Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Discussion of lenses, brand or independent, uses and merits
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
User avatar
mikeriach
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 644
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Location: Aberdeen

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby mikeriach » Mon Jun 02, 2014 7:27 pm

Wish they made it in A mount :(
Some Sony stuff and now some Nikon stuff (shock horror). Sony cannot supply what I want so rightly or wrongly I'm branching out to someone who does.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3538
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Tue Jun 03, 2014 1:35 am

pakodominguez wrote:
Mark K wrote:Can't stop my GAS and bought one. Wonderful piece of small lens which does everything my Minolta beercan does without an adapter.

The beecan is good at some points. Compared to the Minolta/Sony 70-200 f2.8, it close focus "better" (less distortion, a little bit closer, the beercan has a "macro" range) with similar magnification. But Bokeh (important for some), overall sharpness, SSM and a much better control of fringing makes the f2.8 a much better lens. Then, it is up to you if yo want to pay the extra money for it...

The beercan was not really an expensive lens at introduction (250 $ of 1986, about 500 $ in today's money) it I believe it was not meant to become a legend in the Minolta world if it was not a cheap good performer. But specially cheap. 20% cheaper than a Canon similar lens in 1986...

The new Sony 70-200 OSS f4 is probably a better lens than the Sony 70-200 f2.8 GII. Sony is working with a different technology now, I think there is little Minolta DNA on the new designs (but probably Minolta could follow the same path Sony is taking) and there is A) a big demand on this lens and/or B) production is low due to special request in producing and assembling parts.

I own a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 macro and I'm quite happy. I thought about buying the new Sony F4 but I'm not sure yet. Not because the price since I believe it worth it, but because I'm not sure I want to have one of this lenses for each system I own... Too much money invested while the LAEA4 works quite well (but the Tamron is bigger and slower AF)

in any case, even if the beercan is a fine lens, I sold it the day I compare it against the Tamron, that sport a moderns design and focus closer and better. We all know it is a good lens. But it is popular because is cheap.


Which tamron version the newer or older 70-200mm?

The beercan is a cracker for the price, subject to getting a good copy. Only weak points I can find are CA (at times) and flare can be an issue (it flares badly in direct sun - one of the few lenses where a hood is mandatory)
I doubt I'd ever sell mine it's a fun lens to use and in my hands I work it hard and get the results from it.

I might get an f2.8 at some point, but Sony's pricing is so OTT it almost guarantees people will run to Tamron (Both versions)
There would be no point at all Sony releasing an f4 70-200mm at £1000 or over it is simply not worth spending that on an f4 lens. At £500-£600 it might be

Very few are stocking the FE mount 70-200mm f4 in the UK WEX are looking for £1250 which is bit heavy if you ask me
My priorities are optical quality and stuff like SSM and white paint jobs come second place. Bokeh wise I can't fault the 70-210mm esp at the tele end it delivers

User avatar
pakodominguez
Minister with Portfolio
Posts: 2526
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:38 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby pakodominguez » Tue Jun 03, 2014 3:17 am

bfitzgerald wrote:Which tamron version the newer or older 70-200mm?

The beercan is a cracker for the price, subject to getting a good copy. Only weak points I can find are CA (at times) and flare can be an issue (it flares badly in direct sun - one of the few lenses where a hood is mandatory)
I doubt I'd ever sell mine it's a fun lens to use and in my hands I work it hard and get the results from it.

I might get an f2.8 at some point, but Sony's pricing is so OTT it almost guarantees people will run to Tamron (Both versions)
There would be no point at all Sony releasing an f4 70-200mm at £1000 or over it is simply not worth spending that on an f4 lens. At £500-£600 it might be

Very few are stocking the FE mount 70-200mm f4 in the UK WEX are looking for £1250 which is bit heavy if you ask me
My priorities are optical quality and stuff like SSM and white paint jobs come second place. Bokeh wise I can't fault the 70-210mm esp at the tele end it delivers

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) Macro 001S
I have no idea of the situation in UK, but here the problem is not that stores are not stocking the 70-200 f4. The lens is been produced at boutique rhythm, and the demand is quite high...
Pako
------------
http://www.pakodominguez.photo/blog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby peterottaway » Tue Jun 03, 2014 6:49 am

Unless it is a question of price and you are buying the Tamron 24-70 / 2.8 and 70-200 / 2.8 instead of the Sony, I can't see much point in buying the f 2.8 lenses. OK some people will think they live or die at f 2.8, but if you need fast then go with primes. I see no problems with eventually converting over to the FE 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200.

I have the Sony 16-35 / 2.8 and the Minolta 28-70 / 2.8, 28-135 and 80-200 / 2.8 as I never saw enough advantage in upgrading. The 28-135 is a good lens although not with the performance some claim. But it does a lot of the coverage I usually use in the one lens. It may be low contrast to many but given the natural high contrast light where I live, then it can be a matter of toning things down rather the max boost you can get away with.

Others may not have my advantage in deciding on what I consider value for money rather than straight out cost. I understand that but to me performance is more than price and lpm at 10 feet. Even though I would struggle to give a name to exactly what I do look for.

Also as David has stated, the A7r like the Nikon 36 MP cameras have a clearly defined focus / out of focus zone. As you will be aware that with the high MP sensors diffraction can be noticeable at f8.0 and moderate softening can be detected at f 11.0. So depending on what you are shooting you need to use the effects of diffraction as well as at your d o f. Photozone's lens charts are important for both the highs and the lows.

As I said lpm sharpness ain't everything and softish corners are not always in the real world a problems whether you are shooting sports or cityscapes or many landscapes.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3538
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Wed Jun 04, 2014 11:07 am

I'd be genuinely scared of the E Mount f2/8 prices if those lenses do arrive at some point the f4 versions are fairly heavy on price as it is.
As for A mount they only have f2.8 offerings nothing f4.

I've no problems with f4, but if they don't make it you can't buy it. A Tamron 24-70 and 70-200mm f2.8 isn't cheap, but it's not that much over a Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 on it's own. If Sony made f4 lenses for A Mount I'm not sure they would be priced at appealing levels (based on the E mount lens prices)

I think over time people are starting to wake up to what's going on..and some of the plain rip off pricing on optics from OEM makers. I simply buy Tamron and I'm far from unhappy with that choice so far.

What the optical performance like Pako on the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) Macro 001S ?

peterottaway
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 9:24 am
Location: Northam, Western Australia

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby peterottaway » Wed Jun 04, 2014 2:16 pm

I would agree that for most photographers, even those who have been prepared to buy the A99, lenses such as the Tamron 24-70 at about AUD 1030 or so and the latest 70-200 at for around AUD 1250 are much more sensible purchases.

With the A7 series some of the prices have begun drop to about AUD 1250 to 1300 for the 24-70 and so with the difference in size and weight you can consider which way you want to go. Especially as there are questions about whether adapted lenses will take full advantage of improvements in AF in the future. The FE 70-200 has only been out for a few weeks and is selling for its list price of AUD 1799 so no joy there at present. But then again many dealers are still charging around AUD 1400 for the Tamron so it will be interesting what the differences will be in 6 - 12 months.

With the 70-200 / 4.0 you get stabilization, 72 mm filter size, a length of 175mm and a weight of 840g. With the Tamron you don't get stabilization ( doesn't matter with A mount but will do for E mount ), 77 mm filters, a length of190mm and a weight of 1.49 kg. Now for an A mount photographer, these are almost always going to be acceptable trade offs especially with the larger camera size and some extra weight.

However for a photographer with a hypothetical 2015 A7 Mark 2 the total difference in size and weight between an equally hypothetical A99r with grip and lenses ?

Yes we are talking about a general purpose A mount camera as opposed to what will still be a more specialized minority interest camera. Just like in the old days when some people chose a Nikon F4 over a Hassy or others choose a Pentax 67 or a Leica its up to you .

User avatar
pakodominguez
Minister with Portfolio
Posts: 2526
Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 5:38 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Sony G 70-200 / 4.0 OSS FE Lens

Unread postby pakodominguez » Wed Jun 04, 2014 4:04 pm

bfitzgerald wrote:I think over time people are starting to wake up to what's going on..and some of the plain rip off pricing on optics from OEM makers. I simply buy Tamron and I'm far from unhappy with that choice so far.

Photography, the industry of camera/lens making, is going in a totally new direction. Sony took the lead with the "intermediary" step of SLT cameras, then with the ILCE. (Olympus/Panasonic and Fuji with the M4/3 are also looking ahead). The new tech molding glasses, coatings, and mechanics (optimization for video, etc) place Sony ahead Canon and Nikon, that will need, at some point, to upgrade their system.

Lenses are not designed to last forever. Mounts are not designed to last forever. Minolta created the A-mount for their Maxxum AF cameras. Canon killed their previous (2, 3?) mounts when they went AF, and even now, you have Canon AF lenses that you can not mount in Canon cameras... Canon and Nikon are milking the same old cow, probably because their user base is so big, they feel they still have time before they'll be forced to change. But when that moment arrives, their lenses won't be priced as today (what Canikon is selling is mostly old designs, they already paid for the R&D long time ago) but prices at the level of the fabulous Nikon 14-24 f2.8 or their 24-70 f2.8 or more.

We are paying prices of a small manufacturer, boutique-like, new designed lenses. This new lenses are not cheap, but as you can see at DXO Mark test, the new FE 55 1.8 is one of the best "normal" lens around, same goes with the FE 35f 2.8. The 24-70 f4 (that I own) and the 70-200 F4 are not that bad compared to the Canikon, ad they all sport a similar price tag. And the new FE lenses are compact and light. The E 10-18 f4 is AMAZING: compact, light and high image quality.

I don't want to offend anybody, but is not because you can not afford it that it is overpriced. Hey, I can not afford it either, if I decide to buy new equipment I need to sell first. And that is what I'm doing now. I'm waiting to see what is that FE Macro lens they announced on the roadmap: if it is a 100mm, I'll go for it and the 35mm f2.8 and I'll be good for a while.
bfitzgerald wrote:What the optical performance like Pako on the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 DI LD (IF) Macro 001S ?

Optically, the Tamron is great. Great.
When I just got it, I tested it against the Beercan and I rented the Sony 70-200 f2.8: The Tamron focus closer than the other two lenses, better corrected at close focus. No fringing at all compare to the Beercan (the Sony is good here also) Bokeh is as good or better... I sold the Beercan and stopped dreaming about the Sony.

But... AF is slow even on A900/A99. If finally got in focus the focus is accurate. And I had two issues with this lens: a) I needed to replace two times (first time 3 years ago, second tie last February) the tripod collar because the know that adjust it to the lens went wrong. and b) shooting in low temperature (-15 Celsius) the aperture blades didn't work anymore. It went back to normal when I got to a warmer environment -I finished my shooting with the Minolta 35-200 Xi that performed flawlessly down to -17 Celsius. there is not indication in the Tamron manual about lower temperature, and I asked the Tamron Reps about (they are Upstate NY, so they might endure a couple of days a year at -15 Celsius) and I didn't get any answer.

That is why I understand there are reasons for a lens to cost 700$ and a similar lens 1400$
Pako
------------
http://www.pakodominguez.photo/blog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Return to “Lens Lore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests