Reading mode: Light Dark

70-200mm lenses....who's the best?

Go to last post
christian carneiro

christian carneiro

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
283
Reaction score
8
Location
Santiago/Región Metropolitana/Lo Barnechea
Hello folks!

I'm writing to ask for advise on two 70-200mm lenses I'm considering.

First, there's the Sony 70-200 mm G. Some say it's a bit soft wide open...other's claim it's OK, but it's a rip off.

The only reviews I got from it are from Photozone.de, SLR gear and Kurtmunger.com

Then there's the new Sigma 70-200 OS...which claims to be a breakthrou in Optics design with its new fluoride lenses...but I haven't really seen hard reviews on it.

Price is +- similar....maybe with a Tokina 11-16 2.8 of difference :-)

So...what should I do? Reccomendations? Resources?

I shoot mainly with my A700. Usually landscapes and nature pgotography. I recently sold my Tammy 70-200 because although very sharp...AF was simply Baaaadddd!
 
christian carneiro said:
Hello folks!

I'm writing to ask for advise on two 70-200mm lenses I'm considering.

First, there's the Sony 70-200 mm G. Some say it's a bit soft wide open...other's claim it's OK, but it's a rip off.
Click to expand...
I've been eyeballing a 70-200 upgrade for a while now - in fact, it's one of the main reasons (aside from Sony's ineptitude) that I'm considering a brand switch. (I'm currently using a Sigma HSM; the recently discontinued model).

The Sony is a pretty sharp lens, but a bit soft wide open. Still better than my Sigma, but not by so much that I'm excited to shell out $1000 for an upgrade. (And autofocus is better primarily due to the focus limiter; it doesn't otherwise focus faster than the Sigma). AF is adequate, but nothing like the 24-70.

The Canon is about the best out there, but it's new and it's typically around $2300-500. It's ridiculously sharp, fast & silent, and supposedly offers around 4 stops with improved IS. To me, that makes the $1800 Sony seem overpriced. I'd rather pay several hundred more for a lens that offers much more. Versus the inexpensive Sigma, the Sony primarily offers better build, reliability, focus limiter and a touch better sharpness.

The new OS lens is sharper in the center, particularly at 200, soft on FF corners. But it's mtf charts show that at 70mm, it's actually a bit worse than the previous version (not bad, but not great).

My approach:
On a budget: get the older Sigma HSM
Willing to spend more: get the Sony
Want optical IS for video with an SLT: get the new Sigma OS
Want the best: switch brands and buy Canon (Nikon close 2nd)

Tamron is interesting - plenty of people love it and it's supposedly very sharp for the price. AF is screwdriver style, sluggish (though not bad, people say) and a bit noisy. But the thing that put me off from trying one is reports of focus inaccuracies, that it suffers from "misses" more often than the Sigma or Sony.
  • Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
 
If exclusiveyly devoted to 70-200, then the latest Canon is the best.
Nikon is no. 2
See the MTF graphs.

Sony/Minolta is pretty but would certainly seem outdated. See its MTF graph. The curve dips sharply though starts prominently.

But in the range 70/80/100-400 Sony seems to be the best.

That's my opinion. But of course, others may have better ideas.

Thanks
A.G.
 
Dennis,

I have the Tamron 70-200 2.8 and I have had no more "misses" than with my CZ 1680 or 70300G. I actually find that the focus accuracy is spot on. I think a lot of those complaints you are referring to were for the Canon/Nikon version (unless you are reading dyxum?). If you look at the reviews on Amazon, I think every single review from a Sony user is five stars. Yes, the focus speed is not lightning fast or silent and there are no locks, but if you can work around that it's worth every penny.

Take care,
  • Doug
 
christian carneiro said:
Hello folks!

I'm writing to ask for advise on two 70-200mm lenses I'm considering.

First, there's the Sony 70-200 mm G. Some say it's a bit soft wide open...other's claim it's OK, but it's a rip off.
Click to expand...
After a few years Sony's price, I stopped thinking this way.
christian carneiro said:
The only reviews I got from it are from Photozone.de, SLR gear and Kurtmunger.com

Then there's the new Sigma 70-200 OS...which claims to be a breakthrou in Optics design with its new fluoride lenses...but I haven't really seen hard reviews on it.
Click to expand...
I can sure you than Sony lens runs for years and years and the Sigma 70-200/2.8 I had, does not do so.
christian carneiro said:
Price is +- similar....maybe with a Tokina 11-16 2.8 of difference :-)

So...what should I do? Reccomendations? Resources?

I shoot mainly with my A700. Usually landscapes and nature pgotography. I recently sold my Tammy 70-200 because although very sharp...AF was simply Baaaadddd!
Click to expand...
Why not consider the 70-300G
--
Mark K
 
Arun Gaur said:
If exclusiveyly devoted to 70-200, then the latest Canon is the best.
...
But in the range 70/80/100-400 Sony seems to be the best.
Click to expand...
I agree. And 70-300 is a match for Canon's new $1500 L lens (maybe not build or AF speed, but at half the price, I can live with it). A specific lens has to be awfully important to merit a switch.
  • Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
 
I personally love my new Tamron 70-210mm f/2.8 LD SP from the 90's that I just got for under $400 in really great condition. Focus limiter = awfully fast focusing considering it is in-body AF, plus extreme sharpness by f/4 and decent sharpness wide open. The issue here is CA up the ying yang, though I can always fix that in post processing. Obviously not what you'd look for though. The $1300 Sigma OS isn't that well recieved, as some believe the cheaper Sigma is just plain better except that it doesn't have OS. The other issue with Sigma is quality control. A lot of people have had issues in the past with Sigma quality control. Some lenses are amazing. Some are trash. You just have to get lucky. Good luck finding what you need. =D

--
-Eric (A learning photographer)
 
Hi folks...is it my impression or the Sony has really the best reputation among the A mount users?

I'm really happy with my CZ 16-35's SSM speed....does anyone know how does the 70-200's speed compare to the CZ?

Cheers :o
 
Take my opinion for what is worth: another opinion :)

The SONY 70-200G is the best there is for a-mount. It is by far my favorite lens among the ones I own - cz24-70. 70-400G, 50 1.4 and 85 2.8.

Is it worth $1800? Well, to me it is. I had the Tamron 70-200 for about 6 months, which was great, and then I got the SONY. I will put it this way: it is the best 70-200 lens for the a mount, and the price is what it is. Nothing you can do about it :)

The character, the bokeh, the COLORS of this lens are second to none. The images taken by it are just .. different. Speed is fine, build is GREAT. '

My $0.02 :)
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/evangelos_k/
 
Hello,

I would recommend you go to some photo camera shop and try to take some test
pictures with both Sony and Sigma. Maybe that will tell you more than you
would expect now. At least as happened to me. For some time I was considering

Sigma as option (reading all those reviews and so on), but then I had mounted the lens on the camera, took several pictures and mounted off - forever (However I know: "never say never"). I guess not only Sony, but also - let say - Minolta Beercan - are the better lenses in terms of image quality (especially better contrast, however Beercan has problems with chromatic aberration).

And do not forget consider Minolta 80-200 2.8 (High Speed version), if AF speed is important for you.
Sony seems to be the best option, unless not perfect (AF speed is not what
would one expect from such a pivotal lens in Sony line).

Regards.
Martin
 
First off, the Sony will hold its value. Look and see how much the Minolta 80-200mm lens still goes for. You'll pay $1800 today and get back $1650+ 2 years from now.

Second, every time I use this lens I am shocked at how much better the images are and almost everyone is a keeper. It is the lens I use most. I use it for portraits, indoor events, sports, wildlife, etc. Even pics of my dog. :)









Here is the mandatory 100% crop...



 
....

I have the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM II, wich has excellent optics, fast and silent focus and a reasonable price. Unfortunately after two years of moderate use the HSM motor stoped working, it's now at Precision Camerra for repair ( under Sigma warranty ).

I always wanted to have the Sony but could never justify its hefty price, IMHO it's the best of them all ( even comparing to Canon and Nikon ) in every aspect but the price.

... Lucas

--
Always having fun with photography ...

http://www.lucaspix.smugmug.com/

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top