p.1 #1 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
When the A7R4 was announced I thought that 61MP was too big but then learned about its telephoto reach possibilities using APS-C mode--still delivering a 26.2MP file. This essentially works like a 1.5 teleconverter with no loss of one f-stop. I programmed my C3 button to instantly access crop mode when I need more reach. The 50MP A1 will also deliver a quite good sized APS-C file.
At its time of release Mark Galer did an eye-opening video about the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 advantages vs. the FE 70-300 for those using full frame cameras. Turns out the 70-350 comes with Sony’s best XD linear focusing motor, the same one used in the 100-400 and even the 400 f2.8. The FE lens does not, and will not keep up for sports and wildlife like newer design Sony long glass.
Is anyone regularly using the 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G in crop mode? The potential advantages are mind blowing when you consider it weighs just 22 ounces and can become a 105-525mm lens that shoots at f6.3 through the longer range.
I bought the 100-400 but even though it is just three pounds, it’s not as likely to hit the road with me when I try to keep the bag light. Recently, I’ve been intrigued with the soon to be released Tamron 150-500 but it weights 4 lbs while delivering f6.7 at the long end.
I’m thinking that at only $900 the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS Lens could be a great travel solution. I can certainly live with a 26.2MP file (still plenty big!) if sharpness and speed truly compete with the 100-400.
Thoughts? Experience from those who have shot with it?
Nowadays the cameras have already so much dynamic range that it may not matter. A lightweight high-quality APS-C zoom could be a good companion to FF cameras. When compared to FE 70-300, a reduction in weight alone would not be enough for me.
p.1 #3 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Yes, that is of course a question:
Full frame 70-300 vs. crop mode 70-350. If the 70-300 was definitely sharper than the other, I could probably give up the better linear focusing motor of the 70-350. However, the 70-300 seems to have so-so reviews from what few I've read.
Apr 25, 2021 at 11:09 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #4 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I shoot the 55-250 STM constantly and love it. I probably use it more than I should! The Sony is heavier, but it has more reach, so that's reasonable imo.
I'm not really interested in carrying a 3 lb lens right now. Too heavy for me. The 150-600's aren't that heavy for what they are but they're heavy. Idk about the Sony, I really like the 70-300 type lenses but performance tends to fall off, often quite badly, past 200mm.
So I'd definitely recommend looking at the 75-350.
p.1 #7 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I had, in this order :
- 55-250 STM + Viltrox adapter - very cheap (paid $100 used ! ), good sharpness, poor bokeh/rendering, and lots of AF issues with the Viltrox.
- Sigma 100-400 (Canon version) + MC-11 - good sharpness, terrible AF-S , Ok AF-C
- Canon 70-300 IS II + MC-11 - quite cheap (paid $350 on ebay), good sharpness and rendering, AF-C was fine. Overall a good option, but I wanted to try a 100-400mm again.
- Then the Sony 100-400GM ... excellent, as expected. But got tired to carry 3lbs, so sold it recently.
Now considering the Tamron RXD as it's light, cheap, and has a good rendering/sharpness according to the reviews (besides the bad corners at 70mm F/4.5 ).
Tamron RXD vs Sony 70-350mm is a valid question. If I had an aps-c body, I would probably get the Sony. But I prefer to shoot full frame as much as possible with the A7Riii. The 50mm extra range + OSS is a plus though.
p.1 #8 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I will say that my Tamron 70-180 f2.8 never ceases to impress me. No IS either.
I have tested it in APS-C mode giving me 270mm f2.8 versus my Sony 100-400. Set the Sony to my approximation of 270mm in regular mode. Shot each at 5.6, the max brightness of the 100-400.
p.1 #9 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
onthebeam wrote:
I will say that my Tamron 70-180 f2.8 never ceases to impress me. No IS either.
I have tested it in APS-C mode giving me 270mm f2.8 versus my Sony 100-400. Set the Sony to my approximation of 270mm in regular mode. Shot each at 5.6, the max brightness of the 100-400.
Both were fantastically sharp.
Yes, the Tamron 70-180mm is tempting too. A bit short at 180mm but more versatile with the constant f/2.8
p.1 #10 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
With the work I do, it wouldn't be practical max out my kit at 180mm, even with the reach of APS-C to 270.
If Tamron's new 150-500 performs like the 70-180, it will be a winner. However, the Tamron 70-180 is a lightweight lens at 1.8 lbs while the 150-500 will be 4 lbs., a bit of a letdown for me.
p.1 #11 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
SrMi wrote:
How does Tamron 70-300 RXD compare to Sony 70-300? I read that Tamron is weak at 70mm but otherwise quite decent.
Check out Christopher Frost's recent review of the Tamron 70-300 RXD on YouTube. It seems to be brilliantly sharp. The problem at 70mm is field curvature, so it may not be perfect for flat subjects at widest aperture. But if your subject is off center, and you focus there (without recomposing), then it should be fine. The corners are very sharp if you focus there, although that puts the center slightly out of focus.
Apr 25, 2021 at 06:35 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
onthebeam wrote:
When the A7R4 was announced I thought that 61MP was too big but then learned about its telephoto reach possibilities using APS-C mode--still delivering a 26.2MP file. This essentially works like a 1.5 teleconverter with no loss of one f-stop. I programmed my C3 button to instantly access crop mode when I need more reach. The 50MP A1 will also deliver a quite good sized APS-C file.
At its time of release Mark Galer did an eye-opening video about the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 advantages vs. the FE 70-300 for those using full frame cameras. Turns out the 70-350 comes with Sony’s best XD linear focusing motor, the same one used in the 100-400 and even the 400 f2.8. The FE lens does not, and will not keep up for sports and wildlife like newer design Sony long glass.
Is anyone regularly using the 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G in crop mode? The potential advantages are mind blowing when you consider it weighs just 22 ounces and can become a 105-550mm lens that shoots at f6.3 through the longer range.
I bought the 100-400 but even though it is just three pounds, it’s not as likely to hit the road with me when I try to keep the bag light. Recently, I’ve been intrigued with the soon to be released Tamron 150-600 but it weights 4 lbs while delivering f6.7 at the long end.
I’m thinking that at only $900 the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS Lens could be a great travel solution. I can certainly live with a 26.2MP file (still plenty big!) if sharpness and speed truly compete with the 100-400.
Thoughts? Experience from those who have shot with it? ...Show more →
I don't think it makes sense to think of crop mode as no loss of IQ. You are magnifying the image more so the noise will be bothersome about a stop earlier than it will be if you didn't crop. This extra magnification also means that if you present the output at the same size your are downsizing the non-crop image more which will give you about a stop more dynamic range. Lastly this greater amount of downsizing will give you about a stop more color depth in the uncropped image. In clearly measurable ways the cropped image will have a clear loss of IQ that will actually be a little more than the loss in IQ you would have from turning up the ISO another stop and using the whole image.
p.1 #13 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
NJPhotographer wrote:
Check out Christopher Frost's recent review of the Tamron 70-300 RXD on YouTube. It seems to be brilliantly sharp. The problem at 70mm is field curvature, so it may not be perfect for flat subjects at widest aperture. But if your subject is off center, and you focus there (without recomposing), then it should be fine. The corners are very sharp if you focus there, although that puts the center slightly out of focus.
Thank you for the pointer to Christopher Frost. I have a profound dislike of YouTube reviews, but Christopher's channel is worth watching.
p.1 #14 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
NJPhotographer wrote:
The problem at 70mm is field curvature, so it may not be perfect for flat subjects at widest aperture. But if your subject is off center, and you focus there (without recomposing), then it should be fine. The corners are very sharp if you focus there, although that puts the center slightly out of focus.
I missed that part. If it's only a field curvature issue, then it's Ok in most cases. Looks like this lens checks all the boxes at this price point.
p.1 #15 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Fboss wrote:
I missed that part. If it's only a field curvature issue, then it's Ok in most cases. Looks like this lens checks all the boxes at this price point.
Except . . . the longer the lens, the more the need for IS. Fortunately this Tamron is light, and bargain priced. Still, with slow speed in terms of f-stops, the same focal length Sony has a big advantage with stabilization. I don't mind so much that my Tamron 70-180 does not have it yet it's a 2.8 lens throughout the range.
p.1 #16 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I shoot this exact combination (A7R4, Sony E 70-350mm G OSS) and I love it. I'm not a huge wildlife shooter, but having such a relatively light telephoto lens I can toss into my backpack and pull out when I need to is great. I don't mind the 26.2MP APS-C resolution as it's plenty, especially since you get 525mm FF equivalent focal length so you can frame distant wildlife tighter than you could with the FE 100-400mm GM. The aperture range is basically the same as the 100-400GM for equivalent focal lengths (ie. they're both f4.5 at 70(crop)/105(ff), and f5.6 at 266(crop)/400(ff)) so you aren't losing any light.
The other surprising benefit is that IMO the E 70-350 G has very good image quality. It's sharp, probably a tad less so than the 100-400GM but it definitely punches above its weight (considering the G designation). The bokeh rolloff is smooth and the bokeh rendering is pleasing.
I think it all boils down to whether you want a compact setup that's easier to carry around (hence you're more likely to take it with you) vs. the ultimate resolution and image quality. I upgraded from APS-C to FF recently but I've had the 70-350G for a while and shooting with it on the A7R4 I realized I don't really need to buy a FF telephoto lens (100-400GM or 200-600) because I know that I wouldn't carry those around as often as I carry the 70-350.
p.1 #17 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I just posted about the 70-350 on another thread. I compared the 70-350 against the 70-300, shooting on the rIV and the 70-350 was sharper.
The other advantage I found was the 70-350 covers more than APS-C. At the lower end it is almost full frame. At the upper end the amount of coverage depends on the image ratio, but I found that on a 4x5 you still get about 37mp, on the rIV. The coverage tests can be seen at https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1645188/0#15216898
p.1 #18 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Michael Everet wrote:
I just posted about the 70-350 on another thread. I compared the 70-350 against the 70-300, shooting on the rIV and the 70-350 was sharper.
You compared against the Sony or Tamron 70-300 ?
Apr 26, 2021 at 10:31 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #19 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Fboss wrote:
I had, in this order :
- 55-250 STM + Viltrox adapter - very cheap (paid $100 used ! ), good sharpness, poor bokeh/rendering, and lots of AF issues with the Viltrox.
Wondered about this statement, what you compared it to, I'm not saying it's going to beat an 85/1.4 or anything, but I've found the bokeh quite good on the STM and original IS versions. I shoot at 250mm at/near mfd a lot though, been using 5.6 for flowers lately
250/5.6 is about the same diameter aperture as 50/1.2, actually a little larger. And the longer FL makes it easier to isolate a bg. Excellent macro on the lens
p.1 #20 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
markpariente wrote:
I shoot this exact combination (A7R4, Sony E 70-350mm G OSS) and I love it. I'm not a huge wildlife shooter, but having such a relatively light telephoto lens I can toss into my backpack and pull out when I need to is great. I don't mind the 26.2MP APS-C resolution as it's plenty, especially since you get 525mm FF equivalent focal length so you can frame distant wildlife tighter than you could with the FE 100-400mm GM. The aperture range is basically the same as the 100-400GM for equivalent focal lengths (ie. they're both f4.5 at 70(crop)/105(ff), and f5.6 at 266(crop)/400(ff)) so you aren't losing any light.
The other surprising benefit is that IMO the E 70-350 G has very good image quality. It's sharp, probably a tad less so than the 100-400GM but it definitely punches above its weight (considering the G designation). The bokeh rolloff is smooth and the bokeh rendering is pleasing.
I think it all boils down to whether you want a compact setup that's easier to carry around (hence you're more likely to take it with you) vs. the ultimate resolution and image quality. I upgraded from APS-C to FF recently but I've had the 70-350G for a while and shooting with it on the A7R4 I realized I don't really need to buy a FF telephoto lens (100-400GM or 200-600) because I know that I wouldn't carry those around as often as I carry the 70-350....Show more →
So glad to get your feedback, Mark. I'm going to be keeping the 100-400. If I would decide to take it abroad my driver usually serves as assistant so I walk with one bag and, if safe, keep a second in the vehicle. I can imagine some scenarios where I would take one of my photo shipping cases on the plane including 100-400. Yet when traveling light, I can foresee that for me it wouldn't be redundant to keep both.
When it's just me, if image quality checks out vs. 100-400, I'd carry the 70-350 and shoot exactly as you do, 26.2MP in crop mode, often at f6.3.
