Jump to content

Thoughts on a6700 + 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS + teleconverter


Recommended Posts

I have the a6770 which I like very much, but I also bought the FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS, which has great IQ and reach, but is just much too heavy handheld for me now at my age.  I definitely need a much lighter outfit.  

So I'm thinking of the 70-350mm lens.  Together with a 2x TC, how many stops will I lose?  Also, will the IQ be just too soft at the far end of the zoom?  Thoughts appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact: 2xTC will make you lose two stops, so your lens will become roughly a f/9-13 lens.

The answer: it depends.

Teleconverters are a quick fix to extend the focal length of a lens. They were popular in the old days of prime lenses because zooms were expensive and primes were fast, light and with good optical quality. Plus, film was more forgiving than digital on image quality. 

That said, the answer is yes if you will use your 70-350 mostly without, and you add the TC in some specific cases, but if you plan to keep it 100% of the times, either you are going to accept compromises in image quality and handling, or you'd better stick with what you have. Keep in mind that the 70-350 wide open is already soft at the long end, the TC will add extra softness and you will be forced to use it wide open and ramp the ISO up to be able to manage the outfit without a tripod.

If the issue is handholding your current outfit, what I can recommend and what I use when I need to hold the camera for a long time, e.g. when following an airshow or sports from the side, is a monopod. It removes a lot of the strain, does not impact on image quality, actually it improves because of less fatigue, and I often use it as a walking stick. Plus, it comes at a fraction of the cost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sony only supports teleconverters (both the 1.4x and 2x) on a select group of lenses - all of them white, and not even all of the white ones (for example, the 70-200 f/4 mark 1 does not support a teleconverter). 

One possible reason is that the lens has to be designed with room at the body end to receive the part of the teleconverter that sticks out.

There are "conspiracy" theories that suggest Sony wants you to buy expensive lenses to use teleconverters. I don't believe that, but hey, there are plenty of posts online making those claims.

Anyway, you can find lists of supported lenses on Sony's website under both the teleconverter pages.

From memory (so I might miss one or two):

  • 70-200mm f/2.8 GM both mark 1 and mark 2
  • 70-200mm f/4 G II (only)
  • 100-400mm GM
  • 200-600mm G
  • 300mm GM
  • 400mm GM
  • 600mm GM

I think that's all the lenses that can be used with teleconverters.

I have seen a few reports that there is at least one Sigma lens which can be used with a Sony teleconverter, but I don't remember which lens (or lenses).

And before you ask, there are no third party teleconverters for the E mount (unlike, for example, Canon's EF mount, where there are multiple third party teleconverters). Apparently the reason that there are no third party teleconverter has to do with Sony licensing - they license out the lens side of the mount, but not the camera side of the mount - I speculate that maybe Sony want to keep the option to innovate on the camera side? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • In this case „people“ is me and I made exactly that experience. And you should consider that „people“ have some kind of knowledge before calling their statements rubbish.
    • The best value in that range is probably the mino 70-210 3.5-4.5. The 4.5-5.6 isn’t worth the box they came in. “The beer can” f4 tends to be overrated and or worn out. The 80-200s produce beautiful images but I’d look at the white hs only. The black looks nicer but feels to torquey on the SLTs. The DTs can be really good or really bad because quality control didn’t seem to be a thing at that point. Worth trying if they’re cheap enough. The SSMs in good condition are nice but pricey. Third party the Tokina glass seems to be a bit sharper than sigma or Tamron or all the rebranded ones. You can ask a bunch of people and get a different answer since the glass shops, particularly Minolta, seemed to have guidelines that were basically we do what we want. Most days they produced good, some bad, and some next level optical sickness. Sometimes the journey with the old stuff is as much fun as the destination.   Good luck and good hunting!
    • I have a Sony A7c. Shooting in Aperture priority mode with Sony 24/105 F4 G OSS. I have ISO set to Auto ISO; range 50-204800; Min.SS 1/250s. When I take a shot on fairly low light at F16. The camera takes the photograph at 1/30s 100 ISO which is not what I want. I would have expected it to take the photograph at 1/250s and ISO 800. What am I doing wrong/what am i not understanding? What I want to do is set the aperture to the aperture I desire, then let the camera chose the appropriate shutter speed, but if it requires a shutter speed slower than 1/250s I want the camera to increase the ISO to a value that exposes ok for 1/250s.        
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...