The Sony A73/A7R3/A7S3/A9 Thread

Associate
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Posts
1,696
Location
wakefield
Before you buy the A73 though, I would say to check out the A9, there are some good deals on that and you certainly would see a difference especially for sports.
I was toying with A73 / R3 or a9 actually haha , Especially with going to the isle of man next year for the tt as long as the human malware doesnt ruin things

I know i want the Tamron 17-28/28-75-70-180 and either a 100-400 or 200-600
 
Soldato
Joined
15 May 2007
Posts
12,804
Location
Ipswich / Bodham
I was toying with A73 / R3 or a9 actually haha , Especially with going to the isle of man next year for the tt as long as the human malware doesnt ruin things

I know i want the Tamron 17-28/28-75-70-180 and either a 100-400 or 200-600

I've got the 17-28 and 28-75, and they're cracking lenses. If I didn't already have a Sony 70-200 f/4 I'd be looking at the 70-180 too. I probably will anyway once things calm down a bit.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Posts
1,696
Location
wakefield
May be worth considering the 200-600 instead of the 100-400 as you will not have as much overlap and the 200-600 is a bit cheaper... it's a BIG lens though

I researched that it was not as sharp as the 100-400GM. I think I will stick with my plans for now maybe rent one then do a buy maybe
and grey import the 100-400 is 100 odd more vs 200-600
 

And

And

Associate
Joined
7 Dec 2002
Posts
1,079
It's about 2/3 the length of the 600GM but not as well balanced and in use handheld 'feels' the same weight despite just under a kilo difference.

May be worth considering the 200-600 instead of the 100-400 as you will not have as much overlap and the 200-600 is a bit cheaper... it's a BIG lens though
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
5,040
Location
Pembrokeshire
I'm perfectly happy with the sharpness of my 200-600 when I compare results with my 100-400 which was stellar.
I use the A9.

Same, in fact from my tests the 200-600 was sharper at some focal lengths and apertures. Like I said above the only thing I could really comment on was the 200-600 is a lot bigger, if it's something you want to put in your bag with a bunch of other lenses the 100-400 may be better choice.
 
Associate
Joined
8 Oct 2005
Posts
1,874
Location
Cumbria
Love em . Still toying on A7R3 or A9
I have the R4 and A9, I have not touched the R4 since getting the A9
I researched that it was not as sharp as the 100-400GM. I think I will stick with my plans for now maybe rent one then do a buy maybe
and grey import the 100-400 is 100 odd more vs 200-600
You will struggle seeing the difference, I tried a load of my own comparisons with both these lenses and like most reviews you really can't tell but as soon as you fit a TC to the 100-400 the 200-600 will come out on top.
 
Associate
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Posts
1,696
Location
wakefield
I have the R4 and A9, I have not touched the R4 since getting the A9

You will struggle seeing the difference, I tried a load of my own comparisons with both these lenses and like most reviews you really can't tell but as soon as you fit a TC to the 100-400 the 200-600 will come out on top.

I will ultimately get both but for now I want the Tamron 2.8 Trinity and the 100-400

And realistically i could walk around all day with the 100-400 on at cadwell park
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Sep 2005
Posts
7,798
Location
What used to be a UK
I've got the 17-28 and 28-75, and they're cracking lenses. If I didn't already have a Sony 70-200 f/4 I'd be looking at the 70-180 too. I probably will anyway once things calm down a bit.
I just purchased the Tamron 28-75 to compliment the FE 70-200 & FE 200-600 mm. Just looking for a wide angle Landscape/astro-photography at the bottom end and maybe the 85mm (and I'll be happy).
 
Back
Top Bottom