Third party lenses

[mathand1]

Ok,

So you get what you pay for in this world.

But like many of us, I'm on a bit of a budget for a telephoto lens in the region 0f 200/300mm . 

So the question is, what third party lens alternatives  can you advice without having to take out a mortgage?

 

Thanks for any help guys  

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

If you have an E Mount camera, there are only branded Sony lenses in the telephoto range. The one exception I can think of is the Tamron 18-200 superzoom for crop sensor.

 

Otherwise, the alternative is to buy a DSLR lens with a Canon EF mount and adapt it with a Metabones or Sigma MC-11 adapter. You'll have to pay attention to lens compatibility in this case, as some lenses work better than others. There is plenty information on the makers' pages and web forums.

[tinplater]

I would strongly recommend you go native...adapted lenses tend to have focus issues which are compounded in the telephoto range and are larger and heavier with the adapter.  My recommendation would be the Sony 70-200 f4 used which can be had for around $800 or the 70-300.  The 70-200 is relatively lightweight and very sharp.  If too expensive, start saving rather than buy off brand, adapter, and struggle with focus (just my opinion).

[slackercruster]

I tried a Pentax 300 adapted to a Leica then adapted Leica to the E.

 

Doable if you have to have something, but poor IQ. Maybe it would do better with a direct Pentax to E, but I didn't have that adapter.

[Username]

..... I'm on a bit of a budget for a telephoto lens in

the region 0f 200/300mm . 

So the question is, what third party lens alternatives  

can you advice without having to take out a mortgage?

 

..........

     

Old manual focus lenses are very affordable, even the really

good ones. Nothing you've posted thus far precludes using

MF lenses. You can turn that tired cliche on its head and get 

MORE than you pay for. Don't let the remark about a Pentax 

300 scare you away. There's definitely something abnormal 

there. Or mebbe even something VERY normal: User Error !    

  

BTW, if you do adapt an older lens, you'll be pleased to hear  

that the a3000 is Sony's only tripod-friendly APS-C E-mount  

body for users of older heavier lenses. The other models do 

have a tripod threaded hole, but no one in their right mind is 

gonna trust those skrawny little base plates to cantilever the 

off-balance load of a typical heavier older lens. 

   

200-300mm on your a3000 is definitely tripod territory. But if 

you really expect to skip the tripod, then you better be ready 

to pay Sony's price for a native lens with optical stabilization. 

    

Adapting Canon EF lenses is hardly a budget-wise approach 

unless you already own the Canon lenses, and even then it's

a compatibility nightmare ... sometimes, everything EXCEPT

optical stabilization works. Equally often, nothing at all works.  

  

Simplest route is the $300 Sony's 55-210 OSS. It's not very

compact, but it's not heavy at all, and is stabilized. It is also 

actually sharp ... not a miracle, in that it's of modest aperture. 

It's Sony's kit tele for buyers of their two-lens kit, so you can

prolly find a very clean used one from someone who felt too 

embarrassed to even be seen with it, and quickly upgraded. 

His loss, your gain :-) 

 

 

   

  

`

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

Oh, yeah, if the OP has an A3000 then 55-210 is the obvious choice. A good match in terms of price and performance.

 

I got the impression OP was after a 200mm or 300mm prime, maybe for full frame, where adapted EF lenses is the most affordable route.

[Username]

`       

 

The OP has another thread running, concerning 

the controls on an a3000 so I knew which format 

and which camera he uses. 

   

It's a marketplace flop, but there's no accounting 

for taste ... it's a huge bargain. Sony had dumped  

them in the U.S. for $225 ! And it's such an early 

model that it comes with the GOOD kit lens, the 

old non-PZ non-collapsible one :-) The lens alone 

is worth the price, so the body is more or less a 

"freebie bundled accessory". I actually did buy it 

just to get that lens, so I have zero complaint with 

my free camera body :-) It cannot do BB-AF so I

assigned it to my old Nikkor lens herd.  

   

I spoze Sony's marketing error was in giving it a 

"faux SLR" body shell, looking like an ultra-zoom 

bridge model. But it's a normal APSC E-mount, in 

sheep's clothing. And the faux SLR shell provides 

a generous surface surrounding the tripod hole, a 

feature DRASTICALLY absent on all other APSC  

E-mount bodies. It's a very basic model, but even 

before the clearance it was only $375 with lens. It 

shoulda been EVERY noob's entry level ILC. Did 

I already say "No accounting for taste" ? I did ? 

Z'OK ... deserved repeating ;-) 

[Mr_A7s]

@ OP -- if you shoot in good light condition, I would highly recommend RX10 IV(24-600mm f4). Save your back & bank from lugging those 300mm, 400mm or 600mm heavy lenses. As an A9 owner, I'm amazed with AF tracking on this RX10 IV. 

 

These were shot w/ RX10 IV:

_DSC0396 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

_DSC0333 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

_DSC0322 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

[richoff]

I bought the Sigma MC-11 a few days ago to try my Canon glass on the a7r3... the long & short of it (for me);  the auto focus does work, but not up to the level I was expecting, I feel the focus worked better on the (old) Canon 5dm3... i think i'll return it for a native lens.

[mathand1]

@ OP -- if you shoot in good light condition, I would highly recommend RX10 IV(24-600mm f4). Save your back & bank from lugging those 300mm, 400mm or 600mm heavy lenses. As an A9 owner, I'm amazed with AF tracking on this RX10 IV. 

 

These were shot w/ RX10 IV:

_DSC0396 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

_DSC0333 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

_DSC0322 by Dylan Nguyen, on Flickr

Excellent Pictures ;-)

[tinplater]

What would you say to a 24-200mm constant aperture 2.8 zoom with Zeiss optics for $350?  It's a great lens, it is, however, permanently attached to a Sony RX10 version I.

[Username]

I bought the Sigma MC-11 ....... the auto focus does work,

but not up to the level I was expecting, I feel the focus

worked better on the (old) Canon 5dm3... i think i'll return

it for a native lens.

   

Above is one of the more POSITIVE experiences of 

adapting EF to E. Most reports are worse. I speak 

not just from 2nd hand info [altho thaz included, too]. 

I've bought 4 and kept 2, and the 2 I've kept are not 

useful for AF nor IS ... but at the holiday discounted 

prices, they serve some purposes worth keeping. At 

their normal prices, they would NOT be keepers for 

any purpose at all ... and, important budget matter: 

I use ONLY my EF lenses that are already on hand.  

Even at the semi-acceptable holiday pricing, there's 

only insanity in buying some Canon lenses AND the 

EF-to-E adapters all "from scratch". IOW, don't eat 

yellow snow. 

[Username]

What would you say to a 24-200mm constant aperture 2.8 zoom

with Zeiss optics for $350? ...... permanently attached to a Sony

RX10 version I.

   

I know what I'd say:

 

Sony should give them away in a no-charge online raffle. 

[Guest Jaf-Photo]

I know what I'd say:

 

Sony should give them away in a no-charge online raffle.

 

Agree. Asking this type of question is often pointless because most people will recommend the latest thing they bought, just because they bought it.

[petach123]

Ok,

So you get what you pay for in this world.

But like many of us, I'm on a bit of a budget for a telephoto lens in the region 0f 200/300mm . 

So the question is, what third party lens alternatives  can you advice without having to take out a mortgage?

 

Thanks for any help guys  

 

I am new to the Sony range, but I have just got the Tamrom 70-300 f/4-5.6 Di VC USD from Wex at £329.  Why?  Well I had a Canon 17-40L left from my Canon days and have it on an adapter (Sigma Canon)  It works really well.  So, when I saw the Tamron in Canon fit, and needing a long lens I got it.  It focuses quick enough except at the long end in poor light (it hunts).  Image sharpness  suffers at the long end in anything below f/8. Manual focus is smooth.  Centre focus lock on is not available nor is "eye focus".  Hope this helps, may be worth a look.