p.30 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Steve Spencer wrote:
The 100-400 obviously has a faster max aperture and it has a shorter minimum focus with higher magnification. We'll see about AF speed and bokeh is probably a matter of taste. Do any of these things mean GM instead of GF? I don't think so. I think that is a marketing decision.
Is anyone beside myself surprised at how low the price is for this lens?
Being and internal zoom that accepts their TC's Sony has come out with a very aggressive price IMO. I would have easily paid $3,000 for this lens and in comparison to many of their other lenses that cost well north of $2,000 this lens is a bargain.
Granted it is a little slow for sports or TC's but the bokeh looks great and it appears to render well I guess the only questions I have is how fast and accurate the AF is, how well the animal eye-focus is and the IQ across the frame.
I can be someone forgiving on a lens this long if the corners are not super sharp as most of of the subjects I shoot at 400-600mm are in the center half of the frame. If it is real good there winner winner chicken dinner.
I will be pre-ordering at 9am central time for sure.
On the 600 F4 I think I will wait and see how the IQ compares to my Canon 600 F4 and how much I like the 200-600 G.
I shoot primarily stationary objects or slow moving animals so improvement in Sony AF is not that critical. I would like to save 2.5lbs over my 600 F4 II with Metabones but it is not a must have right now. But selling my Canon for 7k brings the 600 GM down to a pretty tempting upgrade so I probably will do that later this fall before I head to Florida where I shoot birds.
p.30 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
trstahly wrote:
Is anyone beside myself surprised at how low the price is for this lens.
Being and internal zoom that accepts their TC's Sony has come out with a very aggressive price IMO. I would have easily paid $3,000 for this lens and in comparison to many of their other lenses that cost well north of $2,000 this lens is a bargain.
I am surprised, primarily because Sony tends to charge significantly more than their competitors. But when you consider the competitive lenses, they are in the $899-1300 range. This one is internally zooming, and so probably justifies some cost. But the Nikon equivalent is 200-500 f/5.6 and costs only $1299. For equivalently slow apertures you can also get a better deal. But then you don't have internal zooming.
p.30 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Jesse Evans wrote:
I am surprised, primarily because Sony tends to charge significantly more than their competitors. But when you consider the competitive lenses, they are in the $899-1300 range. This one is internally zooming, and so probably justifies some cost. But the Nikon equivalent is 200-500 f/5.6 and costs only $1299. For equivalently slow apertures you can also get a better deal. But then you don't have internal zooming.
I see your point when comparing to Nikon but I don't think Nikon is that much of a threat they do not adapt to Sony worth a hoot, and are not native and require an adapter and AF would suffer and the same applies to the Sigma and Tamron's by the time you factor in the converter and AF performance this lens should have been prices at $2,599 IMO or higher. Not complaining one bit though just sayin.
They could have always lowered the price in six months or if and when Canon or someone had a lens that was comparable I tried both Sigma's sport and contemporary and sent both of them back they were not usable for me. AF and MF was too poor in comparison to my Sony lenses.
p.30 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Jesse Evans wrote:
I am surprised, primarily because Sony tends to charge significantly more than their competitors. But when you consider the competitive lenses, they are in the $899-1300 range. This one is internally zooming, and so probably justifies some cost. But the Nikon equivalent is 200-500 f/5.6 and costs only $1299. For equivalently slow apertures you can also get a better deal. But then you don't have internal zooming.
The Sigma 150-600S and 60-600 are close to the Sony price. The internal zooming surely adds a premium over the Tamron, Sigma C and Nikon (only 500mm)...and I'd surely rather have the Sony versus those Sigmas.
p.30 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
2.1 kg (4.6 lb) , just barely made the cut!
From Gordon Laing 'I’m pleased to say the new Sony also continues to focus effectively at f13 when using a 2x tele-converter' at Cameralabs. He's a name most trust.
p.30 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Just got my pre order in for this with Allen camera. Thanks to the forum members for recommending these guys. Gonna give em a shot as I have heard good things from them from you guys. Usually use b&h or adarama.
p.30 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Now I have a dilemma. Should I sell the Voigtlander 10mm I just purchased to fund this new 200-600? I’m torn since they are so close in focal length. 🙂
p.30 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
DOF yes F6.75 -8.4 as far as gathering light F5.6 is F5.6 no matter the sensor. Advantage of APS-C sensor glass. You get more DOF at the same F stop than a Full Frame while still maintaining the gather light of the F stop selected.
randomguy wrote:
No, your Fuji lens is equivalent of a full frame 150-600 F6.75-8.4 lens. F5.6 on a full frame sensor receives more than a stop more light than on an aps-c sensor.
p.30 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
trstahly wrote:
Is anyone beside myself surprised at how low the price is for this lens?
Being and internal zoom that accepts their TC's Sony has come out with a very aggressive price IMO. I would have easily paid $3,000 for this lens and in comparison to many of their other lenses that cost well north of $2,000 this lens is a bargain.
Granted it is a little slow for sports or TC's but the bokeh looks great and it appears to render well I guess the only questions I have is how fast and accurate the AF is, how well the animal eye-focus is and the IQ across the frame.
I can be someone forgiving on a lens this long if the corners are not super sharp as most of of the subjects I shoot at 400-600mm are in the center half of the frame. If it is real good there winner winner chicken dinner.
I will be pre-ordering at 9am central time for sure.
On the 600 F4 I think I will wait and see how the IQ compares to my Canon 600 F4 and how much I like the 200-600 G.
I shoot primarily stationary objects or slow moving animals so improvement in Sony AF is not that critical. I would like to save 2.5lbs over my 600 F4 II with Metabones but it is not a must have right now. But selling my Canon for 7k brings the 600 GM down to a pretty tempting upgrade so I probably will do that later this fall before I head to Florida where I shoot birds....Show more →
According to
?t=429
It looks like a quite capable tool, if at 25600 ISO the A9 manages to drive it at full speed and (apparent) quality...
p.30 #16 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Totally agree, but no everyone has an A9. Most likely most users will be shooting with an A7III.
shadow9d9 wrote:
I bought the panasonic 100-400, with 200-800 equivalent, for $1000. Even better. Except neither panasonic nor fuji have the a9's autofocus...
p.30 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Wow, so this is a shocker - at least to me. The price is crazy good and I'm going to guess the lens is a hands-down winner no matter what people try to say about it. Impressed that Sony did this. Can't wait to see some of y'all's images with it. It's not something I would ever have a use for but it looks terrific for the wildlife shooters. Maybe even daytime sports shooters.
p.30 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998)
Steve Spencer wrote:
The 100-400 obviously has a faster max aperture and it has a shorter minimum focus with higher magnification. We'll see about AF speed and bokeh is probably a matter of taste. Do any of these things mean GM instead of GF? I don't think so. I think that is a marketing decision.
