Looking for advice on telephoto lenses for a7 iv:

[mlevin77]

I am going to have an opportunity to catch some unique wildlife, much of which will be at a considerable distance. I'm not a professional, but I do a lot of nature photography with my a7 iv. I currently have a Tamron 70-300 telephoto lens which I like a lot. I mostly will not be using a tripod, but there are times where I will have one, so I'm trying to decide: do I

1) get something that covers 300-600, and assume I will only use that lens when using a tripod, or

2) get a 50-400 Tamron like https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1719896-REG/tamron_a067_50_400mm_f_4_5_6_3_di_iii.html and not have to switch lenses and give up on the higher mm.

     The question is, are the >400 ranges useful or will be too blurry even with tripod (given animal movement, wind, etc.), and are there any down-sides to that 50-400 lens. It seems kind of too good to be true, covering that wide range - what are we giving up? There are much more expensive lenses covering a much narrower range. Any issues here that I'm missing?

 

Related issue: something like the 60-600mm https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1741153-REG/sigma_60_600mm_f_4_5_6_3_dg_dn.html , what are the downsides there? Weight, size, and cost, but otherwise - at the lower ranges, is it fine without a tripod or does this thing require a tripod no matter what mm I'm shooting at?  Will it be just as good at say 100mm as my current lens, or are there tradeoffs that mean that it's not good as an all-in-one?

 

[KennyC]

Hello melevin77. 

I too own the A7 iv and I bought the Sony FE 200 - 600mm G lens.  I absolutely love this lens.  There are a lot of videos on YouTube about the lens and the settings the user used to capture wildlife and birds in flight even.  I've also used this lens with no tripod and I've never had a blur.  So just throwing out another lens option for you to consider.  Good luck!  

EDIT: This lens has Optical Image Stabilization in it too. 

https://electronics.sony.com/imaging/lenses/all-e-mount/p/sel200600g

Edited June 30, 2023 by KennyC
Forgot to mention built in OIS in the lens.

[XKAES]

One important factor you left out is $$$. 

That aside, you won't find much difference between 300mm and 400mm, so go with something that has 500mm or longer.  And decide if you need a zoom.  A fixed 500mm, 600mm, or 800mm might work for you -- and would be lighter and less expensive.  There are a ton to choose from -- new or used.  I just nabbed a 500mm f6.3 CAT for $35 in mint condition.  I don't really need it, but it was too good to pass up.

If you want a zoom, only get one with a WIDE range for convenience.  A 50-400mm is convenient, but will not be as good at 400mm as a 200-400mm zoom, for example.  The problem with long tele-zooms is that they are not fast (not too good for auto-focusing) OR they are fast (not too good for the wallet).

 

Edited July 1, 2023 by XKAES

[FunWithCameras]

The classic answers to this are Sony's 100-400 (if you want the 100-200 range), or the 200-600 (if you want to get out to 600, which is worth it). The 200-600 is a good choice.

Consider whether you want the hassle of a full tripod, or if maybe a monopod would be enough.

[XKAES]

11 minutes ago, FunWithCameras said:

 The 200-600 is a good choice.

I agree -- if you happen to TWO GRAND burning a  whole in your pocket.  Since you're using a 70-300mm, I assume that this might not be the case.  You can get a 500mm f6.3 for around $50.  Like I said at the beginning:

"One important factor you left out is $$$." 

Edited July 1, 2023 by XKAES

[mlevin77]

thanks everyone! To make sure I understand: the fixed lens is something like

https://www.amazon.com/Foto4easy-Manual-Telephoto-Mirror-Adapter/dp/B08MTLYVTP

   ?  I had no idea it could get down to this low cost. And it really works well at those magnifications?   Or is there a better site you're buying these from?

 

[XKAES]

That's the same lens I have, but mine is white.  It not only came in Black OR White, it came under different labels, such as Vivitar Series 1, Bowers, Samyang, Phoenix, and others.  They are all the same lens, and if you shop around you can get it for a lot less -- especially used.  I found mine at a Thrift store and the label on mine is Shutterbug -- no kidding.  If it's a 500mm f6.3 CAT, they are all the same.

I wasn't expecting much in terms of resolution, but I have a 500mm Yashica 500 f8 CAT and a Sigma 500mm APO f7.2 to compare it to.  I was very surprised at the high resolution -- I used a resolution chart.

Of course, it is a fixed aperture with a narrow DOF, and is manual focus only.  It can not be used in shutter priority or programmed exposure modes -- only M & A.

But if you don't like it, you can always sell it.

Edited July 1, 2023 by XKAES

[FunWithCameras]

5 hours ago, XKAES said:

I agree -- if you happen to TWO GRAND burning a  whole in your pocket.  Since you're using a 70-300mm, I assume that this might not be the case.  You can get a 500mm f6.3 for around $50.  Like I said at the beginning:

"One important factor you left out is $$$." 

I didn’t recommend the 600mm f/4 GM or the 400mm f/2.8 GM. Those are the stratospheric choices. OP, make sure you are sitting down before you look up those prices!
 

The 200-600 G is a good choice for those of us on more reasonable levels of affordability. It is not cheap, but long lenses generally aren’t cheap. It supports teleconverters, adding the option of using it as a 1200mm f/13 lens with AF on some bodies (the A7RV does support it - I have used it, even out to 1800mm using APS-C crop - that’s entertaining).

The catadioptric lenses are cheap, and I am prepared to believe that some perform reasonably well (within limits). The MF only is an issue shooting BiF. The doughnut bokeh may bother some people. 

You offered one option; I’m offering another, with autofocus. The OP can read up on both, and make a decision. If someone can afford an A7RV, we can assume they are not penniless 🙂

[XKAES]

10 hours ago, FunWithCameras said:

If someone can afford an A7RV, we can assume they are not penniless 🙂

There are plenty of shutterbugs that have little cash to spare after buying their digital-wonder SLR.  I've met many.  Some have taken out loans to afford their camera.  Some of us live in the real world.

Edited July 2, 2023 by XKAES

[thebeardedgroundsman]

I'm a complete amateur but I have had a 2nd hand 100-400mm GM for some time (£1500 minus trade in for my old A-mount lenses), which I love for wildlife and some landscape. I recently bought myself a x1.4 tele converter and have just come back from a 2 week trip, in which I used this combo extensively. I was gob-smacked at the quality of images I have got with it. This combo gave me 140-560mm on my full frame camera.

Yes I do lose a stop of light, but this did not cause me any problems.

With IBIS and OSS and a 1/800-1/1000 shutter speed I did not need a tripod.  

I love the idea that a 600mm prime might be cheaper - £12,000 new for the GM! - I did see one 2nd hand for a mere £6,000!

Edited July 3, 2023 by thebeardedgroundsman

[FunWithCameras]

On 7/4/2023 at 5:46 AM, thebeardedgroundsman said:

I'm a complete amateur but I have had a 2nd hand 100-400mm GM for some time (£1500 minus trade in for my old A-mount lenses), which I love for wildlife and some landscape. I recently bought myself a x1.4 tele converter and have just come back from a 2 week trip, in which I used this combo extensively. I was gob-smacked at the quality of images I have got with it. This combo gave me 140-560mm on my full frame camera.

Yes I do lose a stop of light, but this did not cause me any problems.

With IBIS and OSS and a 1/800-1/1000 shutter speed I did not need a tripod.  

I love the idea that a 600mm prime might be cheaper - £12,000 new for the GM! - I did see one 2nd hand for a mere £6,000!

Just be aware that these catadioptric lenses (sometimes called mirror or mirror reflex lenses) have some serious drawbacks. Despite those drawbacks I do occasionally consider getting one.

One of the serious drawbacks is the fixed aperture, typically f/8. And by fixed I mean the maximum aperture is f/8 and the minimum aperture is f/8!

Another drawback is the odd looking bokeh - out of focus highlights have a recognisable "doughnut" shape due to the central mirror.

The last drawback that bothers me is that these lenses are generally from manufacturers I've never heard of - I don't know what the long-term reliability might be.

On the other side, they are usually seriously cheap for the focal length. And far lighter than you'd expect for the focal length, too. That's why I keep looking at the them every so often 🙂 

---

I have considered the 400m f/2.8 GM and the 600mm f/4 GM, too. There are two things holding me back. Well, three...

1. both are very very very expensive by my standards
2. both are heavier than I can handle comfortably handle for any length of time
3. if I have to choose one, which one?? (I'd want both!)

I keep telling myself "They are way too heavy for my aging physique", but I'm dreading the day that Sony announces new versions that reduce the weight substantially, because that would eliminate the easy argument against them! Sony already did that to me with the 70-200mm f/2.8 GM II (and now I own one...).

[XKAES]

Your "serious drawbacks" are for others "something to consider" -- which you should do with any lens. 

Sure, CATS have fixed apertures, but they are one third the length, under one third the weight, and much less than one third the cost of non-CAT alternatives.  For me that's a "fair trade", not a "serious drawback".

My 500mm f6.3 is labeled "SHUTTERBUG", but was made by Samyang, and also sold as Vivitar Series 1, Phoenix, etc.  It cost me $30 (used) and is remarkably good when compared to my much larger, heavier, and expensive Sigma APO 500mm f7.2 APO non-CAT.

If you want to be "serious", CATS are something to consider.

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by XKAES