New Version 2 Sony Teleconverters?

arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · New Version 2 Sony Teleconverters?

Maxxus46 wrote:
Except that the 70-200mkii GM bare and even with 1.4tc is a sharper lens than the 100-400 regardless of focal length. Aren't you comparing two different lenses ?? I mean if 400mm end is what you need then get the 100400. That said , if you compare optical quality independent of focal length the new 70-200GM Mkii wins by a large margin. It's much better optically... And I do believe it to be as sharp with the 2.0tc attached at 400mm... Difference is negligible (mine certainly is and sold my 100-400). Not sure where you found that chart ..to me...Show more →

The chart is from The Digital Picture lens comparison charts. However, their results do not always reflect what one sees in the field. They are shot indoors and at close range. But they have been a trusted and heavily relied on source for lens comparisons over the years (originally a Canon only site but now using Sony and Canon).

Going off of their charts the 100-400 never seems behind the 70-200 no matter what focal lengths you compare. 300 v 280 looks better on the 100-400. 400 v 400 certainly looks better on the 100-400. 200 v 200 is pretty much a wash.

There is copy variation out there so I could see results all over the place. One could have a super copy of 70-200 and a below average copy of 100-400. Or the complete opposite or something in the middle.

Apr 08, 2022 at 05:20 AM

nikon_matt
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · New Version 2 Sony Teleconverters?

I’m responding to another’s comment claiming that the 70-200 v ii with a 2x is sharper than a bare 100-400 which is simply beyond laughable and a flat out lie.

The version ii is not much better optically. The charts have proven that. That chart is from the digital picture. The are the defining source; not you and not me. They perform controlled and scientific tests on the lenses. What they say is more or less gospel and is far above whatever you or I think.

People claim is iii variants of canon are sharper than is ii. They are not. People want to believe what they want because they have paid a lot of money so they deceive themselves. They perform half baked tests or just have flat out fully deceived themselves because they can't come to grips with the truth. We must be careful to lose our opinions and look at the facts without bias. Thus, those lens comparisons from a trusted and proven source are of vital importance to any discussion. They are the arbiter of truth.

Maxxus46 wrote:
Except that the 70-200mkii GM bare and even with 1.4tc is a sharper lens than the 100-400 regardless of focal length. Aren't you comparing two different lenses ?? I mean if 400mm end is what you need then get the 100400. That said , if you compare optical quality independent of focal length the new 70-200GM Mkii wins by a large margin. It's much better optically... And I do believe it to be as sharp with the 2.0tc attached at 400mm... Difference is negligible (mine certainly is and sold my 100-400). Not sure where you found that chart ..to me...Show more →

Apr 08, 2022 at 07:53 AM

nikon_matt
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · New Version 2 Sony Teleconverters?

Digital picture gets multiple copies of lenses in their tests fyi. If you read what they went to to try and find a sharp copy of the canon 600 is iii, it is quite humorous. Basically, there are very very few sharp copies of that lens. I have had the privilege of owning one sharp copy and multiple soft copies when compared to the is ii variant

arbitrage wrote:
The chart is from The Digital Picture lens comparison charts. However, their results do not always reflect what one sees in the field. They are shot indoors and at close range. But they have been a trusted and heavily relied on source for lens comparisons over the years (originally a Canon only site but now using Sony and Canon).

Going off of their charts the 100-400 never seems behind the 70-200 no matter what focal lengths you compare. 300 v 280 looks better on the 100-400. 400 v 400 certainly looks better on the 100-400. 200 v 200 is pretty much...Show more →

Apr 08, 2022 at 07:55 AM

Dr Al
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · New Version 2 Sony Teleconverters?

On paper the 100-400 should be better than the 70-200 GM ii with a tc. Less glass is usually better. In the real world the 22 elements in the 100-400 isn't that much less than the 17 elements in the 70-200 GM ii combined with the 8 elements in the tc. I'm guessing that slight variations between copies and different skill levels is why some people say one or the other is better. I don't think we'll see a second gen version of the tc unless Sony can find a way to remove a couple of the lenses from it (like they did when they did with the 70-200 GM ii). In fact I think Sony would focus on creating a second version of the 100-400 GM. I would think it should be possible to reduce the number of elements in it to match the 70-200 GM ii.

Apr 09, 2022 at 11:16 AM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end