Looking forward to your images!
Very interested to hear how the ability to resolve holds up with the A1+300GM+2xTC combo, it appears the 300GM performs very well with the 2xTC
Interesting that Sony dropped the a mount 300 from $7200 to $6000 for the E. The original was a rebadged Minolta optics and was hand built by a craftsman.
This lens has me intrigued to say the least. Very nice capture BTW. I live in the 400mm to 600mm range and the thought of having a lens as light and compact as the 300 f/2.8 is very appealing, especially if it handles teleconverters well. I have no doubt the lens will be amazing with the 1.4x on it... the 2x is the big question... at least for me. The image above shows a lot of detail for having the 2x on it.
Did you notice any major impact to focusing speeds or in the full size file... a big hit to the fine details?
I'm not expecting it to look almost macro sharp like a 600 f/4 @ f/.5.6 but it would be pretty amazing if it were close.
Nice to see one of the first actual real-life images from this combo here, on FM forums .
I have a small question too:
the blurred bird near the top-right corner in the first picture looks a bit off to me. Is it straight out of cam or could it be some post-processing effect?
j4nu wrote:
Nice to see one of the first actual real-life images from this combo here, on FM forums .
I have a small question too:
the blurred bird near the top-right corner in the first picture looks a bit off to me. Is it straight out of cam or could it be some post-processing effect?
Would love to see if the 300 GM+2X TC is sharper than the 200-600 at 600mm. May get one to shoot hummingbirds in my yards if it's sharper. I have no use for 300mm, so it may be silly to buy a 300mm lens to use it with a 2X TC all the time.
Douglas L wrote:
Would love to see if the 300 GM+2X TC is sharper than the 200-600 at 600mm. May get one to shoot hummingbirds in my yards if it's sharper. I have no use for 300mm, so it may be silly to buy a 300mm lens to use it with a 2X TC all the time.
it is way sharper. i was not able to get any detail shot with my 200-600G.
Alex Phan wrote:
it is way sharper. i was not able to get any detail shot with my 200-600G.
Waddaya mean, can't get any detail shot? I mean, its a zoom, not a prime, I get it, but no detail? You will have seen the gazillion of sharp shots in the 200-600G image thread. You'll get more details from a shot with the 200-600G on a high rez body, than from the 300GM+TC2x on the A9III.
Alex, thank you for posting the examples above. Is the roadrunner a 100% crop or is this a full image as you were close enough to fill the frame. The details are great!
I own the 200-600 as well... I've been very pleased with the lens. I've also rented the 600 f/4 a couple of times and it's almost macro sharp. Have you shot the 600 f/4? If so, would you say the 300 f/2.8 is on par with it? I was very happy with the 1.4x on the 600... almost no loss in details. I do not own the 2x so I don't have anything to compare it to.
Speaking for myself... if the 300 with the 2x on it is sharper than the 200-600 and I gain f/5.6 over f/6.3...and a 420mm f/4 with the 1.4x on it... and lol of course a 300 at f/2.8...it might be worth the purchase. I like the size and weight of the lens as well.
Thanks again for taking the time to post the images and to share your thoughts.
Hatch
.