Photoclubalpha

I am willing to buy a Tele of the G-series.
What is a better idea?
70-400 G or 70-200 2.8 with 2x teleconverter?
I suppose the latter would be better up to 200 mm but what about 200mm - 400 mm?
I may also soon consider the a99 and in any case full frame will come sooner or later.
Miltos


I just heard from the local SONY dealer that the 70-400G is discontinued. At the end of March, the successor model (whatever that means) will be available.
In February the new lineup will come out.

I just heard from the local SONY dealer that the 70-400G is discontinued. At the end of March, the successor model (whatever that means) will be available.
In February the new lineup will come out.

I just heard from the local SONY dealer that the 70-400G is discontinued. At the end of March, the successor model (whatever that means) will be available.
In February the new lineup will come out.

Both lenses are to be discontinued.
I have two versions of Sigma 70-200/2.8 and I will say if your money is OK, please go for a Sony, old or the upcoming new one.
I really love my Minolta 70-210/4, an old heavy lens with a lot of sharpness and easy to carry.
The newer 70-300G is also good and sharp, but 70-400G is simply much better.
Depending on your need. I will consider a 70-200 2.8 for general purposes. As A77's noise performance is so so....a faster lens helps a lot.

I've used the 70-200 G with a 2x TC, and let me say it is not a combo I would seek to use again. I would suffer judicious cropping before I use it on anything but astronomical subjects. The 70-200/2.8 is superbly sharp, even from wide open, but none of that made it through the teleconverter in my experience. It hadn't any usable sharpness within two stops of maximum aperture. I was sitting down, watching a bird construct a nest, with my the tripod collar resting on a steady surface. The bird came and went several times, very leisurely, and I wasn't able to get a sharp image with that combo no matter what I tried; AF, MF, f/5.6, f/8, f/11... I eventually swapped lenses, got up and walked closer, used my 85/2.8 once, and walked away satisfied. Well, I say "satisfied," but satisfaction would have been getting to use the 70-200 without the teleconverter, but I hadn't any extra body or mount caps with me to protect the teleconverter, and it was a dusty environment.

If 400mm is what you want, get the lens that delivers it. Sony's 70-400mm G already delivers better than any other zoom of similar range, and compromising a faster zoom to get there is more expensive and less effective.

As a general rule I have yet to find a 2x TC that delivered good IQ with even a very decent lens. I think the old age rule of if you TC it, go for a 1.4x not a 2x