This lens is the reason I made the switch to Sony apsc, from Canon ef-m. For wildlife photography, travel, hiking… even for a very shy street photographer who wants genuine shots .. I love this lens in conjunction with compact and light sony apsc bodies. (I still feel a bit clumsy with their ergonomics though compared to Canon, I hope Sony improves this aspect with future bodies). The e-mount in general has really exciting affordable lenses at all focal lengths. This 70-350 and the sigma 18-50 are 2 of my favourites!
Yeah that’s a great lens combo. This Sony lens is underrated. It sits in a weird spot because it’s a G lens but isn’t as good as the other G lenses. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t absolutely amazing. Don’t has access to some incredible quality glass. The glass they use in the G lenses is very very high quality. The focus motor is the fastest Iv ever used.
I use this on my a6400, and it works very well. It's light enough to walk around with all day, no problem. I've gotten some incredible shots at 350mm with that lovely DoF drop-off that took my breath away. This is my favorite Sony lens, and the low cost was a big selling point.
I bought this lens to use with my A6500 and A7RIII and the photos from both are really nice. I tend to use it more on my A7RIII because of the better EVF. I highly recommend this lens.
I have both the 70-200mm f/4 G lens which I use on both my APSC and A7iii cameras and this lens which I use on my APSC cameras only. I like both lenses but, the longer focal length of the 70-350 makes it a bit more versatile for some uses such as wildlife and the constant f/4 aperture of the 70-200mm makes it a better lens for lower light. I think that I will take a long and hard look at the new Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 lens and will very likely substitute that for my 70-200mm f/4 G...
Just got it a couple of weeks ago at a great price used. This lens is epic! I have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 (saving my dollars for the 16mm and the 56mm), and that was my favorite... But the Sony is special and a great addition for my Sigma Holy Trinity of You Can't Go Wrong kit. I can't wait to take this out when the Spring is in full bloom.
This Sony APS-C lens is showing the quality of Sony E mount lenses is getting better and better! 🧐 It now give a lessons to the Full Frame lenses (Quality and price) That’s mean the APS-C camera have more great future then ever. Now I can say ”Small is Better”! 👍 Thanks for this review!
Thank you for the comments and sharing your thoughts! I agree and can't wait for more high quality resonable priced lenses to come out. The A6600 with the new larger battery is also welcomed!
When i bought it new i paid roughly 700$. Its a fun lens and i do bring it when im hiking and so on (if i notice animals on a distance)... I pair it with my tamron 17-70mm/f2.8 this way i got 17-350mm covered (before crop factor) 👍👍✌🏼
This is a great zoom lens for Sony APS-C. Really enjoyable to use and great quality. Be even greater if they added focus limit switch or maybe have it in camera menu.
As usual, fantastic review J. I had not watch your channel in a while so it was endearing to see how your kids had grown. It would be nice if Sony could follow this with an update to the full frame FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS for a similar price.
Another great review! I wish this lens had a tripod collar available. I have a Sony 70-200 f4 for my a6500 which I love, but I understand that it's a full frame lens and sort of an overkill for the 6500. I do like that the zoom is internal, and the lens is fairly compact, but this 70-350 seems 'optimized' for apsc. Good job.
Yes I agree that would be a nice feature, but in most cases you can get away without it. I really think Sony was trying to keep the cost as low as possible and decided against putting the collar on. They did the same thing with the full frame 70-300 G OSS Lens and that's even heavier... I do also like the internal zoom of the 70-200mm for a number of reasons, but it's significantly larger when at 70mm, so you never get something for nothing ;) Thanks for great comments Eric!
This video is great. I recently started shooting baseball and was looking for a zoom lens that doesn’t break the bank completely. I usually use the Tamron 28-200(found online used for $500) on my A7iv and its great close range but definitely lacks in other aspects. I try my best to have different gear than others and not break the bank and this lens seems perfect for that. Thanks!
12:35 It's really impressive comparing 70mm and zoomed in 350mm. The pictures are just self explaining what you can get with this extra telephoto zoom. Nice job!
Awesome review! I have a Sony a6000 camera & the 55-210 lens but I’m not able to get the sharpness with said lens for wildlife photography and I can purchase the 70-350 pre owned from Hunts for $650 and your review has convinced me that I definitely want this lens. Thank for this review, you covered everything I needed to know about this!
Was between this lens and Tamron 70-300 (almost twice cheaper), but Tamron have NO manual focus, which is break deal for me... Also already have G lens 15mm F1,4 and very happy with quality. Going to buy Sony Today
The Sony lens is better for sure, but the Tamron does have a manual focus ring, just not a switch on the lens. You can switch the camera to MF and then use the focus ring on the lens for manual focus mode if you want just to let you know... I love that 15mm f/1.4 G lens also!!
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you for respond. Ordered from B&H, on sale now (- $100) and they including filter and cleaning supply. Also using their credit card removing tax. Uffffff..
First thing id like to say is this was a FANTASTIC review and showcase of this lens that I've been looking at and studying for a while now, i have a Sony a6000 with the kit lenses and i have the 210 mm and would like a bit more power and i was bouncing between the 350 mm and the 300 mm and id really enjoy that extra 50mm from this Lens and just off this review i feel like I've decided to get this lens, i personally love to shoot sports like my siblings in football and softball and golf and even do some wildlife as well i also would like to get into night photography and i understand i hear this Lense isn't best under low light and i typically just use my 210 and the pics do come out fair in my opinion. would the 350mm be better or worse than the 210 when it comes to low light/ night time photography? if this will be answered in your comparison video of the two then no worries on answering! anyways thanks so much for this review definitely the best review on this lens or any review on camera lenses by far! Definitely Earned my subscription!
Thank you for the kind words :) Both lenses have the same f/6.3 aperture at there max focal lengths, so the low light results would be very similar in my opinion, other than the focal lengths themselves. Meaning 350mm will be harder to hand hold than 210mm, so with slower shutter speeds the 210mm would be slightly easier to hold steady if not using a tripod. However, the stabilization in the 70-350mm lens is a bit better in my opinion, so the hand holding issue sort of cancels out anyway...
I had the 70-300 lens for my A7RIII, but found the image quality lacking. I ended up selling it. I did, however, just purchase this lens to pair with the a6600 as part of my lightweight kit.
I'm torn between this and the new 70-200mm f4 macro for my A7Cii. The 70-350mm covers a full frame sensor for the first 30mm or so. So effectively it would work as a 70-525mm on full frame (by using crop mode or changing the aspect ratio).
Yeah I hear ya, but I would go with the 70-200mm f/4 and the 1.4x teleconverter for extra reach and macro for the best quality possible. You can always crop in on the full frame image for4 an effective higher focal length also similar to crop factor...
Great lens, im absolutely love it! Sharp and fast and very compact size! Best lens you can buy for apsc camera at that low🙃 prize 😎 I've had it since the premiere and I took a lot of cool photos
What would be a great compromise is if Tamron released a 1.5x and or a 2.0x teleconverter for their 70-180mm f/2.8 lens which would give you a 105-270mm f/4 or a 140-360mm f/5.6...
don't get the 10-18! Many of them had problems with being blurry. I got the laowa 9mm and it's great. All manual but f2.8 instead of f4...and much much sharper than the 10-18. If you can live without the OSS. Plus laowa is several hundred $ cheaper!
Is this lens really good for wildlife photography? I really think that the very slow/dark varying aperture sucks, especially for this price point. The problem is also shooting in low light situations. I think I'll give up on this lens and get the 70-200 f4 constant aperture. Yes, the focal range there is considerably smaller, but the constant aperture is the must.
Well, your point is 100% valid, but faster lenses are very expensive when it comes to this kind of reach. So yeah, the FE 400mm f/2.8 lens would clearly be a way better option for wildlife if speed is your concern, but you get a huge heavy lens that is crazy expensive and only one focal length. Or you could go with the 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 version, but you are limited to 200mm. It's always some kind of sacrifice ;)
@@Jason_Hermann Yes, you 100% right. I'm not a pro wildlife/sports photographer, so 400 f2.8 is crazy for me. But shooting after sunset, in low light conditions, stopping some action, like a moving car or even rain drops from some distance is really my cup of tea, so I really think of getting 70-200. I have a dilemma whether getting f4 or f2.8....f2.8 is expensive and heavy...
Yes, I totally agree! Not good for indoor sports. I would say 70-200mm f/4 G, 70-200mm f/2.8 GM, E 16-55mm f/2.8 G lens, Sigma 56mm f/1.4 Lens. It really depends how dark it is, how close you are to the action, and how fast the action actually is...
I use an a6000 and 55-210mm kit sony lens and I just can't auto focus, it will only sharpen lets say the eye of the bird and none of the feathers. I also as a result manual focus and lose my shot half the time as bird has flown away. How is the a6400 with the 70-350mm focus and the sharpess of getting the whole body of a bird?
To get the entire bird in focus, you would need to stop the aperture down to like f/8 if you are really close tot he bird. What you are talking about is "depth of field" not the actual focus... The eye is sharp and then the depth of field falls off from there like all lenses... So you need a larger depth of field, so you can stop down the aperture to like f/8 or even f/11 for example and that will give you a larger area of sharpness. Check out this video for a full breakdown on how depth of field works and much more: ruclips.net/video/lt2Kp-2mCHA/видео.html
Hi my friend, I am doing a research because I need a tele objective lenses. I have a Sony A7III, and I believe that in this case I would suffer some crop factor is that right? I would lost quality and sensor space?
I really like my copy of this lens on my A6400... At considerably less than half the price and weight of the 100-400mm Sony GM lens, it is a great combination for my A6400 or A6500! I use it occasionally with my A7iii but the APSC format of that camera is not quite as good as my native APSC A6400... OTOH - it makes a nice combination on a pair of APSC cameras with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens providing a seamless equivalent focal range from 42mm to 525mm WOW!
I have owned the lens for a couple of years now and love it. I use it on the a6000. What settings can I use if I want to zoom in on something and get crisp detail of everything?
I want to buy a tele zoom for my a6500. I am not into sport or wildlife, only landscape. I might buy the Tamron 70-180 instead. I don't need the range from 180 to 350 very often. The F2.8 aperture all the way from 70 to 180 is more important.
With all these new line on crop sensor lenses we do have today, I’m strongly thinking on jumping back to a6k line, a6600, 16-55 2.8, this lens etc. really appealing, maybe a comparition with the upcoming Sigma for FF?. I believe that if Sony come out with an equivalent to 70-200 2.8 ( maybe 50-135 2.8), many people could also jump back to Sony Crop. Actually Sigma has a drsl 50-100 1.8!! 🤔😁
Yes, I agree with you 100% I wish Sony would make more high quality APS-C Lenses as well. An E 17-55mm f/1.8 Lens would also be great for example ;) I used to have one for my Canon 40D back in the day....
Hi Jay, thanks for this really useful review. It gives me a good impression of what can be expected from the 70-350. Yet I'm uncertain as to whether I should go for it. I have th 55-210 and a Tamron 70-300 USD which works fine with my a6500 through the LA-EA4 adapter. Apart from the difference in weight and size, what do you think is the main benefit of the 70-350?
Hello and thanks for the comments and question ;) If you already have the 55-210mm and Tamron 70-300mm it is a hard decision. Basically this would replace both of those lenses as long as you don't need the 55-70mm range of course. The focus with this lens will be better for video in particular and more accurate when tracking moving subjects for photography I would say. It also offers significantly more range and as you mentioned the size and weight. The focus hold button is also nice, not sure if your Tamron has any manual controls or optical stabilization?
Im using the same “combo” for birding with my son, and looking for more range now ; ) so, no sure if 200-600 will add too much grain to my pics, or the 400mm GM is a better choice??
Well, if you don't need full frame coverage why carry the extra weight and have less zoom? Better off with the 70-350mm instead ;) If you plan to go full frame, then the 70-300mm is worth considering instead i would say...
I actually have the A7 III, but I only use it with my Batis primes. I went mirrorless to save weight and I don’t like heavy lenses. The 70-350 on the A6000 is a much more portable combo than the 70-300 on the A7 III and I still get 24 megapickles as well as the extra reach.
This lens is a weird one. I have this lens. I came from the tamron 18-300 which I liked. But I was doing more small bird photos and photos of owls in my local preserves. The Sony lens is way sharper than the tamron. But I do miss the wide angle. I guess I’ll have to invest in a different lens for that. Because I love this song lens. Low light performance isn’t great. But that’s to be expected from a telephoto lens of this size.
I would say the Sony Lens is much lighter weight than both those lenses because it is made for the crop factor cameras like the A6600 for example. The Sigma and Tamron lenses are made for full frame coverage cameras, but can also be used on the crop factor camera bodies of course... Which camera are you using?
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you so much for the reply. I'm just now seeing it. Sony ZV-E10. Do you think the image quality on the 70-350 will be much different than the image quality of the Sony 200-600? (I know the reach is much different.)
Hey There, I need a zoom, I use a A7C, so a full frame, and I shoot video only for my youtube channel. I was thinking of using the 70-350 on the A7C in crop mode. I would get a longer zoom, but more importantly I get a really light lens. Do you have any experience testing the 70-350 on a full frame in crop mode?
It will certainly work, but at the cost of some resolution. You are not using the entire sensor, so you will have less pixel information captured if that matters to you?
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for the reply, as the purpose of the zoom is for videos of cars at a race track, I'm hoping I'm ok. The other thing is it won't be used often. If I was zooming in for stills I would not go this way, but for some B roll video I think it will be ok (I hope) the A7C is a 24MP full frame sensor, so in Crop I get about 10MP so for my purposes I think I'll be ok. Biggest thing is lightweight with fast AF, and the 70-350 does that. Image quality does not have to be the greatest. Appreciate the reply, and you have yourself a good week sir !!!
No that is the question ;) The Sony lens is over 1 pound lighter weight, so depending if that matters to you.. Otherwise it doesn't look like you can go wrong with either. I would like to test the Sigma lens and compare the sharpness to the 70-350mm. Another advantage to the Sigma is it's full frame compatible and the E 70-350mm is not....
I had the sigma for canon DSLR and nowadays I own the 70-350. Compared face to face the sigma was a little sharper at 200mm and higher focal length. Below 200 mm the 70-350 is extremely sharp even wide open. The autofocus and stabilizer are better on the sony, but it all depends on your needs. The sigma is heavier, about 1kg against 650 grms on the sony. The 70-350 balances very well with crop sensor bodies compared to the sigma.
Hello, yes this a crop factor APSC lens. You can use it on the A7 IV in crop factor mode which will yield you an effective 105-525mm zoom range. Also the Mega-pixels will be reduced to 4672 x 3112, which is still pretty darn great.
I'm new to photography and I'm really interested in the Sony line. I will pull the trigger on a camera before spring, I'm just soaking up information. Maybe the 6600 or the A7III. Or both. I have some things in the works. I'm not rich but I want to buy cameras I could grow into so I don't mind making the investment. Thank you for your work. Great information.
Thanks for the comments Steve and sounds like you looking at some great cameras and lenses! The A7 III is the best bang for the buck full frame Sony for sure, but the lenses for full frame will tend to be larger, heavier, and more expensive. However, there are more top quality lenses available for that format. The A6600 is smaller lighter camera and we do have a decent amount of high quality dedicated lenses to choose from, and you can always use the full frame lenses on that camera as well. Let me know if you have any questions, I am happy to help! Jay
I'm probably going to pull the plug this week. Between the 66 or the A7III. I have about a $2500 budget. So what is your professional recommendation. I'm not a professional photographer. I never will be. I just don't mind spending a little bit more and growing into it. I know lenses or a little bigger and a little more expensive but if they do take a better picture and if the latter is a better camera, I am fine with that. You get what you pay for. Your thoughts?
@@stevecleans If you have about ~$2500 you could go for the A6600 w/ 18-135mm kit lens = $1600 (bhpho.to/2PRMoXD) + Sigma 16mm f/1.4 = $400 (bhpho.to/2Ay1yIo) and/ or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 = $289 (bhpho.to/2OzCdbB) and/ or Sigma 56mm f/1.4 = $429 (bhpho.to/2J4g03M) Grand Total = $2718 US Before Tax for everything. Now this set-up would give you a great all-in-one kit lens and three amazing prime lenses that cover everything you would need to do for both photography and video. The 16mm is awesome for landscapes, astrophotography, and that awesome wide-angle view of things, the 30mm is great for vlogging, street, food, portraits, etc... 56mm is killer for portraits in particular, but also many other things. Be sure to check out my reviews of those lenses! Of Course you would not need all of that, I just wanted to give you an idea of what I would do with that approximate budget for the best bang gear line-up. I hope that helps Steve and let me know if you have any other questions ;) Lens Reviews Here: www.sonyalphalab.com/category/reviews/lens-reviews/e-mount-lens-reviews/
Jay SonyAlphaLab At what point do you say I would buy the A7iii Over the 6600? I will have a budget of about 3500. I know the body for the A7iii is $1800. that would give me 1700 for lenses. I don’t care if it’s just one lens for a month. I can violins every month and budget $1000 for the next two or three months. And get my bag full of goodies. Or I can stick with the 6600 and really load up. I have time on my side as I’m totally new to this. So both options are good for me. I just wonder at what point you say if you have that much money then I would definitely buy the big boy.It would be interesting to talk to you on the phone
Mostly hand held, but I did use my Manfrotto Tripod for a few. My tripod is over 13 years old so they don't make that model anymore, but the BeeFree is a really good place to start: amzn.to/328I4JU
No, because this is a APS-C specific lens and not desinged full frame coverage. You would need to look at something more like the FE 100-400mm GM Lens (amzn.to/3H92rcX) for a fairly close full frame equivalent that also provides top quality!
Well, it's hard to chose honestly. The Sigma 100-400mm will certainly offer you more reach and it's full frame compatible, but it weighs about 1 pound more and is significantly larger. Do you need full frame coverage, an extra 50mm reach, and don't mind the extra size and weight?
Now i have a a3000 and im going to chance to a 6400, so idont need the full frame coverage, but i only use my camera to do portrait and wildlife picture ant that 50mm extra will be great. I not and expert using the camera and taking i dont fix my picture in computer. software.
Yes, the lens will mount and work on the full frame A7 II or III, but it would default to APS-C crop factor modes on those cameras. Therefore, you will be working at lower megapixels due to only using a APS-C sized portion of the Sensor.
I'm wanting to get a 70-200mm f4 but this is now an option. Currently have a 6300 with intentions of adding another 6300 or 6400 for a second body. I don't feel the need for over 200mm but this is tempting. Which way would you go? I'm at about 50/50 indoor/outdoor work. I wish the 70-200mmf2.8 was in my budget.
That is a hard decision James. If you are doing half indoors the f/4 aperture on the 70-200mm would be significantly better than the f/6.3 this lens offers on the tele end. If you don't need more than 200mm I would probably go for the 70-200mm if indoor was 50% and you are looking for the cleanest low ISO images possible.
That is a hard call, and I have not tested the 100-400mm Sigma yet. However, it looks like a killer option for sure, and offers full frame coverage....
@@Jason_Hermann Is this 70-350 same price as sigma 100-400 in ither countries i checked her in India its same but since sony weighs 650 gms whereas sigma weighs 1135 gms
I'm sorry I do not know off the top of my head and a buck search ddid not yield me any results. I can tell you it's not that much zoom before it changes though, I just don't know the number.
It performs really well and differs exactly as you described. At the end of the day I would go for the more range myself. However the FE 7-0-200mm G OSS Lens is a full frame lens and is faster, so if you plan on using on a full frame camera it would be a better option. Also, if you need that extra light it's also worth considering. The FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS Lens is very expensive!
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for the reply. Considering what zoom lenses to buy for my a6500 mainly for landscape. Its more for me about whether the 200 to 350 rage would be useful considering i would also have to deal with atmospheric issues at that focal length but if the 70-350 lens was equal or better that the 70 200mm terms of sharpness then it becomes a better option and cheaper. amazon.de as of today 849 v 1099. Would have much rathered if they had brought out a 70 to 280 with faster aperture
hi Jay, last week I bought this beautiful lens on my a6500. In your review I see razor-sharp photos, also taken with a slow shutter speed. I still have difficulty getting handheld photos that are really sharp due to motion blur. Have you used a tripod in all cases? What was your setup when taking your photos? Thanks!
Hi WIm, I used a tripod for a few things like the lab testing and moon photo, but other than that it was all hand held. You can try using a faster shutter speed than what you are using? Also, try bracing yourself, leaning on something when possible, and use the viewfinder with you elbows against your body for the maximum sterdyness!!
I did buy and tested this lens on the a6600 and everything over 200 zoom is VERY poor.Hand held and on a tripod using 1/100 to 1/1000.I did births in flight at centre focus point and wide.From 1/100 to 1/2500 sec.I tried the focus respond options also. Only close up pictures are reasonably sharp. Much worse then my cheap Canon SL1 with a sigma 18-250 and not even close to the Canon SL1 and a Canon 70-200 F 4 cropped to the same size.I got this Sony setup for my wife to get something better for birth photography with more zoom and still light weight.Any suggestions ? Is it possible that I got a bad lens ? Or do I expect more then this Sony setup can do.Any help is greatly appreciated.
You must have a bad lens or a faulty IBIS system in the A6600 would be my guess. The lens is extremely sharp and should produce way better results than 18-250mm. As far as the Canon 70-200mm f/4, is that an L lens? If so sharpness would be similar to that I would say...
Thank you for this fast reply.How do I get this corrected? Go back to the store or contact Sony.?The store is closed due to the corona virus. (My test was with the Canon 70-200 f4 L series.Idid some more testing with this lens on the Canon SL1 body and using a 1.4 converter. Single shots and panning continues shots.The results where much better then I expected.Very similar then my Canon100-400 L2 on a Canon 7 D 2 cropped to the same size and compared side by side.I am utterly amazed.)Can I use an adaptor for the Canon 70-200 L with the 1.4 Canon EF 3 extender to fit the Sony a 6600 and get good or better results. I look forward to you reply.
Jay SonyAlphaLab I did some more testing with the Sony a6600 and the 70-350 lens.I had some help from photographer with a Sony R7 and 100-400 G master lens.We did over 200 shots.Free hand still and moving subjects including birds in flight.Also static shots on a tripod.I used a range of settings.Shots close up stills where ok but over 200 zoom where soft and not sharp.I used a higher F stop F 8 and up with 300-350 zoom and it improved quality a little.(This was suggested on some reviews.)At the time of testing we duplicated everything using an older Canon SL 1 and a 70-200 F 4 L lens with a 1.4 extender. The Canon setup got far better results.Better quality and more keepers. The advice I got: Get a high quality Sony lens. I can except spending the 2000 to $ 3000 but the weight is the problem for my wife.We went for this Sony gear for small size and light weight and the claim of the sales staff that the a6600 with the 70-350 lens due to its NEW technologie can give us sharp flying bird pictures. I guess the old saying you get what you pay for is sill true. My request can anybody send me some pictures of birds in flight that are clear and sharp shot with a zoom over 300. My email:walterklomp44@gmail.com. To close if anybody wants a deal on an almost unused Sony a6600 with a 70-350 and a 18-135 kit lens please contact me.
Excellent video! I was wondering, does the OSS + IBIS really work better than IBIS alone, or OSS alone? I tried my Sony 35mm F/1.8 OSS versus the Sigma 30mm F/1.4 (no stabilization) on the a6600, and I couldn't see a difference. Both lenses were sharp at around 1/8 or 1/6 for my handheld hands. Any other videos you recommend that shows OSS + IBIS is superior? thanks!
Not in the bright conditions I was using the lens in no. In lower light conditions it would certainly be a factor though. Indoors, low light, dusk for example...
Well the A6400 is going to provide better low light performance due to the larger sensor, but the RX10 IV is a turn key solution with a ton of zoom range. For travel and all in one ease of use and flexibility I would go with the RX10 IV (amzn.to/37FFT1W). If you go with the A6400, you would need several lenses to get the same effective range the RX10 IV offers. Plus it's nice to not have to change lenses when traveling and the 1" sensor provides very good quality and 24-600mm zoom in a fairly compact package.
@@Jason_Hermann enlighten my mind sir...thank you so much ...any latest model of sony like rx10 iv? I have no idea....really appriciate your responce..thank you...got a sub because of this..more power
This lens is the reason I made the switch to Sony apsc, from Canon ef-m. For wildlife photography, travel, hiking… even for a very shy street photographer who wants genuine shots .. I love this lens in conjunction with compact and light sony apsc bodies. (I still feel a bit clumsy with their ergonomics though compared to Canon, I hope Sony improves this aspect with future bodies). The e-mount in general has really exciting affordable lenses at all focal lengths. This 70-350 and the sigma 18-50 are 2 of my favourites!
Yeah that’s a great lens combo. This Sony lens is underrated. It sits in a weird spot because it’s a G lens but isn’t as good as the other G lenses. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t absolutely amazing. Don’t has access to some incredible quality glass. The glass they use in the G lenses is very very high quality. The focus motor is the fastest Iv ever used.
I use this on my a6400, and it works very well. It's light enough to walk around with all day, no problem. I've gotten some incredible shots at 350mm with that lovely DoF drop-off that took my breath away. This is my favorite Sony lens, and the low cost was a big selling point.
Thanks for sharing and I agree it is a fantastic telephoto lens option!
Can I see those photos at 350mm. Do you have an Flickr account.
Thank you for clearing all my doubts about this lens and now i can choose this lens over 70-300oss and sigma 100-400 for my A6400 !!
Good choice and I'm really glad the review helped you out ;)
Thanks just grabbed this for my a6400 :)
I bought this lens to use with my A6500 and A7RIII and the photos from both are really nice. I tend to use it more on my A7RIII because of the better EVF. I highly recommend this lens.
Thank you Roscoe for sharing your experience with this lens on the A7R III ;)
@Test86 One4 The A7RIII will auto switch to APS-C and you will have 18mp.
I'm waiting for the telephoto sequel to the Sigma 18-50 f2.8.
Sigma has a patent out for a 50-150
I have both the 70-200mm f/4 G lens which I use on both my APSC and A7iii cameras and this lens which I use on my APSC cameras only. I like both lenses but, the longer focal length of the 70-350 makes it a bit more versatile for some uses such as wildlife and the constant f/4 aperture of the 70-200mm makes it a better lens for lower light. I think that I will take a long and hard look at the new Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 lens and will very likely substitute that for my 70-200mm f/4 G...
Just got it a couple of weeks ago at a great price used. This lens is epic! I have the Sigma 30mm f1.4 (saving my dollars for the 16mm and the 56mm), and that was my favorite... But the Sony is special and a great addition for my Sigma Holy Trinity of You Can't Go Wrong kit. I can't wait to take this out when the Spring is in full bloom.
Awesome lens!!
Thanks Jay, for the review. Bought this lens and love it! The image quality is amazing and the weight just right for me.
This Sony APS-C lens is showing the quality of Sony E mount lenses is getting better and better! 🧐 It now give a lessons to the Full Frame lenses (Quality and price) That’s mean the APS-C camera have more great future then ever. Now I can say ”Small is Better”! 👍 Thanks for this review!
Thank you for the comments and sharing your thoughts! I agree and can't wait for more high quality resonable priced lenses to come out. The A6600 with the new larger battery is also welcomed!
This is a cracking lens. I use it with my a6300, and also the a7riii in crop mode. What a light 525mm FF equivalent lens!
Thanks for the comments and sharing your experience ;)
Jay SonyAlphaLab How good are the crop-mode shots with the a7iii?
It is a good lens for the 6300?
When i bought it new i paid roughly 700$. Its a fun lens and i do bring it when im hiking and so on (if i notice animals on a distance)... I pair it with my tamron 17-70mm/f2.8 this way i got 17-350mm covered (before crop factor) 👍👍✌🏼
Awesome to hear and those are the best two zoom lenses available for the crop factor system in my opinion. Thanks for sharing and all the best, Jay
Great review, brother. Another one! Thanks for your commitment and the value you offer.
Lens + a6400 and boom!!amazing sharpness and clarity.
This is a great zoom lens for Sony APS-C. Really enjoyable to use and great quality. Be even greater if they added focus limit switch or maybe have it in camera menu.
It's an excellent lens, but not just for crop sensor users. I use it on an A7Cr and it produces night 26MP images.
As usual, fantastic review J. I had not watch your channel in a while so it was endearing to see how your kids had grown. It would be nice if Sony could follow this with an update to the full frame
FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS for a similar price.
Thank you very much for the kind words Rick :) I agree and G badged update to that lens would be awesome!
Another great review! I wish this lens had a tripod collar available. I have a Sony 70-200 f4 for my a6500 which I love, but I understand that it's a full frame lens and sort of an overkill for the 6500. I do like that the zoom is internal, and the lens is fairly compact, but this 70-350 seems 'optimized' for apsc. Good job.
Yes I agree that would be a nice feature, but in most cases you can get away without it. I really think Sony was trying to keep the cost as low as possible and decided against putting the collar on. They did the same thing with the full frame 70-300 G OSS Lens and that's even heavier... I do also like the internal zoom of the 70-200mm for a number of reasons, but it's significantly larger when at 70mm, so you never get something for nothing ;) Thanks for great comments Eric!
Isn't this 70-350 lighter
This video is great. I recently started shooting baseball and was looking for a zoom lens that doesn’t break the bank completely. I usually use the Tamron 28-200(found online used for $500) on my A7iv and its great close range but definitely lacks in other aspects. I try my best to have different gear than others and not break the bank and this lens seems perfect for that. Thanks!
Thank you very much for such a great and very detailed review 👌🙏
12:35 It's really impressive comparing 70mm and zoomed in 350mm. The pictures are just self explaining what you can get with this extra telephoto zoom. Nice job!
Thank you :)
Great review! I own this lens and I am pleasantly surprised at the sharpness and Bokeh!
Great to hear!
Awesome review! I have a Sony a6000 camera & the 55-210 lens but I’m not able to get the sharpness with said lens for wildlife photography and I can purchase the 70-350 pre owned from Hunts for $650 and your review has convinced me that I definitely want this lens. Thank for this review, you covered everything I needed to know about this!
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts Donna! You're going to love the lens!
This lens is amazing. Love it.
thank you...lens is very sharp
Thank you so much, I have been waiting for this review 👍
Thank you for the comments Adrian ;)
Was between this lens and Tamron 70-300 (almost twice cheaper), but Tamron have NO manual focus, which is break deal for me...
Also already have G lens 15mm F1,4 and very happy with quality.
Going to buy Sony Today
The Sony lens is better for sure, but the Tamron does have a manual focus ring, just not a switch on the lens. You can switch the camera to MF and then use the focus ring on the lens for manual focus mode if you want just to let you know... I love that 15mm f/1.4 G lens also!!
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you for respond. Ordered from B&H, on sale now (- $100) and they including filter and cleaning supply.
Also using their credit card removing tax. Uffffff..
Excellent video. Thanks very much
Excellent review thanks, very thorough, nice one!
Great review man- thank you for the in depth info. Subscribed!
wow Dream camera
Well priced, good job Sony 👍🏽
I agree and thank you for the comments!
看了你的视频我买了这颗镜头！你的测评很专业（very professional)
First thing id like to say is this was a FANTASTIC review and showcase of this lens that I've been looking at and studying for a while now, i have a Sony a6000 with the kit lenses and i have the 210 mm and would like a bit more power and i was bouncing between the 350 mm and the 300 mm and id really enjoy that extra 50mm from this Lens and just off this review i feel like I've decided to get this lens, i personally love to shoot sports like my siblings in football and softball and golf and even do some wildlife as well i also would like to get into night photography and i understand i hear this Lense isn't best under low light and i typically just use my 210 and the pics do come out fair in my opinion. would the 350mm be better or worse than the 210 when it comes to low light/ night time photography? if this will be answered in your comparison video of the two then no worries on answering! anyways thanks so much for this review definitely the best review on this lens or any review on camera lenses by far! Definitely Earned my subscription!
Thank you for the kind words :) Both lenses have the same f/6.3 aperture at there max focal lengths, so the low light results would be very similar in my opinion, other than the focal lengths themselves. Meaning 350mm will be harder to hand hold than 210mm, so with slower shutter speeds the 210mm would be slightly easier to hold steady if not using a tripod. However, the stabilization in the 70-350mm lens is a bit better in my opinion, so the hand holding issue sort of cancels out anyway...
I had the 70-300 lens for my A7RIII, but found the image quality lacking. I ended up selling it. I did, however, just purchase this lens to pair with the a6600 as part of my lightweight kit.
And how do you like the 350 as compared to the 300?
I'm torn between this and the new 70-200mm f4 macro for my A7Cii. The 70-350mm covers a full frame sensor for the first 30mm or so. So effectively it would work as a 70-525mm on full frame (by using crop mode or changing the aspect ratio).
Yeah I hear ya, but I would go with the 70-200mm f/4 and the 1.4x teleconverter for extra reach and macro for the best quality possible. You can always crop in on the full frame image for4 an effective higher focal length also similar to crop factor...
Excelent review. Awesome lens.
Wonderful and formative video. Thank you so much. I will go for it
Thank you for the kind words and all the best :)
Just ordered mine as companion for my Alpha 6400. We have it currently on sale at Saturn (-20%). It should arrive this Friday. Cannot wait anymore :)
Great lens, im absolutely love it! Sharp and fast and very compact size! Best lens you can buy for apsc camera at that low🙃 prize 😎 I've had it since the premiere and I took a lot of cool photos
What would be a great compromise is if Tamron released a 1.5x and or a 2.0x teleconverter for their 70-180mm f/2.8 lens which would give you a 105-270mm f/4 or a 140-360mm f/5.6...
Awesome review!
Thank you! Cheers!
I only have 2 lens now. This and the Tamron 17-70..
Looks like you are covered ;)
Well I sold the Tammy 17-70 and got the Sigma 18-50. I much prefer the Sigma. Especially I am pairing it with the 6600
Well, I know the next lens I'll be getting. I was thinking of going for the 10-18mm but I've been waiting for a really nice telephoto lens for aps-c
The 10-18mm is tempting as well ;) Thanks for the comments!!
don't get the 10-18! Many of them had problems with being blurry. I got the laowa 9mm and it's great. All manual but f2.8 instead of f4...and much much sharper than the 10-18. If you can live without the OSS. Plus laowa is several hundred $ cheaper!
Got it. 💕 it. It performs superbly on Sony’s best APSC camera my a7R4. 26 megs can’t be beat!
Awesome to hear and thank you for the comments!
Is this lens really good for wildlife photography? I really think that the very slow/dark varying aperture sucks, especially for this price point. The problem is also shooting in low light situations. I think I'll give up on this lens and get the 70-200 f4 constant aperture. Yes, the focal range there is considerably smaller, but the constant aperture is the must.
Well, your point is 100% valid, but faster lenses are very expensive when it comes to this kind of reach. So yeah, the FE 400mm f/2.8 lens would clearly be a way better option for wildlife if speed is your concern, but you get a huge heavy lens that is crazy expensive and only one focal length. Or you could go with the 70-200mm f/2.8 or f/4 version, but you are limited to 200mm. It's always some kind of sacrifice ;)
@@Jason_Hermann Yes, you 100% right. I'm not a pro wildlife/sports photographer, so 400 f2.8 is crazy for me. But shooting after sunset, in low light conditions, stopping some action, like a moving car or even rain drops from some distance is really my cup of tea, so I really think of getting 70-200. I have a dilemma whether getting f4 or f2.8....f2.8 is expensive and heavy...
is it a manual zoom lens?????????
nice lens, but very dark. Its only for outside day shooting. For indoors you need something faster , like 70-200mm f4.
Yes, I totally agree! Not good for indoor sports. I would say 70-200mm f/4 G, 70-200mm f/2.8 GM, E 16-55mm f/2.8 G lens, Sigma 56mm f/1.4 Lens. It really depends how dark it is, how close you are to the action, and how fast the action actually is...
I use an a6000 and 55-210mm kit sony lens and I just can't auto focus, it will only sharpen lets say the eye of the bird and none of the feathers. I also as a result manual focus and lose my shot half the time as bird has flown away. How is the a6400 with the 70-350mm focus and the sharpess of getting the whole body of a bird?
To get the entire bird in focus, you would need to stop the aperture down to like f/8 if you are really close tot he bird. What you are talking about is "depth of field" not the actual focus... The eye is sharp and then the depth of field falls off from there like all lenses... So you need a larger depth of field, so you can stop down the aperture to like f/8 or even f/11 for example and that will give you a larger area of sharpness. Check out this video for a full breakdown on how depth of field works and much more: ruclips.net/video/lt2Kp-2mCHA/видео.html
Hi my friend, I am doing a research because I need a tele objective lenses. I have a Sony A7III, and I believe that in this case I would suffer some crop factor is that right? I would lost quality and sensor space?
Great review, I'll stop @ BestBuy today ;-)
My setup : A6400 :sigma 16mm: sony 55-210 (which ill be selling for $100) tamron 28-75 and this is next
I really like my copy of this lens on my A6400... At considerably less than half the price and weight of the 100-400mm Sony GM lens, it is a great combination for my A6400 or A6500! I use it occasionally with my A7iii but the APSC format of that camera is not quite as good as my native APSC A6400... OTOH - it makes a nice combination on a pair of APSC cameras with the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens providing a seamless equivalent focal range from 42mm to 525mm WOW!
Thank you Richard for the comments and good call about the Combo with the Tamron which I still need to review!! ;)
what a great review!
Thank you!
between this 70-350 and the tamron 28-200 f2.8-5.6 which one is sharper?
I would say the 70-350mm off the top of my head....
I have owned the lens for a couple of years now and love it. I use it on the a6000. What settings can I use if I want to zoom in on something and get crisp detail of everything?
If you want crisp detail of everything you will need to stop down the aperture. So maybe try f/8 or f/11 for example.
I want to buy a tele zoom for my a6500. I am not into sport or wildlife, only landscape. I might buy the Tamron 70-180 instead. I don't need the range from 180 to 350 very often. The F2.8 aperture all the way from 70 to 180 is more important.
With all these new line on crop sensor lenses we do have today, I’m strongly thinking on jumping back to a6k line, a6600, 16-55 2.8, this lens etc. really appealing, maybe a comparition with the upcoming Sigma for FF?. I believe that if Sony come out with an equivalent to 70-200 2.8 ( maybe 50-135 2.8), many people could also jump back to Sony Crop. Actually Sigma has a drsl 50-100 1.8!! 🤔😁
Yes, I agree with you 100% I wish Sony would make more high quality APS-C Lenses as well. An E 17-55mm f/1.8 Lens would also be great for example ;) I used to have one for my Canon 40D back in the day....
Another great review! THX @jay SonyAlphaLab !
Now - I'm struggling again .... 55-210 or this one :-D ... for my a6000
Hi Jay, thanks for this really useful review. It gives me a good impression of what can be expected from the 70-350. Yet I'm uncertain as to whether I should go for it. I have th 55-210 and a Tamron 70-300 USD which works fine with my a6500 through the LA-EA4 adapter. Apart from the difference in weight and size, what do you think is the main benefit of the 70-350?
Hello and thanks for the comments and question ;) If you already have the 55-210mm and Tamron 70-300mm it is a hard decision. Basically this would replace both of those lenses as long as you don't need the 55-70mm range of course. The focus with this lens will be better for video in particular and more accurate when tracking moving subjects for photography I would say. It also offers significantly more range and as you mentioned the size and weight. The focus hold button is also nice, not sure if your Tamron has any manual controls or optical stabilization?
Comparing the sony 70-350 to sigma 100-400 which one has better image quality?
I would say the Sigma, because it is a full frame compatible lens also which makes it significantly larger and near double the weight.
Im using the same “combo” for birding with my son, and looking for more range now ; ) so, no sure if 200-600 will add too much grain to my pics, or the 400mm GM is a better choice??
Great review cool beard!
Thank you David ;)
Where are the filer recommendations you mentioned?
Great Review. Thank you
Thank you for the comments and you are very welcome Gali ;)
I actually sold my 70-300mm lens and bought this one. No regrets so far.
Why so? I'm trying to decide between the two
Well, if you don't need full frame coverage why carry the extra weight and have less zoom? Better off with the 70-350mm instead ;) If you plan to go full frame, then the 70-300mm is worth considering instead i would say...
I actually have the A7 III, but I only use it with my Batis primes. I went mirrorless to save weight and I don’t like heavy lenses. The 70-350 on the A6000 is a much more portable combo than the 70-300 on the A7 III and I still get 24 megapickles as well as the extra reach.
@@Jason_Hermann // Outside comment and test are saying the 70-350mm is better then the 70-300mm for FF.
This lens is a weird one. I have this lens. I came from the tamron 18-300 which I liked. But I was doing more small bird photos and photos of owls in my local preserves. The Sony lens is way sharper than the tamron. But I do miss the wide angle. I guess I’ll have to invest in a different lens for that. Because I love this song lens. Low light performance isn’t great. But that’s to be expected from a telephoto lens of this size.
what about sports photography?
This lens is an excellent option, and here is a tutorial on sports settings using the A6700 ruclips.net/video/IzBIPDjhTjo/видео.html
Jason, thank you for this excellent review. How would you compare the Sony 70-350 to the Tamron 150-500 and the Sigma 150-600 Sports?
I would say the Sony Lens is much lighter weight than both those lenses because it is made for the crop factor cameras like the A6600 for example. The Sigma and Tamron lenses are made for full frame coverage cameras, but can also be used on the crop factor camera bodies of course... Which camera are you using?
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you so much for the reply. I'm just now seeing it. Sony ZV-E10. Do you think the image quality on the 70-350 will be much different than the image quality of the Sony 200-600? (I know the reach is much different.)
Awesome - thank You!
You're welcome!
Nice review, thanks. Could I ask how far away your test notice board is from the camera please.
Hey There, I need a zoom, I use a A7C, so a full frame, and I shoot video only for my youtube channel. I was thinking of using the 70-350 on the A7C in crop mode. I would get a longer zoom, but more importantly I get a really light lens. Do you have any experience testing the 70-350 on a full frame in crop mode?
It will certainly work, but at the cost of some resolution. You are not using the entire sensor, so you will have less pixel information captured if that matters to you?
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for the reply, as the purpose of the zoom is for videos of cars at a race track, I'm hoping I'm ok. The other thing is it won't be used often. If I was zooming in for stills I would not go this way, but for some B roll video I think it will be ok (I hope) the A7C is a 24MP full frame sensor, so in Crop I get about 10MP so for my purposes I think I'll be ok. Biggest thing is lightweight with fast AF, and the 70-350 does that. Image quality does not have to be the greatest. Appreciate the reply, and you have yourself a good week sir !!!
Yeah, in that case I think you will be fine and I totally understand wanting the lighter weight lens!!
This was great!
Thank you :)
Compatible with the 874 Sony
Yes, but this is a crop factor lens so it will default to APS-C mode when used on a full frame camera like the A74.
What focal length I can use on a fullframe body without crop mode and without vignetting
New Sigma 100-400 or the Sony 70-350?
No that is the question ;) The Sony lens is over 1 pound lighter weight, so depending if that matters to you.. Otherwise it doesn't look like you can go wrong with either. I would like to test the Sigma lens and compare the sharpness to the 70-350mm. Another advantage to the Sigma is it's full frame compatible and the E 70-350mm is not....
I had the sigma for canon DSLR and nowadays I own the 70-350. Compared face to face the sigma was a little sharper at 200mm and higher focal length. Below 200 mm the 70-350 is extremely sharp even wide open.
The autofocus and stabilizer are better on the sony, but it all depends on your needs.
The sigma is heavier, about 1kg against 650 grms on the sony. The 70-350 balances very well with crop sensor bodies compared to the sigma.
I know the sigma for sony e mount is not the exact same lens as the dslr version (many say it's even better).
How is this lens paired with the Full-frame A7IV? Only for APSC?
Hello, yes this a crop factor APSC lens. You can use it on the A7 IV in crop factor mode which will yield you an effective 105-525mm zoom range. Also the Mega-pixels will be reduced to 4672 x 3112, which is still pretty darn great.
I'm new to photography and I'm really interested in the Sony line. I will pull the trigger on a camera before spring, I'm just soaking up information. Maybe the 6600 or the A7III. Or both. I have some things in the works. I'm not rich but I want to buy cameras I could grow into so I don't mind making the investment. Thank you for your work. Great information.
Thanks for the comments Steve and sounds like you looking at some great cameras and lenses! The A7 III is the best bang for the buck full frame Sony for sure, but the lenses for full frame will tend to be larger, heavier, and more expensive. However, there are more top quality lenses available for that format. The A6600 is smaller lighter camera and we do have a decent amount of high quality dedicated lenses to choose from, and you can always use the full frame lenses on that camera as well. Let me know if you have any questions, I am happy to help! Jay
I'm probably going to pull the plug this week. Between the 66 or the A7III. I have about a $2500 budget. So what is your professional recommendation. I'm not a professional photographer. I never will be. I just don't mind spending a little bit more and growing into it. I know lenses or a little bigger and a little more expensive but if they do take a better picture and if the latter is a better camera, I am fine with that. You get what you pay for. Your thoughts?
@@stevecleans If you have about ~$2500 you could go for the A6600 w/ 18-135mm kit lens = $1600 (bhpho.to/2PRMoXD) + Sigma 16mm f/1.4 = $400 (bhpho.to/2Ay1yIo) and/ or Sigma 30mm f/1.4 = $289 (bhpho.to/2OzCdbB) and/ or Sigma 56mm f/1.4 = $429 (bhpho.to/2J4g03M) Grand Total = $2718 US Before Tax for everything. Now this set-up would give you a great all-in-one kit lens and three amazing prime lenses that cover everything you would need to do for both photography and video. The 16mm is awesome for landscapes, astrophotography, and that awesome wide-angle view of things, the 30mm is great for vlogging, street, food, portraits, etc... 56mm is killer for portraits in particular, but also many other things. Be sure to check out my reviews of those lenses! Of Course you would not need all of that, I just wanted to give you an idea of what I would do with that approximate budget for the best bang gear line-up. I hope that helps Steve and let me know if you have any other questions ;) Lens Reviews Here: www.sonyalphalab.com/category/reviews/lens-reviews/e-mount-lens-reviews/
Jay SonyAlphaLab At what point do you say I would buy the A7iii Over the 6600? I will have a budget of about 3500. I know the body for the A7iii is $1800. that would give me 1700 for lenses. I don’t care if it’s just one lens for a month. I can violins every month and budget $1000 for the next two or three months. And get my bag full of goodies. Or I can stick with the 6600 and really load up. I have time on my side as I’m totally new to this. So both options are good for me. I just wonder at what point you say if you have that much money then I would definitely buy the big boy.It would be interesting to talk to you on the phone
@@stevecleans Hey Steve, Send me an email with your # and I would be happy to chat with you ;) SonyAlphaLab-at-Gmail.com
The lunss is use in A7C full frame sensor?
This lens is 70-350 on apsc right? I mean this lens isnt a full frame lens corect? I own the sony a6600 and want to buy this lens for that
Yes correct and here is a link tot he best prices: geni.us/zyB9o0p
Were you using a tripod for your nature( real world) shots? If so, what do you recommend for the a6500 with the 70/350 mm lens?
Mostly hand held, but I did use my Manfrotto Tripod for a few. My tripod is over 13 years old so they don't make that model anymore, but the BeeFree is a really good place to start: amzn.to/328I4JU
how would you compare it to the sigma 100-400?
Can I see moon surface clearly with this lens ? I have ZV-10.
You certainly get a good view of the moon, but by seeing the surface I'm not sure what you mean?
Was there a specific LUT that you used in this video? Looks great 🤘🏻
No, I grade my own footage myself... Thanks!
Hi,
is this lense suitable for sony a7r iv for perfect photography?
Please let me know about the details
Thank you
No, because this is a APS-C specific lens and not desinged full frame coverage. You would need to look at something more like the FE 100-400mm GM Lens (amzn.to/3H92rcX) for a fairly close full frame equivalent that also provides top quality!
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you for information
Appreciate@!
Cual me recomiendas comprarme este lente o el sigma 100-400 mm
Well, it's hard to chose honestly. The Sigma 100-400mm will certainly offer you more reach and it's full frame compatible, but it weighs about 1 pound more and is significantly larger. Do you need full frame coverage, an extra 50mm reach, and don't mind the extra size and weight?
Now i have a a3000 and im going to chance to a 6400, so idont need the full frame coverage, but i only use my camera to do portrait and wildlife picture ant that 50mm extra will be great. I not and expert using the camera and taking i dont fix my picture in computer. software.
Hi, do you think this would be ok for moon shots?
Yeah, it would do a great job for moon shots ;)
Can I use it on a Sony A7 II or III? Is it compatibel with the mount of these camera's?
Yes, the lens will mount and work on the full frame A7 II or III, but it would default to APS-C crop factor modes on those cameras. Therefore, you will be working at lower megapixels due to only using a APS-C sized portion of the Sensor.
I'm wanting to get a 70-200mm f4 but this is now an option. Currently have a 6300 with intentions of adding another 6300 or 6400 for a second body. I don't feel the need for over 200mm but this is tempting. Which way would you go? I'm at about 50/50 indoor/outdoor work. I wish the 70-200mmf2.8 was in my budget.
That is a hard decision James. If you are doing half indoors the f/4 aperture on the 70-200mm would be significantly better than the f/6.3 this lens offers on the tele end. If you don't need more than 200mm I would probably go for the 70-200mm if indoor was 50% and you are looking for the cleanest low ISO images possible.
@@Jason_Hermann thanks, I wish I could just do both
Should you recommend.. This one or sigma 100-400mm on apsc camera?
That is a hard call, and I have not tested the 100-400mm Sigma yet. However, it looks like a killer option for sure, and offers full frame coverage....
@@Jason_Hermann Is this 70-350 same price as sigma 100-400 in ither countries i checked her in India its same but since sony weighs 650 gms whereas sigma weighs 1135 gms
70 350mm or the 100 400 sigma dg dn? shootn with a6100
70-350mm is lighter weight, but the 100-400mm has more range and full frame compatible if you ever upgrade to that format...
I have a question about the lens :) Can you tell me at which focal lengths, the maximum aperture change?
I'm sorry I do not know off the top of my head and a buck search ddid not yield me any results. I can tell you it's not that much zoom before it changes though, I just don't know the number.
@@Jason_Hermann Thank you for your response :)
Any idea how it compares to 70 200 F4 in the same range. You gain 1/2 to 1 stop in exposure, dof against loosing extra zoom
It performs really well and differs exactly as you described. At the end of the day I would go for the more range myself. However the FE 7-0-200mm G OSS Lens is a full frame lens and is faster, so if you plan on using on a full frame camera it would be a better option. Also, if you need that extra light it's also worth considering. The FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS Lens is very expensive!
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for the reply. Considering what zoom lenses to buy for my a6500 mainly for landscape. Its more for me about whether the 200 to 350 rage would be useful considering i would also have to deal with atmospheric issues at that focal length but if the 70-350 lens was equal or better that the 70 200mm terms of sharpness then it becomes a better option and cheaper. amazon.de as of today 849 v 1099. Would have much rathered if they had brought out a 70 to 280 with faster aperture
@@TheDogogd I would say the sharpness is equal if not better on the E 70-350mm lens based on my testing ;)
Wait i just noticed that you didn't mention the Sony a6000. ISnt that body compatible with this lens?
Yes it is compatible with the A6000 also!
What is the autofocus like?
It's very good i would say.
hi Jay, last week I bought this beautiful lens on my a6500. In your review I see razor-sharp photos, also taken with a slow shutter speed. I still have difficulty getting handheld photos that are really sharp due to motion blur. Have you used a tripod in all cases? What was your setup when taking your photos?
Thanks!
Hi WIm, I used a tripod for a few things like the lab testing and moon photo, but other than that it was all hand held. You can try using a faster shutter speed than what you are using? Also, try bracing yourself, leaning on something when possible, and use the viewfinder with you elbows against your body for the maximum sterdyness!!
I did buy and tested this lens on the a6600 and everything over 200 zoom is VERY poor.Hand held and on a tripod using 1/100 to 1/1000.I did births in flight at centre focus point and wide.From 1/100 to 1/2500 sec.I tried the focus respond options also. Only close up pictures are reasonably sharp. Much worse then my cheap Canon SL1 with a sigma 18-250 and not even close to the Canon SL1 and a Canon 70-200 F 4 cropped to the same size.I got this Sony setup for my wife to get something better for birth photography with more zoom and still light weight.Any suggestions ? Is it possible that I got a bad lens ? Or do I expect more then this Sony setup can do.Any help is greatly appreciated.
You must have a bad lens or a faulty IBIS system in the A6600 would be my guess. The lens is extremely sharp and should produce way better results than 18-250mm. As far as the Canon 70-200mm f/4, is that an L lens? If so sharpness would be similar to that I would say...
Thank you for this fast reply.How do I get this corrected? Go back to the store or contact Sony.?The store is closed due to the corona virus. (My test was with the Canon 70-200 f4 L series.Idid some more testing with this lens on the Canon SL1 body and using a 1.4 converter. Single shots and panning continues shots.The results where much better then I expected.Very similar then my Canon100-400 L2 on a Canon 7 D 2 cropped to the same size and compared side by side.I am utterly amazed.)Can I use an adaptor for the Canon 70-200 L with the 1.4 Canon EF 3 extender to fit the Sony a 6600 and get good or better results. I look forward to you reply.
Jay SonyAlphaLab I did some more testing with the Sony a6600 and the 70-350 lens.I had some help from photographer with a Sony R7 and 100-400 G master lens.We did over 200 shots.Free hand still and moving subjects including birds in flight.Also static shots on a tripod.I used a range of settings.Shots close up stills where ok but over 200 zoom where soft and not sharp.I used a higher F stop F 8 and up with 300-350 zoom and it improved quality a little.(This was suggested on some reviews.)At the time of testing we duplicated everything using an older Canon SL 1 and a 70-200 F 4 L lens with a 1.4 extender. The Canon setup got far better results.Better quality and more keepers. The advice I got: Get a high quality Sony lens. I can except spending the 2000 to $ 3000 but the weight is the problem for my wife.We went for this Sony gear for small size and light weight and the claim of the sales staff that the a6600 with the 70-350 lens due to its NEW technologie can give us sharp flying bird pictures. I guess the old saying you get what you pay for is sill true. My request can anybody send me some pictures of birds in flight that are clear and sharp shot with a zoom over 300. My email:walterklomp44@gmail.com. To close if anybody wants a deal on an almost unused Sony a6600 with a 70-350 and a 18-135 kit lens please contact me.
Have this lens auto zoom? Or only manual zooming?
Manual Zoom controlled.
Excellent video! I was wondering, does the OSS + IBIS really work better than IBIS alone, or OSS alone? I tried my Sony 35mm F/1.8 OSS versus the Sigma 30mm F/1.4 (no stabilization) on the a6600, and I couldn't see a difference. Both lenses were sharp at around 1/8 or 1/6 for my handheld hands. Any other videos you recommend that shows OSS + IBIS is superior? thanks!
Oss works better with telephotos, generally
Did you feel that the aperture slowed you down when taking pictures of the kids in movement?
Not in the bright conditions I was using the lens in no. In lower light conditions it would certainly be a factor though. Indoors, low light, dusk for example...
im here because of sony camera...plan to purchase one, what would you recommend me a6400+70-350mm or rx10 iv use for travel videos ...
Well the A6400 is going to provide better low light performance due to the larger sensor, but the RX10 IV is a turn key solution with a ton of zoom range. For travel and all in one ease of use and flexibility I would go with the RX10 IV (amzn.to/37FFT1W). If you go with the A6400, you would need several lenses to get the same effective range the RX10 IV offers. Plus it's nice to not have to change lenses when traveling and the 1" sensor provides very good quality and 24-600mm zoom in a fairly compact package.
@@Jason_Hermann enlighten my mind sir...thank you so much ...any latest model of sony like rx10 iv? I have no idea....really appriciate your responce..thank you...got a sub because of this..more power