Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Opinions on renting a Sony 70-400mm f/4-5.6 SSM or similar lens?
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Dec 22, 2012 12:44:58   #
LAE Loc: Las Vegas
 
Sony does have a SAL-20TC 2.0x teleconverter lens, new around 550$, used around 350$.
The SAL-70400G has just been marked as discontinued by Sony, so there may be some good deals coming up.

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 12:58:44   #
Rob O' Loc: Freakin' Hot Arizona
 
planepics wrote:
By the way, do you use the lens on a crop sensor or a full frame camera? On my A330, the 400mm would be like 600mm.


I use it on an a77, an APS-C sensor. I'd like to have an a99, but then I lose the extra reach with the 70400. Of course, sometimes we have to make sacrifices.

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 13:22:46   #
gopiqpp Loc: SAUDI ARABIA
 
I use the Sigma 150-500 with my Sony A390, and the A57. Great lens.

Reply
 
 
Dec 22, 2012 13:41:16   #
MisterC Loc: Nashville, TN
 
planepics wrote:
I have a similar but much more generic thread going...with limited responses. I am going on a cruise to Alaska for my 50th birthday next June and have never rented any equipment before. After talking to my local camera store (which doesn't offer any Sony rentals) I am thinking about this lens. Does an extra 100mm (150 with my A330) really make that much of a difference? I currently have the kit lenses...18-55 and 75-300. The reviews seem to be pretty good, except for the bokeh and it's a "G" lens, which I've never used. Any pics (i.e. 300mm vs 400mm) would be appreciated.
I have a similar but much more generic thread goin... (show quote)


I still have my Sony 70-400 lens (used twice) for sale if you would be interested. Asking $1700 which would include shipping.





Reply
Dec 22, 2012 13:46:47   #
spphoto Loc: Long Island,N.Y.
 
there is no indication on the Sony site that this lens is discontinued only a $100.00 discount

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 15:01:22   #
Hawkeye055 Loc: Nottingham UK
 
Hi

I've had the Sony 70-400mm lens for a couple of months now and just love it. People do comment about the weight of the lens but I can go out for a few hours with no problems and all I use is handheld. If you can afford it I would buy it instead of the rental.

I have the Sony 55a.

Kev



Reply
Dec 22, 2012 17:07:03   #
planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
 
I might be nice to own a professional lens, but I don't make my living off of photography...never even sold a single pic and don't think it would be practical given my current employment status. A new 70-400 would be 3 months of savings, if I didn't eat, pay rent, or drive. I might consider a TC, but I didn't realize even they were in the $300-500 range (would a TC be worth putting on a kit lens that cost less than the lens is worth anyways?). The 150-500 also sounds interesting, but again, something like that would have to wait for a full time job, retirement, or winning the lotto. For my 50th birthday cruise to Alaska, I was just thinking about treating myself to a nice rental with more range than my long kit lens and better optics. I might also consider taking my kit 75-300 and renting something shorter to temporarily replace my 18-55 I just can't decide if I want the W/A for the glaciers or the T/F for the whales and sea lions.

Reply
 
 
Dec 22, 2012 18:28:16   #
Rob O' Loc: Freakin' Hot Arizona
 
I really think you would be more than disappointed in your pictures if you went with a TC. Your 75-300 is an adequate lens at best and will get you some OK pictures. But it suffers from chromatic aberration and softness. A TC will double not just the range, but also the flaws. If you want to treat yourself, but don't want to spend for a G lens (and I can totally understand that) then I vote for the rental. As for wide angle, your 18-55 is a better lens than people make it out to be. At 18mm it's pretty wide and should give you some satisfying results with the glaciers. I like it quite a bit.

More advice? Try to get your wide angle shots in the early morning or late evening when the light is soft. And consider shooting in RAW+JPG. If needed, the RAW file will let you adjust your white balance more readily than a JPG will. I envy you the Alaska cruise!

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 19:29:49   #
DWHJR Loc: Kannapolis NC
 
Rob O' wrote:
original


Don't think you could ask for more. Beautiful shot!

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 19:33:26   #
Rob O' Loc: Freakin' Hot Arizona
 
Thank you very much. It is appreciated.

Reply
Dec 22, 2012 20:26:37   #
adirondacker Loc: Redford, New York
 
Love my 70-400 on my a55. But if its not in the budget Ive got some great shots with the 75-300 They just needed a little photo shop after.



Reply
 
 
Dec 23, 2012 13:05:48   #
planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
 
I never thought about the TC magnifying the flaws as well as the distance. I think I will more than ever consider renting the long lens. Our union (which I was forced to join when I got hired this summer) just voted in a new contract and we are going to be getting some retroactive pay. It's probably not going to be much, but wouldn't if be fun to be able to rent 2 nice lenses?

Just had another thought. What about something like an 18-270? I'd lose some on the long end, but if I got something with good enough optics, I wouldn't have to worry about changing lenses and getting anything on the sensor. I've never used a "uni-lens" before.

Sorry...just had another thought after looking at rerviews of uni-lenses...Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 G SSM or Sony 70-400mm f/4-5.6 SSM, the 2.8 being $6 more expensive (at borrowlenses.com), with 1/2 the reach, but a larger aperture. Which is more important???

Reply
Dec 23, 2012 17:48:59   #
Rob O' Loc: Freakin' Hot Arizona
 
On a cruise to Alaska? I'd go for the reach. You'll be shooting in daylight, right? You shouldn't need f/2.8. And I think taking a picture of a grizzly bear, you'd want to be as faaaaaar away as possible!

Reply
Dec 23, 2012 18:48:36   #
planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
 
good point :)

Reply
Jan 1, 2013 14:17:22   #
planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs
 
I just had a new thought...For a little more than the 100-400, I could rent the Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM and the 16-50 DT. They are each lighter than the 70-400 and the reviews seem to be pretty good as well. Does anyone have experience with these lenses?

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.