Review of the Sony 70-300mm G Telephoto Zoom lens
Sony FE 70-300mm G Real world images (click for larger)
Sony FE 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS Review:
Sony released the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5 – 5.6 G OSS in 2016, their longest zoom lens at the time. Every mature full frame camera system has a variable aperture 70-300mm lens but they are usually “consumer” grade lenses. For example, the newest Nikon AF-P 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 VR is under $600 and the Canon 70-300mm F/4-5.6 IS is under $500. Canon also offers an “L” version of the lens with similar specs, Canon EF 70-300mm F4-5.6L IS for over $1300. By including the “G” designation and in pricing the Sony FE 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS at almost $1200 (September 2019 pricing), Sony is clearly not positioning the lens as “consumer kit.” Instead, like the Canon “L” glass, Sony is positioning the 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G as high end glass for enthusiasts, prosumers and professionals.
When introduced, Sony already had the excellent Sony 70-200mm F/4 G OSS, which was well reviewed by this blog. Both are “G” lenses but the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G is priced about $200 more.
In this review, let’s see if the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS is worth the price tag and G moniker.
Body and Handling
Upon inspection, the build quality of the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6G appears exceptional, clearly above the standards of a consumer kit lens. The barrel is well built with the right amount of heft. The lens includes the convenience of switches for AF/MF, for turning on and off the optical steady shot system, and for a focus limiter. There is also a lock for the barrel at 70mm, to prevent lens creep.
The zoom and autofocus rings are both smooth. There is a sizable lens hood. When it’s reversed on the lens, it’s difficult to reach the zoom ring.
At 854 grams, the Sony 70-300mm is basically the same weight as the 840 grams of the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G. The weight is in the middle of the range of the dSLR lenses, with the Canon 70-300 L much heavier at 1050 grams, while Nikon 70-300 4.5-5.6 is only 680 grams.
Below, we can see the size comparison between the Sony 70-300mm and the Sony 70-200mm F/4.
For the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G, zoom is internal while the Sony 70-300mm extends as you zoom. As a result, the Sony 70-200mm F/4 is a bit larger at shorter focal lengths but when fully zoomed, the Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 is a bit larger.
When fully zoomed, the weight is well balanced in the back of the lens. As a result, this is a relatively comfortable lens for hand holding. In my opinion, it’s the longest Sony zoom that you can comfortably handhold for extended stretches. (The Sony 100-400 GM is 1400 grams and the new Sony 200-600 G is over 2100 grams).
Autofocus is entirely silent. It’s difficult to objectively measure autofocus speed but my impression is that af speed is only “fair.” Maybe because of the smaller aperture, the Sony 70-300mm G hunted for autofocus a bit more often than my other lenses and at times the autofocus speed just didn’t feel lightening fast. For typical consumers, the autofocus probably will not present any issues. I can’t help but feel demanding sports/wildlife shooters may be let down by the autofocus speed. Sony’s more recent lenses (2017 onward) seem to have greatly improved autofocus speed.
Steady Shot System
The Sony 70-300mm G is equipped with OSS which works in conjunction with the in-body SteadyShot found on the most current Sony bodies. You definitely get benefit, with the ability to shoot at shutter speeds below the 1/focal length rule. Exact amount of benefit will depend on the stability of your personal shooting technique.
I found less benefit than on many other Sony lenses. As shown in the samples below, my hit rate was pretty low below about 1/160 at 300mm. Without stabilization, I’d probably want to shoot at 1/600 to keep images sharp. So I am getting about 2 stops of improvement with the IBIS and OSS combination.
Image Quality
On the surface, the build quality reaches the level for a “professional” lens. The 70-300mm G is one of the few variable aperture zoom lenses to earn the “G” designation. One would hope for professional level image quality. Typically, variable aperture lenses suffer from worse image quality than constant F2.8 and F4 zoom lenses, but the Sony 100-400mm F/4.5-5.6 GM OSS was previously reviewed by this site as a truly exceptional lens. The Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 is more of a mixed bag, as you’ll see below.
Vignetting
Above, see the vignette at the wide end of 70mm. Vignetting (darkened corners) is easy to correct in post-processing but runs the risk of introducing extra noise into the corners. In the case of the Sony 70-300mm G, the light fall off is moderate and very gradual. There is definitely vignetting present at F4.5 and it gradually improves but even at the worst, it doesn’t hurt the image much.
Below at 135mm, the maximum aperture is F5. Even at the maximum aperture, there is very minimal vignetting.
Shown below, vignetting is a bit worse at 300mm and the maximum aperture of F5.6 but it’s still not severe. If shooting landscapes at 300mm, stopping down to F8 resolves the minor vignette.
The Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G performs very well in this test of image quality. Better than many other Sony lenses.
Flare – Sunstars – Chromatic Aberration/Purple Fringing
See above (click for larger) to get a sense of how well the Sony 70-300mm handles harsh back lighting and strong light at the edge of the frame. Overall, I’ve seen worse from some other Sony zoom lenses but this is far from the best. The good news is that flare patterns are a bit predictable and it’s typically easy to re-position and avoid blobs of flare. Though in addition to straight up flare, you’ll get significant contrast loss with heavy back lighting.
Many lenses exhibit color fringing in high contrast / wide aperture situations. It’s usually a bigger issue in wide aperture primes and in cheaper zoom lenses. Flowing water in strong sun is a pretty good test of such issues. As shown below, we get a bit of a purplish tint but it’s rather mild. If you see this minor degree of fringing, it’s easy to fix in lightroom. None of my images had severe fringing that I even saw the need to correct.
Bokeh
My expectations for bokeh aren’t very high for zoom lenses, especially a variable aperture lens. Still, you’ll get a lot of background separation at the long end.
Many people look at the quality of the out of focus highlights, or the “bokeh balls.” Bokeh snobs look for very soft well rounded circles, with clean interiors. By these standards, the Sony 70-300mm G isn’t a huge success. The bokeh balls have pretty rough outlines with busy interiors. The general pattern of background blur takes on a busy appearance. Examples:
The bokeh quality is especially poor at the wider end. If you’re not a “bokeh snob” and just looking for background blur, the Sony 70-300 G is fine. If you’re more demanding, especially for portraits, this may not be the lens for you. A couple real world examples below:
Real world bokeh examples:
Particularly in the seagull image, we see the effect of hard-edged busy bokeh, distracting from the image. In the image of my daughter, the background blur has a bit of a nervous quality to it, instead of just a smooth blur.
Just to stress though, these results are what one would expect from a variable aperture zoom lens. But you will get better results from something like the Sony 70-200mm F/4, and certainly from a 70-200/2.8 or a prime lens.
Distortion
Distortion is pleasantly low. To my surprise, you get pin cushion distortion at both the long end and the short end. Above, see the uncorrected and corrected files. When you correct severe distortion, it stretches the image, therefore causing loss of sharpness. Here, there is very minimal distortion whether you correct it or not. A definite success for the Sony 70-300mm G.
Sharpness
Sharpness is often overrated by many. While I include an extensive sharpness section in my reviews, I encourage everyone to take the comparisons with a grain of salt. Today, most lenses are quite sharp. Sharp enough that nobody is going to be able to tell the difference in sharpness in regular sized prints and displays. So ultimately, for me, it’s a question of whether a lens passes this “sharp enough” threshold. Let’s see if the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G meets this threshold:
70mm Sharpness
Center Frame:
It’s hard to complain about the centers at 70mm. Maybe wide open at F4.5, it isn’t quite tack sharp but it’s completely acceptable. By F/5.6, it’s certainly a very sharp result.
Off Center/Borders:
The borders aren’t as good as the center at 70mm. Wide open at F4.5, the frame border/off center area is a bit soft. It sharpens up as you stop down and you basically get a tack sharp result at F8.
Extreme Corners:
The corners never become tack sharp at any aperture but they are acceptable. Certainly, if you aren’t pixel peeping, the corners are just fine, even wide open.
135mm Sharpness
Frame Center:
At 135mm, the widest possible aperture is F5. The center is just a tiny bit soft but become quite sharp at F6.3. Certainly, the center is totally usable wide open.
Off Center/Borders:
The borders are quite good overall even if not totally perfectly sharp. By F8, you get a pretty much tack sharp result.
Extreme Corners:
The corners are never really terrible but also never become tack sharp. For the intended uses of this lens, it’s unlikely anyone is going to be looking at the corners is extreme detail, so the sharpness is very acceptable.
200mm Sharpness
Center Frame:
The widest aperture at 200mm is F5.6. The center of the frame looks very acceptable wide open, but it is a bit shy of being tack sharp. With the aperture of F5.6 already being on the slow side, one wouldn’t want to stop down too much which is fine, as F8 doesn’t really improve the sharpness much. In short, the center of the frame is very good but nobody would confuse it with a prime lens.
Off center/Borders:
No way around it, the borders at 200mm are getting a bit on the softer side. They improve just slightly as you stop down. The good news is that if you aren’t pixel peeping (or cropping extensively or printing huge), the sharpness will be “good enough.”
Extreme Corners:
Wide open at F5.6, the corners are a bit on the ugly side at 200mm. If the corners aren’t critical to your image, such as when shooting wildlife or sports, then it’s fine to use wide open.
If anyone is going to be looking closely at the corners, stop down a bit. The corners never become good, but they become less ugly as you stop down to F6.3.
300mm Sharpness
Frame Center:
If you buy a 70-300mm lens, you will probably use it most often at the maximum reach of 300mm. At the maximum aperture of F5.6, you get a lot of detail in the center of the frame. Sharpness appears to be dropping slightly compared to the shorter focal lengths, but you get an acceptable center of the frame at all apertures. You get a tiny bit of improvement as you stop down.
300mm off center/borders:
I can describe the borders as okay. You aren’t reaching true critical sharpness but the results are perfectly acceptable, especially if you don’t pixel peep.
300mm corners:
The corners aren’t great but actually a bit better than at 200mm. They improve slightly as you stop down. For the common uses of this lens, the corners are acceptable at 300mm.
In summary, the Sony 70-300mm G gives “acceptable” sharpness through the whole focal length range, but you’re never going to be wowed.
Comparisons between Sony 70-200mm F/4 and 70-300mm at 200mm
A Sony photographer can choose between the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G or the Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G for a similar price. As shown above, they are similar in size and weight. Reading the review of the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G, you can see it’s an excellent lens, with superior bokeh and faster aperture in comparison to the Sony 70-300mm, but it’s 100mm shorter. Below, see a few extreme comparisons at 200mm on each lens. 200mm is the weakest focal length on the Sony 70-200. Being it’s middle of the range for the Sony 70-300, I wasn’t sure which lens would be superior at 200mm.
This is an extreme test — Below are crops taken at 300-400%. At this size, no lens will look good. Below, the 70-300mm lens appears on the left and the 70-200 F/4 is on the right. The 70-300mm is wide open at F5.6, while the 70-200 gets the benefit of stopping down to reach F5.6. (Click to appreciate the comparisons)
There isn’t a huge difference in the center but the Sony 70-200mm F/4 is definitely marginally sharper. Remember, this is extreme magnification. You won’t notice this difference in the center in real life. At the border and corner, we see a pretty extreme difference. If absolute critical sharpness is important to you, the Sony 70-200mm F/4 is simply far superior.
If we stop down the 70-300 to F8, keeping the 70-200 at F5.6, let’s compare the borders and corners:
Basically, now the lenses are closer in sharpness. At 200mm, the Sony 70-300mm G has to be stopped down to F8, just to get close to the sharpness of the Sony 70-200mm F/4 at F/5.6. Even then, I would give the Sony 70-200mm F/4 the slight edge.
This exercise is not purely academic– The superior sharpness of the Sony 70-200mm F/4 means you will have better results with large prints and with cropping than you would with the 70-300. While the extra cropping won’t make up for the entire 100mm difference, it does close the gap.
Overall:
The Sony FE 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS is a bit of a mixed bag. On the positive side, the build quality is extremely professional and the image quality is free of major defects with only mild vignetting and distortion. Flare control is decent. My first concern is the autofocus speed which simply doesn’t feel super fast compared to some of Sony’s more recent lenses. If you shoot sports or wildlife at a very demanding level, the autofocus speed may be disappointing. For more casual shooting, including occasional sports and wildlife, the autofocus speed will be satisfactory.
Lens sharpness is a bit disappointing for a lens with the “G” moniker. For me, I mostly look at whether the lens can product accepted sharpness without significant stopping down. At that threshold test, the Sony 70-300 4.5-5.6 G passes, but just barely. If you shoot high resolution like 42mp on the Sony A7rii/iii or 61mp on the Sony A7riv, you’re not going to be maximizing the sensor resolution with the Sony 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 G. I try to avoid other reviews until I’m done with my own. As I write, this conclusion, if I look the lens up on DXOMark, I find their testing rates the perceived resolution of the 70-300 G at 24mp, while they rate the 70-200 F/4 at 35mp and the Sony 100-400 GM at 36mp. In other words, their testing agrees that the Sony 70-300mm G is much softer than the shorter Sony 70-200mm F/4 and the longer Sony 100-400mm GM.
If you are an image quality snob, you might want to pass on the Sony 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 G OSS. If you need long reach, don’t care about price or weight, then get the spectacular Sony 100-400 GM. If you don’t quite need the reach of 300mm, then the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G is the better overall lens. It’s similar in weight and only slightly more expensive.
Still, the Sony 70-300mm G benefits from a lack of direct competition. For many people, it’s simply the perfect combination of reach, price and size. The Sony 100-400mm will be too expensive and heavy for many people, myself included. The 70-200mm lenses may be too short for wildlife and sports, especially on full frame. So if it’s the perfect compromise of size, reach and price, then this may be a great lens for you, even accepting some diminished sharpness.
I previously recommended the Sony 70-300mm G for aps-c shooters due to the lack of a decent aps-c telephoto lens. With the recent announcement of the Sony 70-350mm F/4.5-6.3 G, an aps-c lens that weighs and costs a little less, with a bit more reach, there is no reason for aps-c shooters to consider the Sony FE 70-300mm G. Sony A6xxx owners can see the Sony 70-350mm F/4.5-6.3 G on Amazon / Adorama.
For full frame shooters, the Sony FE 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS is a good but imperfect option. If you’re looking for the best IQ in the weight and price range, get the Sony 70-200mm F/4 G (On Amazon / Adorama). If you want long reach with the best image quality, and you don’t mind significantly more weight and cost, the Sony 100-400mm GM is a far superior. See the Sony 100-400mm GM on Amazon / Adorama.
If you really need to shoot longer than 200mm, keeping price and weight under control, then the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS is a good compromise lens. I’m not sure whether it’s worth the price tag of $1,200: It’s better than typical consumer 70-300mm lenses, while not really reaching the standards of other Sony “G” lenses. See the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS on Amazon / Adorama.
As a compromise lens with good overall image quality, the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS deserves in my subjective perspective:
Rating (1-10): Score: 6
(About my scoring: 9-10 is a superb lens which could have a place in the bag of almost every photographer. 6-8: recommended with caveats. 3-5: A compromised lens that may still be suitable for some shooters and situations. 1-2: Just stick to your phone camera)
At not additional cost to yourself, you can support this site by purchasing the Sony 70-300mm F/4.5-5.6 G OSS with this link on Amazon / Adorama.
I’m getting close to my goal of reviewing every Sony FE lens (at least those produced by Sony). Please follow me on twitter and/or accept notifications from this site, to catch the latest reviews and posts.
Thank you.
