The Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II looks like another very good lens option, although I will happily stick with my Tamron 70-180.
Sony 70-200 GM f/2.8 II: Excellent image quality, OSS, f/2.8, relatively light for what it is although the heaviest of this group, takes teleconverters. On the downsides, relatively low maximum magnification (although not unusual for its class), expensive.
Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II: Gives up a stop of aperture. Still has OSS and takes teleconverters. Cheaper than the GM f/2.8 II but still fairly expensive. Is more compact than the GM f/2.8 II, relatively light for what it is (although not as much lighter than the GM f/2.8 II as I, and I think many others, were anticipating), and has relatively high maximum magnification.
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8: Gives up 20mm at the long end, OSS and the ability to take teleconverters. Not as good for tracking fast moving action as the GMs(?) (My Tamron has been fine for tracking moving subjects but equally I haven't yet used it to try to photograph fast, erratically moving subjects.) However, it is f/2.8 but at a size and weight, and with a relatively high maximum magnification, similar to the GM f/4 II (although the maximum magnification is not as high as the GM f/4 II can get when used with a teleconverter), and is the cheapest lens of this group.
Pick your poison.
EDIT: As noted in a later post, I overlooked the fact the Tamron 70-180's maximum magnfication matches that of the GM f/4 II only at 70mm and using manual focus. Otherwise, the Tamron actually has lower maximum magnification than the GMs (atlhough I believe not much that lower than the GM f/2.8 II).
The Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II looks like another very good lens option, although I will happily stick with my Tamron 70-180.
Sony 70-200 GM f/2.8 II: Excellent image quality, OSS, f/2.8, relatively light for what it is although the heaviest of this group, takes teleconverters. On the downsides, relatively low maximum magnification (although not unusual for its class), expensive.
Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II: Gives up a stop of aperture. Still has OSS and takes teleconverters. Cheaper than the GM f/2.8 II but still fairly expensive. Is more compact than the GM f/2.8 II, relatively light for what it is (although not as much lighter than the GM f/2.8 II as I, and I think many others, were anticipating), and has relatively high maximum magnification.
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8: Gives up 20mm at the long end, OSS and the ability to take teleconverters. Not as good for tracking fast moving action as the GMs(?) (My Tamron has been fine for tracking moving subjects but equally I haven't yet used it to try to photograph fast, erratically moving subjects.) However, it is f/2.8 but at a size and weight, and with a relatively high maximum magnification, similar to the GM f/4 II (although the maximum magnification is not as high as the GM f/4 II can get when used with a teleconverter), and is the cheapest lens of this group.
Pick your poison.
EDIT: I overlooked the fact that the Tamron 70-180's maximum magnfication matches that of the GM f/4 II only at 70mm and using manual focus. Otherwise, the Tamron actually has lower maximum magnification than the GMs (atlhough I believe not much that lower than the GM f/2.8 II).
The Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II looks like another very good lens option, although I will happily stick with my Tamron 70-180.
Sony 70-200 GM f/2.8 II: Excellent image quality, OSS, f/2.8, relatively light for what it is although the heaviest of this group, takes teleconverters. On the downsides, relatively low maximum magnification (although not unusual for its class), expensive.
Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II: Gives up a stop of aperture. Still has OSS and takes teleconverters. Cheaper than the GM f/2.8 II but still fairly expensive. Is more compact than the GM f/2.8 II, relatively light for what it is (although not as much lighter than the GM f/2.8 II as I, and I think many others, were anticipating), and has relatively high maximum magnification.
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8: Gives up 20mm at the long end, OSS and the ability to take teleconverters. Not as good for tracking fast moving action as the GMs(?) (My Tamron has been fine for tracking moving subjects but equally I haven't yet used it to try to photograph fast, erratically moving subjects.) However, it is f/2.8 but at a size and weight, and with a relatively high maximum magnification, similar to the GM f/4 II (although the maximum magnification is not as high as the GM f/4 II can get when used with a teleconverter), and is the cheapest lens of this group.
The Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II looks like another very good lens option, although I will happily stick with my Tamron 70-180.
Sony 70-200 GM f/2.8 II: Excellent image quality, OSS, f/2.8, relatively light for what it is although the heaviest of this group, takes teleconverters. On the downsides, relatively low maximum magnification (although not unusual for its class), expensive.
Sony 70-200 GM f/4 II: Gives up a stop of aperture. Still has OSS and takes teleconverters. Cheaper than the GM f/2.8 II but still fairly expensive. Is more compact than the GM f/2.8 II, relatively light for what it is although not as much lighter than the GM f/2.8 II as I, and I think many others, were anticipating), and has relatively high maximum magnification.
Tamron 70-180 f/2.8: Gives up 20mm at the long end, OSS and the ability to take teleconverters. Not as good for tracking fast moving action as the GMs(?) (My Tamron has been fine for tracking moving subjects but equally I haven't yet used it to try to photograph fast, erratically moving subjects.) However, it is f/2.8 but at a size and weight, and with a relatively high maximum magnification, similar to the GM f/4 II (although the maximum magnification is not as high as the GM f/4 II can get when used with a teleconverter), and is the cheapest lens of this group.
Pick your poison.
Jul 13, 2023 at 07:49 PM
Previous versions of JD07's message #16292389 « Official: Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS II Lens »
