telephoto lens for Sony a6000

[sibylle]

I've followed a similar thread on this question, and two lenses are recommended:

Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS Lens.

Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM - for $999.

What is the difference between the two lenses (aside from price).

I'm a new bird photographer, and not very technically informed about cameras. I currently have the 55 - 210 lens for my camera, and it's not adequate for birds further away, up in a tree, or flying ( or else I'm not capable!).

I'd like to buy a more powerful lens, but am unsure what to buy. I'd like to avoid buying a lens, and then deciding that it's not adequate, and buying another lens.

And what about the:

Tamron SP 70-300MM F/4-5.6 DI USD Lens for Sony -

Some background - I don't know what OSS stands for, or SSM.

Here are photos I've taken with the 55-210:


Cattle egret, Hawaii, was very close to me - maybe 20 - 30 feet

 

[Hank Radt]

https://photographylife.com/sony-lens-abbreviations

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

 

[JohnNEX]

I've followed a similar thread on this question, and two lenses are recommended:

Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS Lens.

Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM - for $999.

What is the difference between the two lenses (aside from price).

The second of these two lenses (the SSM) is an A mount lens. It will not work on your a6000 without an adaptor (e.g. LA-EA4), which costs extra $$$.

The first of the two (FE) is a very good lens which i use a lot. It will work just fine on your a6000. It is substantially better (and bigger) than the 55-210.

OSS stands for "Optical Steady Shot", which means that it will dampen any vibrations or wobbles when taking the shot. Nikon lenses use the term "Vibration Reduction" (VR) and other brands use other terms.

Your 55-210 also has OSS.

I'm a new bird photographer, and not very technically informed about cameras. I currently have the 55 - 210 lens for my camera, and it's not adequate for birds further away, up in a tree, or flying ( or else I'm not capable!).

The 70-300 will get you closer to the birds. For birds flying, I'm afraid that this is largely a matter of practice (and understanding your camera) and its tough!

I'd like to buy a more powerful lens, but am unsure what to buy. I'd like to avoid buying a lens, and then deciding that it's not adequate, and buying another lens.

The FE 70-300 is a good lens, but only you can decide if it is "good enough".

Most of the bird and animal photos on my facebook page were taken with the 70-300 lens:

https://www.facebook.com/pg/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/photos/

And what about the:

Tamron SP 70-300MM F/4-5.6 DI USD Lens for Sony -

This is also an A mount lens. It won't work on your a6000 without an adaptor.

--
https://www.facebook.com/John-Clark-Photography-1035965476487072/

 

[QuietOC]

The Sony 70-300 G zooms are so expensive that it is cheaper to buy another camera and some other x-300 zoom. Like a camera that works better with big lenses and some x-300 zooms are much lighter than the 70-300 G's. I haven't tried the 70-300 G OSS, and I am sure it can work as well as such a lens can on the A6000.

For example I bought my refurbished Sony DT 55-300 SAM for $149, and its the sharpest x-300 zoom I've had. That's not a general fact, but just my situation. While I can and have put the 55-300 on an adapter and used it on my A6000, nothing about that works very well. It works better adapted to an A6500.

I might use my $150 Tamron 70-300 USD on my new A7II. I just traded a 70-300 G SSM II for a 70-400 G SSM. I am not planning to keep that one either.

 

[Anders_Nilsson]

I've followed a similar thread on this question, and two lenses are recommended:

Sony FE 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G OSS Lens.

Sony 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G SSM - for $999.

What is the difference between the two lenses (aside from price).

I'm a new bird photographer, and not very technically informed about cameras. I currently have the 55 - 210 lens for my camera, and it's not adequate for birds further away, up in a tree, or flying ( or else I'm not capable!).

I'd like to buy a more powerful lens, but am unsure what to buy. I'd like to avoid buying a lens, and then deciding that it's not adequate, and buying another lens.

And what about the:

Tamron SP 70-300MM F/4-5.6 DI USD Lens for Sony -

Some background - I don't know what OSS stands for, or SSM.

Here are photos I've taken with the 55-210:


Cattle egret, Hawaii, was very close to me - maybe 20 - 30 feet

Birding is the most expensive discipline in photography. It relates to normal photography like a Cigarette racing boat relates to a 30 foot family sail boat.

I'd say either get a Nikon D7500 or D500 plus a Nikon 200-500 zoom, or, if you want to stay with Sony, an a77ii plus the Sony SAL70400G2. G2 has much faster AF than G1 from what I\ve seen. Also the Tamron 150-600 is useful.

 

[D Lynch]

Your comments helped me too.

I came back to Sony when Sony Canada closed corporate stores. (Read--lower price! briefly) I bought my camera with the kit zoom and that moderate telephoto zoom to keep price down.

Life happened; I broke my shoulder in a fall at home. I bought an FE24240 to allow me to keep shooting while my left arm was in a sling. It works so well that I kept it, and sold my two other Sony lenses. It's a wonderful lens.

Youre right: BIF are a challenge. Remembering film days, I used to increase exposure 1 stop for side lighting; 1-1/2 stop for back lighting. That works better for me until I forget and overexpose everything....until I see my error.

I've found focusing issues with the FE24240 if I don't keep the lens wide open. My a6000 has trouble finding focus at smaller apertures.

 

[Stan in NH]

Birding is the most expensive discipline in photography. It relates to normal photography like a Cigarette racing boat relates to a 30 foot family sail boat.

I'd say either get a Nikon D7500 or D500 plus a Nikon 200-500 zoom, or, if you want to stay with Sony, an a77ii plus the Sony SAL70400G2. G2 has much faster AF than G1 from what I\ve seen. Also the Tamron 150-600 is useful.

I totally agree. I do a lot of bird photography and almost always bring my Canon 80D with either a Sigma 100-400 or a Tamron 150-600 lens. On closer shots, the small Sony will do just fine, but I personally would not want to put such large glass on such a small body.

Any used or refurb DSLR body with a long focal length lens is, IMHO, a better choice. Prices are fairly reasonable, especially for older models.

 

[zackiedawg]

Personally, I've gone the other direction than some of the posters suggest here - I shot birds mainly with DSLRs, and used the E-mount camera as a backup and second body, for many years. But as the cameras got better and more capable, and more native lenses became available within E-mount, I found that it was simply a better overall system for birding for me. I started using it side-by-side with my A-mount system for a few years, and then last year came to the conclusion that I could do everything with just the one system, and often better, and I found the smaller size body to be very comfortable especially with longer lenses...and transitioned to wildlife and birding with just one system.

For me, the things that the A6xxx cameras can do exceed what I could do with the DSLR, and they focused faster, tracked better, shot faster bursts, and had a better viewfinder experience (I even tried transitioning my DSLR to an 'SLT' model which was an A-mount camera that used an electronic viewfinder, but I still found the E-mount system operated faster and more seamlessly and without the translucent mirror costing me a little light).

As for the lenses you listed, the FE70-300mm G lens would perform at a completely different level than the other two, because it's the only native E-mount lens you listed. The lens is designed for E-mount cameras, no adapters needed, so you get the camera's full performance capabilities. Adapted lenses not only require an adapter, but they also cripple many of the camera's best abilities - you're limited to 3 frames per second shooting with continuous focus, and with the LA-EA4 adapter, you aren't using the A6000's focus system at all, but a much less capable one within the adapter. I wouldn't recommend shooting with adapted lenses on your A6000 - you'd have to at least move to the A6300 or A6500, which work a little better and much faster with adapted lenses using the native focus system.

Each person needs to decide for themselves about ergonomics. It's often stated that a big lens would be uncomfortable on a small camera body, but that's something you'd have to try to determine if true. For me, it's not at all. Having shot with very long lenses for over a decade, I'm quite accustomed to large, heavy lenses up to 600mm, and shoot them strictly handheld, no tripods or monopods, walking miles a day with them. I find absolutely no ergonomic advantages with my 150-600mm lens mounted on my DSLR body vs my A6300. With ANY lens of 300mm or up, no matter the camera, most of the weight is best supported by your left or non-shooting hand, holding the lens barrel itself. The right (or your shooting hand) only needs to hold the camera grip to aim and swivel the camera to the subject, and bears little or no actual weight. Shooting this way, it doesn't much matter if you're using a 55-210mm, 70-300mm, 100-400mm, or 150-600mm lens on the A6300 - they all feel about the same to the shooting hand...only the land supporting the lens' weight will notice any significant difference, and that's up to your own strength and desire as to how much weight you can bear.

The FE70-300mm lens is considered my 'light' birding lens - I use it for travel because it's much smaller than my others and can fit in a shoulder bag with some other lenses...my other birding lenses are generally too large to fit in medium bags and are significantly heavier and larger. It is of course still heavier than the 55-210mm lens, and a much fatter barrel, but it is a completely higher class of lens with much higher image quality, and a much faster focusing system...so it would be a good choice as an upgrade if you can afford it.

 

[D Lynch]

Personally, I've gone the other direction than some of the posters suggest here - I shot

.....

The FE70-300mm lens is considered my 'light' birding lens - I use it for travel because it's much smaller than my others and can fit in a shoulder bag with some other lenses...my other birding lenses are generally too large to fit in medium bags and are significantly heavier and larger. It is of course still heavier than the 55-210mm lens, and a much fatter barrel, but it is a completely higher class of lens with much higher image quality, and a much faster focusing system...so it would be a good choice as an upgrade if you can afford it.

Thanks Juistin!

Your comments really help me.

I want a lightweight system. Years ago my Leica m3 and lenses were my lightweight system, as 2 Nikon F3's with motor drives and fast glass punished me every time I carried them. ASA of film (ISO Now) restricted me further. Thank heaven for digital.

I've kept my DSLR in spite of my retailers attempts to make me change when I bought an OLY OMD M5 (deep regret there for buying that camera).

My a6000 is remarkable. My FE24240 effectively gives me 35 to 350 range. My results suffer from old habits. I'm getting better photos of birds in flight, but nothing anywhere as good as what you show.

 

[sibylle]

I use the Sony because I hike a lot of 14,000' peaks. We hike in carrying tent, slepping gear, cooking stove and pots, plus food, and camera gear.

Do you recommend carrying the Nikon camera and lens for 12 - 20 miles uphill, with other camping gear? I'm trying to keep the weight down.

 

[Anders_Nilsson]

I use the Sony because I hike a lot of 14,000' peaks. We hike in carrying tent, slepping gear, cooking stove and pots, plus food, and camera gear.

Do you recommend carrying the Nikon camera and lens for 12 - 20 miles uphill, with other camping gear? I'm trying to keep the weight down.

Yes I still recommend You carry the Nikon camera plus lens to you 14000 foot peaks. If that's not possible then i don't know what to recommend.

There's no high quality long focal length zoom on the market that will be substantially smaller or lighter. The professional grade 100-400 all weigh about 1.5kg or more. Just bite the bullet. Drop the camera bag to save weight and roll your equipment in clothing.

One piece of advice would be to investigate the Nikon D5xxx range, they're somewhat lighter since they don't have an in-body focusing motor.

Finally, this hiking thing was not in your original post so it's hard for us all to give a good answer.

 

[Barmaglot_07]

Birding is the most expensive discipline in photography. It relates to normal photography like a Cigarette racing boat relates to a 30 foot family sail boat.

Oh my sweet summer child... go price out an underwater wide-angle kit.