Thinking of getting the Sony 70-350 to go with my A7cR.

[davidzvi]

I bought the Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 Macro G OSS II Lens to go with my new Sony A7cR. The "R" version came with the add-on grip, so true handling is pretty good. But after using it for a bit, it's not really what I want for my kit. I want something smaller, lighter, and with more reach.

I think I really only have two options:

Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD
Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS Lens

Both are smaller and lighter. Between these 2 the Sony is the smaller and the Tamron is the lighter. Both are smaller and lighter compared to 70-200 f/4 + either the 1.4 or 2.0 TC to equal their reach. The 2 lenses are pretty close in sharpness from the reviews I've read with the Sony having a slight edge.

At the moment I'm leaning toward the Sony hence the thread subject. Yes, I know the Sony is an APS-C lens. The reviews I've seen show it has almost no vignetting at 70mm wide open. So I can get the true 70mm on the wide end and since I'm starting with 61mp, I'm not worried about resolution.

I've seen a thread or 2 here about using it on a FF body. Serious downside? Occasional sporting events and random nature walks, but these are NOT a serious part of my interests.


Here are 3 recent times the reach would have been nice attached. Looked up and saw the Great Blue Heron, actually surprised the shot was that good. The Eclipse speaks for itself, but since I only had the 200mm I didn't bother spending the extra for the filter so only took shots when filter was not needed. And the duck? I didn't even know what it was, I just took the shot to try and zoom in and figure out what it was.

 

[DaveC Oz]

I bought the Sony 70-350 not too long after its release to go with the A6000 I was using at the time. I stayed with it when I upgraded to the A6600, Last year I also got the A7cR. Initially I used the 70-350 in APSC mode, but I have since taken up weight lifting in the form of the Sony 200-600. Each to there own, what suits me won't necessarily suit others, but now that I'm getting used to the 200-600 I find the APSC lens stays at home a lot. In fact I'm seriously thinking of selling it to fund other wish list items. Just for reference the following 2 shots were taken with the 70-350 on the A7cR in APSC mode. If it has the reach you want it's a good option, but I would tend towards a full frame just to still have the "cropability" of the 61MP still available.
70mm

• Sony E 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS
• 70.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3000001907349
• 1/320 sec
• ISO 100

350mm

• Sony E 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS
• 350.0 mm
• ƒ/6.3000001907349
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 160

 

[davidzvi]

I bought the Sony 70-350 not too long after its release to go with the A6000 I was using at the time. I stayed with it when I upgraded to the A6600, Last year I also got the A7cR. Initially I used the 70-350 in APSC mode, but I have since taken up weight lifting in the form of the Sony 200-600. Each to there own, what suits me won't necessarily suit others, but now that I'm getting used to the 200-600 I find the APSC lens stays at home a lot. In fact I'm seriously thinking of selling it to fund other wish list items. Just for reference the following 2 shots were taken with the 70-350 on the A7cR in APSC mode. If it has the reach you want it's a good option, but I would tend towards a full frame just to still have the "cropability" of the 61MP still available.

Thanks for the info. Those images are pretty much exactly what I'm looking for. I'm done with weightlifting. I was never into birding. But I was a pro event shooter and normally carried a pair of FF bodies for events (24-70/70-200 + flashes). I picked up m4/3 as a lighter fun system during that period. I no longer shoot events, but still hooked on smaller systems.

Wondering how much vignetting there is through the range at f/5.6 or f/8 in FF mode? From what I've read, there is very little at 70mm and you can get more than just the 26mp APS-C crop at 350mm.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I went in kind of the opposite direction to you, I have the A6700 and bought the full frame Tamron 70-300mm. In short, I regret my choice. I should have ponied up and dropped a few more hundred dollars on the Sony 70-350 for its slightly longer reach and OSS feature. That said, the Tamron is a little lighter (80g) and $400 lighter on the wallet.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

For reference, here is the Tamron 70-300 on the A6700:

• Galaxy S23+
• 5.4 mm
• ƒ/1.8
• 1/60 sec
• ISO 800

• Galaxy S23+
• 5.4 mm
• ƒ/1.8
• 1/60 sec
• ISO 640

 

[TerryL]

I bought the Sony 70-350 not too long after its release to go with the A6000 I was using at the time. I stayed with it when I upgraded to the A6600, Last year I also got the A7cR. Initially I used the 70-350 in APSC mode, but I have since taken up weight lifting in the form of the Sony 200-600. Each to there own, what suits me won't necessarily suit others, but now that I'm getting used to the 200-600 I find the APSC lens stays at home a lot. In fact I'm seriously thinking of selling it to fund other wish list items. Just for reference the following 2 shots were taken with the 70-350 on the A7cR in APSC mode. If it has the reach you want it's a good option, but I would tend towards a full frame just to still have the "cropability" of the 61MP still available.
70mm
View attachment 59550
350mm
View attachment 59551

Selling to B&H or Adorama is a pretty hassle free way to sell a lens.

 

[DaveC Oz]

Selling to B&H or Adorama is a pretty hassle free way to sell a lens.

Unfortunately neither of these options work well for me in Australia. I'm still considering my overall kit, but may also be shedding all of my APSC gear.

 

[TerryL]

I bought the Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 Macro G OSS II Lens to go with my new Sony A7cR. The "R" version came with the add-on grip, so true handling is pretty good. But after using it for a bit, it's not really what I want for my kit. I want something smaller, lighter, and with more reach.

I think I really only have two options:

Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD
Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS Lens

Both are smaller and lighter. Between these 2 the Sony is the smaller and the Tamron is the lighter. Both are smaller and lighter compared to 70-200 f/4 + either the 1.4 or 2.0 TC to equal their reach. The 2 lenses are pretty close in sharpness from the reviews I've read with the Sony having a slight edge.

At the moment I'm leaning toward the Sony hence the thread subject. Yes, I know the Sony is an APS-C lens. The reviews I've seen show it has almost no vignetting at 70mm wide open. So I can get the true 70mm on the wide end and since I'm starting with 61mp, I'm not worried about resolution.

I've seen a thread or 2 here about using it on a FF body. Serious downside? Occasional sporting events and random nature walks, but these are NOT a serious part of my interests.


Here are 3 recent times the reach would have been nice attached. Looked up and saw the Great Blue Heron, actually surprised the shot was that good. The Eclipse speaks for itself, but since I only had the 200mm I didn't bother spending the extra for the filter so only took shots when filter was not needed. And the duck? I didn't even know what it was, I just took the shot to try and zoom in and figure out what it was.

I would definitely consider the Sony 100-400 GM.

 

[Unframed Dave]

I would definitely consider the Sony 100-400 GM.

Me too, it's a bit of a waste using a 50mp sensor, a cracking one at that with an apsc lens.

The 100-400 is a belter of a lens and not that heavy.

 

[davidzvi]

I would definitely consider the Sony 100-400 GM.

Me too, it's a bit of a waste using a 50mp sensor, a cracking one at that with an apsc lens.

The 100-400 is a belter of a lens and not that heavy.

*60mp sensor

Please reread my first post in the thread.

I bought the Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 Macro G OSS II Lens to go with my new Sony A7cR. The "R" version came with the add-on grip, so true handling is pretty good. But after using it for a bit, it's not really what I want for my kit. I want something smaller, lighter, and with more reach.
......

I'm sure the 100-400 is a great lens. But it only meets 1 of 3 objectives. And not that heavy is 1.4 pounds heavier than the 70-200 f/4 macro.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Noted.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

@davidzvi What about the new Tamron 50-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD?

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) | E-mount | Telephoto Zoom Lens - TAMRON

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) is a 6x telephoto zoom lens for Sony E-mount that delivers outstanding convenience and image quality. Discover the groundbreaking capabilities of a 300mm telephoto zoom that starts from 50mm at the wide end.

www.tamron-usa.com

More range.
Weighs 665g which is less than the Sony 70-200 f4 (794g).
About the same length (150mm).
Also has vibration compensation (VC), their version of OSS.

Only downside I can see is that its not a constant aperture.

 

[davidzvi]

@davidzvi What about the new Tamron 50-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD?

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) | E-mount | Telephoto Zoom Lens - TAMRON

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) is a 6x telephoto zoom lens for Sony E-mount that delivers outstanding convenience and image quality. Discover the groundbreaking capabilities of a 300mm telephoto zoom that starts from 50mm at the wide end.

www.tamron-usa.com

More range.
Weighs 665g which is less than the Sony 70-200 f4 (794g).
About the same length (150mm).
Also has vibration compensation (VC), their version of OSS.

Only downside I can see is that its not a constant aperture.

Worth a look, but I'll have to wait for some reviews.

But it would have to be a good bit better than the Tamron 70-300 to justify the extra $$ ($300 new and the 70-300 can be found used for a lot less).

 

[Richard A]

I have the Tamron 50-400, which was recommended to me, and received great reviews and I am really happy with. Reviews I have seen so far suggest the 50-300 is just as good.

 

[davidzvi]

@davidzvi What about the new Tamron 50-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD?

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) | E-mount | Telephoto Zoom Lens - TAMRON

Product Page | 50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD (Model A069) is a 6x telephoto zoom lens for Sony E-mount that delivers outstanding convenience and image quality. Discover the groundbreaking capabilities of a 300mm telephoto zoom that starts from 50mm at the wide end.

www.tamron-usa.com

More range.
Weighs 665g which is less than the Sony 70-200 f4 (794g).
About the same length (150mm).
Also has vibration compensation (VC), their version of OSS.

Only downside I can see is that its not a constant aperture.

I have the Tamron 50-400, which was recommended to me, and received great reviews and I am really happy with. Reviews I have seen so far suggest the 50-300 is just as good.

Will definitely have a look at this, but my first impression is the extra 50mm on the long end will be more useful than the 20mm on the wide for me.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I'd definitely look at the Tamron 50-400 over that Sony

 

[davidzvi]

I'd definitely look at the Tamron 50-400 over that Sony

Assume you mean the 50-300 and not 50-400?

Macro ability would be nice. 50mm vs 70mm is no real value to me. 300mm (450mme crop) vs 350mm (525mme crop) .

Back in my APS-C days, I went back and forth between the Nikon 70-300 and 80-400 (450mme and 600mme respectively). I always found the 70-300 a little short and the 80-400 a little too big and those early VRs weren't the best. I was also only working with 6mp to 12mp.

But it has laid the foundation of my "I want more than 300mm/ 450mme crop".

I wonder how long it will take for the 50-300 to show up on the used market.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

No they make a 50 400, Brownie has one, its fabulous.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I'm kinda scratching my head as to why Tamron needed to build both?

50-400mm Ultra Telephoto Zoom Lens | Tamron Americas

Experience the groundbreaking Tamron 50-400mm ultra-telephoto zoom lens. This quality lens is ideal for portraits, wildlife, and sports photography.

www.tamron-usa.com

Highlights: 50-400mm, f/4.5-6.3, 1155g

50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD

The lightweight 50-300mm lens offers enhanced versatility for APS-C cameras. Enhance your photography with this groundbreaking Tamron telephoto zoom lens.

www.tamron-usa.com

Highlights: 50-300, f/4.5-6.3, 665g

Both have vibration compensation, same aperture range, and built within a year of each other. So its really just range, size and a few buttons that differentiate them EDIT and price (obviously)

Side note, I am contemplating to purchase that 50-300mm to replace my Tamron 70-300mm. Mine doesn't have VC and, when I was at F1 last month, I found myself wishing for a bit more on the wide side so that I could truly be happy with carrying only one lens into the event. but that's just my use case...

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I'm kinda scratching my head as to why Tamron needed to build both?

50-400mm Ultra Telephoto Zoom Lens | Tamron Americas

Experience the groundbreaking Tamron 50-400mm ultra-telephoto zoom lens. This quality lens is ideal for portraits, wildlife, and sports photography.

www.tamron-usa.com

Highlights: 50-400mm, f/4.5-6.3, 1155g

50-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III VC VXD

The lightweight 50-300mm lens offers enhanced versatility for APS-C cameras. Enhance your photography with this groundbreaking Tamron telephoto zoom lens.

www.tamron-usa.com

Highlights: 50-300, f/4.5-6.3, 665g

Both have vibration compensation, same aperture range, and built within a year of each other. So its really just range, size and a few buttons that differentiate them EDIT and price (obviously)

Side note, I am contemplating to purchase that 50-300mm to replace my Tamron 70-300mm. Mine doesn't have VC and, when I was at F1 last month, I found myself wishing for a bit more on the wide side so that I could truly be happy with carrying only one lens into the event. but that's just my use case...

Partly because they can, and I just think that extra reach has more wide appeal, 100 400 are very popular, this bridges a nice gap between 28-50/24-70's. Honestly, I know that Tim is extremely impressed by it, and it seems very very sharp, which I would expect from Tamron anyway.

 

[davidzvi]

No they make a 50 400, Brownie has one, its fabulous.

Again, it may be but it's not even in the running. Too big and heavy for what I am looking for.

 

[Cαscαdian]

I'm with you in the lighter tele hunt. I'm pleased with the 50-200sam on ea3 adapter.. not thrilled, but pleased. Can shoot full pixels and crop out the corner darkness, or pretend it's an 80-300 and pay the crop penalty. Either way it's ~400g but not a speedy focuser with Sam in play. I still have my Maxx 100-300Apo if manual focus is tolerable.

 

[davidzvi]

I'm with you in the lighter tele hunt. I'm pleased with the 50-200sam on ea3 adapter.. not thrilled, but pleased. Can shoot full pixels and crop out the corner darkness, or pretend it's an 80-300 and pay the crop penalty. Either way it's ~400g but not a speedy focuser with Sam in play. I still have my Maxx 100-300Apo if manual focus is tolerable.

Manual is not an option, my eyes suck. the only manual leans I'm considering is the Vioghlander 15mm since f/8-16 pretty much everything is in focus anyway.

Besides weight, reach is the second goal. It's one of the reasons I have been considering the 70-350 for the extra 75mme of reach in crop mode.