135 1.8 and 70-200 2.8 or 70-300G .. Help please

[adakshi]

Hello,

I am planning to invest on medium-tele lenses. I shoot landscape, portrait, indoor, kids ..etc. I'll be upgrading from A700 to low rez full frame, when it comes up. So, not investing on wide lenses now. I am quite happy with my 18-250 .

I was torn between 135 STF and 135ZA . but at last decided to get za ... that'll be my prime portrait lens. Now, prime lens always has limitations when I can't move closer or away. Say, indoor, kids, stage shows ... situations like this requires fast zooms. Now which one to get, Somy 70-200 or tamron 70-200 or 70-300G.

Tamron 70-200 is cost effective, but without SSM, and no minolta color. Sony 70-200 is the best contender, I like 3-D effect of the pics. but is it sharp wide open, given its price? I am really concerned about this. 70-300G has greater reach, light .. color is nice IMO, but not as good as 70-200, bokeh is also not as good as 2.8. not fast enough to handle stage shows/kids.

If you were to choose between thse 3 lenses(or if you see any other alternative) .. what would you choose?

By the way, I have a good copy of 50mm 1.7 .. which is quite usable from f2.8. I like the color too.

Thanks for your help. Sorry for my English
Ayan

[springm]

As you probably are 'spoilt' by the sharpness of the Zeiss and need the large f-stop and the SSM for action scenes, probably the 70-200 is it for you. The 70-300G I have is really nice, but nowhere near fast enough for indoor kids.

Markus

[adakshi]

As you probably are 'spoilt' by the sharpness of the Zeiss and need the large f-stop and the SSM for action scenes, probably the 70-200 is it for you. The 70-300G I have is really nice, but nowhere near fast enough for indoor kids.

Markus

Thanks Markus,

What you said is true. Also, I think, I'll be buying these lenses once in my life, why settle for less? 135Za is excellent in sharpness and speed, as far as I hear in forums. My only concern is sharpness and bokeh of 70-200. If its not good, given its price tag, I'll refrain from buying it. I'll wait another 3-4 years for its replacement.

Currently I am in US, the place where I live, cost of these lenses are 4X US equivalent.. so, if I don't buy 70-200 now .. I'll have to wait for say another 3-4 years until I come to US/UK again. That's why decision is crucial for me.

A-mount in my country is rare ... so re-selling is not an option.

Thanks
Ayan

[pakodominguez]

Tamron 70-200 is cost effective, but without SSM, and no minolta color. Sony 70-200 is the best contender, I like 3-D effect of the pics. but is it sharp wide open, given its price? I am really concerned about this.

Gimmi a couple of days for process the images I took this weekend with both lenses. I can tell you that Bokeh is as good on both lenses and sharpness is probaly better on the Tamron -sometimes the Minolta/Sony gets soft on the corners...

Regards

[adakshi]

Tamron 70-200 is cost effective, but without SSM, and no minolta color. Sony 70-200 is the best contender, I like 3-D effect of the pics. but is it sharp wide open, given its price? I am really concerned about this.

Gimmi a couple of days for process the images I took this weekend with both lenses. I can tell you that Bokeh is as good on both lenses and sharpness is probaly better on the Tamron -sometimes the Minolta/Sony gets soft on the corners...

Regards

Great, Thanks. I'll be waiting for your pictures. I am interested in bokeh, color and sharpness. How fast is AF?

Ayan