DWOfPaul
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.4 #2 · Official: Sigma 200mm f/2 DG OS Sports lens announced! | |
freaklikeme wrote:
The 200/2's a bit heavier than the 300GM. It's not quite as long, but it really isn't that much smaller, either. Otherwise, I hadn't considered that perspective. My wildlife kit is the 70-200GII on the a6700 for bugs and small critters, and the 300GM and extenders on the a1. I don't have a need for anything faster in that kit. What sort of subjects would you look to shoot with it?
Good point on the 300GM being close in weight. I was thinking of my 300mm F, which is over 6lbs.
In the DSLR days, I was using a very similar setup to you, 70-200 f2.8, 300mm f2.8, d500 (crop), d800e (ff) + TC's for wildlife.
The last few years I have mostly been using the Sony 200-600 f6.3 and Sony 24-105 f4, which for the last year is now mostly the Nikon 24-120 f4. It's very rare that I miss the 100-200mm range for wildlife. If I am doing something more dynamic, like an air show, I break out my Tamron 70-300 f6.3 to cover the missing range.
In my experience, especially in warmer months, I get a bunch of shore birds that like to come back the the wetlands as the light falls. A few weeks ago, I was pushing my 200-600 to ISO 12,800 at f6.3. As it continued to get darker, more birds were still coming in, but I gave up at that point due to the extreme ISO. If I could have switched to a 400mm f4, I definitely could have continued photographing longer. Less extreme but more common, I find myself pushing the ISO to around 3,200 at f6.3 for birds that have decided to land in shadowy spots. The last one is a much more of a nice to have, but if I had a 200mm f2 in my bag, I can't help but feel it could make some really nice photos of birds I can get close to, like ducks.
For the future, on paper, the 400-800mm f8 sounds like a great update over my 200-600 for super telephoto work, as often I end up using the TC f1.4 on the 200-600. But I have hesitated to buy it because I am not going to carry around a 200-600 and 400-800 at the same time, and I do find the gap of 100-400 to large not to fill. Sure I could go the more traditional route and get a 100-400 f5.6, but for 1lb more, a 200mm f2 that takes TCs I feel could open up a nice amount of additional possibilities a 100-400 can't.
|
