p.96 #4 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Even if the 200-600 could be proven to be less sharp than a Sigma or Tamron 150-600 (or Nikon 200-500), there are a lot of qualities with this lens that can easily justify the $2K cost.
1) Native performance for AF and FPS
2) No extending barrel (can be a negative for packing but I view it as a plus for build and balance)
3) Way better build quality (compared to the Sigma C and Nikon 2-5 I owned).
4) Takes TCs way, way better than the Sigma and Nikon (and I presume the Tamron)...TCs were mostly unusable on the Nikon and Sigma, with the 2-6 I can use the 1.4 without much compromise (on A9).
5) The nicest zoom throw I've ever had on a zoom lens...even better than the Canon 200-400 I owned....magnitudes better than the Nikon and Sigma and Tamron.
But again, in my use of the 200-500 and 150-600C, both of those required f/8 to really sharpen up. Both of those really struggled with a 1.4TC on them. The 200-600 does not need to be stopped down (I've never done so) and it can take the 1.4TC, shot wide open, and still look as good as the bare Nikon and Sigma lenses (when they are shot wide open).
p.96 #5 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
But again, in my use of the 200-500 and 150-600C, both of those required f/8 to really sharpen up. Both of those really struggled with a 1.4TC on them. The 200-600 does not need to be stopped down (I've never done so) and it can take the 1.4TC, shot wide open, and still look as good as the bare Nikon and Sigma lenses (when they are shot wide open).
I've never used one of the 150-600 zooms, but I can definitely state from experience that there is no comparison between the Nikon 200-500 and the Sony 200-600 GM; the Nikon's only redeeming quality is its price.
p.96 #6 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
I had the Tamron 150-600 for a few years when shooting Nikon. It was a nice lens, but no way was as sharp as the Sony lenses, and it lagged far behind in focus performance.
p.96 #9 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
Even if the 200-600 could be proven to be less sharp than a Sigma or Tamron 150-600 (or Nikon 200-500), there are a lot of qualities with this lens that can easily justify the $2K cost.
1) Native performance for AF and FPS
2) No extending barrel (can be a negative for packing but I view it as a plus for build and balance)
3) Way better build quality (compared to the Sigma C and Nikon 2-5 I owned).
4) Takes TCs way, way better than the Sigma and Nikon (and I presume the Tamron)...TCs were mostly unusable on the Nikon and Sigma, with the 2-6 I can use the 1.4 without much compromise (on A9).
5) The nicest zoom throw I've ever had on a zoom lens...even better than the Canon 200-400 I owned....magnitudes better than the Nikon and Sigma and Tamron.
But again, in my use of the 200-500 and 150-600C, both of those required f/8 to really sharpen up. Both of those really struggled with a 1.4TC on them. The 200-600 does not need to be stopped down (I've never done so) and it can take the 1.4TC, shot wide open, and still look as good as the bare Nikon and Sigma lenses (when they are shot wide open)....Show more →
I'd add one more benefit of the 200-600. I can still lift it (barely)
p.96 #11 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Photo cross posted in the Sony FE Image Thread and taken at 12:45 PM.
Looking at a Snowy Egret in breeding plumage.
Cropped a little from the side with the beak and top and then flipped, tripod mounted 200-600mm G set to 600mm and A7rIII; silent shutter.
ISO 100, f6.3, 1/1600 second.
January 6, 2020
At Gatorland, Orlando or Kissimmee, FL.
p.96 #16 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
To MedicineMan404:
I checked your flicker page, and it is clearly you were about 25-30 meters from the bird.
The light was very good, the shot is OK, sharpness
Here is the same, kind of, setup,
25+ meters to the birds, birds are the same size, light-sunset I think.
No extenders.
And the main point, it is $800 lens not $2000. As I said, it is a nice glass, but it is not $2000 glass.
p.96 #18 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
And for the record: the 200-600 has no issues with shooting across long distances as long as there are no atmospheric issues. The following is a 100% crop of the most distant bird I could find in my collection (ca 2800mm equivalent crop):
p.96 #20 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
tester_V wrote:
To MedicineMan404:
I checked your flicker page, and it is clearly you were about 25-30 meters from the bird.
The light was very good, the shot is OK, sharpness
Here is the same, kind of, setup,
25+ meters to the birds, birds are the same size, light-sunset I think.
No extenders.
And the main point, it is $800 lens not $2000. As I said, it is a nice glass, but it is not $2000 glass.
Somehow I find posting a low resolution version, of such a highly processed image, an unconvincing reference for the sharpness of a lens at any price. Better to post the unprocessed image for comparison. For me your main point has not been made with this image.
