p.2 #1 · 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.
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
Michael, trying to get my arms around this. . . Does this mean you would shoot in regular mode and just crop out the vignetted black areas around image later? If I'm understanding you, rather than a 26.2MP file in APS-C mode, even after cropping out the black, I'd still have a bigger file than 26.2?
EDIT--I looked at the post you linked to from 2020. See you did get a file up into the 30s. How do you best determine best whether you've gotten rid of the full vignette? I guess it would be worth testing. Shoot same static scene of tripod on APS-C, then without, then crop later and compare files. . .
I did see a couple examples of that online yet shot at 70mm where the image practically filled to full frame. I'd be using this lens primarily at longer focal lengths, 200-350 more often than not.
p.2 #2 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
markpariente wrote:
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.
You can also use the 100-400GM in crop mode, 600mm equivalent.
Using the lens always in APS-C reduces a bit the dynamic range and increases the noise by ~1-stop. As I use the telephoto a lot for BIF, I need fast speeds and 1-stop can help.
With that said, the 70-350mm sounds like a good option, especially if you already own a good copy.
Now for someone who needs to buy a lens for a FF body, it's a tougher choice. FF 70-300 against APS-C 70-350, $400 more expensive, but with extra 50/75mm reach, and OSS.
p.2 #3 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
AmbientMike wrote:
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
I didn't like the rendering and bokeh. Yes you can still isolate the subject. But the out of focus background wasn't smooth. It's a 7-blade aperture, so this definitely doesn't help. Still usable and a good compact lens at this price. (if you find a good adapter for it on Sony ...)
p.2 #4 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Fboss wrote:
[/Now for someone who needs to buy a lens for a FF body, it's a tougher choice. FF 70-300 against APS-C 70-350, $400 more expensive, but with extra 50/75mm reach, and OSS.
Yep. I can actually buy the 70-300 at about the same price, currently on sale, etc. But I need a lens like this for quite a bit beyond 300. Logic would dictate I'd buy the FF lens for my a7R4 yet with the "lesser" lens I'd get a reach of 525mm vs 450.
By the way, both have OSS. The Tamron referenced to earlier in thread does not.
p.2 #5 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Next question for those experienced with 70-350. How hard is it to get a good copy?
I see there was a positive initial buzz about it in 2019 and then several sent it back saying it just couldn't cut it at 350mm setting. Others held out for a good copy and when found said it was dramatically better than first one they'd tried. Some said they felt there was an earlier firmware issue, now resolved, depending on camera used.
p.2 #6 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
onthebeam wrote:
Next question for those experienced with 70-350. How hard is it to get a good copy?
I see there was a positive initial buzz about it in 2019 and then several sent it back saying it just couldn't cut it at 350mm setting. Others held out for a good copy and when found said it was dramatically better than first one they'd tried. Some said they felt there was an earlier firmware issue, now resolved, depending on camera used.
my first copy was so bad that I sent it back and never even bothered to get an 2nd copy. stick to the 100-400.
p.2 #7 · 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.
I assume you mean the Sony FE 70-300 G OSS--I've only tried it in a store.
The Tamron 70-300 RXD worked pretty well for me yesterday on A7RII for motorsports. My back didn't get fatigued which has been my experience with the heavier zooms. I did get confused about zoom direction a few times probably since I used Canon lenses last year. The big rubber zoom grip and lack of superfluous doodads is great.
It does have some field curvature at the wide end. I was mainly using it in the 150-300 mm range.
p.2 #8 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
onthebeam wrote:
Next question for those experienced with 70-350. How hard is it to get a good copy?
I see there was a positive initial buzz about it in 2019 and then several sent it back saying it just couldn't cut it at 350mm setting. Others held out for a good copy and when found said it was dramatically better than first one they'd tried. Some said they felt there was an earlier firmware issue, now resolved, depending on camera used.
I'm sure you got enough answers to your question. I bought the 70-350 for almost same reason. Wanted something to carry around on A9 (may be A1 in the future) with family and when I go for a walk that has best AF and sharpness. 70-350 is in the 30 fps list for A1 (70-300 is not there). So I assume the AF is as good as 200-600 and I think it's true. On A9, I have no room to crop, but it works ok for me. My copy seems be sharp even compared to 100-400 (now sold) and 200-600 at 350mm. Some sample images below.
Buy from a shop that allows return if you are not satisfied.. Good luck.
No crop
I tried PS super resolution on this.
200-600 @ 600mm (24mp) and 70-350 at 350mm (10mp). See the vignetting on lower image.
p.2 #9 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Jemini wrote:
I'm sure you got enough answers to your question. I bought the 70-350 for almost same reason. Wanted something to carry around on A9 (may be A1 in the future) with family and when I go for a walk that has best AF and sharpness. 70-350 is in the 30 fps list for A1 (70-300 is not there). So I assume the AF is as good as 200-600 and I think it's true. On A9, I have no room to crop, but it works ok for me. My copy seems be sharp even compared to 100-400 (now sold) and 200-600 at 350mm. Some sample images below.
Buy from a shop that allows return if you are not satisfied.. Good luck....Show more →
Been using the 70-350 for awhile now on the Riv (26mp) 67mm is handy as well. At least my lens is very sharp. The 100-400 was one of my favorites but I noticed I tended to leave it behind alot on longer hikes. The 70-350 I can have on a capture clip on my backpack no problem. Could not do that with the 100-400. I'd have to dig it out of my pack. I'm curious to try the tamron 150-500 when that comes out. It will not replace the 70-350 but compliment it possibly when not going on long hikes.
p.2 #12 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I'm curious to try the tamron 150-500 when that comes out. It will not replace the 70-350 but compliment it possibly when not going on long hikes.
I was curious to try the Tamron 150-500, too. However, its going to weigh 4 lbs. while the 100-400 is 3 lbs.
p.2 #14 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I would love to see a native Sony 300mm f4 that can take a 1.4 teleconverter like my Canon version of this lens can. I can use my Canon with the Sigma MC-11 adapter to Sony but the focus speed can't keep up with Sony, Sigma or Tamron native glass.
One other trend I don't like when it comes to long glass for mirrorless is less and less options to use teleconverters. For example, the stellar new Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 no longer takes a teleconverter. I'm betting on an update to the Sony 70-200 f2.8 this year and if it follows the Canon path that will be a bummer.
p.2 #15 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I own 70-350 G. I play it on a7rIII.
Focus speed is good. Day and night better than 70-300. Its camera dependent also.
Lens is sharp. In the ballpark of 100-400. In 100-400, the money is for few other things, most the ability to use it on full frame cameras.
I pair it with my 500 PF. Its a perfect companion as i will never carry a 100-400 sized lens with an equally heavy 500 PF. In any case, 1-4 is mostly equally slow aperture wise. For back up, and tossing around, i have nikon 70-300 DX, which is surprisingly sharp as well, in the center it matches all the above lenses at $200 and 450 grams.
Those who can enjoy it, 2-6 remains the best such lens in Sony world.
p.2 #17 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
I owned it thrice. I suspect all copies were equally good. But subjectively i feel my second copy was the best. I think its a psychological thing as i shot most with my second copy. I never got a lemon. I am happy with my current copy also.
onthebeam wrote:
Next question for those experienced with 70-350. How hard is it to get a good copy?
I see there was a positive initial buzz about it in 2019 and then several sent it back saying it just couldn't cut it at 350mm setting. Others held out for a good copy and when found said it was dramatically better than first one they'd tried. Some said they felt there was an earlier firmware issue, now resolved, depending on camera used.
p.2 #18 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
onthebeam wrote:
I was curious to try the Tamron 150-500, too. However, its going to weigh 4 lbs. while the 100-400 is 3 lbs.
Yeah, size is basically the same though. Which is more my concern, weight really isn't. I have a specific bag I pack out when I had the 100-400 and it looks like the 150-500 will fit the same spot. In the end having a range of 150-750 on the A7riv is worth the pound to me verse the 100-600 range. Assuming the tamron is even good at the long end of course.
p.2 #20 · Sony E 70-350mm G for A7R4 / A1 vs. 100-400 GM?
Jemini wrote:
I'm sure you got enough answers to your question. I bought the 70-350 for almost same reason. Wanted something to carry around on A9 (may be A1 in the future) with family and when I go for a walk that has best AF and sharpness. 70-350 is in the 30 fps list for A1 (70-300 is not there). So I assume the AF is as good as 200-600 and I think it's true. On A9, I have no room to crop, but it works ok for me. My copy seems be sharp even compared to 100-400 (now sold) and 200-600 at 350mm. Some sample images below.
Buy from a shop that allows return if you are not satisfied.. Good luck....Show more →
Thanks for posting the samples, they all look good.
By any chance can you add the exif data ?
