Totally agree with the above! Reach is basically king when it comes to birds, and even 350mm can feel short really fast once you start cropping in post-processing. I've been shooting wildlife for years and the one lesson I've learned is that it's better to have the reach and not need it than vice-versa, right? The Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS is definitely the dream lens for Sony shooters, but on an a6700 it's gonna feel super front-heavy. Like, seriously heavy lol. If you go that route, maybe look into getting a cage or a baseplate to help with the ergonomics? But since you mentioned a $1,500 budget, I'd actually suggest looking at the Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG DN OS Sports for Sony E-mount. It's a bit cheaper than the Sony—usually around $1,400—and the build quality is basically tank-like. Another great 'middle ground' is the Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD for Sony E-mount. It's much more compact for hiking than the 200-600mm, tho you lose a bit of reach on the long end. Just make sure to consider the weight... your neck will thank you if you also grab a Peak Design Slide Camera Strap instead of using the tiny one that comes in the box. Honestly, if you can swing the weight, the Sigma or the Sony 200-600 are the way to go for those small skittish birds. GL with the choice! 👍

sooo birds are super skittish, right? reach basically matters most because you need to fill the frame from far away. i tried the Sony E 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS but honestly was kinda disappointed cuz it wasnt long enough. unfortunately, the Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G OSS is heavy, but way better for birds. maybe try the Tamron 150-500mm f/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD too? TL;DR: 200-600mm for reach, 70-350mm for hiking. gl!

> Honestly, I'd say just stick with the Sony brand for this. Their native AF motors are literally the gold standard I actually have to disagree a bit on the native-only rule because if you look at the current market the third-party stuff is catching up fast and offers way better value for a $1,500 budget tbh. While the Sony 200-600 is amazing it is basically a workout to carry and on an a6700 it feels totally unbalanced so you might end up leaving it at home which is the worst thing for a wildlife photographer. I have been looking at the market research and the Sigma options are super competitive right now for way less cash and honestly the AF is like 90% as good as native. If you want that extra reach without the Sony Tax you should check out:

• Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG DN OS Sports
• Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG DN OS Contemporary The 150-600 gives you basically the same reach as the big Sony but it fits the budget better and the OS is really solid for handheld shooting even if it is still a bit heavy tho. You could even look into getting a SmallRig Baseplate for Sony Alpha 6700 to help with the handling because it gives your hand more surface area to grip when using these massive lenses. Just feels like a better way to spend your $1,500 than blowing it all on one lens and being too tired to hike with it.

> I’m worried 350mm might not be enough reach for smaller birds. For your situation, it's basically all about pixel density and "filling the frame." On an APS-C body like ur a6700, a shorter focal length sounds good for hiking, but birds are TINY. When you crop in post-processing because you couldn't get close enough, you lose a ton of resolution, which kinda defeats the purpose of that nice sensor. Honestly, I'd say just stick with the Sony brand for this. Their native AF motors are literally the gold standard for tracking fast birds, and third-party stuff sometimes struggles with the highest burst speeds. I've been so happy with my choice to go with their premium telephoto glass—the balance is a bit front-heavy, sure, but you get used to it fast. I mean, just get the longest first-party zoom you can afford. You wont regret having that extra reach when a rare bird shows up! 👍

Honestly, this whole debate reminds me so much of my friend Dave when he was trying to choose between a Sony and a Nikon setup for his first big trip to the Everglades. He was so obsessed with the weight-to-reach ratio that he basically turned his living room into a science lab with scales and spreadsheets. He spent way more time analyzing spec sheets than actually being outside:

• He bought three different tripod heads just to test the swing
• Spent hours debating if white lenses attracted more birds than black ones
• Actually bought a camouflage ghillie suit before he even owned a long lens In the end, he got so burnt out on the technical stuff that he just sold all his gear and started doing macro photography of moss in his backyard. Totally lost interest in birds altogether because the decision-making process was such a headache for him. It is kinda funny how the gear hunt can sometimes just kill the hobby before it even starts... hopefully you actually make it out to the field unlike him!

i was thinking about this for a bit and you might want to be careful with the balance. if you go with a bigger lens, i’d suggest trying to diy a custom counterweight system or a specialized grip for the a6700 body. honestly, i ended up doing something similar for my old telescope setup in the backyard recently. i spent all last week trying to recalibrate the tracking motor on this vintage mount i found at a garage sale for twenty bucks. it was missing half the screws so i had to tap new threads into the aluminum casing which was a total nightmare tbh. ended up spending more time at the hardware store buying specialized bits than actually looking at the stars. my neighbor probably thinks im a loon because i was out there at 2am with a headlamp and a soldering iron trying to fix a loose connection in the control box just so i could see saturn... anyway sorry lol i totally got sidetracked there.