The lens is now at Sony Style US web site:
SAL-70400G
You can check the price there. To me, is quite expensive, but not beyond what I had expected.
70-400 f4-5.6 G SSM - Test Shots
- Thread starter Johnston
- Start date
- Status
The lens is now at Sony Style US web site:
SAL-70400G
You can check the price there. To me, is quite expensive, but not beyond what I had expected.
Sorry guys. Got prompt on the other side, so here I am.
As per request, below are the max f stop at various range;
70-100mm f4
101-210mm f4.5
211-400 f5.6
Hi Johnston,
Thanks for sharing photos from the 70-400mm. 210mm at f4.5 is very good for me. I am still waiting for your photos on the 16-35mm. I am not jumping into the FF anytime soon and I need a good wide angle from Sony. The current 16-80mm carl zeiss has a small aperture hence I am still using the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which I am quite satisfied with now. I hope the Carl Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 can deliver much better image quality wide open and faster AF. Please post some photos if you manage to get hold of the lens.
Thanks very much in advance.Hi Johnston,
Thanks for sharing photos from the 70-400mm. 210mm at f4.5 is very good for me. I am still waiting for your photos on the 16-35mm. I am not jumping into the FF anytime soon and I need a good wide angle from Sony. The current 16-80mm carl zeiss has a small aperture hence I am still using the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which I am quite satisfied with now. I hope the Carl Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 can deliver much better image quality wide open and faster AF. Please post some photos if you manage to get hold of the lens.
Why do you need a large aperture on a wide-angle shot? Just curious, as so far I've been happy with the sigma 12-24
Galdor
Senior Member
Hi Johnston,
Thanks for sharing photos from the 70-400mm. 210mm at f4.5 is very good for me. I am still waiting for your photos on the 16-35mm. I am not jumping into the FF anytime soon and I need a good wide angle from Sony. The current 16-80mm carl zeiss has a small aperture hence I am still using the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which I am quite satisfied with now. I hope the Carl Zeiss 16-35mm f2.8 can deliver much better image quality wide open and faster AF. Please post some photos if you manage to get hold of the lens.
Test photos from this lens are available at the other forum.
Large aperture is needed on the 35mm end for potrait photograph. Rather than switching to prime lens all the time, I can just dial down to f2.8 whenever I want to shoot potrait espeacially in wedding where there is no time to switch to prime (I do not have another body to mount a prime). Normally at the widest end I will be shooting at f4-f5.6 indoor group shot but large aperture is also good for low light landscape photography when I want to handheld the camera although I understand that the shallow depth of field is not ideal for landscape photograph. Compromise has to be made when lugging out a tripod is just too troublesome or time consuming.
I don't think I would ever use such lens for wedding or portrait (unless, I was not prepared and there is no other option). Hand holding a 1.5kg lens + camera body is something I doubt I can do it for long.
For me, wider aperture is good for taking distant action sequences. Say, taking the photo sequences of a bird flying or sport matches (where the moment of action can be very short).
Or as a paparazzi, hunting for scandalous pictures in a low light condition (from a distant).
Anyway, just my opinion.
I don't think I would ever use such lens for wedding or portrait (unless, I was not prepared and there is no other option). Hand holding a 1.5kg lens + camera body is something I doubt I can do it for long.
For me, wider aperture is good for taking distant action sequences. Say, taking the photo sequences of a bird flying or sport matches (where the moment of action can be very short).
Or as a paparazzi, hunting for scandalous pictures in a low light condition (from a distant).
Anyway, just my opinion.
Sorry for the confusion, I was referring to the 16-35mm not the 70-400mm. The 16-35mm only Weight (Approx.) : 1lb 14oz (860g).
ninelives
Senior Member
some pro use tele lens on portrait shot, they use walkies talkie to communicate with the models. you will understand lens perspective, you will understand why they do that.
Huh? The minimum focus of these lenses are only 2 m what... the most they are 4-5 m away... need walkie talkie meh???
ninelives
Senior Member
we are talking about the 400mm, I am talking about focusing at 400mm while you are standing more than 10 meters away. what give you the impression u have to stay as close as possible to the subject when focusing at it maximum focus?
the purpose of using of telephoto lens is because you can't get close to the subject...
but then again, using it for human portrait is a cult subject.
the purpose of using of telephoto lens is because you can't get close to the subject...
but then again, using it for human portrait is a cult subject.
Well it is possible to use 400mm to fill the frame with only part of the face given that the minimum focus distance is like 1.5m? That's one possible use for it as a portrait lens... I would think that usually portrait would mean head and shoulders... even at 400mm, you won't be all that far away from the model to use walkie talkies by my understanding of portrait...
It is now appear in Sony Singapore
Sony G Lens - SAL70400G
Though no mention of price.
On another note, the new super wide angle Carl Zeiss Lens SAL1635Z is also appear.
Carl Zeiss Lens - SAL1635Z
Sony G Lens - SAL70400G
Though no mention of price.
On another note, the new super wide angle Carl Zeiss Lens SAL1635Z is also appear.
Carl Zeiss Lens - SAL1635Z
- Status
Similar threads
