Is Sony ever going to come out with a 300mm lens

[tammons]

Is Sony ever going to come out with a freekin 300mm lens. Gees its been a while now and I nexed, then switched to a pentax system, and now back to an A6000 which I love but still no 300mm lens. Honestly the lack of some standard AF E mount lenses is driving me nuts.

Sigma, Tamron anybody ?

300mm F4 lens. A standard. Where is it ??

Another good one would be a 24mm pancake lens for a 36mm equiv on an A6000 for a small walk around lens. I know they have a 20mm lens but thats slightly wider than I want.

 

[Peerieboy]

You are soooooo right!



Just purchased Tamron's 18-200mm and it is not bad.

Photo is 100% crop of village over 4 miles away. A little work in LR5 but not a lot!

However, it is birds in flight that I'd like to do and a little early work shows the limits of 200mm for this. I would also be interested in the settings for this BIF photography. I had an expert setup on my 7D which was on 'C1' will have to experiment a bit before I get to that methinks.



Roll on 300mm Tamron, you did a not bad job with the 18-200 but a prime 300mm would sell ...




Findhorn Village, Moray, Scotland

 

[tammons]

I have the Sony 55-210 and its not bad, but as you know, there is no way currently to get to 450mm equiv with fast autofocus on the E system.

If the 80-200mm F4 is sharp WO and if they ever (here we go again) come out with a good matched TC, that would do it, but then you are talking 2k.

 

[Aasmund G]

la-ea2 + 100-300 APO? or big beer can? or 70-400? or 300 f/4, or 300 f/2.8?

 

[nevercat]

The thing you say about lenses is very true, but you have to considder that the E-mount needs a lot of lenses, for many type of photography, all lenses are "standard" the the specific type of photography. Hopefuly the lenses for the FF E-mount will cover a lot of the wanted and needed FLs. But I can hear the nay sayers complain allready: "Oh those lenses are so big..."

For the third party lens builders the E-mount is not large enough to build expensive lenses like a good 300mm f/4. So only when =more E-mount cameras are sold, more of those lenses will come on the market, until then you have to do it with adapted lenses...

 

[RonFrank]

If your happiness depends on shooting a 300mm lens then you chose the wrong system. The Sony A system has a 300mm as does Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus, just about everybody but the Sony E system. But you can use 300mm Sony A glass with an adapter, just not native E yet.

The E series is not that popular yet and Sony just figured out how to create an AF system that works with AFC for sports so give them a couple more years. When they do develop a 300mm f4 AF SSM ABCXYZ lens will you shell out the $$$ to buy it? This is a niche market on top of a niche market so a 300mm lens may not be in the cards. I think a 100-300mm or something similar is more likely.

 

[CEfan]

Ummm the e mount SEL70200G is 105-300mm on crop frame and a constant f4 w/OSS. Your lens exists and is on the market now.

 

[vw671]

la-ea2 + 100-300 APO? or big beer can? or 70-400? or 300 f/4, or 300 f/2.8?

Sigma "Bigma" 50-500 with OS is also a nice option with the LA-EA2.

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

Is Sony ever going to come out with a freekin 300mm lens. Gees its been a while now and I nexed, then switched to a pentax system, and now back to an A6000 which I love but still no 300mm lens. Honestly the lack of some standard AF E mount lenses is driving me nuts.

Sigma, Tamron anybody ?

300mm F4 lens. A standard. Where is it ??

A couple of good questions will be:

1- What would be your size/weight expectations for such lens on an a6000?

2- What would be price expectations for such lens?

Another good one would be a 24mm pancake lens for a 36mm equiv on an A6000 for a small walk around lens. I know they have a 20mm lens but thats slightly wider than I want.

Wider is better at that FL. In fact, sometimes I wish E 20 were E18.

 

[123Mike]

I think they will ! *IF* it looks like it will be their worth while. It depends on a few things first.

First the 70-200 f/4 G lens just came out. There must be an appetite for it, because otherwise this whole better-longer-more-pro lens type thing for E-mount will stall...

A 70-400 f/3.5-f/5.6 or something like that might happen, who knows.

 

[James Sherman]

The thing you say about lenses is very true, but you have to considder that the E-mount needs a lot of lenses, for many type of photography, all lenses are "standard" the the specific type of photography. Hopefuly the lenses for the FF E-mount will cover a lot of the wanted and needed FLs. But I can hear the nay sayers complain allready: "Oh those lenses are so big..."

For the third party lens builders the E-mount is not large enough to build expensive lenses like a good 300mm f/4. So only when =more E-mount cameras are sold, more of those lenses will come on the market, until then you have to do it with adapted lenses...

Chicken, egg, chicken, egg....

 

[tammons]

Honestly with a A7, A7r and A7s I can not believe there wont be a market for a 300mm lens or at least a something to 300 zoom.

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

The thing you say about lenses is very true, but you have to considder that the E-mount needs a lot of lenses, for many type of photography, all lenses are "standard" the the specific type of photography. Hopefuly the lenses for the FF E-mount will cover a lot of the wanted and needed FLs. But I can hear the nay sayers complain allready: "Oh those lenses are so big..."

For the third party lens builders the E-mount is not large enough to build expensive lenses like a good 300mm f/4. So only when =more E-mount cameras are sold, more of those lenses will come on the market, until then you have to do it with adapted lenses...

Chicken, egg, chicken, egg....

Or, could it be that a 300mm f/4 lens would be too big to make sense on something like a6000? People think 70-200/4 is massive... now consider what a 300/4 would be like (think 70-200/2.8 dimensions and weight).

Better to prioritize lenses/focal lengths that backup the portability aspect of E-mount cameras, no? Eventually, I do expect to see a 70-300G, but not a constant f/4.

 

[Barugon]

I'm hoping for a FE 70-300mm f4-5.6 G zoom. Maybe next year.

 

[neil holmes]

Honestly with a A7, A7r and A7s I can not believe there wont be a market for a 300mm lens or at least a something to 300 zoom.

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

Honestly with a A7, A7r and A7s I can not believe there wont be a market for a 300mm lens or at least a something to 300 zoom.

There is a market, and the market will likely be addressed at some point. But, that market is also not sensitive to bulk. Let me ask you: What do you think about using 70-200 f/4 on a6000? I think it is a great option to have at hand and completes a trio of zooms well covering 15mm-300mm equiv at f/4 (10-18/4 OSS, 16-70/4 OSS ZA and 70-200/4 OSS G). You?

Would you rather see a 70-200/2.8 before a 300/4? And why not a 300/2.8? But, someone not averse to the size, weight and cost of these lenses can easily look at Sony A-mount for solution. Or, simply pick a Sony A-mount camera instead (that a77 II looks very capable).

 

[bigley Ling]

The thing you say about lenses is very true, but you have to considder that the E-mount needs a lot of lenses, for many type of photography, all lenses are "standard" the the specific type of photography. Hopefuly the lenses for the FF E-mount will cover a lot of the wanted and needed FLs. But I can hear the nay sayers complain allready: "Oh those lenses are so big..."

For the third party lens builders the E-mount is not large enough to build expensive lenses like a good 300mm f/4. So only when =more E-mount cameras are sold, more of those lenses will come on the market, until then you have to do it with adapted lenses...

Chicken, egg, chicken, egg....

Or, could it be that a 300mm f/4 lens would be too big to make sense on something like a6000? People think 70-200/4 is massive... now consider what a 300/4 would be like (think 70-200/2.8 dimensions and weight).

Better to prioritize lenses/focal lengths that backup the portability aspect of E-mount cameras, no? Eventually, I do expect to see a 70-300G, but not a constant f/4.

a nice prime 300mm f5.6 would be a good compromise for size and good tele.

 

[Digital Nigel]

The cropability of the 24mp sensor is an advantage when you want the benefits of a long lens. After all, if the object is a long way off, unless the air is cool and very clear, you won't get a really sharp image, as with that village. Here's an example I took earlier this year, with my SEL18200, of a notorious ship an estimated 2.3 km away (almost 1.5 miles). The air was hot and murky in Panama and even if I'd had a 300 mm or longer lens, the picture quality wouldn't have been great. I was shooting RAW, as usual, and this is what I got after cropping and carefully processing in DxO:

https://flic.kr/p/jb78Sx

If anyone's interested I can also extract and post the embedded JPEG from the ARW file so you can get an idea of the starting point for this processed image.

 

[EinsteinsGhost]

The thing you say about lenses is very true, but you have to considder that the E-mount needs a lot of lenses, for many type of photography, all lenses are "standard" the the specific type of photography. Hopefuly the lenses for the FF E-mount will cover a lot of the wanted and needed FLs. But I can hear the nay sayers complain allready: "Oh those lenses are so big..."

For the third party lens builders the E-mount is not large enough to build expensive lenses like a good 300mm f/4. So only when =more E-mount cameras are sold, more of those lenses will come on the market, until then you have to do it with adapted lenses...

Chicken, egg, chicken, egg....

Or, could it be that a 300mm f/4 lens would be too big to make sense on something like a6000? People think 70-200/4 is massive... now consider what a 300/4 would be like (think 70-200/2.8 dimensions and weight).

Better to prioritize lenses/focal lengths that backup the portability aspect of E-mount cameras, no? Eventually, I do expect to see a 70-300G, but not a constant f/4.

a nice prime 300mm f5.6 would be a good compromise for size and good tele.

I disagree. A tele prime that is no faster than a zoom does not appeal to me. A 70-300/4.5-5.6 makes a lot more sense and it is likely to be one of the next six lenses.