Sony Lounge Thread MKIII (All Sony cameras welcome)

David Arbogast wrote in post #18413365
Since it was announced I've had the major wants for the FE 100-400mm GM...and now it's looking even better than I imagined it would. But, I have to be real to myself. If I bought one it would be like every other great telephoto I've ever owned: under-utilized due to bulky size. Also........

I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer. I am not a bird photographer.
so...........

I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens. I don't need this lens.

I did that...... then hit buy..... Now if B&H would just let me know I have it.

10 minutes walk from my parent's place in D.R.

Sony α7R II / ILCE-7RM2 • 1/5000 • f/1.4 • ISO 100

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/WZ2T​GT
Enjoying the view by rramirez2008, on Flickr

rantercsr wrote in post #18413371
the only real telephoto lens I've ever owned is the canon efs 55-250 stm lens.. and I only bought it because it was 99 bucks , special refurb deal.. I rarely use it . kinda soft , and washed out looking colors.
2nd to that , was recently a sigma 50-150 f1.8 art lens (not super tele I know , but longer than I normally would think about )
I only had it for 3 weeks , supposed to be the crop shooters solution to getting the look of a 70-200 f2.8 on FF..
it was such a super crisp / sharp lens ,I got it for portraits.. but I was using it more for what I didn't really get it for and more excited about those results .not that the portraits were bad but I knew it would be good for that .. I just didn't consider it as a cityscape lens.. but I was wowed by the results
weighs 3lbs though
so I returned it while I still could.. because like you , I got the feeling that after the newness weared off, because of its weight it would sit on a shelf most of its time

Sorry to post non sony pic but you mentioned the 55-250 I hated that lens but yet its one of my best pics LOL. taken with the T5i if I remember

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/dszS​ux

in the past year i'v bought and sold so many different cameras , pansonic , canon , sony , Fuji... and so many lenses..from cheap to high end.

one thing I've learned is that it doenst really matter as far as final finished product goes , its all a matter of how little our chosen tools get in our way , I used to chase "L" glass because only that would give me the best photos..
I've gotten an Awesome image(in my opinion) out of every single camera or lens , cheap consumer grade or "pro" level
I cant help but pixel peep here and there but i'm doing it less and less ,
some lenses will need a little pp assistance to correct things , but even my 24-70 mkii $2200 lens ( I bought it soon after realease ) needed some correction especially on the wide end

But just think, if you like your 85mm lens for landscape photos, imagine how much better it would be at 100 all the way up to 400mm!

Adorama... why didnt i purchase via Adorama.


Grrrr B&H just process me for 2 days no other updates

navydoc wrote in post #18413435
But just think, if you like your 85mm lens for landscape photos, imagine how much better it would be at 100 all the way up to 400mm!

Haha and you are absolutely right; I would love a 100-400mm for that! I purchased the Batis 135mm (used one from the FM buy/sell board) because my hope is that it will be sufficiently long enough for most telephoto landscapes, yet is light and small enough to fit into my Urban Approach 5 and 10 bags. But, there is no question I would dearly love the 100-400mm GM.

Are you still planning to sell your 100-400mm to buy Sony FE 100-400mm GM Gene?

Thank you Gene for the strip-box recommendation a couple of weeks back. I finally received one just today. Being spoiled by modifiers that pop-open fully assembled first impressions having to assemble the rods were not great, but after watching some youtube videos and
finally getting it together I think I can assemble this pretty quickly in the field. The good thing is that it takes up very minimal space when disassembled...all these random modifiers are taking up a lot of space in my laundry room lol.

I'll be in the studio tomorrow and will put these to work (got two of them), but here's a quick test shot of my dad's old camera. It's really dusty and not the greatest shot in the world...just testing this thing out and don't have time to mess with it too much right now. I got the strip box with the grid, and you can see how minimal the light spill is relative to the size of the modifier itself.

70-200 GM....AD200 inside the strip box.

Image hosted by forum (867698) © mystik610 THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

David have you considered the contax 100-300? (Or are you trying to get away from adaptors completely?)

Last one...

Flood management - Swans - Wind in the [Ubiquitous] Willows

I don't need this lens. I don need this lens. I do need this lens. <lol>

xpfloyd wrote in post #18413488
David have you considered the contax 100-300? (Or are you trying to get away from adaptors completely?)

Yes, I gave that one a lot of thought having seen so many superb images from it. Probably the ideal landscape telephoto zoom. Mainly I'm trying to avoid bulky lenses. Even little 70-200mm f/4 lenses go under-utilitized by me because they don't fit into my carrying bags.

David Arbogast wrote in post #18413509
Yes, I gave that one a lot of thought having seen so many superb images from it. Probably the ideal landscape telephoto zoom. Mainly I'm trying to avoid bulky lenses. Even little 70-200mm f/4 lenses go under-utilitized by me because they don't fit into my carrying bags.

It's actually smaller than I thought it would be (but still big). Here's a photo of mine with the liatax adapter connected next to my batis (sorry don't have proper batis hood handy but it's about twice as long as this hood). Also excuse the iPhone photo

xpfloyd wrote in post #18413553
It's actually smaller than I thought it would be (but still big). Here's a photo of mine with the liatax adapter connected next to my batis (sorry don't have proper batis hood handy but it's about twice as long as this hood). Also excuse the iPhone photo

Hosted photo: posted by Eddie in
./showthread.php?p=184​13553&i=i79522348
forum: Sony Digital Cameras

That's not bad at all. Thanks for posting this.

I'll continue keeping the lens in mind, while I see if the Batis 135mm serves me OK as my longest lens.

Yes sir. 1DXii instantly became a dinosaur the day the a9 landed. No
regrets selling mine and now I've shot with the FE100-400 no regrets
selling the EOS 100-400ii. My head just swims knowing Sony already has
the a9's replacement on the board and imagining what it will bring to the table.