G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

I may get shot down in flames but....a lens made to work within a shortish focal length distance is probably better than a lens that covers a huge focal length difference.

The first Canon bridge camera that had a large focal length difference lens had huge problems.

For BIF you need the reach of a long lens - and that comes at a weight.

Work with what you have and see how you like it.

have fun

mrjcall Loc: Woodfin, NC

Not necessarily. Sony is making some incredibly lightweight lenses for their FF mirrorless bodies. I came from a full Nikkor set of lenses and comparable ones from Sony, or at least most of them, are considerably lighter than Nikkor. Their 12-24 f/4 which has comparable performance to the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8 and is about 1.5 lbs lighter. Yes, it's an f/4, but that's not the whole story. Sony has found a way through lighter weight materials and innovative optical engineering to make their lenses quite a bit lighter. There are exceptions, but lightweight is one of the primary goals when it comes to their gear.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

You are comparing an f4 lens to f2.8. That is not how it works. What is the weight difference between the Sony g2.8 and Nikon 2.8 zooms?

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

👍👍 You are absolutely correct - we need to compare apples-to apples. Canon’s 24-70 f4 is considerably lighter than their f2.8 also, and I imagine the same is true of Nikon. In fact the 24-70 f2.8 Sony is actually heavier than the Canon 2.8 (1.95 lbs vs 1.77 lbs) and almost exactly the same as the Nikon equivalent (1.95 vs 1.99).

Sony does have one new lightweight long tele, but if you compare common lenses such as the 70-200 f2.8, Sony’s are just as heavy as Canon or Nikon’s FF equivalent lenses. You can certainly produce lighter lenses by using lighter materials (not always a good thing), smaller max aperture or smaller format sensor, but for all intents and purposes, I stand by my assertion - lens weight is primarily determined by format size, not DSLR or mirrorless, and total system weight is not that different given the same FL, sensor size and max aperture.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Acountry330 Loc: Dothan,Ala USA

I do not believe that you made a mistake. Enjoy your new camera and lens. When you get really good with it, then maybe think about getting a mirror less. Happy Shooting.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Sony's A6500 has the best AF system in the business on an APS-C camera. You may want to see what the buzz is about by either renting or going to a Sony store and borrowing one for free for a day. It may be an eye opener, given the subject matter you are pursuing. Right behind the Sony would be the Nikon D500 - which has group autofocus and lots of AF sensors - also quite good. The D7500 isn't bad, but it isn't in the same league as the other two for difficult and very active subjects. If you can justify having two bodies - the Sony is an absolute bargain at $1100.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

I recently upgraded to the D850 and for the last few years my passion has switched to wildlife. I currently only use the 80-400mm nikon lens. This lens is heavy enough in my opinion for hand holding. At this point I don't want to drag anything heavier around in the field. I shoot alot and to get the best possible shots I strive to get CLOSE. Even the professionals with their long 600mm lens get extremely close, close enough to fill the frame. If your renting the lens and still shooting from long distances and hoping for better shots I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. Learn your subject, learn what they feed on, use blinds, use the rising sun at your back, plan ahead, spend time sharpening your skills. These will make the difference, not what system you use. If you can't get it with the current one, switching will NOT help.......

jdub82 Loc: Northern California

Canon has had some excellent bridge cameras that have up to a 1200-1300mm zoom (SX50 & SX60) I own the SX50 and it is a great camera with amazing zoom capability, though limited in low light by a small sensor. . Not sure which 'first bridge camera' you are referring to??

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Size counts. The weight savings between FF and APS-C lenses is smaller than the weight savings between APS-C and MFT lenses. And the weight savings is even greater between FF and MFT. Should you have gone with mirrorless? If you would not gain anything from the special mirrorless differences, then no you should not have necessarily gone mirrorless. There are some neat things that mirrorless can do that mirrored cameras can't do. But unless you can use those features, they are not a deal breaker.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

I have a Nikon D7100 and I love it. (I also have a Nikon D600, which is full frame, which I use for "wide" to "normal" shots like portraits, etc.) The DX in my D7100 gives me "extra" reach with my telephoto and telephoto zoom lenses. Yes, I know that I can get similar results by cropping or putting my D600 in DX mode, but I like the ability to carry 2 cameras (one FX and the other DX) for the ease of not switching back and forth on one camera.

Given that info, I think that you are on the right track. That Tamron lens (and while personally, I am not a fan of many of the Tamron offerings) should give you a good reach for nature and birding. It will "seem" similar in reach to a 225 - 900 on your camera. The ONLY thing you may wish for is a good tripod at the longer telephoto settings on that lens. I have a Nikkor 80-400 that I use often on my D7100 (it is almost my "go-to" lens).. and it gets to be shaky at the 400 (seems to the camera to be 600mm) reach. I can hold it but I have to watch my shutter speed and make sure that it is fast enough to limit blur.

Oh and because I have both FX and DX bodies, I ONLY purchase FX lenses.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

If you set up in one spot while shooting, you might consider a tripod with a gimble head to resolve your weight problems.

wildweasel

https://learnandsupport.getolympus.com/learn-center/photography-tips/birds/12-reasons-why-i-prefer-micro-four-thirds-for-birds?utm_content=tip_01&utm_campaign=em_learncenter_2018_us&utm_source=email_etprm&utm_medium=email&sfmc_sub=161648215
I shoot BIF almost everyday with an Olympus EM 1 Mark ll.

Largobob

I disagree. The lens weight is MOSTLY due to weight of glass and quality of construction.....the larger the aperture, the larger the glass and the heavier the lens. I took out my old Nikon F2s and Nikkormat yesterday....they are both small and lightweight compared with my D810.....and all have full frame equivalents. Yes, image format CAN and will affect the size and weight of a lens....but not nearly as much as the maximum aperture.

GED Loc: North central Pa

Listen to this mans advice and you will see the greatest improvement in your photography. Renting a lens to try it in the field is a wise choice, purchase the best lens and camera that your budget will allow and that is best suited to what you are photographing. Make sure you have a gimbal head and solid tripod. Many people use top of the line equipment and produce low quality work because they do not practice the suggestions of martinfisher. The easy part of being a natural history photographer is buying equipment, then the work begins transporting and setting up blinds so you are in position when the light is right, learning where to find your subjects and if your shooting birds learn when to shoot so they have best plumage, if your shooting orchids learn where to find them and when they bloom then be ready to shoot them when most of the buds are open but before the insects start to eat them or the first blooms start to deteriorate. There is often a very narrow window of time to get the shots you want, learn to be proficient with the equipment you have. I have seen many folks always changing equipment for the latest greatest thing on the market and they never learn to master what they are shooting with and miss many opportunities. Martinfisher has given you very good advice in telling you to learn how to get close to your subjects. I wish you the very best in achieving your goals.