I have recently been interested in birding, so wanted to buy a camera. I have never owned one before.I use by iphone for all photos.
I did some research, on a birding group i was told to buy a point and shoot and after becoming used to it get a bigger camera.
I decided to get a Sony A6600 which is available on discount at around 60k and for the lens i thought a Tamron 18-300 mm will cover all situations and has enough zoom for bird photography, i chose this to avoid multiple lenses which will increase cost. Is this a good option?
yes the camera is fine if you are ok to start with a mirrorless but not ok with the lens. the focal length range is fine as it covers from wide to long zoom 300mm.. but remember the f stops start at 3.5@18mm and f6.3 at 300mm which is a minus point. but as a beginner you will be used to it... but if you notice with other PROFESSIONALS they prefer fixed focal length lenses like 200/300/400mm with f4 or 2.8 ones... you have to shoot always at higher ISO and to compensate with shutterspeed etc. which is not always possible in photography like birding or wildlife. the beauty happens only when either light is not helpful or a photographer not ready to click... ALL THE BEST
For exploring all types of photography 18-300 is ok, if you are particular about birding 70-300 or similar is better. Later you might want to upgrade to 100-400 or 150-600, although you might want to upgrade the body also but that is debatable.
How is a 70-300 different from the 18-300, i saw youtube comparisons of sony 70-350 with the Tamron 18-300 and there were minor differences but price wise it offers good value to save and buy the 18-300, i may look for a second hand option of the same lens.
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 04, 2026, 07:54:41 PMi was told to buy a point and shoot and after becoming used to it get a bigger camera
I would not agree with that advice! A point&shoot would have left you very dissatisfied. A superzoom "bridge camera" might have been better advice.
But the Sony a6600 is not a point&shoot: it is a serious interchangeable-lens camera :). Try to do some photography other than birds: you will get some very good images with that camera of all sorts of subject.
It's difficult to know, when we start out, what we really need. When I began my current phase of photography, I wasted money on lenses that completely wrong for my purpose. I had to learn.
Everything depends on how much money one wants to spend. For bird photography, a minimum of 400mm (and 1.5x crop factor) is recommended. You can buy a second-hand 150-600mm lens in good condition. Sony has just released a 100-400mm f/5.6-8 lens that is expected to be affordable. However, it is best used in good light.
For the camera, an a6700 is better as it has bird eye focus - if you can find one for a good price in the second hand market. Otherwise an a6600 (has IBIS) or a6400 (no IBIS but cheaper) are good options.
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 05, 2026, 12:06:54 AMHow is a 70-300 different from the 18-300, i saw youtube comparisons of sony 70-350 with the Tamron 18-300 and there were minor differences but price wise it offers good value to save and buy the 18-300, i may look for a second hand option of the same lens.
On paper both have similar telephoto reach of 300mm but in reality lot of things come into play, how the optics are constructed is complicated engineering. Long story short what you would get with 70-300 that you can't get with 18-300.
1. Better picture quality i.e. sharpness, color accuracy etc
2. More telephoto(zoomed in picture), yes! 300mm is NOT always = 300mm, it is a long explanation so just accept it for now.
3. Better autofocus
4. Less fringing
General rule of thumb less zoom = better picture quality
18-300 = 16X , 70-300 = 4X , 300 prime = 1X so 300 > 70-300 > 18-300
generally 18-300 also has its advantages,and it might be suitable in many cases( I have had lots of fun with it), but if 18-300 could do everything why would they make a 70-300 anyway
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 04, 2026, 07:54:41 PMI have recently been interested in birding, so wanted to buy a camera. I have never owned one before.I use by iphone for all photos.
I did some research, on a birding group i was told to buy a point and shoot and after becoming used to it get a bigger camera.
I decided to get a Sony A6600 which is available on discount at around 60k and for the lens i thought a Tamron 18-300 mm will cover all situations and has enough zoom for bird photography, i chose this to avoid multiple lenses which will increase cost. Is this a good option?
If you are serious about bird photography and plan to stick with it, to learn and improve - buy the best camera lens combination that you can afford. I do not think that beginners should buy low end equipment and upgrade later. I think one must buy well and learn to use it. Much shorter learning curve.
OTOH (https://share.google/MJju4z2jgszyYhmWI) If the camera is only for occasional use - get a point and shoot camera that you will anyway keep forgetting how to use because of the long breaks between each use.
About your specific question
The short answer : NO
1. 300mm is not enough focal length for birding. The resulting image will be very small in the frame and when you crop to size, image quality will degrade. You
need at least 400mm to get birding images that you will want to keep Especially as a beginner
2. As ashutosh1979 pointed out, picture quality is usually judged as . . .
Wide (super) zooms ( 18-300 or 150-600) = poor quality (
There will be some here that may argue about the 150-600 being maligned - but, having used it that's how I feel)
Narrow zooms (100-400)= better qualityFixed focal length (Prime lens) = best quality Sony has a couple of other Zooms - 200-600 and 400-800 which are in a category of their own, comparatively more expensive and optically very good
3. As Thad said the 6600 is a serious camera. So you need to pair it with a serious lens, to get what you are paying for. Putting a cheap super zoom will completely defeat the advantage of this camera body.
So, what should you do? You should research some more, match prices with YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcIPlBDsULg) and Photography life (https://photographylife.com/reviews/sony-fe-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6-gm-oss) performance reviews before you take a decision. Remember when you spend all that money it is difficult to change gear after a only a few months of use.
Quote from: Krish Chandran on August 05, 2026, 02:13:14 PM. 300mm is not enough focal length for birding. The resulting image will be very small in the frame and when you crop to size, image quality will degrade. You need at least 400mm to get birding images that you will want to keep
When you say that, are you taking into account the 6600 aps-c crop which will give him 450 equivalent?
I would echo that it is better to buy the best possible, rather than to plan to upgrade. Simple but true:
buying once is always cheaper!@FeatherScope, one of the advantages of aps-c sensor size (eg the a6nnn series) is being able to buy smaller, cheaper, aps-c lenses, but always having the freedom to use the full-frame lenses too. But this only applies up to a certain focal length: above that, aps-c lenses are just not available and one has to buy the full-frame model. If you do get serious about birds, I guess you'll be joining the Big, Expensive, White Lens club!
Thankfully, my subjects sit on a stage about 5m away. :)
Would it be better to go with this lens and a second wide lens instead of 18-300 Tamron Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD (https://www.amazon.in/Tamron-70-300mm-4-5-6-3-Full-Frame-mirrorless/dp/B08KFMFHDD/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=V61Oz&content-id=amzn1.sym.340182bc-8d5c-49c7-8b69-c0403f7ba3a7%3Aamzn1.symc.752cde0b-d2ce-4cce-9121-769ea438869e&pf_rd_p=340182bc-8d5c-49c7-8b69-c0403f7ba3a7&pf_rd_r=0YSVKGDDRN2X6128R6P4&pd_rd_wg=nnHxh&pd_rd_r=a4808a82-28b9-4655-8b46-aba0eb057eac&ref_=pd_hp_d_atf_ci_mcx_mr_) This is 10k cheaper also giving room to buy another lens for everyday photos.
Edit - This is does not have optical image stabilization and even with IBIS in A6600 it can cause issues.
Stabilisation matters more for long lenses. For standard and wide lenses, even without ibis you face only the ordinary task of holding a camera still. That is magnified by telephoto lenses, eventually reaching a point where it is quite hard to keep the subject steady in the viewfinder, let alone get a sharp image of it!
My Tamron 70-180 is unstabilised (the new model doe have oss) and I didn't find that a problem on aps-c (a6500) or FF (a7iv).
Quote from: Thad E Ginathom on August 05, 2026, 09:32:40 PMStabilisation matters more for long lenses. For standard and wide lenses, even without ibis you face only the ordinary task of holding a camera still. That is magnified by telephoto lenses, eventually reaching a point where it is quite hard to keep the subject steady in the viewfinder, let alone get a sharp image of it!
My Tamron 70-180 is unstabilised (the new model doe have oss) and I didn't find that a problem on aps-c (a6500) or FF (a7iv).
At 300mm it wont be an issue with ibis A6600?
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 04, 2026, 07:54:41 PMI have recently been interested in birding, so wanted to buy a camera. I have never owned one before.I use by iphone for all photos.
I did some research, on a birding group i was told to buy a point and shoot and after becoming used to it get a bigger camera.
I decided to get a Sony A6600 which is available on discount at around 60k and for the lens i thought a Tamron 18-300 mm will cover all situations and has enough zoom for bird photography, i chose this to avoid multiple lenses which will increase cost. Is this a good option?
You are in a much more complicated spot than you realise. But let's untangle it together.
The good news first. Sony, Canon and Nikon are now fully equipped to cater you. Whatever brand you choose, you can't go wrong, add Sigma and Tammy into the mix as well and some other brands that I have failed to mention. The inter-brand race is always on and depending on your uses, and the ranks keep changing. So brand hopping doesn't pay in the long run.
Now let's dive deeper.
First of all there is this small matter of analysing yourself about what do you want . You want to observe birds ? For that you don't need a camera, just a good binocular would do. Ok, you are int photographing them. Then ask yourself what kind of photographer would you be ?
Perhaps you would be into getting record shots for substantiating your list ? For that a good bridge camera like those P1000 should suffice.
Or perhaps you are not into the life-list game and want to take good shots of limited number of birds ? Here time is your friend. You would perhaps be going to a limited number of places frequently, thus you would be very familiar with the shooting conditions. In that scenario I don't see why a mid level ML body and a moderately fast zoom won't serve you well. Perhaps a Nikon Z6iii and 180-600 should do enough for now. And always remember that buying and selling your way up is full of penalties, so rather wait, save and buy well rather than changing gear frequently. Later if you want to print really big like 6X4 ft, get a higher megapixel body. Now you see that the ugly head is rearing, expense meter is going up.
Or perhaps you would venture into those dark corners where birds show up only when it's dark? You would be needing those flagship bodies with those 600 F4s? Even then you would see that some birds are so fidgety and come so close that in many situations you need a fast 300. Or perhaps you would shoot that famous Grey Peacock Pheasant individual at Dehing Patkai that sits on a branch minutes on end and you have to come so close that even a 300 is too long and you actually shoot with a 70-200?
So you will discover that no one lens would serve you everywhere. I currently use 70-200 f2.8, 300 f4, 600 f6.3 and 500 F4 with assorted TCs, bodies and support. Do I use them all at a time? no. Do I use everyone of them sometimes ? yes. So it's not about a camera but of building a system. And if you want to do various kinds of photography then your range would be from 14mm to perhaps 600mm and add some quirky ones like tilt-shift or Macro lenses, or IR converted bodies. I know that's a tall order. But many of us has travelled the path and we all have started from same point : zero.
So now it is your time to start. Prepare a 3-5 year plan with possible outlays and upgrade path. For that it's always priceless to mingle with local shooters with similar interests, that gives invaluable knowledge and you get to test their gear before you take the plunge. I still believe shooting with peers teaches you fastest. Enjoy the journey !
Cheers
More thoughts on 70-300, 100-400
Choosing 100-400 over 70-300 is good advice, but like everything there is always a downside also
Here is my 2 cents on this
For 100-400 If you are already committed to bird/wildlife photography, and expect to shoot more in safari like situation where subject is usually far than 100-400 is definitely a good choice, but the problem is that, it is not very versatile for other situations when your subject is not that far enough. So in terms of money and the choice of photography you are more committed, and again in safari scenario you might want to go for 150-600 as 100-400 might feel to small.
For 70-300 it is more versatile, it can do portraits and candid and subjects like flowers, butterflies in a garden more easily , if your bird photography means, you have lots of birds landing in your back/front yard on a nearby park i.e. relatively closer you might do good with a 70-300. If you are not 100% committed to birding means you want to try other stuff or you feel that birding was not as much fun anyway then you might want this, less expense more versatile, easier to dispose. But if you are serious 70-300 will seem smaller than 100-400 ( not too much, but little yes) , and 100-400 is generally better quality then 70-300. Buy a good thing once is good advice any day.
The question is what if good for your particular situation.
IS is a feature that should not be missed in lens if possible, but having said that I would like some confirmation from avid birders here, I think for most of bird photography usually the shutter speed is high enough to make IS more or less wasted, plus the original SOP used to be to shut shown IS when on tripod anyway..... not too updated on that , could use some "gyaan" here
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 05, 2026, 09:59:19 PMAt 300mm it wont be an issue with ibis A6600?
I can only offer experience up to 180. 300 is almost double.
The lenses I use most often are 135 and 35. Sometimes 85 and 50. Occasionally the zooms: Tamron 70-180 and Sigma 24-70. I am not at all bothered that none [iirc] of those lenses has stabilisation: my camera-body ibis copes with my not-very-steady hands.
The
lens stabilisation is a nice extra. I have never thought of it as deal breaker.
You have to start somewhere. After reading ashutosh1979's post, I'm thinking that you should start with the birds you
can find in your garden, and work your way from there, getting to know your own needs as you do.
Aside: for a fast, "standard" prime lens for a6600, I'd recommend the Sigma 35/1.4 apsc lens. For street, walk-around, general pics. Or the lens I now keep on my a6500, which I only use for trips, the Tamron 17-70/2.8 aps-c zoom: very light, very portable, and I think lovingly of it when I am handling a ff camera with a ff 24-70.
Thinking of getting a Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 for everyday photos, get used to the camera and a second telephoto lens after some time.
17-70 2.8 as s walk around lens is a good idea,
Also just one more thought on all the 70-300,18-300 etc discussion, if you are going for a used lens, most important thing is the availability, 70-300 may be best or 18-300 maybe best or 100-400 etc. but in used space not everything is available and the discounts are not standard, some times you get good lens but the price is not that great, or that BEST lens is not on offer at all.
We, who are giving advice sometimes overlook that.
For a new gear purchase the dynamics are totally different and logic changes quite a lot.
Do try to get used gear instead of new one for your 1st camera, this is the principal I live by.
Good Luck
Quote from: FeatherScope on August 07, 2026, 01:17:30 AMThinking of getting a Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 for everyday photos, get used to the camera and a second telephoto lens after some time.
It's a fine lens. I bought one recently after a lot of thought and used it on vacation. Good decision.