My All-Time Favorite Portrait Lens, Upgraded： Sigma 200mm F2

Alright, it's been 17 years since there has been a 200mm f2 out in the market. Sigma was the first one to do it in a very long time. This is my all time favorite portrait lens because of the unique look that you can get with this lens. So I'm going to be testing it out today with Elizabeth. Let's do this. Alright, first shot is I'm going to have this, I'm going to say Sears Tower because it is a Sears Tower. Behind her, the problem is it might not even matter because I'm shooting with a 200mm. So it's going to be really hard to get that in frame but I'm going to try my best. Now I'm going to ask Val here with the light, come over here and we're going to shoot at a 45 degree angle with the light slightly above Elizabeth's head, angled down and we're going to play with different heights, a little bit lower at first and then come toward me a little bit. Yeah. Now the modifier might have to be in the shot because I have to stand really far back. When composing a shot, when you're shooting a long railing like this, a really long railing, especially with this lens, you got to be really careful with your perspective because a little bit of just moving to the right will change everything. So here with a long railing, if I shoot alongside the railing here, for me, it doesn't really do it any justice, right? You just get a bunch of blurred railing here. For me, something like this, you want to just shoot it at a slight angle and that for me changes everything because the railing is more of like a line coming in from the side and then also height that you're shooting at. So if I shoot from up here with this long lens, it looks like I'm looking down at her a little bit. That gives, it can kind of look, it can look good depending on the background, but for me shooting like knee level, waist level is going to make her still, it's going to make her look bigger, more like just powerful in the image. I want to include more background in the shot, but it's really tough because again, a 200 millimeter, there's only so much I can get. So I'm going to shoot off the ground, really low angle to try to get this. And now a composition here, I'm going to try to place her head in between those two buildings over there so you can kind of frame, like frame her up. Let's see if that works. These are waist up. The bridge. Oh yeah, it looks better with the bridge. Okay. Get a couple more. No. Let me get a BTS. Good. Oh snap. I hear it. It's coming. Okay. So for shot number two, and we got to be quick because the thunder, I could hear the thunder coming right now. This shot is less about background blurs, it's just more about the patterns on whatever this is. It's more about the patterns than anything else and the color contrasting off the blue dress. So now for the final shot, because I'm shooting with a 200 again, I got to find spots where there's enough room. And here I got, you know, it's just, I got the bridge, I got the bridge textures behind her. I think that'll make a good shot. Plus I have some backlight. So we're just going to work with what we got. To spice up the composition here, I could just shoot straight on. One thing I like doing is creating depth in a shot or just creating some foreground interest to add to the image instead of just being, you know, just her and the railings behind her. So what I can do is I can shoot where I can use this front railing here as a foreground. And to me that adds a little bit extra to the image that gives it a little bit more of that, you know, that dimension ready. So this video is not sponsored, but if you want to support me and my channel and get better at flash at the same time, well, you can check out my off-camera flash mini course where I show you how I approach my camera settings and flash power, how I tackle that harsh afternoon sun, how I find the perfect light placement, how I approach my compositions and so much more link will be down in description. All right, the 200 millimeter F2 is the greatest portrait lens of all time. I'm willing to back it up with my fist. All right. So let me know if you want somebody to smoke. I got you. The 200 F2 is just the lens out of my entire life. This is the lens that always made my jaw drop when I took photos with it. And Sigma just revived it from, I mean, what it seems like the dead. I mean, these lenses have been made for almost two decades. I don't really understand because these manufacturers are making these super, super niche lenses, but the 200 millimeter F2, that's like a low hanging fruit to create a lens that is pretty useful for field sports, but it is the holy grail portrait lens. I have been using the Canon 200 millimeter F2 for whenever I need that wow factor because not a lot of people are using a lens like this, and it allows for your work to stand out and to give something that looks just different, right? The compression. There's just nothing else with that compression and subject isolation like what this lens can give you. I'm a little biased because I am a huge fan of this focal length, although I don't use it much. I'll talk about why I don't use it very often. A pound and a half shaved off the weight from the 200 F2, and trust me, you feel that. You feel that weight, man. This really starts to get your arms burning after a little while. I know that a pound and a half doesn't really seem like that much, but let me tell you, in the real world, holding this lens out in front of you like this, you feel the weight. It feels so much more than a pound and a half. See, when I was shooting baseball with the Sigma, I handheld the lens the entire time for seven innings, no problem. With this lens, I'm going to have to see my chiropractor, right? My shoulders, my back are going to be straining also this arm. I would need a monopod for sure. See, with the Sigma, I mean, look at how I can never do this with the Canon. I'll straight up snap my wrist in half. I could just throw this thing around. I didn't feel at all any kind of fatigue with this lens. So yeah, no. And what I love about it is that this comfortably fits in your camera bag, unlike the Canon 200. Now, to put that into perspective, the weight of the Sigma 200 attached to a Sony body now matches the same weight as the Canon, but it's all about the weight distribution, right? That 1.5 pound goes a long way when you're holding out a lens with one hand out in front of you versus a lens like this, where you really get that lactic acid buildup. The things that I dislike the most about using a lens like this for portraits is that you have to stand damn near 40 feet away from your model if you want to take a full body shot with a little bit of space on top and bottom, like damn 40 feet. It's ridiculous. It's hard to communicate. How do you feel when I'm shooting with that lens that we shot with and I'm like 40 feet away? How does that make you feel? I definitely feel like I'm in my own little world, for sure, and a little disconnected. I miss you all the way over there, but I love the way the photos turn out, so it definitely is worth it. So when I'm shooting with like an 85 that we normally shoot with and the 200, so you like the 200 photos better, right? Yeah. Yeah, they just have such a vibe to them, for sure. Okay, but then with the 85, so you prefer to be closer to the photographer? I do. I feel like you can get a sense of the energy more and like the angle they're taking and all that. Like you can just kind of tell a bit better. This is a little more disconnected, so you have to like communicate prior to the shot, you know what I mean? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And, you know, it's a heavy lens. Because you're so far away with a lens like this, you're forced to shoot from lower angles, which means that you're always going to be on your knees, on the ground, or with the screen flipped upward, which completely butchers my composition. My lines are really crooked all the time. Another thing is that, you know, arguably the 135 millimeter 1.8, I would say it can give you like 70% of the way of the look that you can get with a 200 f2. Obviously, with a 70 to 200, which is so much more portable and cheaper, 2.8 compared to f2, that's double the amount of light. You really notice the subject separation at 200 millimeter. From 2.8 to f2, it's just a different ballgame. And that is, there's just a look to it. Again, it's not even about background blur necessarily, it's just the overall subject, the way they pop off the screen. So I've actually made videos in the past comparing the 200 millimeter to the 135 1.8 and to the 70 to 200 2.8, and the reality is that the 135 1.8 is going to be the best choice for most people because, I mean, you still got to stand pretty far away, you still need a lot of working distance, and it gives you a really beautiful 3D cutout looking image. But this just takes it to another level. Now even comparing the f2.8 aperture of the 70 to 200, I mean, you're getting double the amount of light with the f2, and even at 200 millimeter, right, you're getting that ultra compressed image, everything is brought, crunched into the image really flat, just a really unique looking photo. That f2 to f2.8, it really makes a big difference. Now for my sports in action photographers out there, took this lens to Wrigley Field to shoot Major League Baseball. This isn't like the best baseball lens, or at least at a ballpark, but it is the perfect lens when I'm shooting in the inner well, which is why I love Wrigley Field. You can shoot, you know, in the inner well, you can fill the frame with the batters at home plate, and then you still have plenty of good reach, the players in the infield. Now this is my first time using a Sigma sport lens, but I've heard good things, and to no surprise, this thing was blazing fast, and as accurate as any other lens that I've used for baseball at this point. For me, it's just how the images look versus the 70 to 200 f2.8 that make this, that make it stand out, you know. See for portraits, it's more of a creative decision to shoot, to pick a lens like this over the 70 to 200 f2.8. But in baseball, I would say it's more of an objectively good thing, right, because you have a whole crowd to blur out, you have a lot of distractions, and being able to isolate the player in the action, just your images pop more. And I've talked to another baseball photographer about this, where we were talking about the 70 to 200, and it's like, it's such a great, great versatile lens, but the images coming out of it are just very basic. And of course, the biggest limitation here, the elephant in the room, is the handicap on this lens, when you're putting it on a Sony camera, right. Anything fast action, it is limited to 15 frames per second, which is, to be fair, it's still plenty fast for most people, plenty fast for me, even though my camera can shoot 30 frames per second. But you know, it's just one of those trade-offs that you must accept if you're going to use any third-party lens with a Sony camera. So this Sigma lens has 19 elements in 14 groups, got 11 aperture blades compared to the 8 that's on the Canon. Got a filter size of 105mm, which I so appreciate because, you know, we've got a traditional lens cap here, unlike with the Canon, you've got a sleeve that goes, that kind of goes on the lens. So you need the lens hood for the sleeve to work properly and I don't like lens hood, so this lens is always naked. Okay. You have two different options for optical stabilization, you get up to 6.5 stops. So you go to one that's going to give you that traditional steady shot and then number two is for when you're panning. So let's say you're doing like motorsports or anything like that, you're still, you know, you're still able to get that panning effect when using stabilization. You have a focus mode switch, you've got a focus limiter, right. You've got a custom mode switch, you've got an aperture click, you've got an aperture lock switch. Okay. There's three AFL buttons that are mappable right here, one, two, and three. Very nice. Okay. Now, there is a reason why both the Canon and the Nikon 200mm F2s are considered legendary. Okay. There's just very few lenses that can throw as good as these optically, even to this day, and that offer such a unique look. And I do believe more people would own them, but it just doesn't make financial sense for most photographers. And I could totally understand that. Sigma is pricing this lens at $3299, which is extremely competitive, still pricey as hell. But in comparison, the Canon brand new $5,700, you know what I'm saying? So who is this lens for? Now, if you're absolutely craving a look that you cannot get with any other lens, this will give it to you. But, and even though it's more than $2,000 less than the Canon, okay, you're saving a lot of money there. It's still a very difficult lens to use and requires a ton of space to work with. The only way I pick up a lens like this for myself is if I sell my Canon 200mm. And so let me know if you want it, you know what I'm saying? It's got some sentimental value to me. because the Sigma is so much lighter and smaller to where, you know, I could casually just put it in my camera bag. Maybe it would motivate me more or inspire me more to use it. The reason why I don't use the Canon so much is just because it's so big and heavy and it's just not easy to transport. Yeah, those are my, those are my first impressions. Hopefully you enjoyed this video. Let me know if you want to see more stuff like this, man. I know it's, you know, this video might seem like, you know, I was just having fun and doing my own photography thing. This is the reality of it. Okay. You see the, the, the nice curated part of a photo shoot, but in reality it was like 95 outside. It was rainy. I was sticky muggy leaving. I was miserable. I was questioning my entire career. When I left that shoot, I was like, why am I doing this? This is pointless. I'm going to go, you know, I questioned everything after it. And it's funny as I'm editing it, everything looks so good. Everything looks so like, yeah, everything's like everything worked out. But in reality it was, it was a hot mess, a hot mess. So that's just a reminder. Social media is fake. Talk to you later.