Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AFPoster

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 14, 2008
1,564
152
Charlotte, NC
Alright, so I am new to the photography and videography. I purchased a Sony a6300 when it came out for the 4k video recording since we have a green screen in our office and we do 10-15minute snap shot videos. As of now, I have been using the default lens.

I'm currently looking at buying the FE 100 - 400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS or FE 70 - 200mm F2.8 GM OSS but prior to making this decision I wanted to ask the community for help.

We film indoors, and we have a lighting kit. I also film on the streets in front of certain environments to give a diverse range of back drops. We also use still photography.

I have been reading on the differences of f2.8 vs. f4.5 and from what I can tell, it seems if I'm in low light / indoor places the 2.8 is better, otherwise they are equal. Is that the correct understanding?

Help is appreciated!
 

JeffreyB

macrumors newbie
Jun 18, 2017
2
0
Alright, so I am new to the photography and videography. I purchased a Sony a6300 when it came out for the 4k video recording since we have a green screen in our office and we do 10-15minute snap shot videos. As of now, I have been using the default lens.

I'm currently looking at buying the FE 100 - 400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS or FE 70 - 200mm F2.8 GM OSS but prior to making this decision I wanted to ask the community for help.

We film indoors, and we have a lighting kit. I also film on the streets in front of certain environments to give a diverse range of back drops. We also use still photography.

I have been reading on the differences of f2.8 vs. f4.5 and from what I can tell, it seems if I'm in low light / indoor places the 2.8 is better, otherwise they are equal. Is that the correct understanding?

Help is appreciated!
 

Moi Ici

macrumors 6502
Sep 21, 2012
324
566
Alright, so I am new to the photography and videography. I purchased a Sony a6300 when it came out for the 4k video recording since we have a green screen in our office and we do 10-15minute snap shot videos. As of now, I have been using the default lens.

I'm currently looking at buying the FE 100 - 400mm F4.5-5.6 GM OSS or FE 70 - 200mm F2.8 GM OSS but prior to making this decision I wanted to ask the community for help.

We film indoors, and we have a lighting kit. I also film on the streets in front of certain environments to give a diverse range of back drops. We also use still photography.

I have been reading on the differences of f2.8 vs. f4.5 and from what I can tell, it seems if I'm in low light / indoor places the 2.8 is better, otherwise they are equal. Is that the correct understanding?

Help is appreciated!
[doublepost=1497824226][/doublepost]Yes, the 2.8 will be better in low light than 4.5 by a long shot. For indoors, I'd even consider 1.8 and more.
 

JeffreyB

macrumors newbie
Jun 18, 2017
2
0
I have the same camera with 70-200 f2.8 it's a fabulous lens I also have the 70-400 which also very good. I would suggest that you rent the lens before you buy. Low light needs the wider f stop. Plus it gives better depth of field. But these are telephoto lens with a very narrow field of view. You would have be 20 ft away from subject.. I suggest starting with a wider zoom or you could try 70-300 mm they much less expensive. Get some experience then go for big bucks on lens.
 

Yakibomb

macrumors 6502
May 13, 2014
413
60
Cape Town
Any reasons you're looking at these specific telephoto lenses? Your use cases seem better suited towards a shorter lens.
 

AFPoster

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Jul 14, 2008
1,564
152
Charlotte, NC
I have the same camera with 70-200 f2.8 it's a fabulous lens I also have the 70-400 which also very good. I would suggest that you rent the lens before you buy. Low light needs the wider f stop. Plus it gives better depth of field. But these are telephoto lens with a very narrow field of view. You would have be 20 ft away from subject.. I suggest starting with a wider zoom or you could try 70-300 mm they much less expensive. Get some experience then go for big bucks on lens.
Thank you for this!

Any reasons you're looking at these specific telephoto lenses? Your use cases seem better suited towards a shorter lens.
When I spoke to a Sony rep they said the GM lenses were the ones I should focus my attention on. I expressed a desire of getting into taking more photos of my family, that might be why, or they just wanted me to buy the most expensive piece of equipment, either way I think I just wanted something more long-term that provided features I could grow to.
 

Moi Ici

macrumors 6502
Sep 21, 2012
324
566
Thank you for this!

When I spoke to a Sony rep they said the GM lenses were the ones I should focus my attention on. I expressed a desire of getting into taking more photos of my family, that might be why, or they just wanted me to buy the most expensive piece of equipment, either way I think I just wanted something more long-term that provided features I could grow to.

The GM lenses are for the full frame cameras, so multiply the focal length by 1.5 to get the crop equivalent.
You can of course use them on a a6300 but it's a bizarre recommendation given they should have known from the questions you were asking that you were sort of a novice. I have mostly ff lenses and zeiss, but the g master lenses are expensive and heavy. Yes, they are excellent.
The lenses you are looking at for indoor use are too narrow and like another poster said, you'd nearly be in the next room to get a shot. Great for outdoor and birding etc..
inside, look at a 35mm 1.8 e lens, very sharp and not expensive. Unless you have lots of light, stick to wide apperatures, which will mean mostly primes (not zoom) as wide primes are far less expensive than wide zooms.
A good lens for outdoor video and photography is the 18-105mm. Very good price and quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenoh

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
I agree. At this stage in your journey tye GMasters are porbably not a wise move. They are very expensive - good - but eye watering expensive.

You may (doubtful) find that Sony is not where your heart is so dropping £1899 on a 24-70 GM zoom at this stage is maybe a tad premature. That rep needs to rethink his frame of reference.

I agree with the posts above. There is plenty of amazing glass to be had on the happy side of £1000 which will be more than good enough for you right now. Even if you go for the original FE lenses, the 35mm 2.8 and the 55mm 1.8. Both still amazing lenses. I go back to them time and again on my A7Rii.

Good luck
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.