Sony Lenses - Which one to Choose?

[avid-myrtle]

Hi

I have just taken up Wildlife Photography in the last year and I am now in the position to buy a new lens but I am not sure which one to go for....

Sony 70-200mm f2.8 G - This is the one I have had my eye on as it has the F2.8, if I brought this I would also get the teleconveter (this would give me extra length but I would lose light)

Sony 70-400mm G SSM 4-5.6 - this is the other option but what will I lose with the less light....

I mainly take animal shots while on holiday to Kenya and Scotland and have managed with a normal 75-300 F4.5 or a 500 mirror lens F8 but would like a faster lens with the ability to do sharper head shots.

My camera is the Sony a350 and while my husband a700 is better I am really enjoying using this camera, our only trouble is that not many people as using the Sony's so advice is hard to find

Any advice would be useful as I really don't what to do.

Thanks

Avid - Myrtle

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by avid-myrtle

Hi

I have just taken up Wildlife Photography in the last year and I am now in the position to buy a new lens but I am not sure which one to go for....

Sony 70-200mm f2.8 G - This is the one I have had my eye on as it has the F2.8, if I brought this I would also get the teleconveter (this would give me extra length but I would lose light)

Sony 70-400mm G SSM 4-5.6 - this is the other option but what will I lose with the less light....

I mainly take animal shots while on holiday to Kenya and Scotland and have managed with a normal 75-300 F4.5 or a 500 mirror lens F8 but would like a faster lens with the ability to do sharper head shots.

My camera is the Sony a350 and while my husband a700 is better I am really enjoying using this camera, our only trouble is that not many people as using the Sony's so advice is hard to find

Any advice would be useful as I really don't what to do.

Thanks

Avid - Myrtle

to be honest I dont know a lot about sony lenses but you might be better of with something from a proven third party manufacturer such as the well regarded sigma 50-500 or sigma 150-500 OS. (or tamron 20-500). Likewise if you want an f2.8 lense the sigma 120-300 is a good one to look at ( I think all the sigmas are available in alpha fit - tho they may not have them in stock in jessops etc.

[Lancashire Lad]

Might be worth considering Sigma lenses. They do most of their range with the option of Sony mount, so that would give you access to these for example, all of which are highly regarded by wildlife photographers: -

120-400mm f4.5-5.6 OS HSM
150-500mm f5-6.3 RF DG OS
50-500mm f4-6.3 EX DG
300mm f2.8 EX DG
500mm f4.5 EX DG

And, don't forget that increasing the camera's ISO setting from 100 to 200, or from 200 to 400, etc. etc., will give you the equivalent of an extra stop of light. (and 100 to 400 will give 2-stops extra etc.), so where lighting conditions are good, you don't necessarily need f2.8.

Regards
Mike.

EDIT - eeyore beat me to it.

[ron1863]

Hi and a warm welcome to WAB.

Have you had a look at the older Minolta G lenses, which are excellent.

[avid-myrtle]

Thanks all for your messages....
Yes I did have a quick look at the Sigma and think that the 150-500mm f5-6.3 RF DG OS might be OK

Ron - I have not been able to find any Minolta lens for sale at the moment as I agree this would also be a great option

My conflict is that I have a Sigma 70mm f2.8 lens which I love and the sharpness of the images compared to my 70-300 f5.6 is amazing so I am concerned that I am getting hung up on the F stop rather then length....

My husband has a Tamron 200-500 and when we were in Kenya it proved that it was a bit soft at the full 500mm range, which is what was pushing me to a F2.8 as that (i hope) would be sharper

also I am not keen on taking a very long lens out, as I really only want to use a monopod

Sorry for the waffle, I am off sick with a bad chest infection, so I have time to ramble and search for my next buy.

[ron1863]

Minolta G lenses all get excellent reviews and are very, very scarce as nobody seems to want to sell theirs, and when they do come on the market they command very high prices.

[eeyore]

I here what you are saying about the f stop but the thing is that if you get a 200mm f2.8 you are going to have to use a TC with it for longshots which will reduce both the effective f stop (1 stop with a 1.4, 2 stops with a 2x) and the sharpness.

The 200 f2.8 is usually a very good lens as a short zoom , but you wont see an obvious benefit over a 400 f5.6 if you use it with a teleconverter.

for that you'd need a 400mm f2.8 which would likely be very expensive

[avid-myrtle]

Thanks for your help - I think I have narrowed it down to
Sony 70-400mm G SSM 4-5.6 - DxL 94.5x196 Grams 1490
Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM - DxL 92 x 203 Grams 1750

or my wild card
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX DG - DxL 95 x 218 Grams 1842

The reason it is my wildcard, a bit log and heavy for me to carry round, I have never used a tripod (well I am new to this!!) and I also I am not sure what not having the HSM on the sony mount will mean to me.

What I do know is that 3 of the shops have told me that the Sigma Lenses are going up at the end of the month due to exchange rates so I need to make up my mind.

SO ANY THOUGHTS?

[ron1863]

I would go for the Sony 70-400mm G SSM, it gets great reviews and would be easier to hold for you as it is the lightest, it looks good too.