The 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is one of the classic workhorses in countless photographers bags, suitable for a huge range of genres and scenarios. As such, you can often expect top-shelf performance out of professional 70-200mm f/2.8 lenses. For Sony shooters, there is the FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II, and this excellent video review takes a quick look at the image quality and performance you can expect from it in usage.
Coming to you from Dustin Abbott, this great video review takes a look at the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II lens. As a member of Sony's respected G Master line, the 70-200mm f/2.8 comes with a variety of impressive feature and capabilities, including:
- 30% lighter than original version for increased portability
- Two extra-low dispersion elements and two Super ED elements for reduced chromatic aberrations and increased clarity
- Nano AR Coating II for fewer flares and ghosting and deeper contrast
- Reduced focus breathing for video applications
- Optical Steady Shot image stabilization with three modes
- Four XD linear motors for fast and precise autofocus
- Focus range limiter for specific ranges
- Three customizable focus control buttons
- Fluorine coating for repelling fingerprints and oil
- Dust- and moisture-resistance
Check out the video above for Abbott's full thoughts on the lens.
It feels like hiking with a brick in the backpack. 1kg is too much. I go for 1 l water instead.
It's about +1 lb lighter than any another 70-200 f2.8.
And, it's 2 lbs lighter than a brick. :D
Show me a lighter 70-200 f/2.8. Canon's EF series was ~1800 grams.
Sony's 24-105 /f4 is still 663G and is a much simpler design...
I gained the experience and loaded a "1kg brick" for a hiking trip. Plus food, plus water for 2 persons, camera, tripod. No, thanks. I reconsider!. Food + water are not negotiable.
We photographers are sometimes a bite strange: Adding weight w/o any doubt to our backpack for sake getting the best shot. Then we spend hundrets of dollars / EURs to buy a carbon tripod in order to save weight.
Coming from my beloved Tamron 103A (f/4 only) with 650g + Adaptor 125g = 775g.
The Sony 70-200mm f/4 is about 840g
The renewed Sony 70-200m f/2.8 the 1kg brick from above.
And there is the Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 with also about 840g.
Every decision is a compromise. Each of us need to answer individually. I plan to go tor the Tamron as is f2.8 the same weight as the "slow" Sony.
--- "Every decision is a compromise. Each of us need to answer individually."
It would behoove to practice what you preach instead of needlessly complaining in a public forum. If an f2.8 lens that's a mere .5 lb heavier going to cause you to pass out in the middle of your hike, then, don't bring it. Simple? Yes? You are aware not all lenses are for everyone for everything? Yes?