Reading mode: Light Dark

Get the 135GM or save for 70-200GMii?

Go to last post
Dhomas said:
ray_burnimage said:
For your stated use cases I’d get the 70-200mm all day long. It’s your bread and butter lens. You say zooms make you lazy, but you don’t always have to zoom with a zoom…. That’s why there are FL markings on the zoom ring….. to assist you with working a fixed FL where appropriate 😉

To me, for your use cases, primes are additional nice to have options AFTER you have your core zoom kit in place.

For example, my core zoom kit for professional work is 24-70mm and 70-200mm GMII and I do 85% of my professional work with these two lenses. I’ve gradually complemented these zooms with some select primes too. In my case that’s 20mm 1.8G, 35mm 1.4GM and 85mm 1.4 Sigma DGDN. I envisage more primes being added to my kit in time, when the need arises and the cost is justifiable, in terms of adding something tangible to my resultant images.
Click to expand...
I have absolutly zero interest in any additional lens between 20 and 85mm (70-200 would be more^^) and only having f2.8... in that range wont cut it as i dont always want to use a flash. The Sigma 15mm 1.4 might be interesting but to much of a niche, even for me.

On paper the the 70-200gmii is a nobrainer without question but im not a pro and i feel like i might not share everyones preferences. This thred is to ensure i took everything into consideration befor i spend money.
Click to expand...
On the bolded points above:

1. I never suggested you need primes in 20mm to 85mm, I mentioned primes used in my case

2. When you stated parties, events, sports in your OP I made the mistake of assuming you were shooting paid/pro. You've subsequently clarified that you're NOT a pro, which changes things a lot.

When you are shooting for your own pleasure there is zero need to "get the shot" no matter what.

Therefore, you should get the lenses you want to achieve your goals and desires.

In that case, forget the 70-200mm if you don't like zooms and simply get the 135mm if that is what you desire.
 
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
Please note that i do not consider third party lenses how ever good they might be. The GM lenses i already own spoiled me and i know i will reach out for the better lens sooner or later anyways. Also while sport is not the main purpose i would like to be able to get the 20 or 30 fps out of my camera, sometimes more is better and its the only complain i have about my 85mm.
Click to expand...
Ignore so-called "third party" lenses at your own peril. Viltrox, Samyang, Sigma and Tamron all makes lenses the equal or surpass "first-party" options. Rather than an "either or" choice, you could spend a similar budget on third party lenses and get both.

I have owned (past tense) both the GM 135 and 70-200 II. Both are superlative lenses and are absolutely the best at what they do. In the end, I parted with both in favor of a Rokinon (Samyang) 135 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180. If you can't get the images you need with those two lenses, do not blame the equipment.
Click to expand...
What are you shooting and in what enviroment. I often shoot moving subjects in dim lit festival tents and my GMs have left an impression in that regard.

I enjoy photography, i like nice gear, i dont want it all, i dont want it now, but id like to make a decission that i wont regret. I want to keep the stuff that i buy and useit, im not into reselling. If you are happy with your decission than im not going to question it as i know that i dont need most of my stuff to get nice images but id like it to be on the same level.
 
ray_burnimage said:
Dhomas said:
ray_burnimage said:
For your stated use cases I’d get the 70-200mm all day long. It’s your bread and butter lens. You say zooms make you lazy, but you don’t always have to zoom with a zoom…. That’s why there are FL markings on the zoom ring….. to assist you with working a fixed FL where appropriate 😉

To me, for your use cases, primes are additional nice to have options AFTER you have your core zoom kit in place.

For example, my core zoom kit for professional work is 24-70mm and 70-200mm GMII and I do 85% of my professional work with these two lenses. I’ve gradually complemented these zooms with some select primes too. In my case that’s 20mm 1.8G, 35mm 1.4GM and 85mm 1.4 Sigma DGDN. I envisage more primes being added to my kit in time, when the need arises and the cost is justifiable, in terms of adding something tangible to my resultant images.
Click to expand...
I have absolutly zero interest in any additional lens between 20 and 85mm (70-200 would be more^^) and only having f2.8... in that range wont cut it as i dont always want to use a flash. The Sigma 15mm 1.4 might be interesting but to much of a niche, even for me.

On paper the the 70-200gmii is a nobrainer without question but im not a pro and i feel like i might not share everyones preferences. This thred is to ensure i took everything into consideration befor i spend money.
Click to expand...
On the bolded points above:

1. I never suggested you need primes in 20mm to 85mm, I mentioned primes used in my case

2. When you stated parties, events, sports in your OP I made the mistake of assuming you were shooting paid/pro. You've subsequently clarified that you're NOT a pro, which changes things a lot.

When you are shooting for your own pleasure there is zero need to "get the shot" no matter what.

Therefore, you should get the lenses you want to achieve your goals and desires.

In that case, forget the 70-200mm if you don't like zooms and simply get the 135mm if that is what you desire.
Click to expand...
1. i just wanted to make clear that im not interested in any lens in that focal lenght. The primes i got are all i need and zooms are to slow for general purpose.

2. I could have made it more clea. I get paid a little to motivate me to finish the images and deliver them. Kirmes festivals are fun but nothing a pro would touch.

I shoot this stuff coz want to shoot pictures that hold value for someone and i get a kick out of it when people start updating their profile pictures with images taken by me. Its also suplementing my hobby. It founds my hobby but is my hobby at the same time. But i want to grow.

Not getting the shot is not to much of an issue coz i get enough and sometimes keep the camera down coz i get to much. I want to enhance my work.

Im leaning towards it but i know that 70-200 is a bread and butter lens and offers more versatility (at a higher price)...
 
Impulses said:
Gotcha, I understand your intent and use case better now, I think the 135GM would fit into that seamlessly and if you do like the FL it absolutely is fun to have that degree of control over isolation with it... It's a big lens but it's also still somewhat less conspicuous than an even bigger internal zooming and white 70-200, so there's that.

This doesn't have to be a fully rational decision, the zooms may be more logical for some use cases but there's a reason there's still a fair amount of 135mm options. You will have more opportunities/shots with the zoom, but if you're not doing tight shots and want more isolation or certain other qualities in the rendering then the prime has that.

I've shot 21/35/135 and enjoyed it despite the sizeable gap (I think 50/135 would work better but I'm more of a 35mm shooter in general). As an aside, sometimes when the lighting is really bad and there's no fixing the color, then a conversation to B&W can potentially save it.
Click to expand...
Thats relatable! I'd be 24/35/135 and the 35 will remain my go to lens.

I like the idea of using the same focal lenghts to give the images an distinctive look.

The thing is i dont know yet if i like it but if i buy a cheaper option im already 50% there.

BW pictures are also my solution if i just cant fix it, no one ever complained about my signs of defeat lol
 
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
For now i feel really happy with the 35gm. If they introduced a 40mm 1.2 GM (im not going to cary that Sigma monster) id be tempted but 50 is to narrow for an general purpose lens and sometimes i dont wanna show the world how much im suffering from G.A.S. ^^

Both 50GM lenses lost against the 35GM in my last round of L.B.A
Click to expand...
Understood. The only glass that has actually moved me have been the 135GM, 50GM, 1655G and the Nikon 28400, in that order. The 24GM doesn't move me, but it is the best glass for how I see the world.
jhunna said:
If i put the 35 on the A1 tho and the 135 on the A9 i think this could also work or maybe other way around since the absence of OSS? i dont know.
Click to expand...
The 35GM and 70200GM is a good one two punch. I think that's better than the 35GM and 135GM, there are LOT of shots betwwen 35mm and 135mm that you are going to miss, something to consider.
Click to expand...
The 24 filled the viod on my short end and did it so well that it sold me to the GM line. I think im gravitating more and more towards the 135 but its just the gutt feeling, my brain is undecided.

One thing i dont like about the 70-200 is that its so obvious.
 
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
For now i feel really happy with the 35gm. If they introduced a 40mm 1.2 GM (im not going to cary that Sigma monster) id be tempted but 50 is to narrow for an general purpose lens and sometimes i dont wanna show the world how much im suffering from G.A.S. ^^

Both 50GM lenses lost against the 35GM in my last round of L.B.A
Click to expand...
Understood. The only glass that has actually moved me have been the 135GM, 50GM, 1655G and the Nikon 28400, in that order. The 24GM doesn't move me, but it is the best glass for how I see the world.
Dhomas said:
If i put the 35 on the A1 tho and the 135 on the A9 i think this could also work or maybe other way around since the absence of OSS? i dont know.
Click to expand...
The 35GM and 70200GM is a good one two punch. I think that's better than the 35GM and 135GM, there are LOT of shots betwwen 35mm and 135mm that you are going to miss, something to consider.
Click to expand...
The 24 filled the viod on my short end and did it so well that it sold me to the GM line. I think im gravitating more and more towards the 135 but its just the gutt feeling, my brain is undecided.

One thing i dont like about the 70-200 is that its so obvious
Click to expand...
Agreed! If the 35mm and 135mm gaps aren't an issue, then I would 100% get the 135GM. Have you shoot with it before? If not you are in for a treat.

Dhomas said:
.
Click to expand...
 
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
For now i feel really happy with the 35gm. If they introduced a 40mm 1.2 GM (im not going to cary that Sigma monster) id be tempted but 50 is to narrow for an general purpose lens and sometimes i dont wanna show the world how much im suffering from G.A.S. ^^

Both 50GM lenses lost against the 35GM in my last round of L.B.A
Click to expand...
Understood. The only glass that has actually moved me have been the 135GM, 50GM, 1655G and the Nikon 28400, in that order. The 24GM doesn't move me, but it is the best glass for how I see the world.
jhunna said:
If i put the 35 on the A1 tho and the 135 on the A9 i think this could also work or maybe other way around since the absence of OSS? i dont know.
Click to expand...
The 35GM and 70200GM is a good one two punch. I think that's better than the 35GM and 135GM, there are LOT of shots betwwen 35mm and 135mm that you are going to miss, something to consider.
Click to expand...
The 24 filled the viod on my short end and did it so well that it sold me to the GM line. I think im gravitating more and more towards the 135 but its just the gutt feeling, my brain is undecided.

One thing i dont like about the 70-200 is that its so obvious
Click to expand...
Agreed! If the 35mm and 135mm gaps aren't an issue, then I would 100% get the 135GM. Have you shoot with it before? If not you are in for a treat.
jhunna said:
.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No i havent, i guess if i had it would be much easier to decide. But i think im pulled towards it... :-)
 
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
Please note that i do not consider third party lenses how ever good they might be. The GM lenses i already own spoiled me and i know i will reach out for the better lens sooner or later anyways. Also while sport is not the main purpose i would like to be able to get the 20 or 30 fps out of my camera, sometimes more is better and its the only complain i have about my 85mm.
Click to expand...
Ignore so-called "third party" lenses at your own peril. Viltrox, Samyang, Sigma and Tamron all makes lenses the equal or surpass "first-party" options. Rather than an "either or" choice, you could spend a similar budget on third party lenses and get both.

I have owned (past tense) both the GM 135 and 70-200 II. Both are superlative lenses and are absolutely the best at what they do. In the end, I parted with both in favor of a Rokinon (Samyang) 135 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180. If you can't get the images you need with those two lenses, do not blame the equipment.
Click to expand...
That last line can depend on the shooting scenario, though. The Samyang 135 f/.18 is an excellent lens, and a tremendous value. It’s the right choice for most people most of the time.

One area I did notice a difference, though, was with the autofocus. For portrait work and other relatively still subjects, there was no noticeable difference. But for moving subjects, especially in more challenging lighting scenarios, the Sony GM can have a better hit rate.

That difference comes at a dramatically higher price, of course, but then marginal benefits at significantly increased cost is the story of camera lenses!
 
The Lamentable Lens said:
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
The Lamentable Lens said:
Please note that i do not consider third party lenses how ever good they might be. The GM lenses i already own spoiled me and i know i will reach out for the better lens sooner or later anyways. Also while sport is not the main purpose i would like to be able to get the 20 or 30 fps out of my camera, sometimes more is better and its the only complain i have about my 85mm.
Click to expand...
Ignore so-called "third party" lenses at your own peril. Viltrox, Samyang, Sigma and Tamron all makes lenses the equal or surpass "first-party" options. Rather than an "either or" choice, you could spend a similar budget on third party lenses and get both.

I have owned (past tense) both the GM 135 and 70-200 II. Both are superlative lenses and are absolutely the best at what they do. In the end, I parted with both in favor of a Rokinon (Samyang) 135 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180. If you can't get the images you need with those two lenses, do not blame the equipment.
Click to expand...
That last line can depend on the shooting scenario, though. The Samyang 135 f/.18 is an excellent lens, and a tremendous value. It’s the right choice for most people most of the time.

One area I did notice a difference, though, was with the autofocus. For portrait work and other relatively still subjects, there was no noticeable difference. But for moving subjects, especially in more challenging lighting scenarios, the Sony GM can have a better hit rate.

That difference comes at a dramatically higher price, of course, but then marginal benefits at significantly increased cost is the story of camera lenses!
Click to expand...
YES! My 24/35GM mounted on my ancient A9 will deliver under any circumstances ive put it through so far. Im spoiled now with getting usable results from everything i shoot 99.9% of the time (i have shot quite a bit with them^^) With an A1 it will only improve. Of course that does not mean that im shooting Time Magazine title images all the time but if i can frame it i will get it and if it does not turn out anywhere good its gonna be my fault :-)

Now upgrading from them would be a different story as i lack the imagination for improvement(aside from LR keeping its stupid lens profile to where i wont see it)
 
The Lamentable Lens said:
SmokeAndMirrorless said:
The Lamentable Lens said:
Please note that i do not consider third party lenses how ever good they might be. The GM lenses i already own spoiled me and i know i will reach out for the better lens sooner or later anyways. Also while sport is not the main purpose i would like to be able to get the 20 or 30 fps out of my camera, sometimes more is better and its the only complain i have about my 85mm.
Click to expand...
Ignore so-called "third party" lenses at your own peril. Viltrox, Samyang, Sigma and Tamron all makes lenses the equal or surpass "first-party" options. Rather than an "either or" choice, you could spend a similar budget on third party lenses and get both.

I have owned (past tense) both the GM 135 and 70-200 II. Both are superlative lenses and are absolutely the best at what they do. In the end, I parted with both in favor of a Rokinon (Samyang) 135 f1.8 and Tamron 70-180. If you can't get the images you need with those two lenses, do not blame the equipment.
Click to expand...
That last line can depend on the shooting scenario, though. The Samyang 135 f/.18 is an excellent lens, and a tremendous value. It’s the right choice for most people most of the time.

One area I did notice a difference, though, was with the autofocus. For portrait work and other relatively still subjects, there was no noticeable difference. But for moving subjects, especially in more challenging lighting scenarios, the Sony GM can have a better hit rate.

That difference comes at a dramatically higher price, of course, but then marginal benefits at significantly increased cost is the story of camera lenses!
Click to expand...
Regarding the bolded part, this might be especially relevant as one of OP’s bodies is A9 and he mentioned adding an A1. If you want to get the most out of the AF abilities of these bodies for tracking then native Sony is the way to go. I say this as an owner of 2 x A1 and before that 2 x A9II. My work lenses are G and GM apart from the Sigma 85mm, but I only use the latter for portraits and some personal street photography.
 
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
For now i feel really happy with the 35gm. If they introduced a 40mm 1.2 GM (im not going to cary that Sigma monster) id be tempted but 50 is to narrow for an general purpose lens and sometimes i dont wanna show the world how much im suffering from G.A.S. ^^

Both 50GM lenses lost against the 35GM in my last round of L.B.A
Click to expand...
Understood. The only glass that has actually moved me have been the 135GM, 50GM, 1655G and the Nikon 28400, in that order. The 24GM doesn't move me, but it is the best glass for how I see the world.
Dhomas said:
If i put the 35 on the A1 tho and the 135 on the A9 i think this could also work or maybe other way around since the absence of OSS? i dont know.
Click to expand...
The 35GM and 70200GM is a good one two punch. I think that's better than the 35GM and 135GM, there are LOT of shots betwwen 35mm and 135mm that you are going to miss, something to consider.
Click to expand...
The 24 filled the viod on my short end and did it so well that it sold me to the GM line. I think im gravitating more and more towards the 135 but its just the gutt feeling, my brain is undecided.

One thing i dont like about the 70-200 is that its so obvious
Click to expand...
Agreed! If the 35mm and 135mm gaps aren't an issue, then I would 100% get the 135GM. Have you shoot with it before? If not you are in for a treat.
Dhomas said:
.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No i havent, i guess if i had it would be much easier to decide. But i think im pulled towards it... :-)
Click to expand...
That's why I suggested shooting the 85mm in crop mode for a bit, it'll give you a feel for shooting around that FL... You could also skin a 70-200 GM II to make it less obvious, can't do anything about the even larger size though.
 
If you could afford both, then get both lenses :-) I used to own 135 GM but used little, sold it. I have acquired 70-200 GM II that used much more, such as 2nd lens on 2nd body in safari trips. For me, 70-200 GM II is more useful and versatile including for family portrait. You have similar subject separation outdoor when framing into the same AOV at 200mm/F2.8 vs 135mm/F1.8, whch means from longer distance with the zoom lens.
 
Impulses said:
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
jhunna said:
Dhomas said:
For now i feel really happy with the 35gm. If they introduced a 40mm 1.2 GM (im not going to cary that Sigma monster) id be tempted but 50 is to narrow for an general purpose lens and sometimes i dont wanna show the world how much im suffering from G.A.S. ^^

Both 50GM lenses lost against the 35GM in my last round of L.B.A
Click to expand...
Understood. The only glass that has actually moved me have been the 135GM, 50GM, 1655G and the Nikon 28400, in that order. The 24GM doesn't move me, but it is the best glass for how I see the world.
Impulses said:
If i put the 35 on the A1 tho and the 135 on the A9 i think this could also work or maybe other way around since the absence of OSS? i dont know.
Click to expand...
The 35GM and 70200GM is a good one two punch. I think that's better than the 35GM and 135GM, there are LOT of shots betwwen 35mm and 135mm that you are going to miss, something to consider.
Click to expand...
The 24 filled the viod on my short end and did it so well that it sold me to the GM line. I think im gravitating more and more towards the 135 but its just the gutt feeling, my brain is undecided.

One thing i dont like about the 70-200 is that its so obvious
Click to expand...
Agreed! If the 35mm and 135mm gaps aren't an issue, then I would 100% get the 135GM. Have you shoot with it before? If not you are in for a treat.
Impulses said:
.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
No i havent, i guess if i had it would be much easier to decide. But i think im pulled towards it... :-)
Click to expand...
That's why I suggested shooting the 85mm in crop mode for a bit, it'll give you a feel for shooting around that FL... You could also skin a 70-200 GM II to make it less obvious, can't do anything about the even larger size though.
Click to expand...
Got it! Will try it this weekend! :-D
 
PWPhotography said:
If you could afford both, then get both lenses :-) I used to own 135 GM but used little, sold it. I have acquired 70-200 GM II that used much more, such as 2nd lens on 2nd body in safari trips. For me, 70-200 GM II is more useful and versatile including for family portrait. You have similar subject separation outdoor when framing into the same AOV at 200mm/F2.8 vs 135mm/F1.8, whch means from longer distance with the zoom lens.
Click to expand...
If money was no issue i would play Poketmon with Sony G/GM lenses ^^ I certein that sooner or later both will enter my inventory but my funds are limited and im using more on photography already then anyone would recommend based on my "fortune" :-D
 
@OP
Based on lenses you have and use-case 70-200GMii is a better choice.

As you already have a 85mm fast prime, that would suit for portraits with great bokeh... if you are shooting outside, you can play with background and subject placement to get great bokeh at f2.8 also with 70200GMii.


Importantly when you place multiple people in a single photo (group photos) at events, you would need f2.8 or smaller aperture to put all faces in focus, f1.8 would make it difficult and might ruin the shot.

--
https://www.instagram.com/neelagopi/
 
Last edited:
135 it is! So ive tried it today and only brought my A9 with 85mm which was shot alot in crop mode. I found that 135 really adds something to my kit but its no general purpose lens (who would have thought ^^). I wished i had brought my 35 on a second body at times as 85mm is to long and to short at the same time if you ask me. Making the 135mm work is work howeverfun tho! I also found a nice deal on one so it might enter my kit sooner than i thought ^^
 
gnPhoto said:
@OP
Based on lenses you have and use-case 70-200GMii is a better choice.

As you already have a 85mm fast prime, that would suit for portraits with great bokeh... if you are shooting outside, you can play with background and subject placement to get great bokeh at f2.8 also with 70200GMii.

Importantly when you place multiple people in a single photo (group photos) at events, you would need f2.8 or smaller aperture to put all faces in focus, f1.8 would make it difficult and might ruin the shot.
Click to expand...
hmm... the 85 sits in the no man's land between to long and still to wide. It will remain my Handball lens where i find it quite usefull (just long enough while still being just wide enough) That being said i tried the recommended 85 on crop mode today and found workable despite it being a small event(beer pong - unpaid) where i could have done it all with 35mm. 85mm however was only used coz i puposly did not bring anything wider. I did enjoy the challenge of making it work so i guess im sold to the 135 GM for now but im sure the 70-200 will come some day... who knows.

Regarding the f2.8 yes and no. I know that i have to sacrifice light if i want several people in focus but often its just one and i cant stop up the 70-200 ^^ btw as you know that thing is 3x the money and i want to scratch the A1 off my wishlist too this year :) and if i combine these two i can easily crop if i ever need to. I would be a different story if someone threw money at me for sports but i thats not the case... Its the very least and the 85 is good enough already.
 
I got my 135GM today, i didnt anticipate it going that fast but for 900€ i kinda feel bad for the seller. Ive only made a few test shots with it and my first conclusion is that when it works it works fantastic but i have to get used to the required distances. Its no general purpose lens but i feel this will work just fine along with the 35GM.

Cant wait to put it into real use!
 
Dhomas said:
I got my 135GM today, i didnt anticipate it going that fast but for 900€ i kinda feel bad for the seller. Ive only made a few test shots with it and my first conclusion is that when it works it works fantastic but i have to get used to the required distances. Its no general purpose lens but i feel this will work just fine along with the 35GM.

Cant wait to put it into real use!
Click to expand...
Congratulations, that price is a steal! One day this lens might end up in my bag too. But my 70-200mm GM II pushes the 135mm prime further down my priority list.
 
Last edited:
Dhomas said:
Hi,

since you guys were a great help last time i wonder if you could help me decide which of the two i should put on my 2025 wishlist.

Currently im focused mostly towards events parties and shooting people, sometimes i do soccer and handball but sport in general is not all that important for this purchase(coz thats the least satisfying stuff when it comes to sharing the images).

I run an A9 and an A7iii but i plan to get an used A1 this year and retire the A7iii. Lenswise i use the 24GM and the 35GM (i really love them two) an 85mm Viltrox which i mainly use for Handball and a 200-600G which covers soccer. I have to admit that i struggle with 2 kinds of lenses when shooting people zoom lenses as and telephoto lenses.

Zoom lenses kinda make me lazy and uncreative, i zoom in and i zoom out and i think i do lame pictures with zoom lenses. The 135 on the other hand is somewhere in the middle and i imagine i have to work alot to make it work (more with wide end in mind mut i can allways use my second camera). The other obvious differences are 1 stop difference, focal flexibility vs fixed focal length and maybe size. So they are vastly different but kind of in the same ball park but at same time.

What are your thoughts about it considering that im a prime-al kind of guy?

The way i see it:

135GM:

+ f1.8 = more faster!!! and more background obliteration (im not yet past this point in my jurney as a photographer of whatever kind lol )

+ bonus point for being a prime and giving me less variables to wrap my head around

+ around half the price 1500-1700€ new, ~1200€ used

- no flexibility in focal lenght

- they pop up regulary on the used marked making me wonder if i will repeat someone elses mistake

70-200GMii

+ a wide usedfull zoomrange

+ starting wider and ending longer

+ optically almost as good

+ they do not pop up on the used marked that often (so i guess people tend to stick to them)

- price new 2600€ used and 2999 new

- im not to keen on zooms

- f2.8 is no alot in some places

I know that @200mm 2.8 is fast enough to get me similar background seperation so its more about light gathering here

I feel like i need something longer but at the same time barly use my 85 cos its to long and to wide at the same time. Either i have lots of space or no space at all and in the end ...

Please note that i do not consider third party lenses how ever good they might be. The GM lenses i already own spoiled me and i know i will reach out for the better lens sooner or later anyways. Also while sport is not the main purpose i would like to be able to get the 20 or 30 fps out of my camera, sometimes more is better and its the only complain i have about my 85mm.

TYIA for helping me make another right decission! I feel this one will be harder.
Click to expand...
I have shot many soccer games in the past 10 years. A few times with a prime, but that didn't work for me.

I now have the GM 70-200 2.8II w/A1 and it the best combination I have ever used for soccer games.

The 70-200 2.8II works great for portraits too.

I think the 70-200 will be the long lens for me regarding portraits. But may add the GM 50mm 1.2 or 85mm 1.4II later on. I feel 135mm will be too long to use indoors in many situations.
 
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