New lens or second camera/lens?

S

Species8514

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8
Name
GR
Edit My Images
No
(apologies if this isnt the right section)

Ok so this is my quandary...

I currently have a Sony A7R mark 3, and a Tamron 28-70mm lens, which I use for landscape photography, and am very happy with.
 
Last edited:
Hi and welcome to TP

Ah! the joys of camera gear choices....a bit like the apparently nebulous nature of 'fluidic space' (;))

But seriously, I used to be a Canon user and could never justify the cost of a 500 or 600mm prime. Lugging the Canon kit I did have just got burdensome. I now use Olympus and am well pleased.

@GyRob I think has both Sony and Olympus so should be able to give some cross platform insights?
 
Thanks for the reply - Gone are the days of me lugging around 6kg of camera equipment all over the world!! You've got some really nice photos on your portfolio - What did you take the Juvenile Bald Eagle with?
 
Box Brownie said:
Hi and welcome to TP

Ah! the joys of camera gear choices....a bit like the apparently nebulous nature of 'fluidic space' (;))

But seriously, I used to be a Canon user and could never justify the cost of a 500 or 600mm prime. Lugging the Canon kit I did have just got burdensome. I now use Olympus and am well pleased.

@GyRob I think has both Sony and Olympus so should be able to give some cross platform insights?
Click to expand...
My 500mm & 600mm primes have all been cheap, never more than £100. They are old manual focus models however so tend to be even more of a challenge to use than modern AF primes (& undoubtedly of lesser quality too)
 
Species8514 said:
Thanks for the reply - Gone are the days of me lugging around 6kg of camera equipment all over the world!! You've got some really nice photos on your portfolio - What did you take the Juvenile Bald Eagle with?
Click to expand...

Agreed oh the weight!!!!! and thanks for looking at my 500px portfolio :)

The Bald Eagle info is on the 500px page if you scroll down
Canon 7D with the 100-400 @100mm
A captive bred bird but wonderful all the same.

PS just realised that was from 2013 and just how noisy the 7D was......................might have to find the original file for another look and re-PP it with the much improved noise reduction filters that software now offers ;)
 
Last edited:
I'd buy the 200-600mm.
I've used apsc and 150-600mm, m43 and 100-400mm.
I now use a Sony A9 and 200-600mm and it's by far my favourite combination.
With your A7Riii you'll have great cropability too.
 
Last edited:
What Olympus camera and lens are you thinking of? I was at one point thinking of moving away to Olympus for similar reasons as I thought i could get a cheaper and lighter setup. From advice on here the older Olympus cameras wouldnt be up to wildlife due to AF performance.

The Sony 200-600 is a tried and tested route that causes you little adjustment of existing kit. You know the output you’re getting via the A7R3. There is also a used market for it so it would be easier to sell on if you find birds isn’t for you. Your budget should get you a used 200-600. It’s not far off a new 200-600 from WEX £1549 after taking the £100 cash back into account- final cost £1449.
 
pity you could not hire some gear ( hard these days i know )

Its not for everyone and many give up after a short while.

i always felt like i needed the reach of a 24-3000 Nikon P1000 but with APS-C / full frame quality.
 
I've just bought a 100-400 to go with my X-Pro 2, which is a 600mm equivalent on the crop sensor as far as i'm aware. It is a lump of a lens and wasn't cheapt but already i'm really pleased with it and it gives me good reach. Like you, i'm not planning on getting heavily into bird/wildlife photography but living by the coast and having 3 or 4 river estuaries pretty close I think I can make some good use of the lens. Good luck with your decision/choice.
 
To get the best out of birding at leased a omd mkII and the 300 f4 but the 200/600 should be fine more so on a - a9 iv not had a - a7rIII but i think it would beat the Olympus regarding in focus BIF shots .

The Olympus does very well but even the em1x with bird detect falls behind what Sony gives my a9 MKII is just amazing .

Rob.
 
Taking in to account your valuable feedback, I think I'll go with the 200-600. Trying to find a used one though is proving quite difficult, but yes, with the current £100 cashback, its just within my budget. Thanks all.
 
Species8514 said:
Taking in to account your valuable feedback, I think I'll go with the 200-600. Trying to find a used one though is proving quite difficult, but yes, with the current £100 cashback, its just within my budget. Thanks all.
Click to expand...
With the cashback deal it can be cheaper going with a new lens with cash back than an used lens. I’ve recently had a look on WEX for the Sony 90mm macro lens. It’s £9 cheaper new with cashback than they are selling used.
 
That's interesting as I was looking at panamoz yesterday. If you've had no issues, I might go with them as they are a fair bit cheaper, even taking in to account the cashback (which I realise I wouldn't get with Panamoz).

In answer to another question about what on the Olympus side I'd been considering, I had narrowed it down to a used OM-D E-M1 Mark II (£550), and then a used Pro 40 150mm F/2.8 ED Lens (£700) + 2x teleconverter (£200).

I realise there's a fair difference in the approach, but the 300 fr was a little out of my price range and the 150mm had such good reviews + it would be fast if I didn't need the converter. I assumed though the converter would degrade the IQ - I just hadn't gotten to the point yet of finding out how much.
 
The Sony 200-600 is pretty good value at around £1500 and you'd be delighted with it.
In APS-C mode you get to about 800mm too.
But quite a cumbersome thing especially with hood on even manipulating in and out of a car needs care.
 
4wd said:
The Sony 200-600 is pretty good value at around £1500 and you'd be delighted with it.
In APS-C mode you get to about 800mm too.
But quite a cumbersome thing especially with hood on even manipulating in and out of a car needs care.
Click to expand...
You must have a very small car :LOL:
Never been an issue getting it out of my car....:)
 
It was the size and weight that made me look at alternatives, like the sigma 100-400mm, but I think I'd miss the extra 200mm, and whilst I know I'm being silly, I just can't get over the fact that thre nikon and canon versions of the same lens are so much cheaper.....
 
Species8514 said:
It was the size and weight that made me look at alternatives, like the sigma 100-400mm, but I think I'd miss the extra 200mm, and whilst I know I'm being silly, I just can't get over the fact that thre nikon and canon versions of the same lens are so much cheaper.....
Click to expand...
Don't worry about it, it's an awesome lens for the money.....
 
Species8514 said:
It was the size and weight that made me look at alternatives, like the sigma 100-400mm, but I think I'd miss the extra 200mm, and whilst I know I'm being silly, I just can't get over the fact that thre nikon and canon versions of the same lens are so much cheaper.....
Click to expand...
Which lenses are you comparing it to? Mirrorless lenses are generally a bit more than older DSLR lenses. The Nikon 200-500 lens is cheaper but it’s an F mount. Nikon haven’t released their mirrorless equivalent yet. Canons mirrorless 100-500 is nearly £3k. The Sony 200-600 is quite well priced in the scheme of mirrorless. £1450 for a UK mirrorless long lens isn’t bad.
 
I think I'll have to bite the bullet and go with 200-600mm. I have tried lenses with adapters and they are usually great for static or slow moving objects, but fast/erratic they tend to struggle compared to native lenses.

It's a shame there arent more options available, but it is what it is I guess - unless I want to go back to a dslr, and I could probably get something second-hand, it's really the 600. But it's been really useful feedback, thank you all very much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top