+ Reply to Thread
Page 10 of 10 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10
Results 451 to 498 of 498

Thread: Sony FE Lens News Thread

  1. #451

    Default    
      
      

    I use either at weddings. Last wedding I shot (fourth shooter) I used the 28 and 50 and was fine with both (had the 55 and 25 with me just in case but didn't use them). It really comes down to a mental thing with me loving my old 24L for canon. It's a lens I miss. I moved to a 35mm there and love it equally but I just have fond memories of the 24L. So I wish I could have it back, especially because with the sony's ability to shoot both FF and crop a 24 is also a 35mm which is the perfect pair. So 25mm and f/2 is closer to that than 28mm. But it's enough bigger I don't use it much unless it's for paid work.

    Like I said, I need to shoot with both a bit and see some more. When I first had the 28mm I actually got a lot of really nice shots I liked and was impressed. I went to the Batis because it was "better" but is it universally? I never really tested it side by side before selling my first 28mm. Also, the other thought is the 28 is kinda sorta a tweener between 24 and 35 so I want to try that FL a bit more. The x70 is another way to test it.

    Oh, and BTW, my buddy who works at Fuji is suggesting heavily I try a XT2... I'm half tempted to get one with the 16mm...
    everytime I think of that tough I'm reminded how much I liked my 18mm f/2 there because of it's size and the 28mm f/2 is basically the same thing for sony, small, and the same speed so...
    also, the 25mm batis is actually lighter than the 16mm fuji. And 1.4 on crop has basically the identical DOF as 2 on FF so yeah, keeping the batis is a cheaper more logical option.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.


    • Advertising

      advertising
      newschoolofphotography.com
      has no influence on the ads
      that Google displays.



        
       

  2. #452
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    That's a reason to keep both. Back up. Although I don't backup my lenses, just the body.

    I strongly believe if you shoot a X-T2 with a 16mm 1.4, you will keep it. The 16 1.4 is a lens that has that intangible Canon 5D magic. I grew to love 24mm,in no small part due to yours and Ken's influence. Then shooting with 24mm and loving it. Good chance I'll be 16/56 by years end. Or dump it all for used Sony gear with 25/85 combo.

    At this point, it is sounding like you should keep both. And just figure out the best times to use each lens.

  3. #453

    Default          

    See, I go back and forth all the time. Both is not the answer though... Took both to the beach today. The 28mm feels like a toy. The 25mm feels beefy and too big. Yes I can live with either but that's my gut feeling with them in hand. The DOF/separation difference is easily seen on the back of the camera with the 28mm being thinner which surprises me. I need to look at the pics on the big screen. But the FLs are pretty darn close. I honestly can't say one way or another which I'd prefer because there are times I wish the 28 was wider and times I wish the 25 was longer.

    As I've said repeatedly on paper the 25 and it's being closer to 35 in APS-C mode makes it the winner w/o any other considerations but for some reason I keep coming back to the 28mm. Enough so that I had the 28 first, got the 25 as soon as it shipped, like the 25/35 deal and dealt with it's size but then realized I was only using it at weddings. Then bought another 28mm because I missed it. I do like the 28mm a lot. The 25mm while I prefer it's FLs in theory I keep feeling like it's too big and too expensive to justify keeping it? If price is my only complaint though I'll suck it up and keep it.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  4. #454
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    It sounds like you prefer the images and the weight of the 28. But your brain is used to the focal lengths the 25 presents in FF/crop, and that bigger build equals pro quality. Versus the cheaper feel of the 28. I'm guessing it's like how the Fuji 35mm f2 feels compared to the other pro feeling Fuji primes. Maybe try putting the 25 away and shoot only the 28 for a few weeks instead of using them side by side. See if you really miss or need the 25 for any reason.

    In my dilemma, I have my biggest event this weekend. But I have a photography staff, so I can do some experimenting. Plus I have my dad on the staff and can make some runs through with his 16/56 for comparison to the 16-55. The 16/56 combo is heavier than the 16-55 by a little. But that weight is not all on the camera at once. But that may be a moot point as the 50-140 may be indispensable after this weekend.

  5. #455

    Default          

    See, I can't get past the bokeh of the 28. It is just so busy and weird. The 25 is big but I just like it better. Colors, contrast (especially into the light), corner sharpness, lack of distortion, all better. But big and expensive.

    YMMV

  6. #456

    Default          

    yes, the bokeh is nicer but the 28 can give you thinner DOF if/when wanted. Bobby, pretty much covering all the points.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  7. #457

    Default          

    rumor has it sony's working on a 16-35 2.8 g-master! . I don't need 2.8 but if it's got better sunstars I'm there!
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  8. #458

    Default          

    one thing I've noticed with my sony setup is every now and again it'll blow focus on a stopped down shot when using "MF". I've had it happen when I KNOW I'm in MF and I've had it happen when I think I'm in AF but in BOTH cases it's rear button focus and I haven't touched the button. I mean maybe I bumped the focus ring but I have few in my latest arch shoot where it's the SAME shot as the one before and after it and the one in the middle is OOF where the previous and after one are both perfectly sharp... When I shot with my 5Diii and mechanical focused lenses this NEVER happened...

    I need to play around with it more and find out EXACTLY why it changes focus. Am I touching the ring? Am I touching the rear button? Is it just doing something on it's own to change focus? I'm not sure but it's a PITA for sure.

    That and MF to infinity being a PITA are my biggest complaints with this system.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  9. #459

    Default          

    Did you know the new Phase software update does hyperfocal as well as focus stacking automatically? Why can a dinky little company like that do something like that and these behemoths not?

    (This might be the frustration talking as I shot a bunch of panos yesterday and TWICE noticed I had bumped the lens half-way through a 30 shot run. I know I hit it both times but... still... bah!)

  10. #460

    Default          

    hyperfocal was in one of the new MF bodies from launch. Not sure if it's the new hassy or a phase or what but I remember seeing it and being pissed. I've wanted that for a decade.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  11. #461

    Default          

    so this was on SAR the other day:
    1) 16-35mm f2.8
    2) STF GM lens
    3) telephoto zoom lens (like 70-400mm f4-5.6 G)
    4) telephoto prime lens (like 300mm f2.8G)
    5) wideangle lens (like 24mm zeiss)
    6) standard zoom lens (like 24-105mm)
    I'll say I'm tempted by a few. I'd go to the 16-35mm 2.8 if the 2.8 isn't massive and has better sunstars. I'd love a 24mm 1.4 again but again, can't be massive and needs to be 1.4 to lure me away from my 28mm f/2. The 70-400 is also tempting as it'd mean I could combine my 70-300 and 150-600 into one lens. They've got an a-mount version I almost bought -vs- the 150-600 but it's a lot more expensive.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  12. #462

    Default          

    picked up an 18-55mm for $75 on FM the other day. It's silver because it's $75 but whatever. Got it for using on the little cams -vs- the 16-50pz for when I want to use filters (I actually like the PZ for making the a6000 a great pocket/P&S camera). The wife and kids both prefer the silver look to the black lenses, wtf?!
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  13. #463
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    What the hell do they know?

  14. #464
    tbert is as tbert does tbert's Avatar
    Member#
    25
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Bisquey Rusiness

    Default          

    Bling!
    Stupidity angers me.
    If it weren't for the last minute, nothing would get done.
    NSOP snapshooter

  15. #465
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Forget looking for another 55FE. If the new 85 1.8 is like the Nikon 85 1.8G, then we might have a winner. This really rounds gives a good 50/85 combo. What Sony needs now is a 24 1.8 option in the $500-600 range. That should give a nice kit.




  16. #466

    Default          

    agreed. I preordered the new 85mm yesterday and will sell my zeiss. I did the same with my 55 for the 50. I'm all about small/light. And I'm 100% with you on the 24mm 1.8. I'd LOVE one. I have the 28mm f/2 but wish I could have a 24 because I love 24 but also because 24mm becomes 35mm with a flick of the switch. I actually have a rokinon 24m right now that I like but it's MASSIVE. Focus isn't that tough with a 1.4 lens though.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  17. #467

    Default          

    135. Where the hell is my 135. SONY!!!!

  18. #468
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    135. Where the hell is my 135. SONY!!!!

    I knew Ben would be pre-ordering the 85 and I knew you would moan about the lack of a 135!

    Actually I was hoping to couple the 85 with the a6300, so that would satisfy 135 for me. I imagine the actual 135 will still be a year or so out. They did reference Minolta tech in their(Sony) talk about the new 100.

  19. #469

    Default          

    yeah, to be honest I use the 85mm in crop mode more than not and LOVE it's size when doing so. The extra DOF helps with focus and the bokeh/blur is still great. It was one of those lenses I didn't feel like I needed since my 55/50 in crop mode was close enough to my 35/85 pair but once I got the 85 anyway and put it in crop mode it was great. My biggest complaint about that setup is I wish they had a button or switch you could assign for crop/FF switching. Or at least the Fn menu.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  20. #470

    Default          

    What, with a 135 you could crop to 200. It's all the rage. All the cool kids are doing it.

    Seriously, when I do my fair run in the summer I often (alright, 90%) convince myself to bring the 135. With the adapter. 25, 35, 85, 135. That's heavy. And somehow the 55 sneaks in sometimes.

  21. #471
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Haha Andy. Thought are right there. It would be like a 200 2.7 in a small package. For $1500-1800 or so, one can't complain. But, I fear Sony would make it $2200.

  22. #472

    Default          

    oh, I wish they'd made it, trust me! I just don't think I'd buy it? I want a 24mm 1.8 or even 1.4 before I want the 135 personally. And I own their 28mm f/2 and the rok 24....
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  23. #473

    Default          

    my 85mm 1.8 looks like it'll ship today!
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  24. #474
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by jacobsen1 View Post
    my 85mm 1.8 looks like it'll ship today!
    Awesome. Looks like a real great lens from the reviews so far. In terms of price/performance vs the Batis

  25. #475

    Default          

    biggest problem is the batis used prices have dropped to ~$900 I'm guessing because of this lens. But I'm still getting some money out of my kit and reducing weight w/o losing anything IMHO. OSS but the a7rii has IBIS anyway. The batis DOF scales are cool but it's something I never use on a prime (I'd kill to have them on my landscape zooms).
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  26. #476

    Default          

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    135. Where the hell is my 135. SONY!!!!
    And here it is!

    Big, heavy, expensive, slow aperture. Nope. So I guess the 135mm A-mount sticks around.

  27. #477

    Default          

    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  28. #478

    Default          


    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ..._5_5_6_gm.html

    Sony 100-400. $2500. Not sure how I feel about this one. It's a lens I've wanted for a while now but I'm torn between it and keeping my 150-600 and 70-300. My pair basically costs the same as the 100-400. The killer is the size of the lenses and when/where I'd use them. I get 900mm effective with my 150-600 on crop. I get 100-450 effective with my 70-300 on crop in a much smaller package. But this is one lens w/o worry about anything. The 100-400 also works with sony's TCs so if that were sharp it brings the range issues back. But yeah, it's all about the weight in the bag for me and it's something I have to consider. My 70-300 goes all over with me. My 150-600 does NOT! It only comes out for specific shoots. And it's AF is pretty slow since it's using an adapter. So if the 100-400 is small enough I'd take it "all the time" it's probably worth getting but if not then the pair is the better choice really....

    all things to consider for myself but I'm glad the option is there! Pretty cool it's been designed to work with the TCs. The thing about their TCs is they're $550 each!
    100-400mm f/4.5-5.6
    w/ 1.4tc 140-560mm f/6.3-8
    w/2.0tc 200-800mm f/9-11

    I also wonder how well it will AF with either TC as that's pretty slow in terms of light at 6.3-8 and 9-11?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  29. #479

    Default          

    ok, so I picked up a sigma art 24mm (EF) with the sigma MC-11 adapter. Both are very well done. Adapter came with fm 1.01 and I updated it to 1.04 today. Sigma has their software and hardware on point! The software recognized whatever is plugged in, DLs and installs the firmware for you (it just tells you what you have FM wise and asks if you want to update). The only complaint is that they use a non standard USB cable. They include it but it'd be nice if it was the standard USB cable the CAMERAS ALL USE!!! Hello?!

    But because I have the MC-11 I picked up a used tamron 150-600 g2 EF mount to test -vs- the first version I have in A-mount using sony's laea3 adapter. At first the g2 and mc-11 was a massive disappointment. It wouldn't do anything unless I manually focused it, then it'd AF to MFD and just sit. A little googling led me to the firmware of the adapter question and the first update (to 1.02) is what allowed the adapter to work in lenses not specifically in sigma's list. So it now works. That took a half hour to sort out so I'll be testing more tomorrow. I will say the lens itself is MUCH nicer. It has a zoom lock that works at all FLs. It's lens foot is much nicer and has arca built in. The hood is nicer as well and all materials/surfaces feel nicer/higher end. For me it's going to come down to AF performance. If they tie then I'll probably keep the new version to get to one adapter, although it's nice just leaving the adapters on the lenses which I can only do if I keep one EF and one A-mount.

    Then the other question that comes up is now that I've got an EF adapter I'm toying with the idea of trying canon's 16-35mm f/4. It's cheaper than sony's so I'd make money switching actually and sony's lens has always underwhelmed me in terms of it's sunstars. I know I harp on that a lot but it effects a lot of what I shoot. So I might compare those two in a while. The canon is bigger and heavier but not by a ton. It kinda feels wrong going back to canon glass though. Another massive benefit with going back to some canon glass though (for landscape work) is it allows true full time manual focus with a scale that I can see and use which is one of the biggest things I miss with the sony lenses. I love being able to just put that old infinity mark where I want it and knowing everything will be in focus.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  30. #480
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    But I thought you said adapters are the devil's work.

  31. #481

    Default          

    yes, indeed they are.

    I'll sell the 24 art in a hot minute once there's a fast 24mm. Needs to be 1.8 at least (and actually preferably, I don't want something as big as the 35mm 1.4). I don't care if it's a sony or if sigma finally converts their range (I'd prefer that on price). AF on the 24mm is actually impressive. All functions work and it AFs super fast. But it's big (yet still smaller than the rokinon). I can't handle MFing the rokinon and it's also stupidly big as they just added some space on the back to make up the difference.

    With the 16-35mm it's just because I'm not happy with the sony 16-35mm f/4. The nice thing with the sony is it's sealed which an adapted lens isn't. But it's got crappy sunstars and no DOF scale. So because I have the adapter I'm tempted to try one but we'll see. The fact it's cheaper makes it all the more tempting. I know sony is working on a 16-35mm 2.8 G which will inevitably fix the stars and probably have an MF switch as well (but still no scale) but that will most likely cost $2k or more?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  32. #482
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    And that brings up the other thing keeping me from making a Sony switch. The lenses I would get are DSLR expensive.

  33. #483

    Default          

    I didn't do too bad on the switch but it was to f/4 lenses. Sony's primes are less than fuji's as long as you're not going to sony's 1.4 G master primes. Their f/2 or 1.8 options are tiny, inexpensive and fast enough considering FF.

    There's an article floating around on dpreview (and it's been on petapixel) about how it'll cost $11k to swap from a pro DSLR setup to the a9 with sony lenses. I find it interesting though because they used the trade in value @ KEH and bought both the 70-200 2.8 and 100-400... They got $11k in value out of the old kit.
    Trade in is HALF what you can get on ebay or FM typically... So that'd be $22k value or breaking even. Then if you bought the 2.0TC for the 70-200 2.8 to give you the same coverage as the 100-400 you'd save another $2k. Or buy the 100-400 and skip the 70-200 if that's your thing but the point is it's unlikely you'd need/want both.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  34. #484
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    If I went back to primes, it would be a lot more doable cost wise. My thinking was if I stayed with my current lens equivalent. The Sony 24-70/70-200 2.8 pair are
    Although, with that said, a Sony switch even to the a9 would be more cost effective than jumping to the Fuji GFX.

    That DP article sounds like it's just stirring the pot. They should know the resale value on the used market. But they need people clicking links to sell advertising.

  35. #485

    Default          

    Gah, I've stayed away from that Sigma adapter as I don't want to find out that I like the Art lenses more than the Zeiss that I already have... especially at the 135mm end now that the FE replacement isn't going to work. Very curious how the AF works. The 135mm through the old adapter isn't great.

  36. #486
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    Do eeet! Get the Siggy Art lenses

  37. #487

    Default          

    the adapter works flawlessly with the 24mm. With the tamron 150-600 not so much, but I get that, it's an identical FL to sigma's own lens (which has two versions) so I'd bet their either intentionally mess it up or it's just a convenient mistake.

    The tamron 150-600 g2 is a nicer lens physically but IQ seems identical and my old version costs less and works better with the sony adapter. So the G2 is going back. But I DO prefer it's built. Better materials, looks nicer shape wise, a lock switch AND the zoom ring is a lock that works at any FL. The tripod collar has an arca plate built in. Blah blah blah. The G2 weighs 2277 vs 2204 for the G1. Those numbers include caps and adapters but the G1 also has an arca plate in there. I'm guessing it's the VR built into the G2?
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  38. #488

    Default          

    so, yeah, sigma just rolled out $100 rebates on their art lenses and $100 off the MC-11... They're also including the USB dock with their lenses AND a 77mm UV filter (a $105 value)... So that's $200 off what I just paid AND the free dock and filter. I'm 20 days out from purchase. The question is do I call and ask for the refund or do I just return and rebuy (less hassles but I'll have to spend ~$15 to ship it back). If I know how these things go I'd bet I have a 50% chance at the credit and a 0% chance at the dock if I call. But a return is pretty much 100%. I just hate forcing them into a situation where they now have a "used" 24mm and MC-11 they have to sell LNIB.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  39. #489

    Default          

    called B&H, getting $200 credited to my CC and they're sending me the dock and filter as well so I'm even w/o returning anything!
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  40. #490
    Worn out shutter BobbyT's Avatar
    Member#
    209
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Out of nowhere!

    Default          

    Nice!

  41. #491
    Pro rkane's Avatar
    Member#
    4184
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    East Greenwich, RI

    Default          

    That is great.

  42. #492

    Default          

    so sony announced the 16-35 2.8 and 12-24mm yesterday. I'm tempted by the 16-35mm if the performance is enough better but I'm not racing to try/get one. I've always liked f/4 wide zooms. The 12-24mm isn't that appealing to me because the 10-18mm covers FF from 12-16mm and is also tiny and a heck of a crop wide lens. The 12-24mm would be nice for some arch work but not at that cost. The 10-18mm can also take filters at 12-16mm so it's easier to do that and fix distortion issues in post.
    http://camerasize.com/compact/#624.4...2,624.553,wd,t
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  43. #493

    Default          


    Sony telephotos by Ben Jacobsen, on Flickr



    so, yeah, I've been toying with this idea for a while now (see the announcement post above)... What made me "jump" was shooting the Js 2 weeks ago. I took out the 70-300 the first 3 days and it did really well but without press access I wanted more reach. The last day I took the 70-300 on the a6000 and put the 150-600 on the a6300. I got some shots I couldn't have gotten with the 70-300 for sure but the keeper rate was maybe 50~60% with a bunch OOF but also a ton just off target from a long FL on a rolling boat and no IS. The 70-300 was amazing and had a ~90% keeper rate I'd guess (in terms of on target and in focus). Impressive. So this got me thinking though because the 2 outer lenses are close enough to the price of the 100-400 I could sell both to fund the 100-400. I LOVE having the 150-600 for crazy tight lighthouse shots etc which is why I've never sold it. And the 70-300 is a great small light lens when I care about that. But the thing I'm noticing is a don't even take my 70-300 often when I'm worried about size/weight (I just top out at 24-70, slap it on crop and deal). And I don't take the 150-600 out unless I'm on a specific mission... So I'm hoping the 100-400 will come out just as often (IE not get left at home because it's not the 70-300 size wise) but will also get me those super tight shots I love from the 150-600. Now bear in mind my 150-600 lighthouse shots have all been on the a7rii so FF which means using the 100-400 on crop yields the same FL with more reach technically (since it's 24mp -vs- the a7rii's 19 when cropped). Not as nice a sensor but damn close. There's also the possibility of adding a 1.4 or 2.0 TC down the road which would either meet or pass the 150-600 in terms of FL (and I usually use it on a tripod anyway).

    anyway, yeah, wall of text...

    The 100-400 is built VERY well. Focuses close and fast. It's got a removable tripod foot (the collar lives on the lens) which is nice as it's easier to remove but gives you the option for landscapes/tripod work. I miss the foot on the 70-300 a lot and punt with a pano clamp/plate... But even in testing (I wish I had two identical cameras, not three close but not the same... ) the 70-300 constantly impresses me with it's AF speed and accuracy. It's no slouch! So it's a tough decision...
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  44. #494

    Default          

    I am pretty interested in your thoughts on that new lens. I recently realized that the longest lens I have is the 135mm f/1.8 Sony Zeiss. It is pretty okay wide open (great at f/2.8) but with the adapter just doesn't do wonderful things with moving objects. I was taking pictures of racing cars last weekend* and it was pretty bad. I thought it was the speed of the cars but even on parade laps I would lose about 1/4 to 1/2 the shots. I switched over to the 85mm (admittedly wider) and it hit all the time at speed.

    Years ago I had the Canon 100-400 and I really, really liked it. Perhaps...

    *And for the record, Watkins Glen track has put up so much fencing now that you pretty much rarely see a car in full view. And when you do get a full view there are dozens of billboards in the way. It probably doesn't get in the way of watching a race much but any photography is limited to just a few locations. I have to go through my father's pictures again and find the shots he took from under the Armco at the F1 and CanAm races. Different times.

  45. #495

    Default          

    I also had a canon 100-400 that I liked before I switched. I think it'll be the sweet spot but I'm very much on the fence. I might need to rent the TCs soon (before I can't return the lens) and see how they go because I'd like to pick one or both up down the road if they work well. For how I use the lens as long as the IQ is good with the 2.0 TC that'd be my choice because I was using the 150-600 stopped down and MF all the time anyway... So that would make this lens a ~f11 800mm which would be amazing. If not the 1.4 is close enough and I've seen some great samples of that on the 100-400 already:https://www.flickr.com/photos/markga...7684618916952/
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  46. #496

    Default          

    oh snap, this review has links and comments about BOTH TCs!:https://sonyalpha.blog/2017/07/16/so...test-a-review/
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  47. #497

    Default          

    ok, call me crazy but I'm also considering the RX10 IV? It's much smaller/lighter overall vs the other options (OK the 70-300 is a tad lighter lens only). It also has 960fps video and borrows some AF from the a9? Uses the same batteries as well... Very tempted to go that route as well...
    http://camerasize.com/compact/#624.6...6.553,555,wa,t


    I know it's a 1" sensor but that's the only negative I can see really? Not changing lenses ever is a plus. I shoot these shots from a tripod anyway so I should be able to keep it at it's base ISO. The fact it's only 20 something MP should be OK as that's what the a6x00 is anyway.
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

  48. #498

    Default          

    /

    https://petapixel.com/2017/09/15/tam...5-6-3-vc-lens/
    Tamron announced today that it’s developing a new Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD lens. Weighing it at just 39.3 ounces (~1.11kg), the lens will be the lightest in its class (the ultra-telephoto zoom lens category).

    The lens has an “advanced optical design,” including 3 low dispersion lens elements which give “greater aberration reduction.” It uses magnesium in key areas of the barrel, which improves weight reduction, strength, and portability.

    It also comes with Tamron’s original eBAND Coating, which Tamron says provides superior anti-reflection performance to reduce ghosting.

    “The Model A035 delivers fast and precise autofocus performance and consistently powerful vibration compensation benefits,” said Tamron. “This is thanks to the high-speed Dual MPU control system found in the latest Tamron lenses.”

    The new lens will be fully compatible with Tamron’s 1.4x teleconverter, as well as the Tamron TAP-in Console. There will be an optional accessory of an Arca Swiss compatible tripod mount, too.

    “This combination of features and optional accessories join to create a lens that photographers everywhere will enjoy using in various shooting situations,” said Tamron.

    Other features and specs include a minimum focus distance of 59 inches (~1.5m), a maximum magnification ratio of 1:3.6, moisture resistance, and a fluorine coating for weather protection.

    The Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD lens lens will be launched at the end of 2017, available in both Canon and Nikon mounts.
    So I hope that works with the sigma adapter (I tried the V2 of the 150-600 and it didn't work as well in canon mount on the sigma adapter) but that's a HUGE weight savings as well as a potential money save too. The fact it works with their 1.4TC means it's a lateral step.

    Sony 70-300g 935g
    RX10 IV 1095g (lens AND camera obviously but this also includes a battery!)
    Tamron 100-400 1110g (1210g w/ adapter)
    Sony 100-400 1663g
    Tamron 150-600 2068g (2163g w/adapter)

    B&H already has a listing: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...6_3_di_vc.html
    I own this joint!
    gear list.
    yesterday is history, tomorrow a mystery, today is a gift, that's why it's called the present.

+ Reply to Thread Go Back to forum

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts