Jump to content

Sony FE 70-200mm Advice


Recommended Posts

Im relatively new to photography and am in the process of purchasing a new lens. I’m hoping to eventually work my way up to doing weddings, events, etc. professionally.

 

I have a Sony A7rii with the Zeiss 24-70mm f4 and Zeiss 16-35mm f4 lenses currently. I’m looking at purchasing a Sony 70-200mm lens to round out what I currently have.

 

I’m wondering for the type of photography that I’m interested in, is the F2.8 g master version worth the extra $1,000+ vs the F4 version? If I went with the F4, I could use the savings to purchase a 55mm f1.8 prime in addition to the 70-200mm. Any advice is appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was allowed to shoot a day with a 70-200 GM lens, and I must say, I was pretty impressed, very sharp and super fast!

On the other hand, the lens is (in the Netherlands) 1600 euros more expensive than the F4 G variant.
You also shoot with a 16-35mm G lens, which I also have and am very satisfied with it, I wonder if for the average user the extra cost of the GM version is a right choice ...
My thought: The F4 G variant and the fantastic 55mm F1.8 as a bonus.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

First, it's your money so only you know what you can afford.

 

Second, a 70-200/2.8 is a very useful lens for people photography. it allows you to shoot at various distances, it provides great background separation and it handles low light situations well.

 

A good rule of thumb is to buy the best gear you can possibly afford. If you buy cheaper gear you'll be unhappy with it and end up upgrading in the end, nonetheless. Buying the better gear will save time, aggravation and money in the long run.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what I ment is how many times the buyer thinks he need it, nog if it is useful or not.

If he don't want to shoot a lot at full aperture, its not worth spending all the many on a gm.

or if you have that 3k for budget, he can buy more equipment in other ranges for it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

Believe me, you use wide aperture if you've got it.

 

It's a bad idea to spread yourself thin by buying more gear of lower quality. It's much better to have fewer items of higher quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe me, you use wide aperture if you've got it.

 

It's a bad idea to spread yourself thin by buying more gear of lower quality. It's much better to have fewer items of higher quality.

 

 

I agree 100%, I have the 70-200 F2.8 and aside from the one major disadvantage (it weighs a lot), I could not be happier with it. 

 

My lens collection:

 

Sony 70-200 F2.8 for sports / wildlife

Sony 35 Distagon F1.4 (got this when I used a a6000/6300/6500, not using it much now)

Sony 35 F2.8 for general walk-around lens, very compact

Sony 12-24 F4 for landscape, incredibly light lens

Sony 55 F1.8  general purpose

Batis 85 F1.8 general purpose when I need a little more reach

 

I don't see myself getting any more lenses at this point and may reduce the number (35mm F1.4, as its a bit bulky)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue totally revolves around how much you need the 2.8 vs 4.0.  I have the 4.0 version (which I purchased for $800 used on Craigslist) and I love that lens.  It is sharp, easy to carry and use and since my use is primarily in bright light outdoors, the 2.8 wasn't in the equation.  I use it almost one day a week taking action shots of my golf buddies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Second, a 70-200/2.8 is a very useful lens for people photography. it allows you to shoot at various distances, it provides great background separation and it handles low light situations well.

 

A good rule of thumb is to buy the best gear you can possibly afford. If you buy cheaper gear you'll be unhappy with it and end up upgrading in the end, nonetheless. Buying the better gear will save time, aggravation and money in the long run.

I'm switching from Canon and have used my 70-200 2.8 more then any other lens.  That being said, since I'm starting over, (and want to go Sony/Sony now), I ordered the 24-70 2.8 and 100-400 for starters but am already having heartburn thinking about not having the 2.8 70-200.  If the 70-200 was a new release, I'd probably go that route right now but will probably see what I can do with the 100-400 for now and pick up the next generation of 70-200.  It would be REALLY nice if that came out at the same time as a 200-600 so I could get both and sell the 100-400 to help offset the cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

Sony doesn't update lenses very often. The 70-200/2.8 represents their state of the art lens technology. In fact, Sony stated that it was designed to scale up with future sensor tech. So, in other words, it may be a long wait for version II.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sony doesn't update lenses very often. The 70-200/2.8 represents their state of the art lens technology. In fact, Sony stated that it was designed to scale up with future sensor tech. So, in other words, it may be a long wait for version II.

Thanks for the background on Sony and the 70-200.  If I don't LOVE the 100-400, I think I'll probably turn it around pretty quick for the 70-200 2.8 and then cross my fingers for a sweet version of the 200-600 down the road.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...