Question about Telephoto lenses

[rdrr]

Hi, I am planning for a photography tour next winter and I am minus one strongly suggested lens, a telephoto lens that the suggestion as 100-600mm ("to capture some abstract images or to photograph wildlife like reindeer.") I am trying to shed packing weight as I am limited to how much luggage I can take with me and I since I am do not have a typical need of a telephoto lens I am planning on renting one during the summer and for the trip. I figure I should get acquainted with one before I go.

So I was looking at the Sony 70-200mm GM II telephoto lens, but I have never used it an wonder if it will not "be enough" for the trip. The Sony 100-400mm GM is close to another pound in weight, and the Sony 200-600mm G is another 1.6 pounds over the 100-400mm. Again never having used a lens and never focusing on wildlife photography before, I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice. Mind you, there are certain things I am not willing to give up in my packing like a crap ton of extra socks and long johns. No way am I going to have wet feet and a cold bottom.

 

[Nycturne]

The extra reach does get heavy quickly. Let me just say that I used the 100-400 G on a whale watching tour a few months back, and it worked, but there were times where I wish I had the 1.4x teleconverter to make it a 140-600. But there the animals can be up close, or very far, and you have zero control. The guide on the boat was using his own 200-600.

I’d probably only use the 70-200 in a Zoo like setting where you can get close and the animals are relatively unbothered by humans. In the wild, the 100-400 is more the minimum to get something interesting and you will likely need to crop a lot on a full-frame sensor for animals that refuse to get close. If you are going to shoot birds, the 200-600 becomes more useful still. It all depends.

 

[Katbel]

Tamrom has a 50-400mm F4.5-6.5
Very useful if you want to get a shot to something closer, without having to change lens beside the longer shots.
I have and like it
Comparing the weights, it is a good option

Weight 2.6 lbs (1180g)

 

[Cmaier]

Hi, I am planning for a photography tour next winter and I am minus one strongly suggested lens, a telephoto lens that the suggestion as 100-600mm ("to capture some abstract images or to photograph wildlife like reindeer.") I am trying to shed packing weight as I am limited to how much luggage I can take with me and I since I am do not have a typical need of a telephoto lens I am planning on renting one during the summer and for the trip. I figure I should get acquainted with one before I go.

So I was looking at the Sony 70-200mm GM II telephoto lens, but I have never used it an wonder if it will not "be enough" for the trip. The Sony 100-400mm GM is close to another pound in weight, and the Sony 200-600mm G is another 1.6 pounds over the 100-400mm. Again never having used a lens and never focusing on wildlife photography before, I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice. Mind you, there are certain things I am not willing to give up in my packing like a crap ton of extra socks and long johns. No way am I going to have wet feet and a cold bottom.

I have an older 70-200, and to give you an idea of the reach, I primarily have used it when I was the official photographer at things like a quinceañera or some school plays, where I can stand at the back of an auditorium or church and zoom in to frame a single person, or zoom out and get about half the stage. If you’re going to be more than 100 feet from your target, you may want a longer lens. And all of these lenses are heavy - I usually use them with a tripod, and they’re not fun to carry around all day.

 

[Eric]

Hi, I am planning for a photography tour next winter and I am minus one strongly suggested lens, a telephoto lens that the suggestion as 100-600mm ("to capture some abstract images or to photograph wildlife like reindeer.") I am trying to shed packing weight as I am limited to how much luggage I can take with me and I since I am do not have a typical need of a telephoto lens I am planning on renting one during the summer and for the trip. I figure I should get acquainted with one before I go.

So I was looking at the Sony 70-200mm GM II telephoto lens, but I have never used it an wonder if it will not "be enough" for the trip. The Sony 100-400mm GM is close to another pound in weight, and the Sony 200-600mm G is another 1.6 pounds over the 100-400mm. Again never having used a lens and never focusing on wildlife photography before, I am wondering if anyone can give me some advice. Mind you, there are certain things I am not willing to give up in my packing like a crap ton of extra socks and long johns. No way am I going to have wet feet and a cold bottom.

I think it really depends on what you want to photograph balanced out with realistic expectations. Wildlife photography requires long lenses, unless you're at a zoo or something (where something like 200 mm will be acceptable) you'll be looking at much more reach. I have the Sigma 150-600mm 5-6.3 Contemporary DG OS HSM which weighs in at around 4 lbs and costs around $1000 US (tariffs notwithstanding) and it's been a fantastic lens or me. It comes with its own case and I just pack it as an extra small piece of luggage.

 

[rdrr]

I think it really depends on what you want to photograph balanced out with realistic expectations. Wildlife photography requires long lenses, unless you're at a zoo or something (where something like 200 mm will be acceptable) you'll be looking at much more reach. I have the Sigma 150-600mm 5-6.3 Contemporary DG OS HSM which weighs in at around 4 lbs and costs around $1000 US (tariffs notwithstanding) and it's been a fantastic lens or me. It comes with its own case and I just pack it as an extra small piece of luggage.

Thanks, I am limited to 2 pieces of luggage. A backpack for camera gear on hikes, which I have a Peak Design Travel Backpack, and one large check-in luggage (30" or so). I think I have settled on bringing four lenses, and I currently have 2 of them. I believe I am going to rent the telephoto lens, because outside of this trip I don't think I am going to be focusing on wildlife photography. Hopefully I just don't throw out my old man back.

 

[Clix Pix]

Coming to this thread a bit late...... I have both the 70-200mm f/2.8 GM II and the 100-400mm G telephoto lenses. The 100-400mm is indeed heavy to carry around all day -- I do use it when walking around our small lake but I can take my time, there are a couple of benches to sit on along the way, etc. I would NOT take that lens if I were doing something where I'd be walking/hiking for a long time and great distances.

So.... The 70-200mm f/2.8 GM II (which actually is a bit lighter than its predecessor) is a viable solution, and it works very well with teleconverters, too. I haven't tried a 2x TC on it but I do have the 1.4x TC and that adds very little additional weight (or packing space) while providing at least a little more reach. Something to think about?