Hello everyone!

I‘m thinking about selling some of my lenses to get the new 70 - 200 mentioned above.

Has anyone used this lens, especially on hikes? How versatile ist it?

I mostly do wildlife and some landscape photography but I fear that the lens is too zoomed in for landscapes and too wide for wildlife.

The lens would be used on an A7R IV and it would „replace“ a sony 20mm f1.8 G (which is too wide for my uses) and the Sony 135mm f1.8 GM.

Thanks for your advice and have a good time!

  • wburbage@lemmy.world
    3·
    1 year ago

    I don’t have the 70-200 GM II but tried it out at B&H and fell in love. It’s relatively light and the image it produced was gorgeous. My one hesitation, and to your point, it might be too long for landscape and too short for wildlife.

    The first lens I bought for the Sony was the 24-70 and then picked up the 200-600 which stays on the camera about 80% of the time. I’d love to fill the gap with the 70-200 f2.8 but I’m completely happy with the lenses I currently have. That 2.8 still talks to me though.

    • titaalik@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for the reply. Yeah, I guess I have to try the lens out myself first to make a decision. If it wasn’t so damn expensive, getting it would be a no brainer

  • BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.comEnglish
    2·
    1 year ago

    Hi,

    I’m not sure you would need the f/2.8 aperture for landscape, I would advise you to go for the smaller, lighter and cheaper 70-200 f/4 II that got announced last week (or the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 which is even cheaper and sharper that the Sony 70-200 f/4 II).

    As for how useful the 70-200mm range would be for you, have you considered renting the lens (or a similar one) as well as a teleconverter (for the wildlife pics) for a few days to see if it fits your needs?

    • titaalik@lemmy.worldOP
      1·
      1 year ago

      Thanks for the reply.

      Yeah, for landscapes the large aperture won‘t be too useful, but it would be great for wildlife in the late or early hours with little light.

      I feel like the f4.0 version ist way too expensive for what it does and compared to the f2.8 version it seems to be lacking in sharpness, which is quite important on the A7RIV’s high megapixel sensor.

      I have to look into the Tamron though, thanks for the suggestion!

      Also I‘m planning to go to a store and ask if I can put on the lens to my camera for a few minutes

      • BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.comEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        I feel like the f4.0 version ist way too expensive for what it does and compared to the f2.8 version it seems to be lacking in sharpness, which is quite important on the A7RIV’s high megapixel sensor.

        I overlooked this aspect while reading the SonyAlpha.blog review, which concludes that the sharpness is excellent only up to 150mm, so yeah, it might be limited on your body:

        It provides excellent sharpness up to 150mm but only very good wide open at 200mm on 61Mpix.

        I was suggesting using a teleconverter with it to increase the lenses reach but he discourages its use:

        It is compatible with teleconverters to get a 280mm f/5.6 [with the 1.5x TC] and a 400mm f/8 [with the 2x TC] but with degraded [sharpness] performance, so limit its use to 42Mpix [sensors]. (translated from the French conclusion)

        To note, the review also compares it against the Sony f/2.8 and the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8.

        Also I‘m planning to go to a store and ask if I can put on the lens to my camera for a few minutes

        From experience testing a lens in a shop doesn’t give the full experience, that’s why I prefer renting to test the lens in the field.