Sony 70-300mm G lens

[Jorgen Udvang]

Edward,
Nice portraits. There's something about the colours from the A900 that reminds me of slide film. Somewhere between Kodachrome and Velvia, I think. Different from my Fujis, but beautiful in its own way. Can I afford yet another system, I wonder

 

[edwardkaraa]

Edward,
Nice portraits. There's something about the colours from the A900 that reminds me of slide film. Somewhere between Kodachrome and Velvia, I think. Different from my Fujis, but beautiful in its own way. Can I afford yet another system, I wonder

Thanks Jorgen.

It is exactly this similitude to chrome film that attracted me to the A900 in the first place. I get it just by shooting in standard style without any increase in saturation or contrast. I'm not sure of it's the sensor or the image processing, or both.

This is something I could not get with Canon Dslr no matter how I tried.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Can I afford yet another system, I wonder

Btw, you might be interested to know that you can get your A900 + lenses from Sony Thailand at 10 months installments with 0% interest at really good prices. Perhaps this would make your decision easier

Needless to mention that I have used this for as much as my credit card provider allowed me to

 

[ralph wagner]

Very nice lens. Its the lens that I keep handy at all times. Both photos on my homepage:

http://www.photosforfreedom.com/

were taken with the 70-300 G. The one on the left was taken with a tripod. The one on the right was taken hand held impromptu on the way back to camp with the take at a distance of approx. 3 miles.

(Larger versions page 5, 6 - Landscapes & Skyscapes)

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Btw, you might be interested to know that you can get your A900 + lenses from Sony Thailand at 10 months installments with 0% interest at really good prices. Perhaps this would make your decision easier

Hmmm.... then I should rather buy two bodies, don't you think

Ummm... is the financing available for foreigners as well (without a whole Thai village signing for me...)?

 

[edwardkaraa]

Hmmm.... then I should rather buy two bodies, don't you think

Ummm... is the financing available for foreigners as well (without a whole Thai village signing for me...)?

It will work with any credit card issued in Thailand.

 

[douglasf13]

Bill, your Polynesian gallery was a treat. Wonderful pics.

Well, you guys have sold me. I'm eloping to Kauai at the end of May, and it looks like adding the 70300G to my 24-70 will be the perfect travel combo. Thanks!

 

[Braeside]

I don't think you will regret it Douglas, look forward to seeing the pics.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Bill, your Polynesian gallery was a treat. Wonderful pics.

Well, you guys have sold me. I'm eloping to Kauai at the end of May, and it looks like adding the 70300G to my 24-70 will be the perfect travel combo. Thanks!

Douglas,

Even though I believe the 70-300 is not a bad lens, you have to consider 2 things before you buy it:

1. It is not a Zeiss. I mean if you're used to a certain look from Zeiss lenses, this lens will not deliver, specifically, micro-contrast, 3D and the saturated Zeiss color balance which can produce warm tones and cold blues. This lens color balance reminds me of my Canon lens days with predominant warm tones overall as well as low contrast.

2. The minimum aperture of f/5.6 (and the relatively higher shutter speed needed to handhold long lenses) is very limiting as I found out recently, especially with a camera like the A900 that doesn't perform so well at high iso.

Also having used the Contax 300mm f/4 on a 1Ds2, I can say that by comparison the Sony zoom is not sharp. The results are consistant with what I've seen from the guys over here and several reviews on the net, but I wouldn't call it a sharp lens.

For me it is an expensive temporary solution until Sony releases a Zeiss prime around 200mm, which may or may not happen.

 

[Braeside]

I have used nearly all of the 70/75-300mm zooms available for the Minolta/Sony Alpha mount and the 70-300G beats them all hands down. Sure it is only f/5.6 at 300mm, but is very reasonable wide open unlike all the others I have tried which were very soft at the long end even when stopped pretty well down.

I also find the colours very pleasing and accurate, not overly warm.

First is shot at 300mm and followed by 100% crop on Sony A700, not sharpened.

Last street scene is at 90mm on A700

Sure a 300mm prime would be better, but I can't think of a zoom that is as good.

 

[edwardkaraa]

David, I'm in no way trying to contradict you, but what you see as sharp on a 12mp camera will look completely different on a 25mp.

 

[Braeside]

Well, not really Edward, the pixel density is higher on my A700 than on my A900 for a 100% crop. However I must re-evaluate this lens on the A900 and see what it is like across the full frame.

Another example of the the lens wide open at 300mm f/5.6 ISO 200 again on the A700. Some motion blur as only 1/500 and panning not perfect. Vignetting added by me.

I don't disagree that a prime would outperform this and a larger aperture would be nice at times, but for that I have the white 80-200 HS G which also focuses faster than the SSM. However if I am going on holiday and need to take 2 zooms, the 24-70 and 70-300 would be them.

 

[edwardkaraa]

David, you're right about the pixel density. I missed the sensor size.

Definitely, the Zeiss 85 and 135 outperform the zoom at the corresponding focal lengths, but I have nothing else to use beyond 135, so for the 200-300mm range I have no other choice.

I will be going on holidays to Macao this Tuesday and the 16-35 and 24-70 will definitely be in the bag. However, I'm still undecided whether I should take the 70-300 or the 135 as I have space for only one of them.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Regarding the f/stops, just some extra info:

The 70-300 is an f/4.5 from 70 to 85mm, f/5 from 90 to 130mm, and f/5.6 from 135 to 300mm.

 

[Braeside]

I will be going on holidays to Macao this Tuesday and the 16-35 and 24-70 will definitely be in the bag. However, I'm still undecided whether I should take the 70-300 or the 135 as I have space for only one of them.

Difficult choice Edward, I guess it depends on what sort of subjects you expect to shoot, and of course the eventual print size etc. I know you love the Zeiss micro-contrast, colours and bokeh, so perhaps that should be your choice and you can crop if you need a little longer reach. Have a great trip!

For my upcoming trip I am hoping to take the Tamron 17-35, CZ 24-70, CZ 135 and the 70-300G and maybe my 28-105 for a lightweight walkabout, but I will be over the weight limit of 5Kg for hand luggage (5Kg come on).:ROTFL:

If necessary I will put some in my wife's hand luggage and my pockets - perhaps get a geeky photovest for that.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Very difficult choice indeed. I know it will be a last minute decision

Btw, I rediscovered recently the lens pouches that came with the lenses and I found them to be very practical for transporting the lenses + shades. They offer reasonable protection to be confident to throw them in your wife's hand luggage

On my last photo trip, I removed all the partitions from my bag and used the pouches instead. It worked very well.

 

[Braeside]

Great idea Edward.

My plan is take a rucksack that is very thin and light and the maximum hand luggage size, then put inside a very old light padded rectangular shoulder bag (that actually was my father's camera bag). I also have another canvas shoulder bag that has a hard base from another Billingham bag fitted in to it, and that can fold up and be put in the rucksack as well, giving me lots of choices when I am going out and want to take as little or as much gear as I think I need. None of it looks like expensive camera bags.

I will take the leather lens pouches and can use them in the canvas shoulder bag. It solves the problem of protecting the shades.

Have a great holiday Edward.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Edward,
I believe that the 135 will be a more useful lens in Macau unless you bring a tripod. That city really shines at night, when the zoom will be too slow, and the sea mist makes it hazy during the day, which makes long lenses rather useless.

Then of course, you could be lucky, and get some great shots of their interesting bridges with your long zoom, and I could be all wrong

The last time I was there, I brought a 70-300, and I hardly used it at all.

 

[edwardkaraa]

Thank you David. The situation is getting worse over here and I might cancel the trip altogether if things keep on degrading.

Thank you Jorgen for your advice as well. I am now leaning more towards chosing the luminosity and higher quality of the 135 over the versatility and longer reach of the zoom.

 

[Braeside]

I was going to ask you how things were Edward, but did not know if the news reports we are seeing were exaggerated or not, sometimes it is hard to tell from a distance the true extent of the problems. I'll keep my fingers crossed that it improves and you can get your holiday.