Lknack Loc: NOCO

I’m looking to upgrade some equipment.

I have a Sony a6000, soon to be up graded to an a6400.

I have a Sigma 100-400c (with the MC-11 adapter) with which I’m mostly satisfied.

I’m looking at the Sony 70-350, it’s a little smaller, just a little more than half the weight and a native lens. The Sigma works well, it could focus a little faster (which the 6400 should help). I don't expect to ever go FF.

My question is sharpness. The Sigma is pretty darn good up to about 375mm and not bad at 400mm.

I can handle the size and weight (lighter would be nice). It focuses fast enough for 90% of my shooting but some say that the Sony is extremely sharp.

Will the Sony be sharper?

Anyone have personal experience with these two lenses?

I appreciate the experience and knowledge of this group.

Thanks for any advice.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Curious as to why you think you need to upgrade? What short comings you have now?

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

I think the OP is looking for focus speed? Maybe. I do not know if the 70 to 100 length is important for some reason.

Lknack Loc: NOCO

You are right---I probably should be happy with what I have-- it's just a hobby and my livelihood does not depend on it. BUT...Just when I get a good, very good, shot of a BIF or at an air show or a close up of a bug and I think "WOW that's pretty good" then I see a super sharp shot and think "mine's not that good.
At the last Thunderbird show in Cheyenne I had a "keeper rate" of about 20% that were OK sharp.
I would post a couple but don't see a way to do it on this thread.
Thanks

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

A 20% keeper rate is actually pretty good. That super sharp one you saw may have been selected form hundreds of shots.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

You underestimate your accomplishments with a keeper rate of 20 percent. That is amazing for BIF or air show images.

Lknack Loc: NOCO

OK--I have thought it over and decided to not do anything about the lens right now. The Sony probably would not be that much better to justify the cost.
What do you thing about going to the a6400 over the a6000? Maybe, again, not worth the cost?
I think I should probably work on me before the gear.
What do you thing?

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Agree.You are the key. Not the equipment.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

The 6400 WILL be better.......IMO, the 70-300 will be also - but much more costly for the performance gain.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

As a Sony a6000 owner as well as the a99ii, a7iii and a7riii, I woul upgrade to either the a6500 or a6600. The reason being that you get 5 ax stabilization in the 65 and 66 that you don't in your a6000 or a6400. As we get older we tend to not hold the camera as steady and that extra stabilization helps. Plus it turns any shot from any lens into a stabilized shot. I would prefer the a6600 over the a6500 because it incorporates the same amazing focus speed as the a7Riv and a9ii. My a7iii and a7Riii have a slightly toned down focus system that is plum amazing. Why don't you rent an a6600 with the Sony lens you are thinking about. Places like Lens Rental out of TN will incorporate your rental fee into the sale of the camera if you decide to keep it. I had a similar delema about my Sigma 150-600. It was heads an above better than what I was previously using but just not good enough in IQ and focus speed. I hemmed and hawed for months and then finally jumped for the Sony 200-600mm ... Nice but no money left for a while. Much faster in focus and IQ. Was it worth the $1000 difference than the Sigma? Maybe maybe not. I have the Sony 70-300mm G lens. It is defenately better than my old 70-300mm Minolta. I am guessing that the Sony 70-350 will be as good if not better than the 70-300G. Tough choices. Do some homework and evaluate your needs and desires. I would definitely upgrade my camera before the lens. Because of the focus speed on the a6600 and 5 ax stab. On either the a6600 or a6500. Happy shooting

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

"My question is sharpness."

I know nothing about your expertise as a photographer but sharpness with any lens depends more on you than on the lens. Modern lenses, specially professional made lenses are of excellent mechanical and optical quality. I cannot remember a lens that did not do its part when I did mine and I have used many lenses in my lifetime.

Is there something wrong with your Sony a6000? Let me put this into perspective; I am using an old Nikon D7000. Nikon manufactures an excellent D500 and a D7500 bodies, both share the same sensor and processor and both, if we talk about technology are superior to my old D7000. None of them are going to make my photography better than it is now. If I am not able to make great images with my D7000 none of those cameras will make me a better photographer. If I need a larger buffer, better AF and a faster firing rate now my decision to buy one of those cameras is more than justified. I hope you understand what I am saying.

I use Nikon lenses. Those are the lenses Nikon manufactures for their cameras. I perfectly understand and know that other lenses are made to fit the Nikon mount and I also understand some of those lenses are superb optically and much cheaper in price but I prefer the lenses that were specifically made for the camera by the manufacturer. I am still using Nikon lenses made in the 60's, 70's and 80's without issues. I have nothing about buying independent lenses if short on the budget. Lenses are only tools.

Try the lenses you have in mind with your camera and you will be in a better position to know if the lens will fit your style.

tcthome Loc: NJ

I have seen some pics in Mark Smith’s you tube vids of the new Sony lens & they show fantastic detail but , he is also using their newest FF cameras. How much are you willing to spend ?

Lknack Loc: NOCO

Thanks guys, for the insight! Being retired and on a fixed budget kinda puts a damper on the top of the line stuff and my skills really don't warrant the best stuff and, again, I don't make a living at it.
I sticking with cropped gear because it's less expensive and some smaller and lighter. The 6500 & 6600 with the stabilization may be something to look at.
I went to the Colorado Air National Guard fly over yesterday and made about 60 shots ----0 keepers-that's the first time with zero.
I may just hold off a bit and see if the 6600 comes down or until there are some on the used market.
Lots to think about.

Thanks

Canisdirus

The Sony 70-350mm has very fast AF and good tracking capabilities...
On a budget...about the best lens out there for your camera.
The Sony 100-400mm will outperform it, as will the Sony 200-600mm (easily)...
But you get what you pay for...

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

With moving subjects in mind... the a6600 would be the cats meow it’s the fastest focusing and most stablized APS-C camera made today. Only exceeded by the a9ii. I use to use my a6000 for bird shots until I got my a7Riii. The focus is so fast and accurate