white wrote:
I have the 300, 400, 600GM. Bird shooting is just a smaller subset that I use these for.
I fully agree that the 2x is very usable with the 300GM and makes it a great birding walk around lens due to the weight savings. Previously I would go more to my OM1 and 300f4 Pro for a lighter set up. (The 300f4 pro is actually slightly heavier than the 300GM which definitely caught my attention to buy the 300).
But I do not get the negativity of the 2x with the 600GM. IF the thermal conditions are good, the image quality is phenomenal and exceeds my original expectations based on the Canon 600's I have had. I have shot 1200mm landscapes that look like you used a macro lens. BUT, the thermal degradation is the limiting factor and it is not often it works out for landscapes. But close in birds are SHARP and aberrations are hard to find in the corners or anywhere. I guess at effective f8 the tracking at 1200mm will take a hit and if birds in flight is your main gig then maybe you would be less happy. I have not explored this as much with birds, but it does extremely well with things like surfing.
The 400GM is definitely the weakest with the 2x as it was in the Canon world. Still very usable though.
Some I think confuse image quality with thermal conditions which can even show up in bird shooting as the distances increase. ...Show more →
I shoot about 75% of all my bird photos with the 600 and 2x combination. There's definitely a very slight softening with the two, and the AF is more sluggish, even on static subjects--although I am not sure I'd call most small birds "static" as they jump and move a lot. The A9III's AF solves most of these problems with that combo so I'm really hoping that the A1II shows a similar improvement.
That said, you are 100% right--it's VERY unforgiving to any thermal issues. Much more so than the 600/1.4x combo. That extra big of magnification will show every atmospheric distortion out there. I generally won't even shoot it if the sun is out, not past 2 hours after sunrise or the last two hours before sunset.
Diffrent lens, but I definitely noticed more thermal issues at 1,200mm (Sony 200-600 + TC 2x) vs 840mm (Sony 200-600 + TC 1.4x). Up until that point I really only considered did I have enough light to add a TC, and I quickly realized I was going to have to keep a much closer eye on thermal conditions and distance.
I feel like part of it is with 1,200mm of reach you start trying for distant pictures you wouldn't have tried for in the past. Using 1,200mm to fill the frame is much diffrent than using 1,200mm and still making a big crop.
white wrote:
I have the 300, 400, 600GM. Bird shooting is just a smaller subset that I use these for.
I fully agree that the 2x is very usable with the 300GM and makes it a great birding walk around lens due to the weight savings. Previously I would go more to my OM1 and 300f4 Pro for a lighter set up. (The 300f4 pro is actually slightly heavier than the 300GM which definitely caught my attention to buy the 300).
But I do not get the negativity of the 2x with the 600GM. IF the thermal conditions are good, the image quality is phenomenal and exceeds my original expectations based on the Canon 600's I have had. I have shot 1200mm landscapes that look like you used a macro lens. BUT, the thermal degradation is the limiting factor and it is not often it works out for landscapes. But close in birds are SHARP and aberrations are hard to find in the corners or anywhere. I guess at effective f8 the tracking at 1200mm will take a hit and if birds in flight is your main gig then maybe you would be less happy. I have not explored this as much with birds, but it does extremely well with things like surfing.
The 400GM is definitely the weakest with the 2x as it was in the Canon world. Still very usable though.
Some I think confuse image quality with thermal conditions which can even show up in bird shooting as the distances increase. ...Show more →
It is not about the IQ. It is about the AF accuracy. I mostly shoot BIF and even if I'm not shooting BIF at a given moment I will be shooting it again within the next 10mins. So I don't like being tied to the 2xTC at 1200mm when so few subject require that focal length. As you say when the conditions are right the IQ is fine.
arbitrage wrote:
It is not about the IQ. It is about the AF accuracy. I mostly shoot BIF and even if I'm not shooting BIF at a given moment I will be shooting it again within the next 10mins. So I don't like being tied to the 2xTC at 1200mm when so few subject require that focal length. As you say when the conditions are right the IQ is fine.
Not to mention at 1200mm good luck getting them in the viewfinder. BIF are not like shooting pics of elephants
Borrowed my friend's lens once again....got to get a copy for myself soon...was trying to wait for my 400GM to sell but I might just buy the 300GM anyways...
Spectacular shooting Geoff...interesting to see the bands. A lot of money is being spent to kill the Columbia River nesting sites (they eat endangered salmon). Out here in the desert of Oregon, they have tried to move nesting to our inland Refuges. I wonder if anyone can read the bands?
arbitrage wrote:
Borrowed my friend's lens once again....got to get a copy for myself soon...was trying to wait for my 400GM to sell but I might just buy the 300GM anyways...
arbitrage wrote:
This lens may end up dethroning my previous two favourite lenses Canon 400DOII and Nikon 500PF.....love it....
Better than the 400 DO II? That's pretty amazing. I believe I've seen some of your posts before where you've extolled the virtues of that lens.
I own the 400 DO II. I really like it, but have been looking for a Sony long prime lens that doesn't break the bank like the Sony 400 and 600 do (at least for me). I shoot two systems (R3 with the 400 and the Sony A9 with Sony lenses). I went with Canon (at the time) on top of Sony b/c I could purchase a used long Canon white lens for much cheaper.
Do you find the AF acquisition with the Sony + TC, as well as IQ, up to the standards of the 400? I'm assuming a tough comparison but thought I'd ask.
. So I don't like being tied to the 2xTC at 1200mm when so few subject require that focal length. As you say when the conditions are right the IQ is fine.
