- Messages
- 8,444
- Edit My Images
- No
JR307840.jpg by Jon Richy, on Flickr
For sports under floodlights f2.8’s are really a must.Heart set on the f2.8?
Out of the two, yea. f2.8 400mm.Heart set on the f2.8?
IIRC it's around the same price as the Canikon 600mm f4's at release, nice cheap lensesThe 600mm f/4 is a wee bit more expensive. View attachment 247409
Anyone got a link to the actual specs of the 200-600? ie dimensions, weight, front element size?
You beat me to it!Just got an email from wex the 200-600 is £1799 View attachment 247408
You beat me to it!
How large is the sigma/tamron equivalent?As a comparison:
Nikon 200-400 f4 = 124 x 365.5mm
Sony 200-600 = 111.5 x 318mm
That’s pretty much me out. I like the price, internal focusing but there is no way I could go back to a lens nearly the same size as the 200-400.
Can the 200-600 accept the TC?Some info here
https://www.wexphotovideo.com/sony-fe-200-600mm-f5-6-6-3-g-oss-lens-1705685/
Looks like a 95mm front element based on the lens cap size.
It depends how many they manage to produce before release. If they are anything like Nikon and the 500mm PF then it will be a very long wait. Am I right in thinking you can cancel a pre-order before its shipped? Personnally if I was interested in it I would like to actual try it or get a very good review thats quite honest. A 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G lens for £1799 at release sounds like there will be a corner cut somewhere. I like that sony have produced something interesting.Now just to decide if I should pre-order or wait for grey pricing. Imagine these will be in big demand and they might be hard to get the hold of for a while.,
I just saw an article mentioning the 1.4 and 2x TC’s. Why on earth you would want to attach one to f5.6-6.3 zoom lens is beyond me!Can the 200-600 accept the TC?
what article? does it accept a tc? even a 1.4tc would be awsome lolI just saw an article mentioning the 1.4 and 2x TC’s. Why on earth you would want to attach one to f5.6-6.3 zoom lens is beyond me!
It does, folks at dpreview tried it with TCwhat article? does it accept a tc? even a 1.4tc would be awsome lol
BrilliantIt does, folks at dpreview tried it with TC
what article? does it accept a tc? even a 1.4tc would be awsome lol
I agree for the size alone think I may stick with my 100-400mm.As a comparison:
Nikon 200-400 f4 = 124 x 365.5mm
Sony 200-600 = 111.5 x 318mm
That’s pretty much me out. I like the price, internal focusing but there is no way I could go back to a lens nearly the same size as the 200-400.
Why is it so important? I would like to see actual evidence on image quality or see AF performance. Every teleconverter Ive ever used has affected image quality and AF speed/acquisition to some degree (faster f2.8 lenses less so). Often with wildlife I’m out early morning/late evening. Sometimes I’m struggling to get get a 1/250 or 1/300 shutter speed with ISO3200 or ISO6400 at f5.6. Throw in a 2x TC that’s now f11 (f13 with the 200-600) and either speed shutter has dropped to 1/60 or ISO has shot up to 128000-256000 way beyond anything useable in low light (early morning/late evening). Couple that with the extra focal length causing camera shake and it’s a recipe for disaster. Anything but very bright light you would likely struggle, and the simple fact is I won’t be out in very bright light because there isn’t any atmosphere to the light.Brilliant
40mm is practically nothing when we are talking between 560mm to 600mm. You would think the Sony 200-600 would outperform the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC. To be honest it’s worth comparing use of teleconverter versus cropping.The 200-600 gives me the same puzzle to solve as does the Sigma 150-600 in relation to my 100-400GM with the 1.4xTC. Does the extra 40mm reach and a two thirds stop of light measure up against the resolving power of the GM zoom particularly when on a high resolution body like the A7Riii?
Obviously being a native lens the AF and tracking would be superior to a third party lens but as pointed out here the size and weight of the 100-400GM is excellent for travel.
I'll be very interested to see the comparison reviews from the pixel peepers on the review sites and Youtube. I'm absolutely certain that Mr. and Mrs. Northrup will do a side by side "unmissable" video
I'm really not sure about the about the 200-600G outperforming the GM lens with a 1.4 tc. The quality of a GM is supposed to be worth the cost premium, I don't find any discernable IQ degradation between using the 100-400 bare or with the 1.4x TC on the A7Riii.40mm is practically nothing when we are talking between 560mm to 600mm. You would think the Sony 200-600 would outperform the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC. To be honest it’s worth comparing use of teleconverter versus cropping.
Fine portrait- excellent pose, lighting, & composition IMO.
To be honest if your current setup is doing what you need to it doesn’t matter what else there is out there. The whole GM-G confuses me as you can’t compare. The likelihood is the difference may be small and probably not seen by many (probably including me).I'm really not sure about the about the 200-600G outperforming the GM lens with a 1.4 tc. The quality of a GM is supposed to be worth the cost premium, I don't find any discernable IQ degradation between using the 100-400 bare or with the 1.4x TC on the A7Riii.
I guess it all depends if you need the extra 200mm. For size and weight comparison 70-200 (850g) and 200-600 (2100g without tripod foot) would nearly be 1400g more than the 100-400 but you would get an extra 200mm. It’s all swings and roundabouts.I agree for the size alone think I may stick with my 100-400mm.
But then I think I could possibly replace 100-400mm with 70-200mm f4 and the 200-600.
Good to have in your arsenalWhy is it so important? I would like to see actual evidence on image quality or see AF performance. Every teleconverter Ive ever used has affected image quality and AF speed/acquisition to some degree (faster f2.8 lenses less so). Often with wildlife I’m out early morning/late evening. Sometimes I’m struggling to get get a 1/250 or 1/300 shutter speed with ISO3200 or ISO6400 at f5.6. Throw in a 2x TC that’s now f11 (f13 with the 200-600) and either speed shutter has dropped to 1/60 or ISO has shot up to 128000-256000 way beyond anything useable in low light (early morning/late evening). Couple that with the extra focal length causing camera shake and it’s a recipe for disaster. Anything but very bright light you would likely struggle, and the simple fact is I won’t be out in very bright light because there isn’t any atmosphere to the light.
Cheers thanks!Fine portrait- excellent pose, lighting, & composition IMO.
picked up a Sony RX1RII
Sigma ART 35 will be up for sale soon if it all works well
It’s down to lens design (cost/ease of construction). The 100-400 is recessed to accept the protruding front element, the 70-200 isn’t recessed.Good to have in your arsenal
Also, why is the 70-200 f4 not compatible with the TC?
You mean the art? If you are interested let me knowHow cheap is that 35mm gonna be?
You mean the art? If you are interested let me know
If you mean the RX1RII then it's the most expensive 35mm I have bought
+ £200 delivery & service charges£350? Deal