It looks pretty good, but if I'm honest, it doesn't quite look like it is up to the ultimate sharpness of Mark's usual work, and while it starts out looking like a review, Mark is very obviously not doing a real review, just posting video and pictures with the combo. He does call the image quality "astounding" during the Egret trying to spear a fish shot.
But it's like he is going out of his way NOT to comment on how the combo compares to his 600mm F4. I know Mark has a strong relationship with Sony as an ambassador or whatever they are called, but I think you can probably take away almost as much as from what is not said as what is said.
My opinion, looking at a video of stills is no way to judge a lens ultimate quality, but Mark was able to track diving osprey and fast action with the combo, and the results at least appeared sharp in that format. I think the jury is still out until someone addresses the 900lb gorilla of a direct comparison to the 600 f4.
arbitrage wrote:
Which ever lens or lens/TC combo is sharpest at 100% is mostly meaningless if you shoot anything that moves faster than a bear lumbering down a mountainside.
Where Sony cameras/TC combos totally fall apart is when shooting moving subjects. The hit rate compared to the bare lens goes down remarkably. Small amounts of back focus (focused on the body or tail) ruin so many of the shots when the DOF is narrow that it is a recipe for end of day frustration looking at the images. In good light with the 1.4 you usually get enough in critical head/eye focus that you can still be happy at the end of the day. The 2xTC is just always disappointing at the end of the day. In less than ideal light even the 1.4TC often dissapoints.
Maybe the 300GM bucks that trend...I have my strong doubts that it will. I'm hoping the weather holds out from full on rain for this Saturday so I might get to try the 300GM. If not this Saturday then it will be at least a month before I can test it....Show more →
I will be looking forward to your trials and conclusions. This is what's important to me. If the AF consistency and accuracy of the 300mm with the 2x TC is worse than the 200-600 on the A1, I certainly wouldn't be interested. I've got my fingers crossed that it is though!
I, too, have lived by the adage that one should never purchase a lens that they will mostly use with TCs.
As someone who has had the lens for a week, I have enjoyed reading the musings of those that do not have the lens in hand. I think there will be great joy when a reviewer you trust posts true findings of use with the lens and tcs for BIF and other fast action. I have the 600GM as well as the 2-6 and now the 300GM. I believe the new 300GM plus tcs will replace the 2-6 for most of the shooting I used the 2-6 for. It will also replace my 600GM when 600mm is enough, light is sufficient and portability is a concern. This lens plus TC's will be my new kayak kit. The days of juggling the 600GM in the kayak are over. How does it track BIF - in this nobody's opinion - great. I will not think twice about taking this lens instead of the 600GM if the conditions are right, and once again, 600mm is enough. Additionally, the cropping ability of this lens' IQ is amazing. For those that want the lens to fail, you will be disappointed. For those that hope the lens really does perform critically well with TCs - get ready to be pleasantly surprised!
ps09 wrote:
I, too, have lived by the adage that one should never purchase a lens that they will mostly use with TCs.
As someone who has had the lens for a week, I have enjoyed reading the musings of those that do not have the lens in hand. I think there will be great joy when a reviewer you trust posts true findings of use with the lens and tcs for BIF and other fast action. I have the 600GM as well as the 2-6 and now the 300GM. I believe the new 300GM plus tcs will replace the 2-6 for most of the shooting I used the 2-6 for. It will also replace my 600GM when 600mm is enough, light is sufficient and portability is a concern. This lens plus TC's will be my new kayak kit. The days of juggling the 600GM in the kayak are over. How does it track BIF - in this nobody's opinion - great. I will not think twice about taking this lens instead of the 600GM if the conditions are right, and once again, 600mm is enough. Additionally, the cropping ability of this lens' IQ is amazing. For those that want the lens to fail, you will be disappointed. For those that hope the lens really does perform critically well with TCs - get ready to be pleasantly surprised! ...Show more →
I've been thinking about picking it up to use primarily at 300mm, so I am optimistic. I will wait a few months because I should be responsible with my finances.
arbitrage wrote:
Which ever lens or lens/TC combo is sharpest at 100% is mostly meaningless if you shoot anything that moves faster than a bear lumbering down a mountainside.
Where Sony cameras/TC combos totally fall apart is when shooting moving subjects. The hit rate compared to the bare lens goes down remarkably. Small amounts of back focus (focused on the body or tail) ruin so many of the shots when the DOF is narrow that it is a recipe for end of day frustration looking at the images. In good light with the 1.4 you usually get enough in critical head/eye focus that you can still be happy at the end of the day. The 2xTC is just always disappointing at the end of the day. In less than ideal light even the 1.4TC often dissapoints.
Maybe the 300GM bucks that trend...I have my strong doubts that it will. I'm hoping the weather holds out from full on rain for this Saturday so I might get to try the 300GM. If not this Saturday then it will be at least a month before I can test it....Show more →
If I remember correctly, I used to shoot Canon and read that their cameras would slow AF down when a teleconvertor was detected. People were taping pins, etc. trying to defeat this slowdown. I wonder if Sony does the same. My experience tells me that it is definitely slower and a bit less accurate. The slowness may contribute or cause the inaccuracy.
I'll put on a 2.0x or a 1.4x on my 400 when I want to get some sportrait type images at a game, but no way I'm trying to get fast moving action images with a TC on the 400.
arbitrage wrote:
Which ever lens or lens/TC combo is sharpest at 100% is mostly meaningless if you shoot anything that moves faster than a bear lumbering down a mountainside.
Where Sony cameras/TC combos totally fall apart is when shooting moving subjects. The hit rate compared to the bare lens goes down remarkably. Small amounts of back focus (focused on the body or tail) ruin so many of the shots when the DOF is narrow that it is a recipe for end of day frustration looking at the images. In good light with the 1.4 you usually get enough in critical head/eye focus that you can still be happy at the end of the day. The 2xTC is just always disappointing at the end of the day. In less than ideal light even the 1.4TC often dissapoints.
Maybe the 300GM bucks that trend...I have my strong doubts that it will. I'm hoping the weather holds out from full on rain for this Saturday so I might get to try the 300GM. If not this Saturday then it will be at least a month before I can test it....Show more →
I've never experienced those sorts of issues with my 600 f4 combined with the 1.4. The zooms, sure, but not the prime.
timgangloff wrote:
If I remember correctly, I used to shoot Canon and read that their cameras would slow AF down when a teleconvertor was detected. People were taping pins, etc. trying to defeat this slowdown.
I don't believe that was the case. If I remember right, the problem was that non-pro Canon bodies wouldn't AF with a maximum aperture less than 5.6 or 6.3 or something like that, and taping the pins was to fool the body into not realizing the TC was there to preserve AF.
I’ve shot the lens for about 20 hours this past week. Pretty much all BIF. I don’t consider it playing with the lens in the field. Am I going to sell the 600GM? No. But I am pleasantly surprised at its af performance and IQ with both tcs and, once again, it will get the nod when conditions are right and 600 is sufficient. It’s so well balanced that I will gladly trade any loss in IQ I would have gotten with the 600gm to have the ease of shooting from the kayak or while hiking. I think of the many shots I missed while trying to control a 6# 20” lens from the kayak. Maybe the iq will take a slight hit with the 300, but I will be in much better control hand held.
I’m out as far as this thread goes. Haters are always gonna hate and it’s frustrating to hear people mouth off that haven’t even used it. Try the not take yourselves so seriously and enjoy this great hobby. We are all shooting with the best gear we’ve ever had!
RikWriter wrote:
I don't believe that was the case. If I remember right, the problem was that non-pro Canon bodies wouldn't AF with a maximum aperture less than 5.6 or 6.3 or something like that, and taping the pins was to fool the body into not realizing the TC was there to preserve AF.
"The teleconverters (TC) will multiply the focal length of any EF lens used with them by either 1.4x or 2x.
So, a 300mm lens beomes a 420mm with a 1.4x TC and a 600mm lens with a 2x TC.
Sounds great, but it comes at the cost of reduced maximum aperture and slowing of AF performance (typ. 50% for 1.4x and 75% for 2x). The latest versions of the extenders are designed to reduce this, but there will always be some performance cost with an extender."
timgangloff wrote:
"The teleconverters (TC) will multiply the focal length of any EF lens used with them by either 1.4x or 2x.
So, a 300mm lens beomes a 420mm with a 1.4x TC and a 600mm lens with a 2x TC.
Sounds great, but it comes at the cost of reduced maximum aperture and slowing of AF performance (typ. 50% for 1.4x and 75% for 2x). The latest versions of the extenders are designed to reduce this, but there will always be some performance cost with an extender."
ps09 wrote:
I’ve shot the lens for about 20 hours this past week. Pretty much all BIF. I don’t consider it playing with the lens in the field. Am I going to sell the 600GM? No. But I am pleasantly surprised at its af performance and IQ with both tcs and, once again, it will get the nod when conditions are right and 600 is sufficient. It’s so well balanced that I will gladly trade any loss in IQ I would have gotten with the 600gm to have the ease of shooting from the kayak or while hiking. I think of the many shots I missed while trying to control a 6# 20” lens from the kayak. Maybe the iq will take a slight hit with the 300, but I will be in much better control hand held.
I’m out as far as this thread goes. Haters are always gonna hate and it’s frustrating to hear people mouth off that haven’t even used it. Try the not take yourselves so seriously and enjoy this great hobby. We are all shooting with the best gear we’ve ever had!...Show more →
Don't disagree with any of that. Photography is and always has been completely about tradeoffs. For your use case, and probably many others, the portability and handhold ability will outweigh whatever small degradation their is in image quality.
RikWriter wrote:
No, I understand there'll be a slowdown, I'm talking about the taping the pins thing.
The taping the pins thing was definitely a thing. Folks tried to convince the camera that no teleconverter was attached. I think mostly people used it to allow using lenses that did not natively allow it. But I think others experimented with it even on the big teles.
timgangloff wrote:
Don't disagree with any of that. Photography is and always has been completely about tradeoffs. For your use case, and probably many others, the portability and handhold ability will outweigh whatever small degradation their is in image quality.
The question for me is whether the price is worth it over something like the new Sigma 500 f5.6.
Had the new GM300 this week in my lens... perfect for handheld... AF worked fine with the 2x teleconverter too... as I already own the GM70200ii...
I want to add 400mm+ for safari, wildlife ... so will go for now with the G200600 and wait for a Sony handheld pendant of Nikon's light 400mm Z lens. The brand new Sigma 500mm looks nice too... anyway I prefer native AF and for consistency Sony lens color rendering.
We just don't appreciate bogus unevidenced claims ("the 300/2.8 + 2X converter is just as sharp as the 600/4").
Literally everyone here agrees the lens is awesome as a 300/2.8 handheld lens and I personally have no reason it's lacking as a 420/4 either with the 1.4X which I like pretty well on my 400/2.8 and 600/4.
When I kayak I use something with a zoom to assist with acquisition (my 200-600 and 100-400 fit that bill).
