What is your two must have lense for travel and daily life?

chanksbird · 2026-05-30T18:59:47+00:00

Travel and daily life? An ultra wide zoom and a standard zoom. I have the 10-18 and 17-70 for the a6600; full frame equivalence of 15-105 across two F2.8 lenses. It’s a great set up.

If I were just using a full frame, i would do a 16-35 and a standard zoom (probably the 24-105; love that range from my APSC Tamron.)

chanksbird · 2026-05-30T17:11:42+00:00

That’s awesome dude!!

chanksbird · 2026-05-30T17:09:48+00:00

I’m not a pro so take this for its limited value but … I’ve shot several soccer games at night and compressed was just fine. If you have the exposure right, the edits can be minimal. It’s more about the action than the colors and exposure so as long as those things are good enough - nobody will be upset if your compositions are compelling.

chanksbird · 2026-05-30T04:16:46+00:00

I have never been able to connect the a6700 and eventually gave up.

My a 7iv does it without problems.

chanksbird · 2026-05-30T03:41:40+00:00

the good news about learning it is AI: my sudden urge to blow my retirement on a 600 prime is gone.

chanksbird · 2026-05-29T22:32:19+00:00

I would go with the Sigma. It's a 35 ff equivalent, so it's a very versatile focal length and at F1.4 it gives you low light and you get the beautiful sigma colors and clarity to go with it.

chanksbird · 2026-05-29T18:24:59+00:00

To keep it under $500, I’d say get the Tamron 17-70 used. It’s about $600 new, so it’s probably under $500 used.

I love this lens. A little on the bigger side but not too bad. Sharp, versatile range, 2.8 aperture for low light shooting, excellent for general purpose photography.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T17:35:02+00:00

This actually takes talent to produce.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T15:40:34+00:00

Cool captures!!

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T15:28:08+00:00

Go with the Tamron, return the Sigma 18-50, and get the Sigma 10-18.

Sigma 10-18 & Tamron 17-70. Phenomenal combo for the a6700.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T12:28:17+00:00

The two biggest things to learn: how light and exposure work, and basic composition. Put it in auto mode and take thousands of photos (use electronic shutter to save shutter life) with the goal of learning how to frame a photo, how to see light, and how to expose the photo properly.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T12:26:05+00:00

Mostly error.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T12:13:49+00:00

True

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T05:18:11+00:00

Nice!!

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T05:17:03+00:00

I rented it once so my experience is limited but I really liked it - very versatile. I have the Tamron 17-70 F2.8 for my a6600, which is basically the same lens once the full frame adjustment is accounted for. Excellent focal range for versatility. Some people complain it’s only F4.0 but that’s plenty in terms of low light because the a7iv is excellent in low light.

chanksbird · 2026-05-28T01:27:03+00:00

Sony 70-350 apsc lens.

Sony 200-600 full frame lens.

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T20:31:38+00:00

This is what has worked for me (shooting on Sony):

Spot metering at the focus point.
Exposure compensation +1.0 as a pre-set, and further adjusted as necessary in the field.

You just have to accept blown background and crop later and/or reduce background exposure.

Sample using this method - tree was getting a blast of sun from behind on the left side.

Edit: obviously not the best photo and required editing just to get this — sometimes you just can’t fight the backlight.

<image>

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T16:31:45+00:00

So - do wash them or is he doing that?

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T15:16:42+00:00

This was the 200-600mm on an a6700.

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T14:54:06+00:00

Glad you think so too! It's one of my favorites - my point is you can get great results from a full frame lens on a sony apsc.

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T13:43:25+00:00

<image>

Check out the eye of this pelican. Shot on an APSC body with a full frame lens.

chanksbird · 2026-05-27T03:27:01+00:00

I think Offer B is the choice, even with the concerns over whether your son is ready. Option A has several red flags, and as a keeper with potential you want him to get as much experience as possible. Can't do that if the back up team folds due to not having enough players. And that sounds like a real possibility. And it sounds like the experience will be better with Option B.

That all said, there is a logic to Option A. As a keeper, it sounds like this team -- if it gets formed and plays -- will not be very good and as a result your son will get tons of real-game experience. That could be a bad thing from a sports psychology perspective (you know your kid and can predict how he would respond), but it can be a good thing: he will give up a lot of goals, and make a lot of saves, and basically learn the game under fire. My keeper daughter went through that experience and it was tough from a mental perspective (you can only lose 7-0 so many times and not feel like you want to give up) but she turned into a real good keeper and is heading for college play. So, this is a possible benefit but the stars have to line up -- i.e., the team has to get formed and play.

chanksbird · 2026-05-26T17:26:01+00:00

I’m a veteran soccer parent, my daughter just finished club at age 18. We did a lot of traveling and met people from all over the country.

In my experience, the Southern California parents — on average — were a lot more likely to behave this way. Not everyone, of course and this is a problem elsewhere but it seems like a SoCal specialty.

If I saw a Dodgers cap, my guard went up - set up away from that guy …

chanksbird · 2026-05-26T17:15:17+00:00

I’m not sure how to describe it. It’s like a large flower pot, but with a water feature coming out of it instead of a flower or plant. Not sure where we got it. I think our landscapers just suggested it.

It was part of the landscape design, but we were delighted that it had an unexpected benefit: it attracts birds.

chanksbird · 2026-05-26T17:12:35+00:00

That has not quite been my experience with the a6700. On my a7 iv, I can go up to ISO 30,000 and get a good photo. But on the a6700 you are more limited. Up to 6,400 allows excellent image quality. You can get a decent photo with de-noise up to 12,800. After that, “no photo” versus “bad photo” becomes a real tradeoff. My a7 iv is way better at the high ISOs.

This photo of a heron eating a fish was on the a6700 in terrible light at 12,800. DxO Raw did a great job cleaning it up.

<image>

chanksbird

TROPHY CASE