p.1 #1If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
There has been a lot of discussion on the 100-400mm f4.5 GM thread about what users hoped the lens would be, what it could or could not replace in their kit, and some level of disappoint and joy. It seems like it will meet the needs of most sports photographers, but for the nature but seems like a mixed bag. Clearly, I am guilty of advancing that dialog. So, to try and not completely highjack that thread, I decided to start a new one here focused on the needs want and desires of nature photographers.
If you could go back in time and influence the Sony roadmap for their Telephoto line up 1) what would you keep? 2) What would you ditch? 3) What would you want that is different and what comprises would you make to keep the number of SKU's reasonable or prices reasonable.
I will go first and you can add your thoughts or criticize mine.
What I own or have owned: 70-200mm GMII and GII, 100-400 f4.5-5.6, 300GM, 400-800, 200-600 (sold), 70-300mm (Sold)
1) I would keep the 300GM as it is light sharp and fantastic with teleconverters. A bit shorter that ideal but a keeper. I would keep the 600 GM in the line-up as it is fantastic performer, I would keep both the 70-200 II's in the line-up, and I would consider keeping the 400-800 if my new lenses could not happen like the 300-600mm f5.6 GM.
2) Lenses I would drop: 70-300mm which is trash, current 200-600 which doesn't go to 600 and has spotty AF and high sharpness variability, both of the new 100-400mm lenses, from a wildlife perspective, but the 100-400mm f4.5 should hang around for sports as should the 400 f2.8
3) What I would want in the line-up. I have avoided putting integrated 1.4X TC's in everything as that adds too much to the size weight and complexity. It would be nice, but improbable
A) 100-300mm f4 GM 82mm filter to match up to the 16-35GM II and 24-70 GMII for the perfect landscape trio. Needs to be sharp enough to work well with a 1.4X TC. Ideally would be at least 0.25X at 300mm and MFD 0.3X would be better.
B) 300-600mm f5.6 GM Use the same 105mm front element size as the 300mm GM, but maybe not the same exact element. It could be 200-600mm, but I would be happy to sacrifice 100mm on the wide end to get outstanding AF and IQ at the tele end and actually get to 600mm. 605mm would be even better just to be sure it hits 600... Needs to work well 1.4X to yield 840mm f8 MFD at 600 needs to yield 0.25X or better without massive reduction in focal length
C) Nice to haves: Either a 600mm f5.6 GM which is pretty easy since it is just designing a 2X TC that is optimized for the 300mm GM and welding it on the back, or a 500mm f4 GM which would be a whole new design and unfortunately would be heavier than the 600mm 5.6. Either one would need to work well with a that would work well with 1.4X TC and the 500mm would need to behave more like the 300mm GM and 600mm f4 with a 2X TC than the 400mm f2.8 which is not good with a 2X.
If Sony built these my kit would use 100-300 GM for landscape trips. For Large mammal trips the 100-300 and the 300-600mm and for birding trips the 100-300 and the 600mm f5.6 GM I would sell my 100-400, my 400-800 and then decide if I could justify keeping the 300mm GM or if it would be swapped for the 500mm if they built it. Primes are better for feather detail.
p.1 #4If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
mudlake wrote:
Here’s what I wish Sony would make:
(1) A super sharp 500/5.6 as good as the 300/2.8
(2) An updated 100-400/4.5-5.6 that is both lighter and sharper than the current lens.
Yes please to both but especially the 500/5.6. And if they are not going to cough one of those up they should at least uncripple the Sigma 500mm 5.6. It's pretty hostile to the folks that shoot wildlife that the only lightweight high-contrast fully-functional option in that space costs $7k and requires the use of a TC.
p.1 #5If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
And while I'm asking for things that are (1) unlikely to happen and (2) likely to annoy people, Nikon should release a Z7 which:
* further miniaturizes the Z8 so that it weighs around 700g while preserving the essential features from a wildlife photography standpoint (the Z8 is old enough now that this sort of further progression ought to be possible even for Nikon : )
* has a mode where it runs a Sony compatible set of menus (hey its only software and everyone tells me AI means that software is no longer a scarce resource : )
* and an official Nikon certified E mount adapter that allows usage of Sony lenses (for those moments where you want to take pictures of something besides birds)
It seems like it's a tradition among Japanese camera companies to leave gaping holes in your product lineups - secure in the knowledge that your installed base is basically stuck with you in any case. But times change and perhaps a fresh look at things is warranted...
p.1 #6If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I think with the 300 2.8, 400-800, and the 100-400 4.5, it will now be the supertele primes that will have their refreshes and time-wise it seems to make sense. The 400 was released in 2018, the 600 in 2019. I am sceptical that they will have integrated TCs, as absolutely no other Sony lens in any focal length, zoom or prime have had it so far but we will see.
Among your suggestions, 100-300 is very close to the very recent 100-400. The GM-level 300-600 is possible I guess but on zooms Sony stopped at 400mm so far in their lineup.
p.1 #7If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
mudlake wrote:
Here’s what I wish Sony would make:
(1) A super sharp 500/5.6 as good as the 300/2.8
(2) An updated 100-400/4.5-5.6 that is both lighter and sharper than the current lens.
I have no problem with #2 above, but I am curious why you would choose a 500mm f5.6 over a 600mm f5.6? The 300mm GM with a 2XTC shows that Sony could make a 600mm f5.6 at about 3.25-3.5 LB and the same 105mm front end diameter. Do you value 95mm over the 105mm more than the extra 100mm of focal length? Do you think 600mm is too long?
Having owned the Nikon 500mm f5.6 and the 600mm f6.3, I would definitely go for 600mm f5.6. Much more useful especially with 1.4X TC.
p.1 #8If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
umut_h_toprak wrote:
I think with the 300 2.8, 400-800, and the 100-400 4.5, it will now be the supertele primes that will have their refreshes and time-wise it seems to make sense. The 400 was released in 2018, the 600 in 2019. I am sceptical that they will have integrated TCs, as absolutely no other Sony lens in any focal length, zoom or prime have had it so far but we will see.
Among your suggestions, 100-300 is very close to the very recent 100-400. The GM-level 300-600 is possible I guess but on zooms Sony stopped at 400mm so far in their lineup. ...Show more →
The 100-300mm f4 I propose is nothing like the 100-400mm f4.5 GM. Sigma made a really nice 100-300mm f4 with 82mm filter size back in the day and both Nikon and Canon had prime 300mm f4 lenses with 77mm filter size that were tiny and light compared to the new Sony 100-400. The big difference is size and weight. A 100-300 would be about the size and weight of the 70-200 f2.8 GM II with a 1.4X TC on it, not close to the new 100-400.
p.1 #9If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
billsnature wrote:
The 100-300mm f4 I propose is nothing like the 100-400mm f4.5 GM. Sigma made a really nice 100-300mm f4 with 82mm filter size back in the day and both Nikon and Canon had prime 300mm f4 lenses with 77mm filter size that were tiny and light compared to the new Sony 100-400. The big difference is size and weight. A 100-300 would be about the size and weight of the 70-200 f2.8 GM II with a 1.4X TC on it, not close to the new 100-400.
While that may be the case, and the product's full nature may be more nuanced than the focal length range and the maximum aperture specs, we don't usually see such closely specced lenses offered side by side from the same brand. This is a bit like Canon's 100-500 7.1 not being an exact successor to its 100-400 5.6 EF but no separate true 100-400 5.6 RF coming out nevertheless.
p.1 #10If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
The 100-400 4.5 was a miss in my eyes. Just way too big. And the reviews just didn't glow. It would have to be incredibly special for a lens that size to be appealing.
I'd still like a longer distance macro and a solid 600-800mm zoom that is fairly light. Something better than the 400-800. The money isn't an issue. Weight/size/sharpness are.
p.1 #11If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I used the Pentax DA560mm f5.6 for years, it was not a very desirable lens according to todays standards, but oddly it was still the closest I got to a 600mm f5.6 lens in any brand.
I like the large front element over the smaller front element of a 600mm f6.3 lens, it simply captures more light, and has a better 3D rendering.
I now have only one wildlife/birding lens, the 600/4 and have experimented with the aperture setting to learn about the differences and find my own personal sweetspot, which is f5.
A 600mm f5 lens would be too big though. F5.6 is also really good.
At f6.3 things start to get less ideal i.m.o.
p.1 #12If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I think a 400mm f4 on par with the IQ of the 300mm GM could be intriguing. Still super sharp at 560mm f5.6 with a 1.4x and still excellent at 800mm f8/2x. Cost and weight would be similar to the 300GM
And at a lower price point, but still high quality, would be a lightweight 600mm f5.6 that could take a 1.4x tc well for 840mm f8. But probably not the best with a 2X. Which would keep ultimate cost below something like a 300GM. Maybe in the $3000 range
I would also love a 300-600mm f4 GM like the Sigma. But if they could find a way to reduce the weight that would be awesome. Cost would probably be very high though
p.1 #13If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I'd like to have better quality and higher priced lenses, starting with a new 200-600/5.6 with a TC.
Update the 400/2.8 and 600/4 to have both 1.4x and 2x TCs built in or even a 1.7x. A new 100-400/5.6 or 100-500/7 would be nice. There is a drastic need for a 1:1 tele macro like 200/2.8.
Medicore 100-400/8 or too short 100-400/4.5 don't work for me.
Save the wimpy little lenses for the smaller focal lengths and internet posters.
p.1 #14If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
Simple. A 600 f4.5 with built in 1.4x TC. Or possibly a slightly faster 400-800 — f6.3 at the 800 end would be huge, 5.6 even better. Yes, I know it would add weight and cost, but if optically stellar, totally worth it.
p.1 #16If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I have been using my 300 GM+2X TC a lot. Before I sold the 600 GM, a 1.4X TC was pretty much glued on it. Now I have the 100-400 F4.5, 200-600, 300 GM and the 400-800. When I have time, I will test the 100-400 f4.5 +1.4X TC against the 200-600 (a very sharp copy). One of them will have to go. The 100-400 is simply not long enough by itself for what I shoot.
Ideally, for me, I would like to have:
800mm f6.3, as light and compact as Nikon's
Or a 600mm f5.6 with a built-in 1.4X TC. I don't think it will difficult for Sony to design this one, since the 300 GM+2XTC is so good already.
Or a light/compact 500mm f4 with a built-in 1.4 or 1.7 TC.
If the rumored 600mm f6.3 is visibly sharper than the 300 GM+2X TC, I may consider it too.
p.1 #17If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I think Sony has a pretty competent telephoto setup at the moment. The 200-600 has its issues, but it's a fantastic gateway lens. The 300f2.8 is amazing, and its ability to take TCs well allows it to fill many uses. The 400-800 isn't a lens I have or desire, but I believe it serves a clear purpose. I think a good prime, be it the rumored 400f4.5 or a 500f5.6 would be a good addition, I think the rumored 600f6.3 would as well, and I think 400f2.8 and 600f4.0 with built in 1.4TCs will sell well. Nikon is constantly lauded for their wildlife telephoto setup (as they deserve to be), but if the rumored Sony lenses come out and if the new 400 and 600 have built in, Sony will have everything Nikon has and a bit more. I don't see what else would be needed.
I would also like Sony to produce a 100-300f2.8, but I don't see that as a wildlife lens so much as it would be useful for indoor sports.
p.1 #18If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
I'd like to see a 100-400 f4-f5.6 for the aps-c cameras, or for the full framers in crop mode.
I have the 70-350 that I use on either my a1, or my a7CR, when my back isn't quite perfect.
It works well if your subjects aren't in the next county, or large enough to mostly fill the frame.
p.1 #20If you could redesign the Sony telephoto roadmap for nature/wildlife, what would you change?
Only 1 for me really, a 400 f2.8 with integrated TC
It would be my one and done 'big' wildlife option, around 3kg so could be handheld, integrated TC and TC compatible for a 560/800mm option with some compromises