I come close to mailing my camera store now and then, and perhaps I should, to put one aside but there is just one persisting little issue with this lens and the 2xTC that keeps me from doing so, and that is the distict yellowish/warm look that this combo has. If you like it, then this lens is such a home run, but I would use it at 600mm 80% of the time, and I know I would grow tired of the color cast. I saw in it in the first samples posted and continue to see it. If only I would like it...
Otherwise, this lens is supreme, and the images at 300mm as well as 420mm are stunning.
I hope in 2025 Sony pulls a 400TC out of the hat..
ChrisMak wrote:
Some really nice shots in this thread.
I come close to mailing my camera store now and then, and perhaps I should, to put one aside but there is just one persisting little issue with this lens and the 2xTC that keeps me from doing so, and that is the distict yellowish/warm look that this combo has. If you like it, then this lens is such a home run, but I would use it at 600mm 80% of the time, and I know I would grow tired of the color cast. I saw in it in the first samples posted and continue to see it. If only I would like it...
Otherwise, this lens is supreme, and the images at 300mm as well as 420mm are stunning.
I hope in 2025 Sony pulls a 400TC out of the hat.....Show more →
I have no idea what you are on about. Never noticed a yellow cast specific to the 2xTC. If you see one then you could easily create an auto applied preset in whatever processing software you use to remove it on import.
If I have time I'll post two identical shots, with and without TC and see if we can see a cast when there is a controlled test. I think trying to generalize something like that based on a bunch of random processing done by people on the internet is a fools game.
I can't speak for others but I shoot a fixed WB that is on the warm side as I prefer a warm look. I was using 6400K but now use 5800K. In overcast, cooler lighting I often warm it up significantly more. I also use Adobe Color in LR so that punches things up on top of the warm starting point. But none of that is specific to the 2xTC.
Can we see a difference between bare lens and 2xTC?
Unfortunately, even this is not controlled but these were shot within a minute of each other.
I will try to do a controlled shot of a CCPassport for you when I can.
arbitrage wrote:
I have no idea what you are on about. Never noticed a yellow cast specific to the 2xTC. If you see one then you could easily create an auto applied preset in whatever processing software you use to remove it on import.
If I have time I'll post two identical shots, with and without TC and see if we can see a cast when there is a controlled test. I think trying to generalize something like that based on a bunch of random processing done by people on the internet is a fools game.
I can't speak for others but I shoot a fixed WB that is on the warm side as I prefer a warm look. I was using 6400K but now use 5800K. In overcast, cooler lighting I often warm it up significantly more. I also use Adobe Color in LR so that punches things up on top of the warm starting point. But none of that is specific to the 2xTC.
In the early days of the 300GM launch, there were several tests comparing shots from the 300GM+2xTC to shots from the 200-600G as well as the 600GM, and although these were of course meant to evaluate resolving power, they were also posted in RAW format, and I had several discussions with posters on the slight but noticeable color cast from the 300GM+2xTC combo, and one or two of them agreed, and we debated whether the 2xTC influences AWB or whether the glass in the 2xTC was the root cause.
Perhaps a white balance tweak would indeed take care of this issue, making it a non-issue. However, I owned the 35/1.4 GM for some time and sold it because I did not really like the colors it produced, and in that case I was not able to correct it with white balance in a satisfying way.
Color is highly subjective, and so are things like bokeh or OOF rendering. In the days of the Nikon 500PF, there were people who would not buy it because of the "supposed" unattractive bokeh, but most called that BS and bought it and were very happy, including myself.
If a 400TC does not materialize, I'll take the jump eventually, but I am weary of a 2xTC to begin with, so still hoping for a 400mm option that will make do with the 1.4TC. As you will know, I routinely praise the 300GM+1.4TC combo, and if that were enough focal length, I would have one now.
ChrisMak wrote:
In the early days of the 300GM launch, there were several tests comparing shots from the 300GM+2xTC to shots from the 200-600G as well as the 600GM, and although these were of course meant to evaluate resolving power, they were also posted in RAW format, and I had several discussions with posters on the slight but noticeable color cast from the 300GM+2xTC combo, and one or two of them agreed, and we debated whether the 2xTC influences AWB or whether the glass in the 2xTC was the root cause.
Perhaps a white balance tweak would indeed take care of this issue, making it a non-issue. However, I owned the 35/1.4 GM for some time and sold it because I did not really like the colors it produced, and in that case I was not able to correct it with white balance in a satisfying way.
Color is highly subjective, and so are things like bokeh or OOF rendering. In the days of the Nikon 500PF, there were people who would not buy it because of the "supposed" unattractive bokeh, but most called that BS and bought it and were very happy, including myself.
If a 400TC does not materialize, I'll take the jump eventually, but I am weary of a 2xTC to begin with, so still hoping for a 400mm option that will make do with the 1.4TC. As you will know, I routinely praise the 300GM+1.4TC combo, and if that were enough focal length, I would have one now....Show more →
Just buy the lens, you will be happy.
It has taken #1 spot on my all time greats list. Which arguably does have a bias towards lighter/compact lenses. But previous top lenses were 400DOII and 500PF.
Of course 600II and 600GM were/are top notch but their weight/size has never allowed them top spot on my list. Also their performance with TCs have held them back.
arbitrage wrote:
Just buy the lens, you will be happy.
It has taken #1 spot on my all time greats list. Which arguably does have a bias towards lighter/compact lenses. But previous top lenses were 400DOII and 500PF.
Of course 600II and 600GM were/are top notch but their weight/size has never allowed them top spot on my list. Also their performance with TCs have held them back.
Just give me until spring to wait for a small ish, light ish 400GM (in vain I know), and after that I will cave in and get the 300GM.
I shortly had the 200-600G for a trip to Costa Rica, and was fairly happy with it, but sold it again because the AF was clearly below that of the 600 GM.
If true, this would really be a great option, aside from the 300GM with two separate TC's, for future travel.
If this comes to fruition I would strongly consider selling the 600GM and buy this. Would probably still keep the 300 as it is rumored to be only 100g lighter than 400GM and will essentially be the same size.
If true, this would really be a great option, aside from the 300GM with two separate TC's, for future travel.
A lens of this type will be my first supertele, if it performs similar to current standards for 600mm+1.4x at 800mm. So it will be a big deal for me.
While I want to be optimistic, I do think it is a bit unlikely that Sony is ready to sell superteles with integrated TC given the recent release of 300GM, which came after the Nikon superteles.
umut_h_toprak wrote:
A lens of this type will be my first supertele, if it performs similar to current standards for 600mm+1.4x at 800mm. So it will be a big deal for me.
While I want to be optimistic, I do think it is a bit unlikely that Sony is ready to sell superteles with integrated TC given the recent release of 300GM, which came after the Nikon superteles.
An integrated TC implies that it can be switched off. Which is surprisingly tricky to design as there still is the extra distance between the lens and the camera where the TC was removed from the optical path. AFAIK this is the harder to solve, the shorter the lens. Again AFAIK so far no one sells a 300mm lens with build in TC.
ChrisMak wrote:
However, I owned the 35/1.4 GM for some time and sold it because I did not really like the colors it produced, and in that case I was not able to correct it with white balance in a satisfying way.
Sounds to me like you need to have a word with your RAW development software about the color profiles it uses.
Daran wrote:
An integrated TC implies that it can be switched off. Which is surprisingly tricky to design as there still is the extra distance between the lens and the camera where the TC was removed from the optical path. AFAIK this is the harder to solve, the shorter the lens. Again AFAIK so far no one sells a 300mm lens with build in TC.
Very interesting, I had not considered this. Why would the 200-400 and 180-400 SLR lenses with integrated TC be more feasible, because of the larger aperture?
Blue-tailed Bee-eater - just snatched the bee out the air as the bee flew past. By the time I realised what was going on I was a fraction too late to catch a frame with the bee flying. One time I wasn’t half pressing for pre-capture ! A9iii + 300 @600mm
The bees wing is still buzzing in the first couple of frames - shutter speed was only 1/1250s
