Which lens / Telephoto zoom

[DzRBenson]

Hello All,

Currently my setup is:

Sony A350
Sony 18-70mm Kit
Sony 55-200 Kit
Sony 50mm f1.4

Coming Next week:
Manfrotto 488RC4 Quick Release Midi Ball Head
Manfrotto 190XPROB

Now im looking for one new lens. I don't think I would get enough use out of a macro yet, so im looking for a zoom. It will be for building shots, animals, kids, sports etc. I was looking at the Minolta AF 70-210 F4 (beercan) but im not comfortable with second hand and no one seems to have this in brilliant quality.

So my choice so far is the Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G Lens #SAL70300G – http://www.digitalcamerawarehouse.com.au/prod5454.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now would the SAL70300G, give me a much better image than just the kit 55-200mm?

Just another note, Depending on the quality, I would also consider the Carl Zeiss DT16-80mm F3.5-4.5 Vario-Sonnar T and get a larger zoom later.

However, i think my 50mm covers close to portraits I would use with the CZ.

[Dusty]

You have to ask yourself what type of shooting you do to determine what type of lens is best. Are you working close to your subjects, where you need to get them all in? A wide angle prime or wide zoom is what you need. Need to bring that moose up close from across the valley? Get a tele or tele zoom. Working in low light or with fast action? You need a fast prime.

I, for one, believe that 98% of the photographers out there can get by with a lot less glass quality than they often pay for. Don't get me wrong, I'd love CZ or G lenses, but if Tamron or Sigma can out-resolve my sensor, am I really wasting money to buy them? Yes, there are always shots where you wish you had a lens that was a bit faster or better, but most of photography is being there and snapping something in focus. Ansel Adams did great work with some pretty bad - by today's standards - lenses.

I once had a Leica snob badmouthing my Minlotas, but when there was something he wanted a picture of, (and his Leica was in the shop), he was happy to take my X700 and Albinar 28mm lens to get the shot. He was also surprised at the results!

Point being, get the glass you need, not just what someone tells you is great. You can give me the best lens out there, but if it's a fisheye and I'm shooting the baseball player in the outfield, it won't do me like a budget tele!

Dusty

[Dr. Harout]

Welcome to the forum DzRBenson.
70-300 G SSM is a great lens, the 16-80 Z too. But I agree with Dusty on what are you going to shoot mainly. You're mentioning kids, buildings, sports etc. These are different, so it's for you to decide. I have the Sony 16-105 which for me is a great lens, and the 70-300 G SSM is on my list (though I have the 75-300).

[alphaPDX]

I've heard very good things about the 55-200 for image quality, so unless you feel that you are missing some telephoto opportunities maybe that can wait. Either that 16-80 or perhaps Tamron's 17-50 f/2.8 would be a good option; you won't get close for sport shots with these, but they are bright so images will be sharp w/less tele and faster shutter speeds. If I had a good copy of the 55-200 I'd go with the Tamron.. but that's just me . I dumped several of my lenses on the used market to help finance the Tamron 18-250, no regrets although I'd like a faster telephoto end. Some day that will be filled with a Beercan or Minolta 70-210 f/3.5-4.5; the f/2.8 teles are just too big and heavy for my comfort.

[01af]

Currently my setup is:

• Sony A350
• Sony 18-70 mm Kit
• Sony 55-200 mm Kit
• Sony 50 mm f/1.4

[...]
Now I'm looking for one new lens. [...] I was looking at the Minolta AF 70-210 mm f/4 [...] my choice so far is the Sony SAL 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6 G lens [...] I would also consider the SAL 16-80 mm f/3.5-4.5 Z and get a larger zoom later.

I think, the first thing to do is to make your mind up. Just why exactly are you looking for a new lens? What are you missing in the lenses you already have? Image quality? Speed? Do you want to add to your existing lenses in order to extend your photographic potential, or do you want to replace them with something better/faster?

All three lenses mentioned won't add much to your setup in terms of potential. The AF 70-210 mm 1:4 will just offer one stop better speed at 200 mm but covers the same range you already have. The SAL 70-300 G will just extend your longest focal length from 200 mm to 300 mm, at a substantial price and no speed gain. 300 mm may seem desirable when your longest lens is 200 mm ... but it won't buy you very much in terms of photographic potential. Finally the SAL 16-80 Z will improve upon the image quality in the standard zoom range, at a substantial price again. Some improvements in range and speed are there, too, but aren't substantial. It's worth the investment only if you're unhappy with the SAL 18-70's image quality.

To extend your photographic potential, you should consider either a super-wide-angle zoom (like e. g. 11-18 mm or 10-24 mm) or a super-telephoto lens (like e. g. SAL 70-400 mm, Tamron 200-500 mm, or the Reflex 500 mm). Buy more lenses covering the focal range you already have only if you're unhappy with the kit lenses' speed or performance.

-- Olaf