This time of year while it is snowing in the north, the streams are running in the southern deserts. Here is an active stream and a chance encounter with a gold prospector who has lived on his "finds" for more than twenty years. He is known as "Swiftwater" and he has a popular Youtube channel. A7RII with FE 24-70 GM
Ronny Olsson wrote:
What do you say .. Contax 100-300 or Sony FE 70-200 f4 G?
My Novoflex adapter is sold so it must also be purchased
and it seems that in that case I have to buy from Japan and then have to pay duty and VAT .. the adapter and Contax in good condition probably cost around 1100-1200 dollars with duty and VAT and a used Sony is about 800-900 dollars
Any other suggestions?
I LOVE my 100-300 but its a btch to focus at night or in the morning. Aside from that its awesome..and yes I usually have to s-curve it in LR to give it some punch.
...one huge upside is that its very light for its reach.
humphrey86 wrote:
A few more from yesterday and today. We got a foot of snow in Portland. i usually hate the snow, but I like it here in portland. Great scenery.
ManuelLaMantia wrote:
Ronny, I would not suggest Contax 100-300... it is a great lens but belongs to another era and although it is very sharp, colors and contrast are not comparable to the current lenses... you have to work more in PP to reach a good result. The 70-200 f / 4 it seems to me a very good and versatile lens with autofocus and stabilizer and in my opinion has better bokeh than the FE 70-300 which among other is very expensive. Probably suggestion provided by Werner is the right solution even though adapter+lens (large lens) seems rather bulky and heavy.
Ciao - Manuel ...Show more →
Hi Manuel, I have used two samples of the 4/70-200 and own a Contax 4.5-5.6/100-300 for a few weeks. I didn't use the Contax enough to finally judge it yet but I think that it has much sharper corners (especially in the 100-200 area) and also an at least equally good bokeh. For travel photography with a high amount of non-moving landscape images, the Contax would be more preferable in my opinion. Furthermore, the 300mm setting is not just a gadget on this lens although it's a tad weaker than the middle focal lengths.
Actually, the bokeh was one of the big surprises with the Contax. I know a few other 70-300/100-300/70-400 (FE 70-300, Sony G 70-400, FD 100-300 L) lenses and in my first impressions, the Contax is far on top of all of them when it comes to bokeh. The FE 4/70-200 was no slouch in terms of bokeh either and has more potential for subject isolation at shorter focal lengths.
Looking at a Lobster Boat and Gulls right along Shore
Tripod mounted A7r and Leica M 90mm f2.5 Summarit lens
ISO 100, f11, 1/320 second
Exposure corrected by +0.71 Stops; processed in LR6.4
July 2, 2015
At Schoodic Point near Winter Harbor, Maine, Acadia National Park
Jannik Peters wrote:
Hi Manuel, I have used two samples of the 4/70-200 and own a Contax 4.5-5.6/100-300 for a few weeks. I didn't use the Contax enough to finally judge it yet but I think that it has much sharper corners (especially in the 100-200 area) and also an at least equally good bokeh. For travel photography with a high amount of non-moving landscape images, the Contax would be more preferable in my opinion. Furthermore, the 300mm setting is not just a gadget on this lens although it's a tad weaker than the middle focal lengths.
Actually, the bokeh was one of the big surprises with the Contax. I know a few other 70-300/100-300/70-400 (FE 70-300, Sony G 70-400, FD 100-300 L) lenses and in my first impressions, the Contax is far on top of all of them when it comes to bokeh. The FE 4/70-200 was no slouch in terms of bokeh either and has more potential for subject isolation at shorter focal lengths....Show more →
Hi Jannik, thanks for your replay. I own only Zeiss 100-300 and recently FE 70-200 f4 then my analysis is limited. Just to be more specific, here a list of pros and cons of both lenses in my opinion.
Zeiss 100-300:
++ super sharp
+ real 100-300mm FL
+ rare = probably more rare in the future
+ compact
+ nice bokeh
- front lens connected to focusing system
- rear lens glued (no more in production by Kyocera)... how long it will last?
- "pump" zoom (specially for mirrorless camera)
- no AF
- no OSS
- rare = expensive
- hood support through filter screw
- color & contrast
- adapter needed
Sony 70-200 f4
+ AF with Sony lock buttons
+ OSS
+ OSS whit IBIS?
+ zoom ring
+ native FE mount
+ acceptable bokeh
+ colors & contrast (LD + ASPH elements?)
- 200mm = 180mm
- some internal parts made by plastic (read on Internet)
- not so sharp at 200mm (real 180mm)
Don't get me wrong, I have Zeiss 100-300 and I'm very happy about it... among other things, I have been lucky enough to find a copy in mint conditions complete with box and documentation, originally purchased by the official Italian importer Fowa.
Mine was a mere analysis on the advantages and disadvantages of the different options for Ronny. Every time I see Werner and Bob images taken with the 70-400 I remain astonished... sure they are both in my top chart and I frequently astound me watching this thread , but it really seems a good option.
Finally, as this thread is dedicated to images, here a couple of shots taken with the two lenses. First one is a different shot of Tobey at Taft Point (this time without Adrian in the background); second one is a shot taken on fly (really surprised by the responsiveness of my A7r AF) at Pfeiffer Beach waiting sunset.
I got a Lensbaby Sweet 50 lens for Christmas and I'm not sure what to think of it yet... The handling is tricky and the results can feel a bit claustrophobic and sometimes they make me dizzy... Maybe it's just a question of practice and finding suitable subjects for it and perhaps it'll grow on me. I'll give it a thorough work-out the coming week and we'll see.
and I frequently astound me watching this thread 
, but it really seems a good option.
