So I just checked and the 70-200 f4 macro is in stock at my mates shop here in the UK, so who will buy it? is it you?

[spudhead]

So as title the lens is in stock here in the UK are you thinking of buying trying, is it good enough for a all in one walk about travel lens. I think its a difficult choice for me because I would keep thinking I could buy the 70-200 2.8 gm2. So your thoughts I am aware some on this forum are awaiting delivery

 

[Clide]

So as title the lens is in stock here in the UK are you thinking of buying trying, is it good enough for a all in one walk about travel lens. I think its a difficult choice for me because I would keep thinking I could buy the 70-200 2.8 gm2. So your thoughts I am aware some on this forum are awaiting delivery

Gary, I just finished trips to Iceland and Scotland. I am a rookie and felt I needed lots of options, that choice resulted in lots of weight and switching out lenses in bad weather. I have decided to buy the Sony 20-70 and new 70-200 f4 lenses for upcoming trips to Portugal and Norway. I want to minimize weight and switching out primes, so I am taking two lenses and the 1.4 teleconverter. The F4 factor of noise I can handle with Topaz AI or denoise in LR, bokeh I can manage with distance to my subject. I do not own the 70-200 gm 2 so I do not need to make the decision on the lighter smaller f4 70-200 g, if I did own it, I am not sure what I would do. Best!

 

[iain clyne]

I’m waiting to see what the reviews say, the fact that it take the tc is interesting and the macro. Get to your mates shop Gary and try it and let us know what you think.

 

[spudhead]

Having been told by my friend with shop that they have this lens in stock now and not September I wonder if Sony will sell many of these? the reason I say this is my mate is no longer a Sony main dealer because the margin they allowed them on camera bodies was paper thin his words not mine so if he has them and looking on the internet so do many UK shops is this lens the right lens at the right price or is it a sign of the times with the price squeeze on people

 

[AlphaWorld]

Well, I took mine out today to try it out. It works!

I won't claim that I felt the 250g difference in weight while I was out and about - it was obvious when I held one in each hand, but shooting, no - I have an 800g lens on a 725g body vs 1050g lens on a 725g body - it's not instantly obvious. I already wander out with the foot off the tripod ring on the GM - I felt no qualms taking the tripod ring completely off the G.

The focus is fast, except when going from near macro to near infinity - not a situation I expect to be a regular issue.

I tried focus from f/4 to f/11, with and without the 2x TC. It felt the same, honestly. Getting eye AF on a cheetah when the entire cat occupies less than a third of the width of the field of view, using an f/4 lens on a 2x? That's not bad!

I'm not putting the GM up for sale, but I am glad I decided to give this lens a go. Honestly, it's getting harder to choose to take the 200-600 with me, because of its weight, and this is the lightest tele-zoom I've tried. This plus the 20-70 may be my travel kit. Damn - am I getting OLD?

 

[AlphaWorld]

Someone on another forum (yes, I confess, I read other forums!) expressed doubt that the new 70-200 G II could match the resolution of the A7RV.

You decide. This is a photograph of a cheetah lying in the shadow of a tree, shot with the new lens wide open. I did adjust the levels a little (the grass in the background was somewhat blown out).

This is not a specially selected shot - it is the first one I shot today which illustrated the point.

She was so far away the A7RV dropped a focus box around the entire cat.

First the whole image (scaled down) so you can see how small the cropped section is, then cropping out a scrap just 2000 pixels wide out of the full 9504 wide frame.

So, do you think this new lens is able to match the resolution of the A7RV?

This image was shot wide open at f/4, ISO 1250, 1/2000, at 200mm.

Do you think maybe I should take the lens back as not sharp enough?

 

[Clide]

Someone on another forum (yes, I confess, I read other forums!) expressed doubt that the new 70-200 G II could match the resolution of the A7RV.

You decide. This is a photograph of a cheetah lying in the shadow of a tree, shot with the new lens wide open. I did adjust the levels a little (the grass in the background was somewhat blown out).

This is not a specially selected shot - it is the first one I shot today which illustrated the point.

She was so far away the A7RV dropped a focus box around the entire cat.

First the whole image (scaled down) so you can see how small the cropped section is, then cropping out a scrap just 2000 pixels wide out of the full 9504 wide frame.

View attachment 43836View attachment 43837

So, do you think this new lens is able to match the resolution of the A7RV?

This image was shot wide open at f/4, ISO 1250, 1/2000, at 200mm.

Do you think maybe I should take the lens back as not sharp enough?

Looks pretty darn good to me. I can see its whiskers. Run it through a Topaz AI or Denoise and I would think it would sharpen up nicely. Thanks for your analysis!

 

[spudhead]

Someone on another forum (yes, I confess, I read other forums!) expressed doubt that the new 70-200 G II could match the resolution of the A7RV.

You decide. This is a photograph of a cheetah lying in the shadow of a tree, shot with the new lens wide open. I did adjust the levels a little (the grass in the background was somewhat blown out).

This is not a specially selected shot - it is the first one I shot today which illustrated the point.

She was so far away the A7RV dropped a focus box around the entire cat.

First the whole image (scaled down) so you can see how small the cropped section is, then cropping out a scrap just 2000 pixels wide out of the full 9504 wide frame.

View attachment 43836View attachment 43837

So, do you think this new lens is able to match the resolution of the A7RV?

This image was shot wide open at f/4, ISO 1250, 1/2000, at 200mm.

Do you think maybe I should take the lens back as not sharp enough?

Thanks Tony for doing the review

 

[iain clyne]

That looks good Tony. You may only be saving 250g but over a full day of shooting you will notice it.

 

[Paul stuart]

would love to own it but i have a 70-200mm f2.8 mk2 ,the f4 macro with 20-70mm is perfect combo for landscapes and travel

 

[spudhead]

Someone on another forum (yes, I confess, I read other forums!) expressed doubt that the new 70-200 G II could match the resolution of the A7RV.

You decide. This is a photograph of a cheetah lying in the shadow of a tree, shot with the new lens wide open. I did adjust the levels a little (the grass in the background was somewhat blown out).

This is not a specially selected shot - it is the first one I shot today which illustrated the point.

She was so far away the A7RV dropped a focus box around the entire cat.

First the whole image (scaled down) so you can see how small the cropped section is, then cropping out a scrap just 2000 pixels wide out of the full 9504 wide frame.

View attachment 43836View attachment 43837

So, do you think this new lens is able to match the resolution of the A7RV?

This image was shot wide open at f/4, ISO 1250, 1/2000, at 200mm.

Do you think maybe I should take the lens back as not sharp enough?

Tony as far a is it sharp, I guess only you can answer that right now but on one small test I would think youve not had chance to test it enough yet, lots of factors in play with the above shots, so give it a chance having got the earlier version I can not see this being anything but better because the first version was nicely sorted

 

[Tim Mayo]

I ordered this lens as I want to do a comparison for the blog with the GM version. Although I thought it was coming to the UK in September so I was a little shocked when I received a shipping notification from Wex last week! I've only played with it a little so far. It's certainly a nice compact lens compared to its bigger GM brother, well at least until you zoom in. AF is very nippy even with the 2x attached but I haven't tested it extensively yet. Luckily the sun came out briefly on the day that it arrived so I managed to grab a few shots in the garden, some with the 2x attached. These are all out of camera JPEGs although I was using the VV Creative Look in-camera for a little more punch to the colours. Some cropping as well. Shot handheld.

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1250

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 800

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 2500

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 400

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 1000

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II
• 200.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/2000 sec
• ISO 400

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II + 2X Teleconverter
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 2500

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II + 2X Teleconverter
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 2500

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II + 2X Teleconverter
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1000 sec
• ISO 2500

• ILCE-7RM5
• FE 70-200mm F4 Macro G OSS II + 2X Teleconverter
• 400.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1600 sec
• ISO 3200