i love my 70-200mm f/4 G OSS lens, mostly because of the form factor. Since I use the lens with both the A7iii and A6400 cameras, the small form factor is very important to me. I have modified my lens by adding a third party tripod ring that has a built-in Arca-Compatible slot to mesh with an A/C clamp without needing an accessory A/C plate... I have also switched the OEM lens hood to a generic metal screw-in lens hood. This hood is black and it is smaller and less obtrusive than the gigantic OEM "white" hood. Two factors that I enjoy about the third party screw-in hood is that I can mount a CPL onto my lens and mount the hood onto the front threads of the CPL, enabling me to rotate the CPL by just rotating the hood. Additionally, I can use a 77mm lens cap mounted in the front of this hood. I wish however, that this lens would accept the Sony 1.4x teleconverter...
Hey Wes, I’m a Nikon shooter, but I just want to let you know, I love your wedding work... outstanding shots!!!! You’re a real artist at what you do!!!! Thank you so much!!!!
As usual a great vid ! I have and use (not very often) the 70-200mm F4 & probably like you, I am happy with it. If I go out to car racing or grass track it's stays on but as you said for most other things use primes...
Thanks Wes, I picked up my copy used from a friend who does mainly wildlife photography and needed something more but I am happy with it. I like the fact that it is a comparatively light lens to carry around for its reach. It will be interesting to see if Tamron releases a "must have" f2.8 version at a competitive price in the coming months.
@@WesPerry Hi Wes, Just revisiting this" older" video ( miss your old kitchen setup a little bit!) I am now debating on whether to order the new Tamron 70-180 f2.8 . I was a bit disappointed to realize that it wouldn't be any lighter than the Sony f4 zoom but perhaps a bit more compact in size ( but not by a huge amount). It seems that there are a number of compromises to rationalize but the bottom line is IQ ,I guess. I already have the Tamron 17-28 and the 28-75 so I have a good idea about the build quality. Do you have any thoughts about that new lens as opposed to the Sony f4 variant? Hope you are continuing to settle in to you new place and am not going lockdown stir crazy. Of course, we are all carrying Nova Scotia in our hearts these days.Stay safe.
I was really looking forward to the Tamron, but I think I might be waiting for the Sigma. I have some doubts about its water resistance (my Sony f4 only gets used outside and has seen a Lot of rain with no issues), and the lack of optical stabilization (I have shakier hands than most, I assume). Optically it looks great, though ;)
@@WesPerry Yes, I am thinking that the lack of stabilization on the lens makes it it less compelling and as there is only a 25 gram difference in weight, hiking around with it for landscape wouldn't be much different than with the f4. Unless you were using it a lot for low light or fast action, it might no the worth the "upgrade" so maybe we can save ourselves a couple of grand ( with tax in Canada!)
@@chryseass.5143 Yeah, every penny counts up here ;) I'm not too concerned about weight for it, myself. Just performance and price. I usually only use 70-200 lenses for outdoor wedding ceremonies and Shakespeare in the park. And overall that accounts for very little of my shooting time.
I picked up the Sony 70-200 F4 used, and other than missing the hood, for a f4 zoom, it was about as good as the Canon 70-200 F4 that I had years ago. When I made the switch fully to Sony, I got rid of all my adapted AF lenses, including a Tamron 70-200 F2.8. I had issues with the adapted AF on the Tamron zoom, and got frustrated with it, so I sold it to buy the Sony zoom. For what I do, I don't miss the extra stop....and I do love the buttons on the lens. For $900 used, it is a very good lens.
@@WesPerry The scarcity of new lenses can actually work in your favor. For instance, I don't have a 24mm Gmaster, though when it was the newest hottest thing I sure wanted one. Now that they're becoming more available, my shiny new penny syndrome has faded a bit.
Thanks for the great and as usual very honest and fair review! In my personal opinion this is the 70-200 to get for 24MP cameras. For 42MP sensors I would recommend the 70-200GM.
Great video. I am seriously looking at this lens to fill a gap in my coverage. I shoot an A7iii and have the 24-105mm f4 G as my "primary" lens and the 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G lens as a telephoto. That leaves me with a "gap" from 105mm to 200mm. I am looking at 3 main options, this lens, the 70-300mm G and the soon to be released Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 lens. Would this lens be a good one to bridge that gap, or would one of the other options be better? (Yes, I realize that what I use the lens for will be a factor in that decision. I am merely trying to get second opinion.)
I’m holding out a bit of hope for the Tamron, honestly. It’ll likely cost less and be about the same size as the Sony 70-200 f4, with twice the light! Might be a long time before anyone can get their hands on one, though.
@@WesPerry Thank you for your response. I have a photo trip to Banff planned in late April/early May time frame and I am tryng to decide if I can live with my gap in coverage that I have or fill it, and if I fill it, I am trying to decide what my best option will be. In an ironic twist of fate, I had the 70-300mm G lens and sold it expecting to buy the 100-400 GM, but then Sony announced the 200-400mm and all of a sudden, I wish I still had me 70-300mm lens. I shoot mostly landscapes, birds in flight and aviation photography & the 70-300mm wasn't giving me the reach I wanted.
Nice review, Wes! Wanted to also add for A9 owners that this lens 70-200 F4 is only rated at '15 fps' by Sony, not full "20 fps." So the most you can get on A9 and it is 15fps. May or may not make a difference to people.
I just kindof assume that since it’s a G and not GM 😏 ...also don’t want to get stuck having to outline how many FPS every lens I review is...but really, isn’t 15 enough for Most people looking to buy the “cheaper” lens? 🤷🏻♂️
G vs GM does not matter for their list, for example 24-105G does full 20fps and it is not a GM. I could think of people who do outdoor sports only who might want to be ok with F4 lens... 15 is pretty good I agree, but hey, I pay $3500 (or some of us paid $4500 at the beginning for A9) for 20fps so I want to get 20fps not 15, right? For reference here is the list of 20fps/15fps lenses support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/support/ilc/products/ilce9/continuousshooting/en/index.html?id=spt
Nice info and thanks for helping us see the good bag and not so great. but also the good and better i would use this for out doors any way birds and animals. and thanks for the last points on your video. as you said you dont like the large size lens and would not use this as much for weddings unless you wanted to be out of the way.
Well I'm a rookie pls guide a bit.Is this an ideal lens for photography or just okay okay? And one more thing which camera & lens you are using for this video?
Pretty big differences in utility here. You get 2 stops more light with the 85, but less than half the reach (if you account for the extra sharpness that will allow extra cropping, it’s probably actually a little more than twice the reach). I honestly prefer the bokeh of the 70-200f4. Less distracting elements. I find the hard edged swirl of the 85 1.8 a bit too distracting (but that’s totally subjective).
@@WesPerry Thanks! I will keep my 70 200 F4 and use more. I dont really carry around just if I have an even which I still didn't have this month to test 70 200 F4. But I m looking for it:)
I bought the lens last month, and i just realiz there s some Dust in between Front element and Zooming optic despite marketed as Weather sealed. its not affecting the image tho... is it Normal?
What is a better choice for shooting a wedding indoors... Sony 85 f1.8 or the 70-200 f4? My only other lens is a Batis 25 f2... I avoid owning more than 2 lenses at any given time. Thanks, Wes! (I use an a7iii).
Hi Wes shame we live an ocean apart, and can’t stop lenses occasionally, I have the 2.8GM and find it heavy so don’t use it a lot, am shooting a friends prom prep tonight and lighter would be better. That said it’s a dull day and the 85 1.8 will be coming too :) Wondering how you get a reasonable dof shooting at 1.8 at a wedding? Do you draw a chalk line for the couple to stand on so they are in the same plane, or does the groom have to accept the bridge will take priority....... 😀🤣🤣
I always feel just a bit isolated where I am, a little bit in the middle of nowhere 😏 You’re mostly right on both parts with the shooting at 1.8 thing. I orient myself to try to line up the two of them on the same plane, which at a ceremony usually isn’t that hard, as they’re usually just facing each other the same distance away like that anyway. And from a distance, 35 1.8 isn’t a terribly shallow depth of field. For some shots I’ll even go to 1.4 on the 85 if I really want to focus in on something. At the beginning of the ceremony I’ll usually take a couple shots with the 16-35 2.8 at 16mm to try to capture the entire experience, and in those shots Everything is in focus. When shooting couple’s portraits at shallower apertures, I usually just focus on whoever’s eyes I can see best, and that has the best effect anyway, because that’s all that your eye is looking for to begin with. Then during group shots it’s all about the imaginary line. Pushing people back so they don’t end up in a horseshoe, angling them all in at 45 degrees if necessary to fit them in. It’s not too hard to get it all to work out.
Works great with it. Not quite as snappy as some newer lenses, but very reliable focusing. I use it mostly with the a9. But have also used it with the a7Siii and a7Riv
I'm still waiting for someone to talk me into this lens over the Tamron or the yet to be released Sigma. And it just doesn't hapoen...I see one lightly used for $880 now. Guess I'll have to not blow.my cash yet.
With a sample size of one, I can’t say for sure, but I’ve had no issues. Also, I’ve never even heard that about this lens. I have, though, heard that about the 70-200GM. I once rented two from LensRentals and one arrived broken. I contacted them about it and they said no lens breaks in shipping more often than then 70-200GM 😬
i love my 70-200mm f/4 G OSS lens, mostly because of the form factor. Since I use the lens with both the A7iii and A6400 cameras, the small form factor is very important to me. I have modified my lens by adding a third party tripod ring that has a built-in Arca-Compatible slot to mesh with an A/C clamp without needing an accessory A/C plate... I have also switched the OEM lens hood to a generic metal screw-in lens hood. This hood is black and it is smaller and less obtrusive than the gigantic OEM "white" hood. Two factors that I enjoy about the third party screw-in hood is that I can mount a CPL onto my lens and mount the hood onto the front threads of the CPL, enabling me to rotate the CPL by just rotating the hood. Additionally, I can use a 77mm lens cap mounted in the front of this hood. I wish however, that this lens would accept the Sony 1.4x teleconverter...
Good stuff
Hallo Manny Ortiz 😃😃😃
Hey Wes, I’m a Nikon shooter, but I just want to let you know, I love your wedding work... outstanding shots!!!! You’re a real artist at what you do!!!!
Thank you so much!!!!
Thanks, Frankie!
Lol, love the intro! The cat pics had me laughing. Cuz all expansive lenses are purely used to take pics of cats rofl
What else are you supposed to do with them?? Haha
As usual a great vid ! I have and use (not very often) the 70-200mm F4 & probably like you, I am happy with it. If I go out to car racing or grass track it's stays on but as you said for most other things use primes...
Thanks Wes, I picked up my copy used from a friend who does mainly wildlife photography and needed something more but I am happy with it. I like the fact that it is a comparatively light lens to carry around for its reach. It will be interesting to see if Tamron releases a "must have" f2.8 version at a competitive price in the coming months.
Definitely looking forward to seeing what Tamron will have on offer soon.
@@WesPerry Hi Wes, Just revisiting this" older" video ( miss your old kitchen setup a little bit!) I am now debating on whether to order the new Tamron 70-180 f2.8 . I was a bit disappointed to realize that it wouldn't be any lighter than the Sony f4 zoom but perhaps a bit more compact in size ( but not by a huge amount). It seems that there are a number of compromises to rationalize but the bottom line is IQ ,I guess. I already have the Tamron 17-28 and the 28-75 so I have a good idea about the build quality. Do you have any thoughts about that new lens as opposed to the Sony f4 variant?
Hope you are continuing to settle in to you new place and am not going lockdown stir crazy. Of course, we are all carrying Nova Scotia in our hearts these days.Stay safe.
I was really looking forward to the Tamron, but I think I might be waiting for the Sigma. I have some doubts about its water resistance (my Sony f4 only gets used outside and has seen a Lot of rain with no issues), and the lack of optical stabilization (I have shakier hands than most, I assume).
Optically it looks great, though ;)
@@WesPerry Yes, I am thinking that the lack of stabilization on the lens makes it it less compelling and as there is only a 25 gram difference in weight, hiking around with it for landscape wouldn't be much different than with the f4. Unless you were using it a lot for low light or fast action, it might no the worth the "upgrade" so maybe we can save ourselves a couple of grand ( with tax in Canada!)
@@chryseass.5143 Yeah, every penny counts up here ;)
I'm not too concerned about weight for it, myself. Just performance and price. I usually only use 70-200 lenses for outdoor wedding ceremonies and Shakespeare in the park. And overall that accounts for very little of my shooting time.
Great stuff man ! I will be buying this lens tomorrow
Jesus I was just searching for a more recent review of this lens. Thank you.
Glad to see that being a little late isn’t necessarily a bad thing 👌🏻
Continue to enjoy your video's Wes, keep 'em coming.
Thanks, Bruce!
I picked up the Sony 70-200 F4 used, and other than missing the hood, for a f4 zoom, it was about as good as the Canon 70-200 F4 that I had years ago. When I made the switch fully to Sony, I got rid of all my adapted AF lenses, including a Tamron 70-200 F2.8. I had issues with the adapted AF on the Tamron zoom, and got frustrated with it, so I sold it to buy the Sony zoom. For what I do, I don't miss the extra stop....and I do love the buttons on the lens. For $900 used, it is a very good lens.
I would expect Tamron to announce (pre-announce) their E-mount 70-200 by the end of the year. Availability will be a whole other thing, though... 😬
@@WesPerry The scarcity of new lenses can actually work in your favor. For instance, I don't have a 24mm Gmaster, though when it was the newest hottest thing I sure wanted one. Now that they're becoming more available, my shiny new penny syndrome has faded a bit.
Thanks for the great and as usual very honest and fair review! In my personal opinion this is the 70-200 to get for 24MP cameras. For 42MP sensors I would recommend the 70-200GM.
Until I get a higher res body I guess I’ll have to take your word for it 😉
Niceeeeeee opening music, got me rocking da chair 🤪 good review , you don’t seem to be in love with this tube, thank you👍
It’s fine. It’s just fine. 😜
Your video footage is very good in quality. And the bokeh looks lovely. By the way it looks like u r filming in ur kitchen!
Thanks! And I am most definitely filming in my kitchen 😉
The equipment I’m using is in the video description 👌🏻
@@WesPerry 😊
Great video. I am seriously looking at this lens to fill a gap in my coverage. I shoot an A7iii and have the 24-105mm f4 G as my "primary" lens and the 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G lens as a telephoto. That leaves me with a "gap" from 105mm to 200mm. I am looking at 3 main options, this lens, the 70-300mm G and the soon to be released Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 lens.
Would this lens be a good one to bridge that gap, or would one of the other options be better? (Yes, I realize that what I use the lens for will be a factor in that decision. I am merely trying to get second opinion.)
I’m holding out a bit of hope for the Tamron, honestly. It’ll likely cost less and be about the same size as the Sony 70-200 f4, with twice the light! Might be a long time before anyone can get their hands on one, though.
@@WesPerry Thank you for your response. I have a photo trip to Banff planned in late April/early May time frame and I am tryng to decide if I can live with my gap in coverage that I have or fill it, and if I fill it, I am trying to decide what my best option will be. In an ironic twist of fate, I had the 70-300mm G lens and sold it expecting to buy the 100-400 GM, but then Sony announced the 200-400mm and all of a sudden, I wish I still had me 70-300mm lens. I shoot mostly landscapes, birds in flight and aviation photography & the 70-300mm wasn't giving me the reach I wanted.
I wonder why you gave 8/10 rating for build quality?
Too high? Too low?
Nice review, Wes! Wanted to also add for A9 owners that this lens 70-200 F4 is only rated at '15 fps' by Sony, not full "20 fps." So the most you can get on A9 and it is 15fps. May or may not make a difference to people.
I just kindof assume that since it’s a G and not GM 😏 ...also don’t want to get stuck having to outline how many FPS every lens I review is...but really, isn’t 15 enough for Most people looking to buy the “cheaper” lens? 🤷🏻♂️
G vs GM does not matter for their list, for example 24-105G does full 20fps and it is not a GM. I could think of people who do outdoor sports only who might want to be ok with F4 lens... 15 is pretty good I agree, but hey, I pay $3500 (or some of us paid $4500 at the beginning for A9) for 20fps so I want to get 20fps not 15, right? For reference here is the list of 20fps/15fps lenses support.d-imaging.sony.co.jp/support/ilc/products/ilce9/continuousshooting/en/index.html?id=spt
Nice info and thanks for helping us see the good bag and not so great. but also the good and better i would use this for out doors any way birds and animals. and thanks for the last points on your video. as you said you dont like the large size lens and would not use this as much for weddings unless you wanted to be out of the way.
Well I'm a rookie pls guide a bit.Is this an ideal lens for photography or just okay okay? And one more thing which camera & lens you are using for this video?
Is it better to get 85mm 1.8? And loose the zoom lens.? Still undecided. Zoom is more versatile but don t have that bokeh
Pretty big differences in utility here. You get 2 stops more light with the 85, but less than half the reach (if you account for the extra sharpness that will allow extra cropping, it’s probably actually a little more than twice the reach).
I honestly prefer the bokeh of the 70-200f4. Less distracting elements. I find the hard edged swirl of the 85 1.8 a bit too distracting (but that’s totally subjective).
@@WesPerry Thanks! I will keep my 70 200 F4 and use more. I dont really carry around just if I have an even which I still didn't have this month to test 70 200 F4. But I m looking for it:)
Thumbs up for the intro alone
some people really hate zooms huh?
I don5 think so Ventis
Great video. Thank you for this review.
Thanks for stopping by :)
I bought the lens last month, and i just realiz there s some Dust in between Front element and Zooming optic despite marketed as Weather sealed. its not affecting the image tho... is it Normal?
No this isn’t normal at all
Likely not an issue but it’s internal zoom so it shouldn’t happen
Hi, good for portrait with bokeh ? :)
jup
What is a better choice for shooting a wedding indoors... Sony 85 f1.8 or the 70-200 f4? My only other lens is a Batis 25 f2... I avoid owning more than 2 lenses at any given time. Thanks, Wes! (I use an a7iii).
Depends on how much light you have. I usually use an 85 for darker indoor ceremonies, though. Just need to sneak up a little closer.
Wes Perry apart from the larger aperture, do you think the 1.8 is a sharper lens?
T. Karim it’s a significantly sharper lens.
Wes Perry thank you!
How about the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8?
ruclips.net/video/iZj8GqzUu00/видео.html 😉
@@WesPerry Of course! Thank you!
Hi Wes shame we live an ocean apart, and can’t stop lenses occasionally, I have the 2.8GM and find it heavy so don’t use it a lot, am shooting a friends prom prep tonight and lighter would be better. That said it’s a dull day and the 85 1.8 will be coming too :) Wondering how you get a reasonable dof shooting at 1.8 at a wedding? Do you draw a chalk line for the couple to stand on so they are in the same plane, or does the groom have to accept the bridge will take priority....... 😀🤣🤣
I always feel just a bit isolated where I am, a little bit in the middle of nowhere 😏
You’re mostly right on both parts with the shooting at 1.8 thing. I orient myself to try to line up the two of them on the same plane, which at a ceremony usually isn’t that hard, as they’re usually just facing each other the same distance away like that anyway. And from a distance, 35 1.8 isn’t a terribly shallow depth of field. For some shots I’ll even go to 1.4 on the 85 if I really want to focus in on something. At the beginning of the ceremony I’ll usually take a couple shots with the 16-35 2.8 at 16mm to try to capture the entire experience, and in those shots Everything is in focus.
When shooting couple’s portraits at shallower apertures, I usually just focus on whoever’s eyes I can see best, and that has the best effect anyway, because that’s all that your eye is looking for to begin with. Then during group shots it’s all about the imaginary line. Pushing people back so they don’t end up in a horseshoe, angling them all in at 45 degrees if necessary to fit them in. It’s not too hard to get it all to work out.
I find it has some focus breathing when focusing, but even when it does it’s fast
Oh it definitely does breathe
Great review! Will this lens be a good performer in terms of sharpness on a sony a6600? It is any drawbacks using this on aps-c? Thanks!
I used it on an a6000 quite a bit back in the day and it was just fine there :)
@@WesPerry thanks! I just find one used only 5 times for 700usd, i think i would go for it, thanks for the response and cheers from Argentina! 🤙🏻🤙🏻
Sounds like a deal!
@@tomasvugman2239 Hola Tomás, cómo andas? Estoy pensando en armar ese combo, a6000 y este lente. Al final lo compraste? Que tal te fue?
Love the intro :)
I'm getting the upcoming a7iv, with the new Af system. Can you tell how this lens do with the modern real time AF?
Works great with it. Not quite as snappy as some newer lenses, but very reliable focusing. I use it mostly with the a9. But have also used it with the a7Siii and a7Riv
Do you have the 100-400 lens ? Can we have a comparison between this and the 100-400 GM ?
Afraid not. That focal length is a bit outside of my area of work.
I'm still waiting for someone to talk me into this lens over the Tamron or the yet to be released Sigma. And it just doesn't hapoen...I see one lightly used for $880 now. Guess I'll have to not blow.my cash yet.
Essentially the only reason to get it would be for the OSS. Which for some applications makes the 70-180 useless (handheld video, etc).
I dont like the flash intro but nice staff ;)
let see whownwe do it
comparing a lens for mirrorless with old sir lenses... wow.
Unfortunately necessary, since there were no other full frame f/4 mirrorless lenses to compare it to at the time. (This video is 2.5 years old).
You should have 1 million subscribers at the least...... I don't understand why..... I did my part to help by subscribing. 👍
Thanks, boss! Slow and steady...😉
@@WesPerry if I am gay, you'd already recieved a letter. Man...! You're incredible.
Is it true that this lens breaks easy?
With a sample size of one, I can’t say for sure, but I’ve had no issues.
Also, I’ve never even heard that about this lens. I have, though, heard that about the 70-200GM. I once rented two from LensRentals and one arrived broken. I contacted them about it and they said no lens breaks in shipping more often than then 70-200GM 😬
@@WesPerry Alright, Thanks!
Hello this is Chef John with Food Wish.
I have the canon and the sony. The canon lens on the sony with sigma adaptator is better...
Probably not better for autofocus, but I could definitely see it being sharper. This one isn’t exactly gonna cut anyone 😏
The best lens is the one you can afford.
This lens need a drop in price.
Maybe just a tiny bit, but I wouldn’t expect much. The 55 1.8, which came out around the same time, has gone Up in price since it was released.
lol. Nice thumbnail.
A little theatre for ya. Too much of this “sexy model on a beach” stuff going on 😂
This guy reminds me of Elon Musk
Zeiss pop is a myth
The fck long term review if U don't use it.....?
It’s all relative. I’ve delivered to clients 12,374 images taken with this lens over several years. Which isn’t the most by any means.