Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

advice on lens required


Artangel 5 3 1 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2009 12:16PM
I am a newbie to the site and have been taking photos for a little while. Love wildlife and am considering a telephoto longer than my present 75-300mm on my Sony A350. Can't affor 'loadsamoney' . Would I be wasting my money on a Samyang TELE LENS 650-1300mm IF MC f/8,0-16,0 for SONY . Anyone got one and if so what is quality of image like. Happy to use tripod and manual focus, any other lens suggestions for around 200, can't get a Sony without huge loan.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 7 2.2k 3 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2009 12:49PM
It's a linear relationship. Good telephoto lenses cost lots of money. If it doesn't cost lots of money then its not a very good lens. End of.
Overread 6 3.9k 18 England
17 Oct 2009 1:10PM
The long telephoto type lenses your looking at there - the 650-1300mm are very weak options for telephoto work - espeailly for wildlife.
On the first case they are a 650mm f8 standard lens, but with no auto focus and with no aperture changing, its fixed at f8 all the time. That will limit you a lot with lighting, meaning that you will have to be out in very good light to get shots at the faster shutter speeds that wildlife demand.
The you get a 2*teleconverter with the setup which takes it to a 1300mm f16 lens - again the aperture is fixed and at f16 its pretty much a 1300mm landscape lens not a wildlife lens - you would have to be in very intense lighting to get anywhere near a decent enough shutter speed.

Finally there is the optical quality - at only $200 for this setup your taking a big drop in opticl quality. Results from the lens even without the teleconverter will be very poor, not just in sharpness but in other areas like CA - add the teleconverter (its a cheap one as well) and your going to get extremly soft results.

I would avoid them - they might be fun to play with for an hour, but after that they are a rather expensive paperweight. Instead tighten your belt and save - wildlife photography is one of hte more expensive areas of photography, especailly if you want good gear.
NeilS e2
7 936 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2009 5:08PM
Check out the sigma range and search on here for comments,

There are a few that will get you 400/500mm and you are then into teleconverter territory where in my experience the 1.4x is better than the 2x regardless of make.
Artangel 5 3 1 United Kingdom
17 Oct 2009 6:18PM
Thank you for your advice people, I will just have to wait until I can get something a lot better. I know I won't settle for 'soft' shots and would be frustrated with no creative choice.
17 Oct 2009 7:07PM
Yes you're better waiting and saving up Artangel. I've got an Opteka 500mm f8 which gives me 1000mm@f16 with my x2 converter. It's fine for a bit of long distance fun. I paid about 90 for the lens and already had the converter, which I use sometimes with my Nikkor 70-300. For serious photography though, especially wildlife, it's just not up to it.
Alex.
IanA 11 3.0k 12 England
17 Oct 2009 9:18PM

Quote:wildlife photography is one of hte more expensive areas of photography,


Some of my best wildlife shots have been taken with a standard zoom! Wink
Overread 6 3.9k 18 England
17 Oct 2009 9:34PM
show off Wink
should I replace expensive with challenging?

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.