A6000 - recommendation for wildlife photography

[NoGroove]

Hello.  New to the forum.  Amateur but enthusiastic photographer.  moved from D90 with 18 to 200 zoom to A6000.  Added the 18 to 105 zoom.  Do a lot of wildlife photography and need something longer.  Looking at the 70 to 300 g master.  concerned about the weight on the A6000 body and the lack of a tripod mount.  Previous experience with the 18 to 200 nikon was that more reach was needed.  Would appreciate any comments and recommendations from the forum members.  

Thanks in advance....

[markfireblade]

I have that lens with my a6300 and it's fine, but I think the a6300 body is made of more robust materials, if that makes any difference to the lens mount...

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

The 70-300 G is fairly light. At the same time, there's not a huge difference in reach between 200mm and 300mm.

 

If you're really into wildlife, a better option may be to buy a secondary camera which accommodates longer lenses.

 

If you buy a used APS-C DSLR with a Tamron or Sigma long zoom, that should land you in the neighbourhood of a new 70-300 G lens.

[tinplater]

I have been using both my 70-200 F4 and 100-400 OSS Gmaster II on my A6000 without any issues related to weight on mount stress.  However I carry the camera most of the time by the lens, and of course both have tripod mounts.  It is a much more comfortable portable setup than my old Canon 5d II and Canon's 100-400.

[NoGroove]

The 70-300 G is fairly light. At the same time, there's not a huge difference in reach between 200mm and 300mm.

 

If you're really into wildlife, a better option may be to buy a secondary camera which accommodates longer lenses.

 

If you buy a used APS-C DSLR with a Tamron or Sigma long zoom, that should land you in the neighbourhood of a new 70-300 G lens.

Thx.  You make a good point about there not being a huge difference between 200 and 300mm.  an option for me could be to buy a long zoom for my old nikon d90.