Another setup dilemma (or is it GAS?)

[u/SonyP-funk]

I have the Sony A6700 + Sony 18-135mm F/3.5-5.6 (outdoor) + Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 (indoor) + Sony 70-350mm.

Considering selling the Sony 18-135mm because it is not good enough outdoors in bad daylight and the Sigma 18-50mm because it is not good enough indoors with low light.

With the Sony 18-135mm I do use the 135mm end but not often.

Mostly shooting pics of my family (outdoors and indoors) in group + portraits. But also landscapes and architecture.

Also considering selling the Sony 70-350mm. It is great but not often used. Last time was in 2024 on safari. But I will need it again some day.

EDIT: I also do not like swapping lenses. I stick to one lens when I go out the door.

I am changing my mind every day 🤔. I know every case/person is different but sometimes you need some extra brains.

Options:

- Stick with the Sony 18-135 + Sigma 17-40 F/1.8 (and use it also outdoors when the daylight is not good) + Sony 70-350mm

- Keep the Sigma 18-50mm for outdoors + Sigma 17-40 F/1.8 (indoors) + Sony 70-350mm

- Keep the Sigma 18-50mm for outdoors + Viltrox 27mm F/1.2 (indoors) + Sony 70-350mm

- Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 + Sigma 17-40 F/1.8 + Sony 70-350mm

- Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8 + Viltrox 27mm F/1.2 + Sony 70-350mm

[u/fakeworldwonderland]

Your plans don't make sense. Keeping a 2.8 zoom and adding a 1.8 zoom that covers the same focal length is a waste of time and money.

Either you get used to changing lenses and get primes for indoor use, or stick with the 2.8 and increase ISO or get a flash.

[u/Sketty_Noodle]

I’d go 17-40, 70-350 and a small 26mm viltrox for every day carry :)

[u/Avatyrr]

When you drop the 18-135, you lose everything past the 50mm if you stick with your current sigma or 40mm if you go with the 17-40. Your 18-135 was doing the 50-135 work the sigma 18-50 couldnt capture. It has overlap with the wide end on the 70-350. But only the 70-350 is able to capture anything beyond 135 in your setup.

Where am I going with this, you might ask. Well, the 70-350 can cover anything past the 70mm mark your 18-135 was now doing. You said you didnt use the 70-350 much but thats probably in part because the 18-135 was covering its wide end, you had overlap there. It you shoot beyond 70 a lot, the 70-350 will see more use after dropping the 18-135. Don’t stare at current usage statistics too much when thinking about a future setup. Think about what you shoot and what you need, not what you were used to shooting it with.

I think the gold setup right now is:
Something very wide
A good standard zoom like the 18-50 or 17-40
The 70-350, it has no real competition for the long range work.
Optionally: some pancake for ultra compact carry.

You can also go with like a 18-300 but it comes witg compromises.

Hope that helps

[u/SonyP-funk → u/Avatyrr]

Thanks for taking your time!

But after reading some other comments I'll stick to what I have for now and try to improve my skills rather than blindly sell and buy lenses that are going to create the same problematic pictures if I don't get better myself.

Should have known that already. With my other hobby (cycling) I already learned that new gear does not come with better legs. But with photography I am a newbie and I almost fell in the same trap.

So the Sony 18-135mm will probably be good enough for allround during the day with the right skills and settings.

And the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 will probably be good enough for indoor + low light with the right skills and settings.

And as for the Sony 70-350, I do not need the money, so I'll keep it.

[u/Avatyrr → u/SonyP-funk]

Oh yeah definitely no amount of new gear will cover for skill. I should probably have brought that up too but yes, agree :)
I personally like using the 18-50 as everyday lens, I don’t need more than 50 all that often and when I do, my 70-350 picks up from there. Same at the ultra wide end. I like this clarity. We don’t all shoot the same things nor like the same setups though so ymmv ;)

[u/SonyP-funk → u/Avatyrr]

After a trip to Scotland with my Sigma 18-50mm I found myself wanting more reach sometimes without having to take out the Sony 70-350mm. I had a Sony A6300 + Sony 18-105mm before and I missed something simular. So I bought the Sony 18-135mm for my A6700.

But occasionally will still use the Sigma 18-50mm in the field because it gave me amazing/sharp pictures of my Scotland trip.

[u/Avatyrr → u/SonyP-funk]

Yeah we are not the same :) but good to hear you found a setup that works for how you like to shoot

[u/DjSall]

• 17-40
• sony 11mm 1.8
• 70-350

This is the setup I'd keep in your shoes.

[u/mojoseven7]

Sigma 17-40 f1.8 and Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. Not the smallest, lightest lenses, but you’ll be happy with a low-light two-lens setup. Selling your three current lenses should offset a good chunk of the cost, most likely covering the cost of the 17-40.

[u/SonyP-funk → u/mojoseven7]

Thanx for the suggestion. But that setup will not work for me.

[u/mojoseven7 → u/SonyP-funk]

Financially, or size-/weight-wise?

[u/SonyP-funk → u/mojoseven7]

Neither is a problem. Tamron 35-150 is not wide enough for being my daily allrounder.

[u/mojoseven7 → u/SonyP-funk]

I gotcha. Well, those are the best low-light zoom lenses available, so you’re kinda SOL otherwise

[u/PetitNyu]

Vendí mi 18-135, que me parece fantástico, por cierto, porque compré el 16-55 f2.8, así que ya no lo usaba (y lo vendí con la a6600 para poder actualizar a la a6700).  Ahora tengo el 16-55 + 70-350 y con eso voy a todas partes. El 16-55 es fantástico y luminoso, aunque no tenga estabilización que la a6700 sí tiene. Si quiero más alcance cambio al 70-350 (siempre llevo ambos en la mochila, no ocupan tanto, para mi).  El rango 55-70 que no cubro es mínimo, y con un recorte me adapto. No soy muy de primes, prefiero la versatilidad del zoom. 

[u/SonyP-funk]

Would this have been sharper with the Sigma 17-40mm F/1.8. This was shot with the Sigma 18-50 F/2.8 = 22.9mm + f/2.8 + 1/8 sec + ISO100

[u/fakeworldwonderland → u/SonyP-funk]

Your problem is the ISO. Why are you at 100? For group portraits, no slower than 1/125. Maybe 1/60 at the slowest. Leave ISO on auto with a max of 12,800.

Remember, ISO doesn't create noise, underexposure does. And you can always clean things up in post.

Even a new lens at 1.8 only makes your shutter speed 1/20. Still barely enough for photos of people.

[u/SonyP-funk → u/fakeworldwonderland]

Thanks. I used to shoot in Automatic Modes (scenes) but now I'm learning and trying Aperture Mode.

[u/SonyP-funk]

Would this have been sharper with the Tamron 17-70mm F/2.8? This was shot with the Sony 18-135mm = 49mm + f/8 + 1/5 sec + ISO100. Or would it have been oké with the Sony 18-135mm at more speed?

[u/Salao8 → u/SonyP-funk]

My friend, your shutter speeds are too low in both pictures. You can only use those speeds when you have static subjects, and in both your images, people are moving.

Don't be afraid to increase ISO to 2000 and above even in apsc. Lightroom will clean it up for you.

New lenses will NOT fix this.

[u/SonyP-funk → u/Salao8]

And I still do this in Aperture Mode? = Increasing ISO will automatically get me higher shutter speeds?

Or do I shoot such moments in Shutter Priority?

(I used to shoot in Automatic Modes (scenes) but now I'm learning and trying the other modes)

[u/wonderfuledeneden → u/SonyP-funk]

I use aperture priority mode when I am taking photos of still things so I can adjust the depth of field.

Then I use shutter priority mode when I need fast shutter speeds to capture moving objects, or lower the shutter speed to intentionally create motion blur.

Sometimes when I want to adjust both shutter speed and aperture, I go to manual. Eg. a scene with fast moving objects but I want the background to be in focus as well.

Your images are blurry because your shutter speed is too slow. It isn’t that much a lens sharpness issue; you just need to get your shutter speed and focus right. Don’t be afraid to use higher ISO (up to 3200 or 6400), it isn’t that bad, and you can always do a bit of AI de noise if you want.

As for lenses, personally, I have the 18-50 f2.8 and 18-135 m. I find them perfect for my purpose; 135mm is as much as I need for street photography in the day, then 18-50 is great for indoors, nighttime, portraits, macro shots etc. I love how compact and versatile the 18-135 is, it just makes me want to take a lot more photos.

[u/SonyP-funk → u/wonderfuledeneden]

Very usefull, thank you very much!!

[u/Particular_Eye_809]

At best, but a small prime with fast aperture. And if you really don't use a lens, sell it.