Slimming down gear

[sh1209]

one thing that gives me solace, is no matter how much gear I have - it's usually the wrong gear at the time.

I'm shooting with the 400TC, I wish I had the 600TC. I'm shooting with the 600TC, wishing I had the 400TC. Shoot with the 100-400, wish for the 70-200. Shoot with the 70-200, wish for the 100-400. It never ends

I feel your pain lol. I always carry two bodies with lenses and occasionally 3 but still sometimes seem like I don’t have the right one

 

[ButlerKid]

I'm in transition mode.....accelerated by shoulder problems. SO - I am adding a lens to the lens stable..... with the intention of selling the 600 TC in the future. Probably will take a small financial hit.....but in the end I will transition lenses to suit different subjects of the future. I don't keep lenses I'm not using......

 

[MrFotoFool]

I am a minimalist, so I hate having things I don't use. I own three lenses, having recently sold a fourth (14-30) because I wasn't using it. Considering how well mirrorless teleconverters work with a 70-200, FOR ME it makes little sens to own that and a 100-400 when you can add teleconverters to the 70-200 and get essentially the same lens (plus a bonus lens at f2.8 by removing them). I shoot Nikon Z, but with these two lenses the situation would be the same for your Sony. If you find you often like or need the larger f2.8 then you may want to do what I do and go with just 70-200 plus 2x and/or 1.4x teleconverter (I own both). If you rarely need f2.8 and usually shoot the 100-400 towards the long end, then perhaps keep that and ditch the 70-200. However, you have the 200-600 which overlaps the 100-400 with more reach, so if you intend on keeping it then I think the more logical solution is ditch 100-400 and keep 70-200 with possible addition of teleconverter.

 

[sh1209]

I am a minimalist, so I hate having things I don't use. I own three lenses, having recently sold a fourth (14-30) because I wasn't using it. Considering how well mirrorless teleconverters work with a 70-200, FOR ME it makes little sens to own that and a 100-400 when you can add teleconverters to the 70-200 and get essentially the same lens (plus a bonus lens at f2.8 by removing them). I shoot Nikon Z, but with these two lenses the situation would be the same for your Sony. If you find you often like or need the larger f2.8 then you may want to do what I do and go with just 70-200 plus 2x and/or 1.4x teleconverter (I own both). If you rarely need f2.8 and usually shoot the 100-400 towards the long end, then perhaps keep that and ditch the 70-200. However, you have the 200-600 which overlaps the 100-400 with more reach, so if you intend on keeping it then I think the more logical solution is ditch 100-400 and keep 70-200 with possible addition of teleconverter.

That is a good point with the teleconverters, because that lens does accept telecon converters very nicely. The 1.4 is completely indistinguishable from the bare lens, but actually it is on the 100–400 as well. The 2.0 on the 100–400 is not that great but still usable.

 

[jhallettbc]

I had the 100-400 but when I got the 600PF, I decided to get rid of and keep my Z70-200 using the 1.4TC when necessary. Keeping the two was too much overlap.

 

[Len Shepherd]

I feel like I have a lot of overlapping lenses and most likely need to sell off a few of them. My biggest dilemma is owning the 100–400 and 70-200. I feel like I should most likely sell the 70–200 since I use the 100–400 very often. I also have the 600gm, 200-600, 24-70, 14mm, 20mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 90macro. So I do have a lot of overlap, but I feel like the one that bothers me the most as having the 70–200 as well as the 100–400. I would just like to get other thoughts on what you would recommend and if you also own these two lenses together.

I own both lenses and use the 100–400 most as I do a lot of relatively close-up insect and flower photography for which I find it especially useful.
Also the 100-400 paired with the 24–120 I find this two lens combination very useful for much photography when I choose not to carry distinctly heavier gear.
I normally use the 70–200 relatively infrequently for sports (mainly cycle racing) on public roads in the summer.
Over the last two days my 70-200 has come very much into use photographing a jazz festival being held in the local church. The combination of f2.8 and modest telephone reach have been extremely useful.
Everyone photographs different subjects – if you very rarely use your 70–200 then there is a good case for selling it even though several other posters find regular use for their copy.

 

[sh1209]

I own both lenses and use the 100–400 most as I do a lot of relatively close-up insect and flower photography for which I find it especially useful.
Also paired with the 24–120 I find this two lens combination very useful for much photography when I choose not to carry heavier gear.
I normally use the 70–200 relatively infrequently for sports (mainly cycle racing) on public roads in the summer.
Over the last two days my 70-200 has come very much into use photographing a jazz festival being held in the local church.The combination of f2.8 and modest telephone reach have been extremely useful.
Everyone photographs different subjects – if you very rarely use your 70–200 then there is a good case for selling it even though several other posters find a use for their copy.

I normally use it most in the spring and summer but need to start implementing it more throughout the year for sure.