lenses are expensive for what you get, but between the 2, the f/4 is the MUCH better value, given that the f/2.8 is $1,000 more for a barely 5% better lens. Keep an eye out and you may see it go on sale soon if you absolutely must have f/2.8. I have no doubt the f/2.8 is outstanding quality, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 S Pro and it is an astoundingly good lens. Sigma has their HSM 70-200 f/2.8 on the way, and having used that lens on Nikon, I would definitely consider waiting. It will likely be priced similar to the f/4 and it's fantastic.
@@brandonbuckles826 I blew my money on the 50mm S pro, also astounding! Settled on a 70-300 as I'm not a hardcore tele shooter. The first copy I got was ok, but the second copy that I own is very very sharp, I was surprised how sharp and how few aberrations there are. It weighs less than my 50mm. Only real negetive I have is the IS drains the battery quite fast.
@@georged822 I watched a review on that 50mm and that is just about the largest and heaviest 50mm that money can buy, so I'm not surprised it was lighter 😆 Still, I would recommend considering the one of the 70-200s down the road. The 70-300 is a great starter lens, but the 70-200s bokeh and edge sharpness can't be matched by the 70-300 and is an excellent portrait lens.
another argument is the s5 can handle low light so u claw back that 1 stop of light. an image at 6000 plus iso is still retrievable. This makes a very good case for f4.
@@markedwards4787 That i wholeheartedly agree with. Even with 1.8 primes i sometimes shoot a 2.8-5.6 or so at 6400 iso to get more in focus. Having half a face out of focus is such a "i just bought my first fast lens" thing.
Panasonic Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/4, which one would you pick?
Also not sure if you notice but I've tried a few new things in this video, let me know what do you think about the video?
i think that the 70-200 f4 is a great lens, too.
both are great! usually I only need f2.8 for standard and wide shots (like night landscape and astro), so f4 for daily zoom stuff is fine! Also, much lighter!
Finally a comprehensive review of this lens! And great to have a comparison with the f4 version. So far some reviewers have suggested that the f2.8 isn‘t worth the extra investment, some people even saying the f4 is sharper. Which does not seem to be the case based on your comparisons. So thanks, Richard, for a very helpful review. As for the dislikes? This is totally beyond me! Hopefully this does not demotivate you from doing more fab reviews!
Just adding: crazy times and especially now this lens financially is out of reach for many people, including myself. Should that stop you making reviews? No! Should that stop peps watching such reviews? Heck, no, we need some distraction!
Thank you Sheik! I haven't really watch other reviews. Usually try not to do that so I don't get affected by other people's opinion. Quite often I would repeat the same test a few times to make sure the result I present is as accurate as possible.
As for the dislikes, that doesn't bother me at all anymore. Most of them are from another RUclips channel in my country. A lot of people know who he is but I won't mention his name here :)
And I was actually wondering if I should continue create and publish more reviews during this crazy time. Should I stop until everything is back to normal
Pls dont stop, Richard. The world needs good reviews. And good lenses to document what‘s going on.
Who cares about sharpness. All modern lenses are sharp enough for their intended applications, what matters is image characteristics, and of course ergonomics, build quality, af and so on.
what a super review, answering all of my questions and then some with clear examples and explanations of your results thank you richard!
Thanks for this review.
I have the S5 with the Pro 50mm and the Pro 24-70mm. I would like to add this 70-200mm 2.8 but I have two questions. Is the lens too large and heavy for the S5 compared to the S1 ? And how good is the stabilization of this lens for video with the S5 ? Thank you very much.
I am currently trying to work out if I should get the 70-200mm f/4 or not. I have just bought the Panasonic S1R, as my 4th camera system, mainly to use my Zeiss manual lenses, but it would be nice to have 1 native L mount lens for studio portrait photography.
The 70-200 f/2.8 look like a lovely lens, but it also looks rather heavy and generally for studio, I do not need f/2.8 or even f/4. So the 70-200mm f/4 is very tempting, though the 24-105mm also covers much of what I will need.
The 70-200 f/4 is a wonderful lens. If you don't need f/2.8, it is a lens I would recommend
Very good and useful comparison. Thank you. I would be interested in better understanding where the Lumix S 70-300mm (non-Pro) compares with these lenses at up to 200mm.
Good idea!
Very helpful review, thank you. I’m thinking that due to the weight of the f/2.8 I will go for the F/4 on my S5. It will do a fine job for me! Your review is very comprehensive and I can’t thank you enough for answering all my questions!
Elisabeth Glad it was helpful!
Great video. Thanks for all the info. I love, love, love my S1 but am worried about investing too much into the system as there seems to be a strange lack of reviews online about the L Mount lenses. All I have now is the kit 24-105 and it's amazing. I want one of these 70-200 but I may wait to see how things shake out over the next year.
A lot of reviewers choose/priortise to do or reviews on system with large existing user base, which is something L-mount lacking at the moment.
There are certainly things the L mount system need to improve but overall i think all the L-mount alliance members have created some very impressive camera/lens within a short period of time and still what I said is 1st generation products. I would expect the system would be more popular in the next 12-18 months.
Thanks for the review, Richard. Can't even think of buying new equipment at this time, but it was a good watch, none the less. Just curious if you noticed how parfocal the lens might be.
I did some test and it seems the f/2.8 is parfocal or at least very close to it.
@@TheRealRichardWong Thanks!!! Any thoughts on how parfocal the f/4 version is?
Another great review! That lens is awesome (2.8)! Can you confirm (if you still have it) if it's parfocal as well? Thanks!
yes i still have the lens on my desk. New Zealand is locking down the whole country so I have an excuse to keep all the loan gear with me for a bit longer. I will do some test re parfocal and get back to you soon!
I did a few tests last night, Zoom in/out at f/2.8 from 200 70 doesn't seem to affect the focus, if there is any change in focus, it's not visible to my eyes.
Richard Wong Thanks! Here is a great example how to check it ruclips.net/video/B0i0fQvviBg/видео.html I’m not sure if you have focus peaking (I have the S1H, which have) on your camera, but it shows easily if it stays in focus 😉
Great review mate, I have been looking for a review like this to help with a future decision!
ooooomyygooodd. That 2.8 looks so GOOD!
The lack of focus breathing should make it a great lens for you!!
Nice review Richard! I quite like the Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/4 but it seems the Lumix S Pro 70-200 f/2.8 even better!
Thanks Kenneth!
I have both, and the f4 is so good that I don't really see the need for the 2.8 unless your always in lower light.
Enjoy your S Pro 70-200 f4 ! :D
Why both? Are you living in the dark?
Min Chu
The weight is a big concern to me. I used to have an Olympus 35-100 F2.0 zoom from my Olympus E-5, I used it with an adapter for E-M1 as well. It's a great lens, but it was so heavy (it actually weighs more than the Lumix 70-200 F2.8), I eventually sold it.
I picked up the F4.0 over F2.8 of Lumix 70-200, mainly because of the weight. Another factor is that I barely used aperture bigger than F2.8 for portraits, most of time I found F4.0 is the ideal aperture to keep enough DoF for eyes, nose, ears.
@@majos1946 I do. I live in the far north and i shoot concerts in small clubs. Even if i shoot landscapes i wait until the light is falling. I can't really think of a situation where i'd want to take a photo in strong light. Headshots or product shots in a controlled studio maybe?
With exception of price and weight, the f2.8 is better at all points of comparison. I have the f2.8 and its is heavenly good. And in low light conditions I am super super super happy to have it.
Hi,Richard
I really enjoy watching your review. Your review is best!!
Do you have a plan to make a review of sigma 70-200mm f2.8 dg dn os sports? I’m looking forward to see your comparsion review of LUMIX S PRO 70-200mm f2.8 vs SIGMA 70-200mm f2.8 dg dn os sports😊
Thank you so much!
Re the Lumix vs sigma, at the moment I do not have a plan for that, but I will see if I have a chance to do that in the future
Notsure what you were looking at. But they appeared identical. In fact in corners it looked like F/4 lens was better. Trying to justify price difference?
Hey Richard: What camera you personally use most of the time? Panasonic or Nikon ??
For video, I mostly use Panasonic. For photos, mostly Nikon. Having said that a lot of time I just grab whatever that is on my desk haha.
can you make a video comparing one of these lenses with the newer lumix 28mm-200mm?
Unlikely at this stage. But maybe one day in future
Amazing video. Thank you for the time and effort making this.
My pleasure!
Hi Mr Wong. I'm happy with my M4/3 (G80) set up for most of my needs. But last year my youngest son started playing football/soccer in a local team and after an entire season I started wandering about better AF tracking and subject separation. YT search made me land here😉. Not a fair comparison but a G9 II or OM 1 with 40-150 f2.8 is very similar in price size and weight to Lumix S5 II or A7 III with 70-300mm f5.6 or a premium 70-200mm f4 but better in light challenging situations. Can you share your thoughts please, or maybe this could be a video idea. Thank you for your time. Ant+onio from Portugal
Hi ant+onio if you want the latest autofocus, camera like gh7 and g9ii or om1ii would be a huge improvement compare to your g80, and similar to the s5ii. If you want shallow DOF, it is much easier with a full frame system with a fast lens. But full frame system esp the lens is usually much bigger and heavier as well so it's something you really need to consider. If it's a7iii vs s5ii, I definitely choose s5ii. I had a a7iii previously too, it's a great camera but at the same time it's really quite old and not quite the same performance as the latest camera like the s5ii
Thanks for your video.
Will be great to have your content with the timeline of the video with categories.
Thanks for your work my friend.
From Chile.
Thanks for watching and feedback!!
Thank you Richard! :)
Hi, thanks for the comparison but honestly, do you think everyone do these zoom in corners and check sharpen like that ?
I shoot (very) old cameras and lenses and cameras and new one with 100M pixels cameras and no one looks every details.
You’ve done a great job, again, thank you so much.
Hi GAM, i don't think everyone do zoom in corner and check like that. To be honest I don't with my own photos. But then there are lots of people do like to compare the corner, part of the reason is that most lenses are so good with center sharpness so the main difference in terms of sharpness is really the corner.
@@TheRealRichardWong thanks for your reply.
I love your video! Can you possibly one day do the same comparison between the Lumix S Pro 7--200mm f2.8 vs the Sigma version?
Thanks Jeric! I will see if I could get my hands on he Sigma!
My last real camera was a Nikon FE2 in 1983. It's April 2023 and I just bought a S5ii camera with a 20-60mm f3.5 kit lens. I haven't touched photography for over 30 years so I'm practically a newbie again. I have a chance to buy a brand new 70-200 f2.8 for $1600 or a 70-200 f4 for $800. Considering the discount, would you go ahead and go with the f2.8? Of course there's still the size and weight difference!
Hi Hien!
I think both lens are good choice and there is no "better" choice. So I would ask you the following questions:
Do you shoot under low light?
do you want the more shallow DOF look?
Are you ok carrying slightly heavier lens?
@@TheRealRichardWong Thank you for the reply. I'm retired, have 2 torn rotator cuffs and arthritis so the weight of the 2.8 may become a problem down the road.
Then get the f/4 it's a really nice lens anyway and fantastic image stabilization as well
@@TheRealRichardWong Thanks for the advice. I kept talking myself into the f2.8 mostly because I didn't to regret later but you're right, it won't do me much good to have the nicer lense if I don't end up using it :) A 24-70mm f2.8 and a 70-200 f4 should cover almost every situation for me.
Richard, the difference is just ONE STOP between both lenses, so one stop higher ISOe.g from 1600 to 3200 ISO! I can see no difference with my S1, do yuo think the same way?
it depends. When shooting under bright/reasonably good light, it doesn't make that much difference. S1 has good high ISO performance. But when because it is a telephoto lens, quite often you need to maintain the shutter speed reasonably fast, so when the light is low, especially if you want to use it with a teleconverter, then that last 1 stop can make a huge difference. e.g. ISO 51200 vs ISO 102400. The other thing is the depth of field for people who want to isolate the subject from the background.
@@TheRealRichardWong Richard, the difference between ISO 51200 and 102400 is the same difference between the Pan S1 and the Pan S1R i think!
In reasonably light and some what darker light it is hard to to reach 12800/25600.
If my thoughts are true than the better ISO of the S1 equalize the differences?
Richard am I right?
@@majos1946 I say one stop is a big difference when you are shooting events, sports or wild life under low light.
@@kennethlowe7330 and Richard and any body else. The S1 is the best on ISO please understand that.
And that is why the F4 equels the F 2.8 on any other Pan or other camera. In the end the results counts.
Richard. No reaction untill now.
Hi! Bummer this is outside of my budget... What telephoto would you recommend for MFT? (I don't mind buying 2nd hand) Thank you!
Great breakdown TY
Thank you! :)
Classic Richard very detailed review. like it . BTW I bought s1 & s1H without any lenses at the moment lol.now only need 1 more S1H then good to go . been trying to pull some strength to get a massive discount otherwise have to rob bank. omg
Let me know did your bank robbing go well?
@@TheRealRichardWong got 30% off offer . now trying to sell S1R for some cash then go for the H thanks for asking .
I’m on a hunt for that 2x teleconverter.
I bought the f/4, but brought it back and got the f/2.8 last January for better low light performance.
So do you like the f/2.8 more?
@@TheRealRichardWong Yes, but I haven't used it in low light conditions as the f/4, just for studio work.
@@nexuses1 cool! and thanks for the sharing your experience
Quick question, on adorama, it says the teleconverters are only compatible with the 70-200mm F4. Does it work with the f2.8 as well?
Yes it works! I have some test results in this review as well
Hi Richard thanks for the review! Very helpful. As a landscape pohotog, those sunstars on the 2.8 sure do look good, but the thought of carrying that weight.. yikes. Quick Q: How do you think the OIS of the F4 lens compares to the F2.8? Thanks!
Hi George, sorry can't answer your question. I feel they are similar but I haven't done any controlled side by side test to confirm
Any plans to test these lens with the 2023 Lumix S5ii, with its Phase Detection AF?
I did some test of the 70-200 f/4 in my s5ii review. But for a special test of just these two lenses autofocus performance, maybe not at this stage. However if there is a chance to do that for some other reason as well I would love to do that
Wow .. really amazed with the video autofocus of the 2.8 ... not Sony level, but not bad at all.
Panasonic autofocus is getting better and better. There are still room to improve but it's better than a lot of people thought it is
I have Panasonic GH5 micro four third camera and using Lumix lenses like 12-35 mm 2.8, 35-100 mm 2.8. Please suggest me the best booster I can use to maintain same focal (1.7/2 times wider) 12-35 mm & 35-100 mm just like full frame camera.
@5:20 when you touch the screen the camera takes a photo. Is that possible with the S5 and S1? I don't know how to enable it.
Yes you can, you need to enable the touch tap setting... Then from the right side of the screen there is a finger icon that you can toggle to a state to enable touch shutter
@@TheRealRichardWong got it! Thank you!
Just tell me this, is it worth the 1300 dollar difference for an additional stop of light and a little shallower depth of field? If yes, I still can't afford it but I'll go with a Canon f2.8 with the mc-21. If no, I'll go with the native f4. What would you do if you were in my shoes?
Sorry it is really a hard question for someone else to answer. There is also the size and weight difference you should consider as well
Great Video. How does autofocus work on the sl2 with 2.8 version?
Sorry I haven't test it with a SL2 but would assume it works very well
Is the material on the focus ring rubber or plastic?
Rubber
Gracias
can i use this lens on the lumix gh5?
No this is for the full frame L mount cameras
Richard Wong would s1 and s1r be right?
sweet pet }
The 70-300.
Wow f2.8 lens with 2x teleconverter was not as sharp as the f4. Very interesting. I wonder if the f4 is a better value if one plans to use 2x converter.
From all the reviews I've read from buyers on various sites, the f/4 version is heavily preferred due to the 2 lenses being virtually identical in quality at f/4 and beyond. Then there's lighter build and most importantly, it's significantly lower price.
At the time of writing this, the f/2.8 is $2,500 and the f/4 is $1500 new.
Both lenses are expensive for what you get, but between the 2, the f/4 is the MUCH better value, given that the f/2.8 is $1,000 more for a barely 5% better lens.
Keep an eye out and you may see it go on sale soon if you absolutely must have f/2.8. I have no doubt the f/2.8 is outstanding quality, I have the 24-70mm f/2.8 S Pro and it is an astoundingly good lens.
Sigma has their HSM 70-200 f/2.8 on the way, and having used that lens on Nikon, I would definitely consider waiting. It will likely be priced similar to the f/4 and it's fantastic.
@@brandonbuckles826 I blew my money on the 50mm S pro, also astounding! Settled on a 70-300 as I'm not a hardcore tele shooter. The first copy I got was ok, but the second copy that I own is very very sharp, I was surprised how sharp and how few aberrations there are. It weighs less than my 50mm. Only real negetive I have is the IS drains the battery quite fast.
@@georged822 I watched a review on that 50mm and that is just about the largest and heaviest 50mm that money can buy, so I'm not surprised it was lighter 😆
Still, I would recommend considering the one of the 70-200s down the road. The 70-300 is a great starter lens, but the 70-200s bokeh and edge sharpness can't be matched by the 70-300 and is an excellent portrait lens.
Who shoots in bright sunlight..?
another argument is the s5 can handle low light so u claw back that 1 stop of light. an image at 6000 plus iso is still retrievable. This makes a very good case for f4.
@@markedwards4787 That i wholeheartedly agree with. Even with 1.8 primes i sometimes shoot a 2.8-5.6 or so at 6400 iso to get more in focus. Having half a face out of focus is such a "i just bought my first fast lens" thing.
♥Richard Wong
Low light test is lacking
I would choose the 2.8 version, I can’t stand the barrel extension of the f4. I have a Zeiss 24-70 that extends, & it bugs 🐛 me a lot!
♥Richard Wong