Should a Sigma Sigma AF 400mm work with a LA-EA2?

My copy of the Sigma 170-500mm was plenty sharp and great for birding at distance. Much too heavy for casual hand-holding, though, and I found myself insufficiently dedicated to carry it around with a tripod very long (and, frankly, insufficiently patient to do well at birding anyway). I tend to use the Minolta reflex with LA-EA4 on the A7Rii, or one of the smaller 300mm zooms.

neilt3 wrote: OhioTry wrote: Thank you to everyone who posted and to everyone who welcomed me to the forum. Thanks to your advice I have not bid on the 400 mm. I bid unsuccessfully on the 170-500, and am now looking at the Tamron 200-400 mm. I had the Sigma 170-500mm lens years ago and was very disappointed with it . I bought it to use with my Sony a100 and even on 10mp it wasn't very sharp . Maybe modern , higher end cameras with micro focus adjust could make better use of it , I don't know . But I think it's good that you didn't win it . I assume you know of our lens database and review section ? https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic24857.html

I think you do the 170-500 something of an injustice. It may not be the sharpest lens when compared to some of the more modern alternatives or even the much more expensive telephotos that were its contemporaries but I found it to perform really well under safari conditions.

You have to take into account that when used at a long distance the haze effect will increase and pin sharp images are hardly possible. I used it on a Minolta 5D, A100 A57 and A580. Image stabilisation or SuperSteady Shot was in its infancy then and not really comparable to what is included in newer bodies.

Thank you to everyone who posted and to everyone who welcomed me to the forum. Thanks to your advice I have not bid on the 400 mm. I bid unsuccessfully on the 170-500, and am now looking at the Tamron 200-400 mm.

Barrin wrote: I take the chance of this topic as I received a laea2. Adapting lenses to my a6000 was not my priority, but this can be a way to try to solve my eternal struggle for a telephoto lens. Any advice on a light cheap one that possibly can serve me better than the 55210 If found to have low contrast and washed out colors?

You found the Sony E mount 55-210 to be low contrast and washed out colours ?

I had one on an NEX 7 and that's certainly not the case .
Did you use the supplied lens hood with it ? It sounds more like it wasn't used and harsh lighting was ruining the image .

As far as what lenses to buy , looking at the lens database would be a good starting point .
But for an APS-C only , low cost , good image quality , the Sony A mount 55-300 would be a good one .

There again a Minolta 300mm f/4 APO HS/G can be had for £400 from Ffordes on their eBay store .
You've a lot of options , but without knowing your needs or budget it hard to help you further .

EDIT ; I've just noticed this isn't a thread you started , so the 300mm f/4 is largely aimed at the OP .
With that and a matched Minolta 1.4X teleconverter they will get far superior quality images than from the sigma .
I owned that and got rid of it .
Even a cropped image from the Minolta 300mm will give better image quality than the sigma .

@ Barrin , perhaps if you started your own thread asking for lens advice , stating your requirements and budget along with the intended use you'll get some good suggestions . Rather than slipping it in the middle of someone else's thread going off topic ?

I'd second ADDY's comment. For a fuller response ...

If you can do without AF then there are lots of film-era teles around that can be adapted with cheap dumb adapters. Don't pay more than $25 for one, except the Tamron 500mm f8 mirror lens (the adaptall one) which is very good but the donut bokeh makes unsuitable for birds in forests ...

Using the LA-EA2 you will get an APS-C crop which is quite okay for long tele use anyway.
I've tried most of the cheaper end of the long tele primes and zooms that will fit an A-mount camera. The AF ones that I could get under £100 GBP and worked best for me (not in any order) are:

1. Sony 55-300mm DT SAM (note that it may not AF with a teleconverter)
2. Sony 55-200mm DT SAM (very sharp and is around f4 at 100-125mm)
3. Minolta 100-300mm (the APO version has less CA in the corners)
4. Minolta 75-300mm (several versions, most of which have strong CA in the corners when you zoom in, so keep small birds/etc in the centre). Great lens for MF.
5. Minolta 75 to 210mm zoom (lots versions; the MFD varies)
6. Minolta 100-200mm zoom
7. Sony 18-250mm zoom

The Sony DT SAM are for me the best of these because they are all very sharp at the long end, all have a usefully short MFD and work okay near it, and you get lens compensations too; however you might have to pay a little over £100 for one. I generally find eBay prices higher than those on Cex and LCE in the UK - no idea how things play out in the US.

If your definition of 'cheap' extends to hundreds of dollars there are more recent lenses available. I'd strongly recommend any of the Tamron 90mm macro lenses (f2.5 or f2.8) which are as good as you'll get in macro for their price and the results will still look good with 1.4x or 2x TC, which is not true of many others. My experience is that AF becomes useless with a 2x TC and is usually okay with a 1.4x. If your camera has focus adjust you may need to check/adjust this for best performance at the FL and distance you intend to use it.

Do not buy any film-era 18-200mm lenses - you will be disappointed. The best Minolta primes are not cheap, the cheap ones are usually okay unless they've been dropped or got fuzzy stuff growing inside them, and the Sigma ones can be great but the affordable ones tend to have some kind of AF problem (broken gear, bent teeth on gear, incompatible electronics, etc).

FWIW I bought the wonderful Minolta 500mm f8 Reflex for slightly over £200 a year ago (in a camera shop!) and that's a terrific bang for your buck... The Donut bokeh is usually an issue on branches close to the bird but not in focus, and doesn't look too bad on those further away.


Edited by Miranda F - 31 December 2021 at 10:59

I take the chance of this topic as I received a laea2.
Adapting lenses to my a6000 was not my priority, but this can be a way to try to solve my eternal struggle for a telephoto lens. Any advice on a light cheap one that possibly can serve me better than the 55210 If found to have low contrast and washed out colors?

The sigma 400mm lens is from my own experience not worthwhile getting. I would suggest getting the 100-300 f/4 and using it with a teleconverter if needed. A sony/minolta 70/5-300 is another reasonably priced option.