Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Sigma 70-200 F2.8 DG DN - A Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 сер 2024
- Pre-Order Sigma 70-200 (affiliate): howl.me/ck05ZS...
ZV-E1 (affiliate): geni.us/SonyZvE1
Time Stamps:
0:00 Intro
1:15 Price
1:32 Build
4:00 Optical Stabilization
5:10 Sharpness
5:40 Chromatic Aberration and LOCA
6:06 Focus Breathing
6:27 Bokeh
7:06 Flaring and Ghosting
7:21 Autofocus
9:04 Conclusion
More Affiliate Links to make me stinking rich:
Music
Epidemic Sound: www.epidemicso...
Lav Mic: geni.us/CMqKB
Lav WindMuff: geni.us/kxWL
Big Camera: geni.us/KnC8A
Vlog Camera: geni.us/SonyZV...
Lights: geni.us/09LdgP2
contact: markcameracrisis@gmail.com
#sigma #telephoto #lens
This lens looks amazing, but to be honest, I'm looking forward to the Sigma 24-70 2.8 II, based on this 70-200 tech :)
Just finished editing this lens video yesterday for my client. Really an amazing one
How is video performance? Thanks!
@@PlunderRoad that lens was for lica mount. Great lens. Especially the lens breathing. If possible you should also try this lens. I have edited many lens and camera review videos this one is the best for me. If you want to know more about it let me know.
I have been holding off buying a 70-200 until the Sigma came out. Big price difference with 70-200 GM, but only $150 difference with the Sony 70-200mm f4 Macro G II (with $50 rebate). For $150 more I get a 1:0.5 macro, removable tripod collar, linear focusing, min focusing distance 26cm vs 65 for Sigma, 541gm lighter, click on hood vs thumb screw hood. I will be giving up 1-stop and internal zoom though.
I rented a Sony 70-200 F2.8 recently... the price tag on the Sigma is a little easier to digest 😄will definitely be budgeting for this and the 11-20.
I was waiting for your review!!! 💀💀
Thanks!!
Why 💀💀?
Great job on the video Mark! Thanks for making it.
I've wanted to get into street videography , as opposed to street photography. And this lens would be great because you can film on the street without having to be up close to the subject matter. Great find! Thanks for the handsome review.
stealth street videography!!
@@MarkBennettCameraCrisis LOL. Exactly.
Comments like this are always a quick reality check for me. While you call it a "good find" so many of us guerilla shooters are somewhat annoyed that it took so long to be released. We've been waiting for years for this lens. It BETTER be good lol.
The Sigma 60-600mm f4.5 has been one of my main lenses for my Nikon for a number of years. It's a very good lens. I can imagine this being a nice upgrade. Now that I'm getting older, the 60-600 is getting too heavy for me, this might be a good alternative. Imagine walking around with this on the Sony ZV-E10, which is my only Sony camera.
I get it. People think it looks ridiculous to have a massive lens on a small camera body. "It ruins the balance!" they say. Rubbish, whatever works. I use a ZV-E10 with the Tamron 35-150 on it all the time...and it's just a lens with a tiny camera mounted on the back. And I laugh all the way to the friggin bank.
@@quirkworks4076 price indeed matters a lot and when you have a camera why not use it regardless of what others think of it
Thanks for the review. Adding this to my Christmas list.. 📝
I was waiting for this lens for 5 years
Me 2
Can you give some examples of what this lens would be used for vs a Tamron 17-70? Really love your channel and I appreciate your opinions. Excellent content!
the 17-70 will cover you for anything closeup. most people shoot documentaries and video at 24 to 35 so it would be good for that too. A lot of people like a 50 for street photography. so the 17-70 is a good walk around lens. Travel, family, video street - you can do a lot with it.
The 70-200 is a telephoto. You can shoot things like portraits from about 70-135, but the lens is also good for event photography and sports. It can also do wildlife and nature photography because you can reach much further than medium lenses. but if you’re doing a lot things like birding you’ll need to get into the super telephotos and get something like a 200-400 or even a 600.
I have already ordered this lens , it is coming next week
Hello was wondering how you like your sigma 70-200mm? I just placed an order for one myself and I was just curious on how you been enjoying yours. I know a lot of people don't like where the zoom ring is and the lens Hood but other than those issues I was wondering how it's been working for you. Thank you for your time
That’s ironic. Was just looking for this range. I keep hearing that a 70-200 is best for wedding photography. I was remembering Sigma lacking this range. Then this video pops up a day later. I’m filming/ photographing an informal wedding for the first time next month. I have the Sony 90 mm, but I heard it shows too many facial imperfections. The Sony 85 1.8 also looks good.
I am doing a review of the very affordable Yongnuo 85 - that or the Sony might be your new lens. the Sigma 70-200 would probably not be your preference because i know you don’t like big lenses. The Tamron 70-180 would be better. Much smaller and lighter
Hey Mark, this is kinda urgent. I was considering getting the Panasonic GX85 for a primarily stills camera (and maybe a little video as well bc it has 4k unlimited), and you can get the camera (which comes with two zoom lenses) for $648. However, with this new Sony holiday sale, the ZV-E10 is (with the kit lens AND accessories) $698. Should I go with the ZV-E10 for better video and stabilization and gamma profiles? Or the GX85 for less rolling shutter, nicer appearance (at least for me :) and an EVF? Not to mention lenses are pretty cheap and I already have a 25 f/1.7 from my old GH4. As regards to the autofocus, again, as I mentioned before it's primarily stills, so the GX85 should work just fine. Anyway, thank you so much for this video; I appreciate the HONEST reviews you always make.
if it primarily stills - the gx85 would be a great choice especially because you have a lens and you’re used to the system - go with your gut and get it.
I don't know what's going on in Australia lately. The Tamron 70-180 2.8 G2 and now this, the Sigma 70-200 2.8 for emount, both of those rings are much more expensive than I expected. Maybe they will go down after their initial launches, but the sigma is listed today in Aus at $3199 where the Sony 70-200 f.8 GMII is only $100 more. The Tamron has dropped a little from it's launch price of $2599 to $2248. But at these original prices, way too expensive here compared to the G Masters
wow - yes - go GM all the way if that's the case
I love sigma lenses. Alway top quality for reasonable prices. I bought the 70-300 way back in 2009 for my Canon 350D (I still have that camera by the way) I have the 16mm F1.4 for the Sony and the 150 - 600 for my Canon 90D all of them are great lenses. Sigma may well watch your Video's Mark so you never know they might send you a free lens cap lol
Lens cap - Let's Goooo!!
I want a compact 50-200mm APAC lens!
Great video! Thanks! Definitely have my eye on this one. I am curious how it compares to the Tamron 70-180 f2.8 G2 for picture quality.
I think they seem pretty on par. Fro is comparing the two soon
Not sure the picture quality compares, but the Sigma is 20mm longer, AND had has pretty good stabilization, while the Tamron has none. I think Sigma is crushing it with this one here. Can't wait to get mine.@@MarkBennettCameraCrisis
Can’t wait for the sigma 24-70 f2.8 version 2 with an aperture ring it’s going to be awesome 😊. Sony shooters are spoiled 😊.
Please review the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 G2
Good review. Actually there is an agreement with third party vendors like Sigma, Viltrox, Tamron and others that there lenses would be limited to 15fps and no teleconverter support. Sony is a minority share holder in Tamron, I believe and they usually release before sigma and others. No third party lens goes over 15fps, period. On the L mount system, I’m not sure.
Mark, please do a comparison to the new Tamron 70-180 for Sony E-mount. Im torn. Images look comparable, Tamron a little cheaper and certainly a lot more compact and lighter in weight. That zoom ring on the Sigma looks to be too far out for my tastes.
The Tamron is fantastic. If you don't thing you need the buttons and switches and the extra 20 mm - the Tamron is a great choice. Smaller, lighter and optically it's amazing.
Sigma is always on point!!
Hi Mark, Great video. I've got an a6700 and I'm looking for a telephoto lens to shoot sports video (soccer). There's a lot of options. What are your thoughts on this sigma 70-200 vs the older Sony 70-350? both are expensive, is it worth the extra money to get the Sigma? less range but it might provide more upgradability in the future for full frame. thanks in advance.
The sigma 70-200 is a full frame lens, so you’ll be paying more than you need but does give you a nice upgrade path. The 2.8 lets in so much more light. If you’ll be shooting at night or indoors, then you’ll be much better off with a 2.8. But if it’s outside during the day, the sony 70-350 will give so much more reach.
I would like to use it for soccer videography, please let me know if it performs exactly as good in videography as it performs in photography
yes, absolutely. But the sony lenses will have slightly better stabilization in video with sony bodies
I love internal zoom myself. I generally don’t buy a lens that isn’t
I was hoping for a bolder lens like the Tamron 35-150. Sigma definitely could have come up with a 30-180mm f2.8. This means you only serve an area that is already well covered, which in the case of the Sigma has to do without a teleconverter. just boring lens. but good video 😉
it will provide a 70-200 2.8 for a little more than half of the GMii. That makes a lot of people happy. 70-200 is covered with Sony, you’re right - but at a step $2800 USD 😀
@@MarkBennettCameraCrisis or the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8 for just under $1,000. Sigma makes good lenses and I have a few of them, but they just don't have enough courage to take new paths.
is this lens a good pair with a6400?
I do own the Tamron 35-150mm. Hi Mark, what´s your take? Should I go for the Sigma 70-200mm F2.8, too?
Since you already have that range - why not look for something different - like a 200-600 or maybe the 150-600 from Sigma howl.me/ck06MhIUDdq
Thank you very much @@MarkBennettCameraCrisis ! Sure, the new Sigma 70-200mm looks not bad, but it would be a waste of money, for me. I´ll take your advice and look for the 200-600/150-600mm. I hope these 2 telelens have a near good quality like the new Sigma.
Sony verison can it change to linar focus? maybe firmware?
no it won’t be able to do that
@@MarkBennettCameraCrisis that was terrible. Nice focus breathing but non-linear is worst.
"Pretty big and HEAVY WAY" as usual... typical Sigma way... :D Sigma's motto should be: Quality comes with Weight! Just like the 24-70 f2.8 lens. Although they do a great job with their APSC lenses 10-18 and 18-50 f2.8!!! I think the Tamron 70-180 G2 is still better for travel creators or someone who has a lower budget. ($1299)
Incredie lens Mark
What's the best apsc equivalent for this focal range?
105-300mm APS-C!
This is actually a bit of a gap in the APS-C line - it's hard to find an equivalent to this focal range because you're looking at a 50-130. So, weirdly, I would look at another full frame option for your APSC to cover this length, The Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 amzn.to/3R23Edu
The old Sigma 50-100 1.8 or the even older 50-150 2.8 😅
Sooo cute and curvy and bright! ( ( (
Now I’m torn between this or the 6700 😂 why not both I guess
Why... I just bought the sony for the double the price lol... why
I wouldn’t regret that. If it’s in the budget that Sony is the best of the best and it’s lighter. Plus, if you end up shooting with a body that can do more than 15 fps - you’ll be covered with the Sony,
Have you ever worked with these 70-200mm lenses in news events, like when people are causing citizens and police trouble? I just saw an event with Antifa there he was, the photojournalist with an array of cameras with a long lens. I'd be there with a 35mm or mid-level zoom grabbing photos of Antifa getting their faces rearranged. I wish I could ask him how he is using a long zoom when he is feet away from the people, or in the middle.
Sigma kitemmurt
Am I the only one who finds the 70-200 the most boring uninspiring type of lens in the world?
Why you think so bro?
70-200 is extremely useful for a lot of people. Sometimes something is so practical that is it used by everyone - and that's possibly why you find it less exciting. But it's a workhorse and needed by many.
@@onlyforyou9999 Big, heavy, meh aperture of 2.8, (yeah, I know bokeh is not everything but just highlighting how this aspect is boring too), clinical image, no character. And did I say big? Sure, it's "practical" for some situations, but not exciting. Jack of all trades master of nothing.
@@kistovisback ok bro
👎🤦♀Слушайте. Ну почему вы всегда говорите, что зум с внутренним перемещением линз не влияет на стабилизацию на гимболе? Ну возьмите трубу, положите в неё металлический шарик и по наклоняйте туда сюда. Вес не перемещается? Конечно перемещается! Ну что за чушь вы несёте. Если вес внутри перемещается, значит он и снаружи перемещается. Либо скажите, что часть линз перемещается в одну сторону, а часть в другую, для компенсации веса. Брат. Это дизлайк. Хватит. Остановись. Не повторяй этой ерунды. Не хочется отписываться от канала.
the lens elements moving inside does not shift the weight anywhere near as much as extending a physical barrel. Gimbals don’t need to be rebalanced with an internal zoom. If you are extending a barrel you will need to re-balance. With an external zoom you slide the plastic and metal casing and the big front element forward. So a lot of weight back toward the camera that shifts dramatically away from the camera with extension. With an internal zoom, the big element, plastic and metal casing stay where they are. The weight of moving smaller glass elements inside is not of much consequence. You can dislike if you want - but I suggest you test it out for yourself before saying it’s nonsense. Maybe it’s the translation, but I would appreciate a more polite comment next time where we could have a discussion instead of the way you made your comment. Your example is not how lenses work. It is not like a ball rolling to the front. An internal zoom has smaller elements moving while the heaviest part of the lens stays where it is. A more appropriate example would be to try and balance a short pipe with a heavy front end and then not only roll the light ball, but also extend the pipe with the heavy end forward. Compare that to a longer pipe balanced in your hand and having the light ball move inside it.
I get excited every time I get the new notification of your video Mark 🫡
This makes you a good person