Sony's New Telephoto Lenses

ijm5012

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Oct 2, 2013
Messages
7,960
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Real Name
Ian
Sony introduced two new telephoto lenses yesterday. Once costs as much as a car, but the other is a bit more affordable at a mere $2,000 USD. While Sony has figured out how to make their cameras the same size as m43 cameras, they haven't quite figured that out with lenses yet ;)

Sure, the Sony lens will yield shallower DoF and the sensor will allow for better high ISO results. But the lens is nearly 200mm longer than the Panasonic (over 200 with the lens hoods on), and weighs 1.6kg more.

I'm sure it's a nice lens, and Sony owners will be happy they have an affordable option besides their 100-400. However, when you really need reach in a compact package, m43 is still a tough nut to crack.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

ionian

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
May 20, 2016
Messages
1,355
Location
Kent, UK
Real Name
Simon
It is very much dependant on the sort of photography you do. I moved to Sony from Olympus about a year ago - I sold my last micro four thirds gear in the past few weeks. But I mainly shoot people and never needed long telephoto, and while the m43 gear was much smaller the fast primes I now have for Sony are easily manageable.

I think if you feel you want to have a lens to cover every shooting need then a system like m43 is perfect, as you can carry so many focal lengths in such a small package - but that isn't going to be what everyone needs. Different strokes for different folks.

There is no way I would lug that lens around on any system though - I'd need to mount it to my car and stick my head through the sunroof!
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2013
Messages
1,471
Location
Colorado
With a high rez sensor in the A7R cameras, APS-C mode makes this look more like a 1000mm lens (or using an APSC body). Nothing that long for m4/3 yet, and better light gathering, too. Pretty interesting offering IMHO. Big for sure, though
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
1,753
Location
The Royal Town of Sutton Coldfield, UK.
Real Name
Richard
It is very much dependant on the sort of photography you do. I moved to Sony from Olympus about a year ago - I sold my last micro four thirds gear in the past few weeks. But I mainly shoot people and never needed long telephoto, and while the m43 gear was much smaller the fast primes I now have for Sony are easily manageable.

I think if you feel you want to have a lens to cover every shooting need then a system like m43 is perfect, as you can carry so many focal lengths in such a small package - but that isn't going to be what everyone needs. Different strokes for different folks.

There is no way I would lug that lens around on any system though - I'd need to mount it to my car and stick my head through the sunroof!
I agree. When I shot weddings 95% of my pictures were taken with an 80mm Zenzanon lens, the remainder were shot with my 50mm, but only when I couldn't walk back far enough to get everything in. Having one focal length in your armoury makes you very good at thinking of new compositions - especially when shooting large groups of people.

I toyed with the idea of chopping all of my MFT gear in and buying a Sony body and two primes. However, being mostly amateur now, I would miss having access to seven lenses. It's nice to be able to take an 8mm fisheye out of your bag whenever it takes your fancy.
 

masayoshi

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2016
Messages
929
Location
Salt Lake City
Real Name
Masaaki
It'll be a good companion for A9 (wildlife) shooters. It's lighter (2kg) than Nikon 200-500 (2.3kg), and it's handholdable but not for hiking more than a couple of miles, IMO. The question is, at 500mm is it F5.6 or F6.3? F6.3 in wildlife shooting limits its use to good lighting conditions. That's why I'm selling Tamron 150-600 (soon). I'm sure this lens will sell very well, especially for people using 100-400mm with TC.
 

wjiang

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2013
Messages
7,525
Location
Christchurch, New Zealand
It'll be a good companion for A9 (wildlife) shooters. It's lighter (2kg) than Nikon 200-500 (2.3kg), and it's handholdable but not for hiking more than a couple of miles, IMO. The question is, at 500mm is it F5.6 or F6.3? F6.3 in wildlife shooting limits its use to good lighting conditions. That's why I'm selling Tamron 150-600 (soon). I'm sure this lens will sell very well, especially for people using 100-400mm with TC.
Well it's already f/5.6 at the shortest end so it's almost certainly closer to f/6.3 at 500mm...
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,551
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
I guess Sony already has a compact 600mm option to compete with m4/3, though. With the f2.4-4 aperture, the sensor size disadvantage is pretty much gone vs the m4/3 combo. Plus this one zooms all the way out to 25mm instead of 200mm

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Pluttis

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
749
Location
Sweden
Real Name
Peter
I guess Sony already has a compact 600mm option to compete with m4/3, though. With the f2.4-4 aperture, the sensor size disadvantage is pretty much gone vs the m4/3 combo. Plus this one zooms all the way out to 25mm instead of 200mm

View attachment 752783
Hard to change lens on that camera ;)

Personally i think Nikon and Canon should be more worried by the release of these two lenses than Panasonic and Olympus.
Sure Sony are a threat and a though competitor to everbody but they are clearly aiming for the pro sports and wildlife segment where Canon and Nikon still dominates.

Sony now basically have every lens needed in their FF mirrorless system and A9 that is as good and in many ways better than what Canon and Nikon have in their more expensive D5 and 1D mark IV.
 

Hypilein

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 18, 2015
Messages
1,420
Yes, for me the compact is certainly more interesting than the FF, but it is still a compact with all it's trade offs. It has a damn fine lens, but there is no ultra wideangle and you can't add a fast prime in case. And I assume it is electronic zoom and that is really, really annoying. I have not held one in person though, so maybe it is nicer than others.

In any case, Sony has filled up their FF lens line up pretty nicely, although their APS-C line is rather lackluster. If I was buying a FF camera right now, it might well be a Sony. I prefer mu43 though for it's trade offs. I can't remember the last time I felt the IQ from the 20mp sensor (or the 16mp sensor for that matter) was inadequate. My only camera that is not good enough is the mavic air, but I can't justify the cost to upgrade considering how little I use it. I can barely justify keeping the thing at all, but my girlfriend insists I keep it (weird how these things pan out sometimes).
 

exakta

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2015
Messages
596
I'm definitely enjoying the $13,000 price tag on the new Sony 600/4 prime.

So much for thinking that Oly's 300/4 is too expensive :2thumbs:

F6.3 in wildlife shooting limits its use to good lighting conditions.
I understand your thinking because I've run into it myself, but fifty years ago Nat Geo was filling their pages with wildlife shots taken on color film no faster than ISO 160 with long teles in the f5.6-8.0 max aperture range. What the heck happened?
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2013
Messages
39
Location
The Netherlands
I'm definitely enjoying the $13,000 price tag on the new Sony 600/4 prime.

So much for thinking that Oly's 300/4 is too expensive :2thumbs:



I understand your thinking because I've run into it myself, but fifty years ago Nat Geo was filling their pages with wildlife shots taken on color film no faster than ISO 160 with long teles in the f5.6-8.0 max aperture range. What the heck happened?
Some photographers got lazy and don't take time anymore to actually understand light (and how to manipulate light) and there equipment. The camera has to do it all by itself. Even framing seems to hard for some nowadays so they think they need 50+mp to crop in post process.

And the internet happened. Some gearheads people with few experience always wanting the newest and talking down on older equipment have strong opinions that are generating a lot of clicks.
 

mumu

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
315
I understand your thinking because I've run into it myself, but fifty years ago Nat Geo was filling their pages with wildlife shots taken on color film no faster than ISO 160 with long teles in the f5.6-8.0 max aperture range. What the heck happened?
What happened is that we haven't seen their contact sheets nor do we know how long they had to wait for the right light to get the shot. Being able to have long reach, a stabilized image, fast and accurate AF, and low noise / high dynamic range high ISO performance will all result in expanding your shooting opportunities and keeper rates. And if that's available to mere mortals at somewhat affordable prices, I can understand why some photographers would want that.

Myself, well, I'm not willing to shoulder the weight, cost and bulk of a larger system.
 
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
122
Location
Alaska/Oregon
I'm definitely enjoying the $13,000 price tag on the new Sony 600/4 prime.

So much for thinking that Oly's 300/4 is too expensive :2thumbs:



I understand your thinking because I've run into it myself, but fifty years ago Nat Geo was filling their pages with wildlife shots taken on color film no faster than ISO 160 with long teles in the f5.6-8.0 max aperture range. What the heck happened?
I love my Oly m43 gear and have collected a solid lineup of lenses that I’m very happy with. However, I am also seriously considering getting whatever the successor to the A7Riii will be (A7Riv?) for portrait/studio specific work.

I won’t get rid of my m43 gear because I love it’s use for so many occasions especially when I need to throw it in a backpack and hike around.

I’ve been paying a lot of attention to Sony lately and remember when they released pricing for the $13,000 600mm lens. I love my Oly 300 f4 PRO for 1/4 the cost and size haha. I’m glad I’m not interested in wildlife/sports with a full frame system haha
I’m definitely not ready to drop that kind of cash for one lens!
 

Jonathan F/2

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
5,027
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Are we doing these comparisons again? I don't think it's worth even debating. Pick the system that vibes best with you! ;)

This would be a more appropriate comparison.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Pluttis

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2016
Messages
749
Location
Sweden
Real Name
Peter
Are we doing these comparisons again? I don't think it's worth even debating. Pick the system that vibes best with you! ;)

This would be a more appropriate comparison.

View attachment 753367
If we only are comparing size it would be more appropriate if not comparing the small Sony APS-C camera with the one of the biggest m43 camera ;) plus these comparisons are somewhat misleading.

The Sony lens is bigger in diameter/volume, 400grams heavier and twice the price.

But i agree with you, pick the system that fit you and your needs.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
1,962
Location
Maryland
Real Name
Loren
I've considered an A9 kit, as there is a lot to like there and the IQ is surely great. But quickly saw that the size and weight (and price, though less so) for what I'd need were not just unfavorable trade-offs for my preferences, they were complete non-starters. I'll continue to focus on improving my skills and sticking with µ4/3.
 

macro

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
570
Location
New Zealand
Real Name
Danny
Sony introduced two new telephoto lenses yesterday. Once costs as much as a car, but the other is a bit more affordable at a mere $2,000 USD. While Sony has figured out how to make their cameras the same size as m43 cameras, they haven't quite figured that out with lenses yet ;)

Sure, the Sony lens will yield shallower DoF and the sensor will allow for better high ISO results. But the lens is nearly 200mm longer than the Panasonic (over 200 with the lens hoods on), and weighs 1.6kg more.

I'm sure it's a nice lens, and Sony owners will be happy they have an affordable option besides their 100-400. However, when you really need reach in a compact package, m43 is still a tough nut to crack.
Does Olympus make a 200-600 lens Ian? I can see one says stamped on the lens 100-300, while the other says 200-600 ;)

If we mount the 200-600mm on m4/3 does it turn into a 100-300.

Or if we can mount the Panasonic 100-300 would it become a 50-150 on a Sony FF. Gets very confusing all this stuff, maybe I'll just go by whats stamped on the lenses. Otherwise I'm using a 1600 F/5.6 and add the 2x TC and all of a sudden I'm using a 3200 F/11. I don't think so.

All the best Ian.

Danny.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom