p.36 #8 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
Q111H wrote:
Is this at Loess Bluffs? If not it looks just like it
This was along the highway somewhere between Joplin and Saint Louis. I was driving back home from Dallas.
I spotted this road heading into the countryside, and went back to take some pictures before heading back to St. Louis.
This one below is from Loess Bluffs a few days ago.
p.36 #9 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
saaketham wrote:
This was along the highway somewhere between Joplin and Saint Louis. I was driving back home from Dallas.
I spotted this road heading into the countryside, and went back to take some pictures before heading back to St. Louis. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/91/2577291.jpg
p.36 #11 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
The diversity of pictures in this thread reinforce that this lens is strong for a lot of different uses...sure that's been the case for 70-200's forever, but this one seems to really have no weakness, with better handling due to weight savings as an added bonus. I know mine has replaced multiple lenses of mine due to the TC performance, and could probably replace a few primes if I had to.
p.36 #16 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
gocolts wrote:
The diversity of pictures in this thread reinforce that this lens is strong for a lot of different uses...sure that's been the case for 70-200's forever, but this one seems to really have no weakness, with better handling due to weight savings as an added bonus. I know mine has replaced multiple lenses of mine due to the TC performance, and could probably replace a few primes if I had to.
really? I thought the moose pic above my post shows pretty nervous bokeh...
I have the lens and I thought it bokeh is a "weakness". It is not BAD but not the best either.
p.36 #18 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
wind30 wrote:
really? I thought the moose pic above my post shows pretty nervous bokeh...
I have the lens and I thought it bokeh is a "weakness". It is not BAD but not the best either.
I chalked that up to shooting distance and background details...but yea it wouldn't be fair for any zoom to match the best primes out there, it's the only thing keeping my 135 GM around, but I'm still skeptical at times based on some of the results I see.
p.36 #19 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
gocolts wrote:
The diversity of pictures in this thread reinforce that this lens is strong for a lot of different uses...sure that's been the case for 70-200's forever, but this one seems to really have no weakness, with better handling due to weight savings as an added bonus. I know mine has replaced multiple lenses of mine due to the TC performance, and could probably replace a few primes if I had to.
Oh I dunno. Much as I think it's good for a 70-200/2.8 (of which I've had my fair share over the years) I'm not as awestruck as some other folks here seem to be. It's a zoom lens and to a certain extent still has all the inherent compromises that every zoom lens has. Its main strength to me is how lightweight it is, but other than that it's just another 70-200 that I bought for the flexibility of having a decent 70-200 that doesn't weigh as much as a small boat anchor like the previous version, not because I thought it had prime-beating, physics-defying image quality. I'll certainly be hanging on to my 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 primes.
p.36 #20 · Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Image Thread
I did an AB comparison of rendering with the 70-200mm, 135mm gm , 85mm dg dn. I sold off my 135mm gm and kept my 85mm dg dn. The 135mm gm rendering to me is not much better than the 70-200mm gm. Both are equally harsh in the transition regions...
I am still waiting for an updated Sony telephoto that renders like the 85mm gm.
