Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Big lenses on little cameras: a problem or not?
Page <prev 2 of 3 next>
Apr 25, 2024 10:21:15   #
robert43 Loc: Auburn, CA
 

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 11:12:58   #
azted Loc: Las Vegas, NV.
 
billnikon wrote:
I own a Sony a1 and a9, for my long lenses like the 200-600 I mount the vertical grip that helps to balance out the outfit. I also hand hold the lens just behind the lens hood, this too helps stabilize the lens.
You really should be able to hand hold the 105 macro without an issue, it is not heavy or big for a macro. I would not put a tripod foot on the macro, too cumbersome. I reverse the tripod foot on the 200-600 so it is easier to handle hand held.
I am 76 years young and have no issues hand holding my equipment, I also own the Sony 600 f4 and hand hold that without issue.
I find a tripod and monopod slow me down in wildlife photography. Below is an image taken of three Cattle Egret chicks and mom, hand held, at a 100 yards, with the 600mm f4.
I find my minimum shutter speed to be greater than 1/2500 sec. that way it helps hand holding and for birds in flight.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.
I own a Sony a1 and a9, for my long lenses like th... (show quote)





Great image!!!!

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 11:48:00   #
rcarol
 
BebuLamar wrote:
The camera is light so it won't harm the mount. Support the lens.


It may not be possible to support the lens.

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2024 11:56:51   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
dsnoke wrote:
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Nikon D7500 I destroyed. The new camera is significantly smaller and lighter that the old one. If I choose to use a Sony 200-600 mm lens on the a6700, I'm putting 4.5 lbs on a mount that weighs a lot less. Since the big lens has a tripod foot on a collar, that should not be a problem if I use a monopod or tripod. So far so good. However, I would like to get a good macro lens, and those tend to be big and heavy also. So I wonder, if I put, for example, a 105 mm macro lens on that A6700, can I get a tripod foot, or will I have the a6700 body on a support with the lens hanging off the front? I fear that will bend or otherwise affect the lens mount. Or am I worrying unnecessarily?
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Niko... (show quote)


Most camera manufacturers are now using magnesium alloy bodies and stiff mounts that will handle any of their lenses at the time of manufacture of the body. And they usually add in a little more extra strength for the future. It is not very likely that your body will be damaged by a heavy lens. Of course, if you use your camera and lens as a hammer, all bets are off!

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 12:50:33   #
OldCADuser Loc: Irvine, CA
 
OldCADuser wrote:
I have a Sony a6500, which in terms of size and construction, is virtually the same as the a6700 (well close enough) and I have both a long lens (400mm) with a tripod mount, and a heavy macro lens (f2.8, 60mm), and have had no problems.


Note that I also mount a 'ring-light' on the macro lens, again with no problems.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 12:54:06   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
Since I mostly shoot my long lenses handheld I usually remove the collar and foot. When it’s on the strap the weight of the lens causes it to hang straight down and when I’m shooting my hand is on the zoom ring so I don’t really worry about strain on the mount.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 13:05:20   #
ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or
 
As part of the chorus: I have the a6500 and a bunch of lenses including the 200-600mm G. Your a6700 is a metal camera and mount. When I put the 200-600m on my a6500 it just goes along for the ride. Same as when I put that lens on my A1 and A9. I actually carry the mounted combo around by the tripod mount turned up like a handle. You will have no problems.

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2024 13:18:28   #
MJPerini
 
If you exercise reasonable caution, you will not have a problem.
The 200-600 has a lens foot. Use it for both tripod mounting and strap mounting.
This way there is never any significant stress on the lens mount.
Something like a black rapid cross body strap and an Acratech Swift clamp, is MADE for this exact purpose.
It is not the only one on the market, but the best engineered one. It has variable tension on the clamp (to accommodate out of spec Arca plates), a safety on the lever release, AND a brass pin that stops any possibility of the plate sliding out.
For lenses without tripod feet, an Arca bottom plate or L-bracket spreads the load a bit, and the Swift clamp solves the strap issue there too.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 13:26:29   #
DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
 
dsnoke wrote:
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Nikon D7500 I destroyed. The new camera is significantly smaller and lighter that the old one. If I choose to use a Sony 200-600 mm lens on the a6700, I'm putting 4.5 lbs on a mount that weighs a lot less. Since the big lens has a tripod foot on a collar, that should not be a problem if I use a monopod or tripod. So far so good. However, I would like to get a good macro lens, and those tend to be big and heavy also. So I wonder, if I put, for example, a 105 mm macro lens on that A6700, can I get a tripod foot, or will I have the a6700 body on a support with the lens hanging off the front? I fear that will bend or otherwise affect the lens mount. Or am I worrying unnecessarily?
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Niko... (show quote)


Big heavy lenses in my experience tend to have collars with a foot to support the lens. My 105 micro is light and I wouldn't worry about the camera supporting it. On my Nikon, probably the heaviest lens I have is the newer 24-70, which has a larger front element than the old 24-70 and is a bit heavier, but my current cameras support it just fine. My camera bodies are metal so they are built to support the lens. Don't know about Sony but I suspect they would be similar.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 13:44:23   #
OldCADuser Loc: Irvine, CA
 
Note that my original Sony a6000 had a lens mount which did have some plastic parts and I was concerned, so I replaced the lens mount with an all metal (Brass) kit from Fotodiox:

https://fotodioxpro.com/products/snye-toughe-p-se15-lt

Note that when I got my Sony a6500 I checked and the lens mount appeared to have been upgraded so that there were no longer any plastic parts, it was now all metal. I assume that this is also the case with an a6700.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 14:01:47   #
bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada
 
dsnoke wrote:
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Nikon D7500 I destroyed. The new camera is significantly smaller and lighter that the old one. If I choose to use a Sony 200-600 mm lens on the a6700, I'm putting 4.5 lbs on a mount that weighs a lot less. Since the big lens has a tripod foot on a collar, that should not be a problem if I use a monopod or tripod. So far so good. However, I would like to get a good macro lens, and those tend to be big and heavy also. So I wonder, if I put, for example, a 105 mm macro lens on that A6700, can I get a tripod foot, or will I have the a6700 body on a support with the lens hanging off the front? I fear that will bend or otherwise affect the lens mount. Or am I worrying unnecessarily?
I recently acquired a Sony a6700 to replace a Niko... (show quote)

I use an A6000 with several heavy lenses with no problems or 'bending'. It works very well with the FE 200-600!

bwa

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2024 14:17:30   #
Timmers Loc: San Antonio Texas.
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
There's a risk. But, look at both the camera throat and the lens mount. If both are metal, you have a lessened risk. Overall, you're overthinking the risk.


This is silly information. I use to use Canon and had one of their top end fast zooms. The lens became locked to the body and went in for repair to the toon of $300 plus dollars. They sent back the repaired lens and the part, a cheap metal ring from the front of the repaired lens. As the NASA astronaut said, as he tossed a Nikon into space after jamming on the third frame, "So much for Japanese junk, hand me the Hasselblad". For me it is not a Hasselblad it is Leica. I have the Leica 8.5cm f 1.5 lens produced for the German military in 1932, that lens and mount is fine as it approaches it's 100 year and still functions perfectly. The mount could fail but you would need to hit it several times with a number three ball bean hammer to get it to fail.

You get what you pay for, I use my Leica lenses on the Sony mirrorless body and have no desire to go back to Canon or the other cheaply made junk cameras. Yes, I gave that super toy lens to a guy I know along with the Schnider zoom lens made for the Leica camera body. All just junk gear.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 15:01:08   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
Timmers wrote:
This is silly information. I use to use Canon and had one of their top end fast zooms. The lens became locked to the body and went in for repair to the toon of $300 plus dollars. They sent back the repaired lens and the part, a cheap metal ring from the front of the repaired lens. As the NASA astronaut said, as he tossed a Nikon into space after jamming on the third frame, "So much for Japanese junk, hand me the Hasselblad". For me it is not a Hasselblad it is Leica. I have the Leica 8.5cm f 1.5 lens produced for the German military in 1932, that lens and mount is fine as it approaches it's 100 year and still functions perfectly. The mount could fail but you would need to hit it several times with a number three ball bean hammer to get it to fail.

You get what you pay for, I use my Leica lenses on the Sony mirrorless body and have no desire to go back to Canon or the other cheaply made junk cameras. Yes, I gave that super toy lens to a guy I know along with the Schnider zoom lens made for the Leica camera body. All just junk gear.
This is silly information. I use to use Canon and ... (show quote)


Canon defines the professional market for interchangeable lens cameras, now for 30+ solid years. Your random detail-free anecdote means zero when considering the market share of a company that dwarves all competition, bigger than the next two manufacturers combined. Moreover, Canon is not even the brand(s) involved in the OP's post, further highlighting the random nonsense of your silly reply.

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 15:22:58   #
Iron Sight Loc: Utah
 
Tripod application with Sony A6000 camera attached to a Sony 200-600 mm lens The camera is not supporting the entire weight. THE FOOT was shipped with the lens.


(Download)

Reply
Apr 25, 2024 16:08:36   #
Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA
 
No fear! Go big or go home.


(Download)

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
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.