Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

Started Dec 17, 2014 | Questions
vinnylo
vinnylo Contributing Member • Posts: 530
Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

-- hide signature --

http://www.viewbug.com/member/vincentlopez
Technology does not take good photos, people do.

 vinnylo's gear list:vinnylo's gear list
Sony a7R II Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony a9 Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +4 more
ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II Sony Alpha a99
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Roses Senior Member • Posts: 2,760
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP
2

Tamron 70-200mm/f2.8, all-weather-sealed, optically sharp and excellent image quality, for around $1400.

-- hide signature --
 Roses's gear list:Roses's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7R III Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 Sony FE 100mm F2.8 GM Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 III +2 more
Douglas F Watt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,784
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

It's a great lens for weddings for sure, but it is built like a tank, heavy, and frankly overpriced. Also heavy and built like a tank, but between $1500 and $2000 less money is the new USD Tamron 70-200 2.8 (not to be confused with their older macro lens which was decent, but noisy because of the screw drive, and not as sharp as the newer lens).

I've been shooting With the Tamron all week and absolutely love it. Indeed it's so much like the Sony G2 that I wonder if Tamron made this for Sony. The Sony G2 came out nine months after the Tamron, weighs within 25 g of it, has identical dimensions to the millimeter, and does not extend – just like the Sony. Going against the supposition that they are the same lens, the 2 lenses have reportedly different numbers of elements (reportedly anyway), and the general assumption has been that Sony's G2 lens is an update of an older Minolta design. In any case, the Tamron is very sharp, and will mate very well with your A 99.

Here's a link: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012GFPPG/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1418849545&sr=1-2&keywords=tamron+70-200mm+f+2.8+sp+di+sony+usd

I thought long and hard about getting the Sony and just swallowing the obscene price, but I'm very glad that I got the Tamron. I think both Tamron and Sigma with some of their newer releases are rewriting the old assumption about the inevitable trade-off between sharper more expensive brand-name lenses and lesser cheaper third-party lenses. They are releasing lenses that are in many instances just a sharp as Sony's for a lot less money. The longer Tamron 150-600 F5-6.3 is also a home run in my judgment as well, and 1000 bucks less than the almost competing Sony 70-400 F4

Hope that's helpful feedback.

-- hide signature --

DFW

 Douglas F Watt's gear list:Douglas F Watt's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Sony RX100 V Sony a77 II Sony a99 II +16 more
digitalshooter
digitalshooter Forum Pro • Posts: 19,604
Sony heavy bulky, not according to dyxum

Douglas F Watt wrote:

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

It's a great lens for weddings for sure, but it is built like a tank, heavy, and frankly overpriced. Also heavy and built like a tank, but between $1500 and $2000 less money is the new USD Tamron 70-200 2.8 (not to be confused with their older macro lens which was decent, but noisy because of the screw drive, and not as sharp as the newer lens).

I've been shooting With the Tamron all week and absolutely love it. Indeed it's so much like the Sony G2 that I wonder if Tamron made this for Sony. The Sony G2 came out nine months after the Tamron, weighs within 25 g of it, has identical dimensions to the millimeter, and does not extend – just like the Sony. Going against the supposition that they are the same lens, the 2 lenses have reportedly different numbers of elements (reportedly anyway), and the general assumption has been that Sony's G2 lens is an update of an older Minolta design. In any case, the Tamron is very sharp, and will mate very well with your A 99.

Here's a link: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012GFPPG/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1418849545&sr=1-2&keywords=tamron+70-200mm+f+2.8+sp+di+sony+usd

I thought long and hard about getting the Sony and just swallowing the obscene price, but I'm very glad that I got the Tamron. I think both Tamron and Sigma with some of their newer releases are rewriting the old assumption about the inevitable trade-off between sharper more expensive brand-name lenses and lesser cheaper third-party lenses. They are releasing lenses that are in many instances just a sharp as Sony's for a lot less money. The longer Tamron 150-600 F5-6.3 is also a home run in my judgment as well, and 1000 bucks less than the almost competing Sony 70-400 F4

Hope that's helpful feedback.

Sony 1300 grams

Tamron A001  1112 or A009 1470 grams

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Digitalshooter
PS: all posts are just my opinion!

 digitalshooter's gear list:digitalshooter's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Canon Pixma Pro9000 Mark II
Douglas F Watt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,784
Re: Sony heavy bulky, not according to dyxum

digitalshooter wrote:

Douglas F Watt wrote:

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

It's a great lens for weddings for sure, but it is built like a tank, heavy, and frankly overpriced. Also heavy and built like a tank, but between $1500 and $2000 less money is the new USD Tamron 70-200 2.8 (not to be confused with their older macro lens which was decent, but noisy because of the screw drive, and not as sharp as the newer lens).

I've been shooting With the Tamron all week and absolutely love it. Indeed it's so much like the Sony G2 that I wonder if Tamron made this for Sony. The Sony G2 came out nine months after the Tamron, weighs within 25 g of it, has identical dimensions to the millimeter, and does not extend – just like the Sony. Going against the supposition that they are the same lens, the 2 lenses have reportedly different numbers of elements (reportedly anyway), and the general assumption has been that Sony's G2 lens is an update of an older Minolta design. In any case, the Tamron is very sharp, and will mate very well with your A 99.

Here's a link: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012GFPPG/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1418849545&sr=1-2&keywords=tamron+70-200mm+f+2.8+sp+di+sony+usd

I thought long and hard about getting the Sony and just swallowing the obscene price, but I'm very glad that I got the Tamron. I think both Tamron and Sigma with some of their newer releases are rewriting the old assumption about the inevitable trade-off between sharper more expensive brand-name lenses and lesser cheaper third-party lenses. They are releasing lenses that are in many instances just a sharp as Sony's for a lot less money. The longer Tamron 150-600 F5-6.3 is also a home run in my judgment as well, and 1000 bucks less than the almost competing Sony 70-400 F4

Hope that's helpful feedback.

Sony 1300 grams

Tamron A001 1112 or A009 1470 grams

Yup, but this estimable website lists the Sony at 1500 grms. I don't have that lens, but when I have used it in the store, it was no lightweight.  Would love to do a close comparison, with test shots.  The available testing suggests that they are close in sharpness.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=tamron_70-200_2p8_vc&products=sony_70-200_2p8_ssm_ii&sortDir=ascending

Just checked at Sony.com.  Your report is correct, and the DPR listing is not!  I stand corrected.  So much for my theory . . .

-- hide signature --

DFW

 Douglas F Watt's gear list:Douglas F Watt's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Sony RX100 V Sony a77 II Sony a99 II +16 more
digitalshooter
digitalshooter Forum Pro • Posts: 19,604
I agree definitely not light but I miss mine! It was very good to me (nt)

Douglas F Watt wrote:

digitalshooter wrote:

Douglas F Watt wrote:

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

It's a great lens for weddings for sure, but it is built like a tank, heavy, and frankly overpriced. Also heavy and built like a tank, but between $1500 and $2000 less money is the new USD Tamron 70-200 2.8 (not to be confused with their older macro lens which was decent, but noisy because of the screw drive, and not as sharp as the newer lens).

I've been shooting With the Tamron all week and absolutely love it. Indeed it's so much like the Sony G2 that I wonder if Tamron made this for Sony. The Sony G2 came out nine months after the Tamron, weighs within 25 g of it, has identical dimensions to the millimeter, and does not extend – just like the Sony. Going against the supposition that they are the same lens, the 2 lenses have reportedly different numbers of elements (reportedly anyway), and the general assumption has been that Sony's G2 lens is an update of an older Minolta design. In any case, the Tamron is very sharp, and will mate very well with your A 99.

Here's a link: http://www.amazon.com/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012GFPPG/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1418849545&sr=1-2&keywords=tamron+70-200mm+f+2.8+sp+di+sony+usd

I thought long and hard about getting the Sony and just swallowing the obscene price, but I'm very glad that I got the Tamron. I think both Tamron and Sigma with some of their newer releases are rewriting the old assumption about the inevitable trade-off between sharper more expensive brand-name lenses and lesser cheaper third-party lenses. They are releasing lenses that are in many instances just a sharp as Sony's for a lot less money. The longer Tamron 150-600 F5-6.3 is also a home run in my judgment as well, and 1000 bucks less than the almost competing Sony 70-400 F4

Hope that's helpful feedback.

Sony 1300 grams

Tamron A001 1112 or A009 1470 grams

Yup, but this estimable website lists the Sony at 1500 grms. I don't have that lens, but when I have used it in the store, it was no lightweight. Would love to do a close comparison, with test shots. The available testing suggests that they are close in sharpness.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=tamron_70-200_2p8_vc&products=sony_70-200_2p8_ssm_ii&sortDir=ascending

Just checked at Sony.com. Your report is correct, and the DPR listing is not! I stand corrected. So much for my theory . . .

-- hide signature --

Thanks,
Digitalshooter
PS: all posts are just my opinion!

 digitalshooter's gear list:digitalshooter's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Canon Pixma Pro9000 Mark II
AlexiJ New Member • Posts: 15
Re: I agree definitely not light but I miss mine! It was very good to me (nt)

I am also considering this lens but will have to save for a while longer. While the sharpness is important to me the focus speed and accuracy are more important for what I want. Is there anyone that can verify wether the Tamron is as good in this area as the Sony?

Thanks

 AlexiJ's gear list:AlexiJ's gear list
Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha a99 Sony 135mm F1.8 ZA Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* Sony 50mm F1.4 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro
Douglas F Watt Veteran Member • Posts: 3,784
Re: I agree definitely not light but I miss mine! It was very good to me (nt)

AlexiJ wrote:

I am also considering this lens but will have to save for a while longer. While the sharpness is important to me the focus speed and accuracy are more important for what I want. Is there anyone that can verify wether the Tamron is as good in this area as the Sony?

Thanks

Well I haven't shot with both lenses, but the Tamron locks on and focuses just about as quickly as the 16-50 2.8 so it can't be doing too badly in that regard.

-- hide signature --

DFW

 Douglas F Watt's gear list:Douglas F Watt's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Sony RX100 V Sony a77 II Sony a99 II +16 more
Calico Jack Senior Member • Posts: 2,306
Minolta AF 80-200/2.8 APO/APO HS G or Sigma AF 70-200/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM?

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

Ahoy!

For a lot less, look at either of the Minolta AF 80-200/2.8 APO/APO HS G (same optics) or the current Sigma AF 70-200/2.8 EX DG OS APO HSM. Check Onestop-Digital for the Sigma and see if you can do better locally, though OSD will normally be able to beat any lower price.  The Sony is too expensive for what it is when compared to other models of a similar focal range and aperture.

Have you done the basic comparison research on the Dyxum website (lenses section) just to guage owner feedback and view image samples?

-- hide signature --

Mark (aka Pirate!)

 Calico Jack's gear list:Calico Jack's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A850 Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +26 more
TristanW
TristanW Contributing Member • Posts: 587
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

70-200GII is very capable of wedding photophraph. IQ is improved a lot with aperture wide open, even in 200mm. Very Fast AF, much better than G1.

-- hide signature --

Tristan.Wang

 TristanW's gear list:TristanW's gear list
Sony a9 Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM Sony FE 50mm F1.4 ZA Sony FE 12-24mm F4 +6 more
vinnylo
OP vinnylo Contributing Member • Posts: 530
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

i think I am going with the 85mm 1.4 prime lens instead. I shoot with my 50mm 1.4 all the time. mainly due to low light capabilities. any thoughts?

-- hide signature --

http://www.viewbug.com/member/vincentlopez
Technology does not take good photos, people do.

 vinnylo's gear list:vinnylo's gear list
Sony a7R II Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony a9 Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +4 more
RE Alpha
RE Alpha Contributing Member • Posts: 554
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP
1

Also consider the Minolta 80-200/2.8 APO HS (white version that is), as suggested before. It is extremely fast and accurate. It is perhaps also a better lens than the 70200, though probably less resistant against lens flare compared to the SSM II version.

The Zeiss 85/1.4 is reportedly also excellent, but less versatile when shooting any action during a wedding (or any event that is). There are reports indicating that it may be a tad slow with focusing.

 RE Alpha's gear list:RE Alpha's gear list
Sony a9 Sony a7R III Sony FE 85mm F1.4 GM Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +6 more
creepy.sol
creepy.sol Regular Member • Posts: 418
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

i used to have the zeiss 85. excellent lens, really beautiful. i sold it and bought the sigma 85mm, though. the images from the sigma aren't quite as nice as the zeiss, but still excellent. the real benefit to me, however, was that the sigma was quite. that sony-zeiss 85 was loud. after a guest asked me if there was a problem with my lens, i decided to switch since it seemed people noticed the noise.

vinnylo wrote:

i think I am going with the 85mm 1.4 prime lens instead. I shoot with my 50mm 1.4 all the time. mainly due to low light capabilities. any thoughts?

 creepy.sol's gear list:creepy.sol's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12mm 1:2 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm F1.8 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 25mm F1.8 +8 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,207
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

Douglas F Watt wrote:

It's a great lens for weddings for sure, but it is built like a tank, heavy, and frankly overpriced. Also heavy and built like a tank, but between $1500 and $2000 less money is the new USD Tamron 70-200 2.8.

I agree with everything you say about that lens. Incredible lens for $1400 after rebate.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +10 more
Gary Dean Mercer Clark
Gary Dean Mercer Clark Veteran Member • Posts: 5,613
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

vinnylo wrote:

I am literally about to purchase this lens as I am a lead wedding photographer. is this a great lens or does anyone have any other option in mind, as far performance goes...

THX!!!

If you can afford the Sony lens, its the best. That being said, I'm shooting professionally with a Sigma 7-200mm F2.8 and it is fantastic and around $1199 USD.  Found no limitations with it so far for low light shooting, action and sports on my Sony A77MK II. Either way, if you go with the Sony, Tamron or the Sigma lenses, you will be fine. The level of quality of these lenses nowadays is outstanding. If you buy the Sigma lens--here is my secret---buy directly from Sigma on their website.  I've never been let down yet ordering lenses direct from Sigma--Each one has been within specs and outstanding. Goodluck!

Gary Dean Mercer Clark

tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 43,207
Re: I agree definitely not light but I miss mine! It was very good to me (nt)
1

AlexiJ wrote:

I am also considering this lens but will have to save for a while longer. While the sharpness is important to me the focus speed and accuracy are more important for what I want. Is there anyone that can verify wether the Tamron is as good in this area as the Sony?

Thanks

Never used the Sony but the Tamron locks on fast and accurately, even in the dimly lit middle school gyms where I shoot my grand-kids basketball.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels
------------
Misuse of the ability to do 100% pixel peeping is the bane of digital photography.

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro +10 more
Evildogofdoom
Evildogofdoom Senior Member • Posts: 2,142
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

RE Alpha wrote:

Also consider the Minolta 80-200/2.8 APO HS (white version that is), as suggested before. It is extremely fast and accurate. It is perhaps also a better lens than the 70200, though probably less resistant against lens flare compared to the SSM II version.

The Zeiss 85/1.4 is reportedly also excellent, but less versatile when shooting any action during a wedding (or any event that is). There are reports indicating that it may be a tad slow with focusing.

I am not sure many professionals would be happy relying on an old unsupportable lens for their income. The old Minolta lenses are also noisy, which can be a drawback in a social occasion.

 Evildogofdoom's gear list:Evildogofdoom's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony a99 II Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM Sony 24-70mm F2.8 ZA SSM Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* Sony Alpha a99 +15 more
vinnylo
OP vinnylo Contributing Member • Posts: 530
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

Yes I am getting the sigma 85 mm 1.4. Huge difference with price and focus motor is way quieter I read as well.

-- hide signature --

http://www.viewbug.com/member/vincentlopez
Technology does not take good photos, people do.

 vinnylo's gear list:vinnylo's gear list
Sony a7R II Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony a9 Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +4 more
vinnylo
OP vinnylo Contributing Member • Posts: 530
Re: Sony 70-200mm F2.8 G SSM II w/ A99 for weddings - HELP

Also, I am going to need a nice wide lens. Any good suggestions? Not expensive as it will only be used on a limited basis.

-- hide signature --

http://www.viewbug.com/member/vincentlopez
Technology does not take good photos, people do.

 vinnylo's gear list:vinnylo's gear list
Sony a7R II Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony a9 Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +4 more
enemjii Senior Member • Posts: 1,889
why such a zoom?

Pardon me as I am no wedding photog, but why would you require such a large zoom for weddings? I woulda thunk that you would be shooting portraits for most part anyways and the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 might just work well. The bokeh on this one is so similar to the beer can. Smooth and creamy, just more of it. Like a lindt milk chocolate.

That said, you would have no latitude to shoot close by either of these lenses. You would still need something like a 16-50 f/2.8 to take care of the group pictures.

-- hide signature --
 enemjii's gear list:enemjii's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sony a77 II Sony DT 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads