What is your NEXT lens?

[DonSchap]

Not everyone can afford the various solutions that are out there. Creativity does not just mean getting the perfect equipment to do the shot. The end result is the most important part. I figure that it is how you arrive at that determines your level of "technical creativity."

Again, rules and restrictions often dictate the solution you eventually come up with. The SONY AF 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM is a terrific solution. Coupled with a dynamite flash ... life is good, indoors or out. It weighs 54-ounces ... versus the 91-ounce SIGMA AF 120-300mm f/2.8 DG EX HSM OS.

I mean I know what that something that "beefy" feels like to tote and operate, as I still have an older TAMRON MF 200-500mm f/6.9 lens weighing in at 96-ounces.



Yes, you will build some serious arm muscles using that pipe. It also gave me the impetus to purchase the newer TAMRON SP AF 200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD lens, weighing less than half of that at 43-ounces.

The lens body is entirely plastic, where the former is mostly metal.

As solutions go ... when I am at the airshow, the latter 200-500 delivers quick response and focal length.

It goes in the camera bag ... the 70-400 .. its fast, but still a bit heavy to follow aircraft darting back and forth, at 400+ mph. You tend to wear out fast under the summer sun and I am no slouch in the muscle power for this kind of work.

Again, your scenario will dictate your glass. They all have something that makes them the better choice for this or that.

[wulf]

I haven't got a particular desire for a new lens but, if I did decide to get a new one, it would probably be a very long telephoto (500mm would be grand). My wife is keen on watching the birds in the back garden and something like that would give a close up view without disturbing them.

FWIW, it would probably be old, second-hand and entirely manual (fitting with my other prime lenses).

Wulf

[DonSchap]

Originally Posted by wulf

I haven't got a particular desire for a new lens but, if I did decide to get a new one, it would probably be a very long telephoto (500mm would be grand). My wife is keen on watching the birds in the back garden and something like that would give a close up view without disturbing them.

FWIW, it would probably be old, second-hand and entirely manual (fitting with my other prime lenses).

Wulf

Wulf, I bought my original TAMRON Adaptall-2 AF 200-500 f/6.9 lens for all of $27. It cost more to ship it! Being an "Adaptall", if you have the manufacturer's adapter collar for your particular camera, you can fit it on darn near everything.

News-flash: I just got off the phone with SIGMA and found out that the SONY-mount of the AF 120-300mm f/2.8 DG EX HSM APO OS has been quashed. They are no longer planning to build ANY for the SONY-mount, so I guess I will have to spend the cash elsewhere ... and I keep my current SONY 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM. So ... we lose the aperture... and the associated hernia, for now.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by wulf

I haven't got a particular desire for a new lens but, if I did decide to get a new one, it would probably be a very long telephoto (500mm would be grand). My wife is keen on watching the birds in the back garden and something like that would give a close up view without disturbing them.

FWIW, it would probably be old, second-hand and entirely manual (fitting with my other prime lenses).

Wulf, if you don't mind really slooooow lenses and eh image quality, you could probably pick up a mirror lens and find out about donut-shaped OOF highlights.

[DonSchap]

"Ink" ... the real drawback to Reflex-lensing is that it simply is not all that sharp, aside from the weird highlights. I have put these lenses to the test and try as I might, getting a sharp focus is just about impossible. You get a slightly "soft" focus. We're also not talking about the Minolta/SONY AF 500mm f/8 Reflex, which is the only lens of this type that will actually autofocus. It is also $500 more for that "feature."

Now, the really awesome part is that these lenses rarely weigh more than a pound, so using them for, say, backpacking would be a strategic trade-off. Most are also limited to f/8 or tighter apertures. Without the sun's direct illumination, your image tends to really suffer and may not even be usable.

I have an MF 800mm f/8 Reflex lens that I purchased for about $250 and it is a fair lens. Again, I bought it for convenience, not detail. The 200-500mm f/5-6.3 will have to do that part, but you pay for that, too. That F-22 'Raptor' shot is from the 200-500. Crispy and quick to focus. I could have never gotten that image with the Reflex lens no matter how I would have tried.

Just bringing up some limitations.

[wulf]

I think for my purposes, I would need a relatively fast lens. Taking photos of birds and other wildlife is frustrating enough without also having to wait for them to spotlight themselves in a suitably positioned sunbeam!

Wulf