Raptor

Good morning. I have enjoyed reading your postings for some time. Thanks for all the teaching. I have a real problem. I shoot with a Sony A68 and usually use a Tamron 18-270
lens. I belong to a photography club and enjoy mostly nature photography and wildlife.
Last week I bought a Tamron 150-600 lens in anticipation of my trip to the Black Water Wildlife Refuge in Md. Practicing with the lens I have discovered I physically cannot handle or carry my camera and the lens. 70.2 oz. I have scoliosis and this is too much weight. I cannot hold lens up. Mounting on tripod does not address the problem. I want to find out if I have any options for wildlife photography other than this lens. By the way, this is the lens of choice for our amazing bird shooting members. It is not for me.
I fleetingly thought of selling my Sony gear and and starting over with another brand but the investment required may be out of my reach.
Thanks for any advice.

CO

Tamron just introduced a new G2 version of their 100-400mm lens. At 1100 grams, it's about one-half the weight of the 150-600mm. I read a review of it in the April issue of NPhoto magazine (Nikon magazine). It's very highly rated.

Tamron also recently introduced an 18-400mm lens for cropped sensor cameras.

RGreenway Loc: Morristown, New Jersey

I have a solution! I have and love the Sony (Minolta) 500 F8 mirror lens. I use it with an adapter on a Sony A6500 and get amazing shots in full daylight. On the A68 no adapter would be needed, and like on my A6500 this lens shoots as a 750mm lens! I bought a very clean used one on eBay like this one: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-500mm-f8-Reflex-Lens-500-8-Minolta-348/202278994961?hash=item2f18c48411:g:gPkAAOSwv~law4~R:sc:UPSGround!07960!US!-1 The slightly older ones with the Minolta logo may be just as good, but I wanted the Sony version. I will post a photo taken with it.

whwiden

Maybe a superzoom for when you are far away? Perhaps eliminating the need to crop as much would compensate somewhat for a smaller sensor.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

Have you considered a bridge camera such as the Sony RX10 iv? Several members here own it and have given it positive reviews. It zooms to 600mm. Why not check out the specs on B&H?

SkyKing Loc: Thompson Ridge, NY

...Sony 70–400 mm F4–5.6 G SSM II...and use a monopod...

RGreenway Loc: Morristown, New Jersey

This is a Mute Swan taken at the Senney Wildlife Refuge in the UP of Michigan. Handheld from my car resting the lens barrel on the door. Download and notice the water dripping from his (her?) beak. The only downside of this lens 500/8 mirror is the dreaded donut bokeh you can get with busy backgrounds. This is not an issue for me for bird photos, except ones I take on my bird feeder.

(Download)

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

You might consider looking at the Olympus micro four thirds line. Chose the OMDEm1 Mark II for my wife. Light weight and with the 300mm long reach. 5 Stars at B&H. Great formate if you are not planning on large enlargements.

olemikey Loc: 6 mile creek, Spacecoast Florida

RGreenway may have a good answer for your situation....and another hog, I believe the Imagemeister (hope I got that right) has shown a type of harness mount (his own design) that may take a lot of the weight out of your hands and redistribute to upper body. There are other harness setups that will also do this, but perhaps another hog has more experience in that arena. I suffer from rotator cup issues that make steady handhold of larger lens difficult in certain situations, especially for following a subject....and for that I almost always go to tripod or monopod....and also use remote shooting gear. Remote requires some scouting and placement (planning) ahead of time, but can completely eliminate the need for a big lens. There are also many levels of remote application - anything from very simple to quite fancy. I went through some trial and error with bridge cameras too...have several with great zoom capability...and they take good quality pics - if you eliminate the "shake and vibration". Shake and vibration are your greatest enemies - try your best to eliminate those....just pushing the shutter button can induce movement, mirror movement, wind, etc... gotta tone them down for a big lens like the new one you have (I want one of those too!!!!!!). Don't despair and don't give up - set back and look carefully at your situation - look at the helpful equipment that is available (think cinema/camcorders/tv cameras - some are big and heavy - require harness for pro work, unless you want it to look like the "Cloverfield" movie. Start researching and see what help you can get. Cheers mikey

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

It's hard to use a manual focus lens on digital cameras with their plain focusing screens. This is important with active subjects. Image quality is just ok, compared to other options. You can't change aperture, so your DoF is only affected by your distance to the subject. The low weight is it's only advantage. Not a great solution.

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

This is always an option if it doesn't interfere with your back issues.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818082-REG/Cotton_Carrier_779_SSV_0062_Steady_Shot_with_Camera.html?ap=y&c3api=1876%2C193843772834%2C%2C&gclid=Cj0KCQjwz7rXBRD9ARIsABfBl827NR4ndRDj5v5TOvniI51WJBEN1HY6TLt9BQLdqeUYOjMsCu5DNboaAlByEALw_wcB

Alternately, you might want to look at a Sony RX10 IV - which only weighs 2.5 lbs and offers up a field of view equal to a 24-600mm lens (on a full frame camera).

If you want to get something inbetween, Micro 4/3 is always a viable option, but more expensive than the Sony. The image quality will be better because it has a slightly larger sensor (2x crop compared to 2.7x crop on the Sony), and the handling will be comparable. It is hard to beat a lens with a 600mm equivalent field of view and a max aperture of F4 (the Zeiss lens on the Sony).

This thread shows the quality of the lens in a variety of circumstances. It's an RX10 III, but the lens is the same. I've since purchased the RX10 IV and totally love it. It's a lot lighter than my walkaround setup for birding and wildlife - a Nikon D810 and a Sigma Sport 150-600 - which weighs around 8.5 lbs.

You can see some of my stuff here:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gene_lugo/

Many of the most recent images have been taken with the Sony, the rest with all sorts of Nikon gear through the years.

alf85 Loc: Northumberland, UK.

Try the Nikon P900, or the Canon SX-50 that is lighter. the Canon has a 24mm to 1,200mm lens, and the Nikon has a 24mm to 2,000mm lens, these are the two camera's i use now as i am now 80yrs old and like you can not carry heavy gear around. Here are a couple of photos, one from each camera. Regards, Alfie.

Canon SX-50.


Nikon P900.

mjgoulet

Nothing to do with photography but I grew up in the UP of Michigan - A yooper.

John N Loc: HP14 3QF Stokenchurch, UK

A smaller lens and a paired multiplier. A 1.4x on the previously mentioned 100-400 will give you reach of 560mm and will hopefully fit the bill. Or you might risk going smaller, say 75 - 300 and 2x multiplier.
The same retailer might treat you sympathetically if you buy replacement from them.

Unlikely to be in this situation again, but a days hire of the aforementioned lens would have cost a few £'s but saved even more. Sorry you found out the hard way.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Welcome to our forum!