hasenbein wrote:
If I am not mistaken, Sony has not released any lenses in the recent years which didn't have a G or GM on them (aside from two small kit lenses), so for sure this one will be a G lens. Sony obviously leaves the budget market nearly completely to the 3rd party manufacturers.
It will be interesting to see what the build quality and IQ is like at that price. I’m betting this will become a popular and appreciated lightweight tele zoom for many Sony users. Currently my simple and lightweight setup for difficult hikes is the 353g Sony 16-35/4 PZ and the 715g Tamron 50-300 (an excellent copy), for a versatile 1068g total. But as Steve mentioned, I could see pairing the 20-70/4 with this new 100-400 depending on focal length preferences at either end of the range. I love the choices we get with E mount.
I like reading that this will be black, as I have found (for me at least) the white lenses attract more attention when I’m shooting around people and I prefer not to do that.
A 100-400mm f/5.6-8 doesn't sound like a G, let along a GM, to me.
Sure, there's always a chance that the fellow running SAR has received a mistaken information. Or got himself pranked.
Douglas L wrote:
There is a Sony 70-300, I have never owned it. Most people say it's just OK. It's an old lens though. For me, it would be even better if Sony updates that lens.
I had The 70-300mm Sony lens. My review is summarized by: It was not very good, but sure was cheap. While it was nice and compact, it's optical performance was lacking. There are better lenses out there in that focal length, size and weight range.
Douglas L wrote:
There is a Sony 70-300, I have never owned it. Most people say it's just OK. It's an old lens though. For me, it would be even better if Sony updates that lens.
Yes, that lens is in need of an update too. About 4 years ago, I was looking at getting it and was advised to get the Tamron 70-300mm f6.3 instead. That Tamron lens definitely hits above its price point. The newer Tamron 50-300mm f6.3 sounds even better. For a new 70-300mm to really replace my want for an updated 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 it would need to take TC's. I don't think we have seen a 70-300mm that takes TC's, but Sony's updated 70-200mm f4 does take TC's, so maybe they could surprise us.
I will reiterate that I think they missed an opportunity to build a lightweight, high quality, small aperture 100-500. Why? Because someone with the budget to pick up a 100-400/4.5 and 400-800 would still want a lightweight 100-500 for when he/she doesn't want to carry either of those two.
That being said, the projected price of 899 surprises me, and actually makes me concerned this wont perform at the level I would like. I am hoping for something sharper and faster to focus than the 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM at overlapping focal lengths and apertures.
If the optical quality of the new 100-400mm f5.6-8 is a step up from the old 70-300mm, it could be a good lens to pair with something like the 20-70mm f4 G, or the 24-105 G. Still the f/5.6-8 if that ends up being the spec is a little limiting.
TravelinBriNY wrote:
I will reiterate that I think they missed an opportunity to build a lightweight, high quality, small aperture 100-500. Why? Because someone with the budget to pick up a 100-400/4.5 and 400-800 would still want a lightweight 100-500 for when he/she doesn't want to carry either of those two.
That being said, the projected price of 899 surprises me, and actually makes me concerned this wont perform at the level I would like. I am hoping for something sharper and faster to focus than the 100-400/4.5-5.6 GM at overlapping focal lengths and apertures.
Canon's 100-400mm f5.6-8 is $750 and gets pretty good reviews, and hopefully the Sony will be even better with a higher price point. F8 will probably start around 200mm and will limit max IQ, especially on high res bodies. So IDK if it's realistic to expect it to be much sharper, but it might be very similar IQ wise to the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 GM. The 400-800mm f8 G gets very close to max IQ for an f8 lens.
I had a similar thought. I wonder if Sony might replace the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 GM with something like a 100-500mm f6.3 GM. Canon does have both the 100-400mm f8 and 100-500mm f7.1 in their lineup. Where I see it get a bit tough, though, is that I would want a 100-500mm to be f6.3 and fully take TC's, which might contradict size and weight based on the Canon. We also will probably end up losing more light on the long end as it would probably hit its max aperture around 250mm.
The more I think about it, the more I lean towards a 50-400mm f5.6 GM that takes TC's as the best replacement for the current 100-400mm f4.5-5.6. I spent quite a bit of time looking into the Tamron 50-400mm f6.3 earlier this year, and it seems like a very versatile lens. The biggest reason I held off on it was Sony's 15fps limitation. The inability to take a TC was second as one of the main reasons I would like to add a 400mm f5.6 to my bag is to be able to add a TC 1.4 and get to 560mm f8 for times when a lens like a 200-600mm f6.3 is too big to take. Otherwise, if I am going to max at 400mm, a 70-200mm + TC 2x will often be more versatile for my needs.
Douglas L wrote:
There is a Sony 70-300, I have never owned it. Most people say it's just OK. It's an old lens though. For me, it would be even better if Sony updates that lens.
I have the 70-300 G and originally I used it with the A6000. When I purchased it it was atrocious and could not get a sharp picture at the long end. It went back to Sony and what I got returned after adjustment was a totally different animal. I dont use it much since at one point I purchased the 100-400 GM: Here are some samples.
Ideally, I wished for a 100-400mm G lens which weighs 800gr and reaches 1:2 magnification (like the 70-200mm G ii lens). I highly doubt this would be the case with the new lens but I am glad that Sony is finally releasing a light weight 100-400mm lens. Assuming the optical performance won't lack, it would replace my Sigma 100-400mm (which in turn, replaced a 100-400mm GM a while ago).
mcbroomf wrote:
I wonder if Sony will allow TC's on this lens (or maybe the rear elements will be too close to fit). F16 at 400mm with the 2x is a bit questionable.
If it's Sony's answer to the Canon RF lens, then it will take TCs.
rd4tile wrote:
I wonder if this lens is going the way of the 16-28 f2 and staying a rumor?
My guess is that it just didn't make sense to announce with the FX5. A cinema camera and a budget wildlife lens aren't exactly matched together, now are they?
Give it time
Douglas L wrote:
According to that rumor site, a new Sony 100-400mm f5.6-8 will be announced on July 22. If it turns out to be true, I have no doubt it will be sharp. Would really like to see the weight and size.
Why would it be so good? Sony should upgrade the 100-400/5.6 to a series II.
100-400/5.6-8 will be a lower grade lens with numerous compromises for the budget.
At f/8 it will be into diffraction already with the high-res cameras and also have the bonus of wide open light falloff.
Yeah, something went wrong with the rumor mill.
Incidentally, my (ex-)wife is going on a trip to the wilderlands soon, but she doesn't want to carry a big tele lens, so one like this would probably be right up her alley. It's unlikely that this lens would be out and available in time for her journey, though. Maybe we'll trade in a few more lenses and the Tamron 50-400 will be obtained, IDK yet.
