Douglas L wrote:
I am not sure what to make of the "reports" from testers that the 400-800 "is not very sharp". Compared to what? I don't recall Sony has made an unsharp lens in the last several years. f8 can be a problem for BIF but if the long end is sharp, I will get one for airshows.
When the 200-600G was new, comments about it's sharpness ranged from soft to undistinguishable from the 600GM. Both extremes were nonsense and (at least mostly) came from inexperienced shooters, shooters with low resolution bodies or video guys. So unless a comment like the one forwarded by SAR has it's source named or at least a qualification as to how exactly sharpness was evaluated, I'd suggest ignoring it. My expectation for this lens is that it is overall somewhat sharper than the 200-600G, simply because all recent Sony zooms have been noticeably sharper than their older designs.
Daran wrote:
When the 200-600G was new, comments about it's sharpness ranged from soft to undistinguishable from the 600GM. Both extremes were nonsense and (at least mostly) came from inexperienced shooters, shooters with low resolution bodies or video guys. So unless a comment like the one forwarded by SAR has it's source named or at least a qualification as to how exactly sharpness was evaluated, I'd suggest ignoring it. My expectation for this lens is that it is overall somewhat sharper than the 200-600G, simply because all recent Sony zooms have been noticeably sharper than their older designs.
My copy of the 200-600 is pretty sharp, I have absolutely no complaint, especially for the price. I wish the weight were less though. I agree, as I said in my last post, Sony hasn't made an unsharp lens in the last couple years, as far as I know. I remain hopeful the the 400-800 is sharp at 800. But f8 is not for everyone, compromise has to be made somewhere.
Douglas L wrote:
My copy of the 200-600 is pretty sharp, I have absolutely no complaint, especially for the price.
I agree, given the price it is a steal. Assuming a reasonable copy that is. E.g. the difference in center-sharpness to the 600GM is practically invisible unless you crop a lot. Add sharpening in post (the zoom needs more) and many will call the difference in the center irrelevant.
Choderboy wrote:
I think all Sony had to do was make sure the 400-800, at 800 beats the 200-600 with 1.4TC.
This gives them a cheap 800, just like Canon.
It's 800 f8 compared to the 840 f9 of the 200-600/1.4TC.
Close enough in length, the slight speed advantage probably wins more buyers.
If it was much better at 800 compared to the 200-600/1.4TC they could have lured more
200-600 owners. They'll get many anyway.
Maybe better business case to save development and manufacturing costs to just beat the 200-600/1.4TC.
That is true, if it is better than the 200-600 with 1.4TC and people are after an 800mm lens then they will gain that 1/3 stop and some sharpness.
But if the rumours are true, this isn't a "cheap" lens like Canon. Canon is $1899, this is rumoured to be $2700-2800. Granted Canon is extending zoom and f/9. Also Canon comes in at 2kg and this thing is supposed to be 2.5kg.
It should outperform the 200-600 at 800 so that will be the one big plus. Also if it takes the 1.4TC okay then you can extend it when needed and should beat putting a 2xTC on the 200-600 if one wants to reach out to 1120mm.
They will surely get some sales. I see a lot of Canon 200-800 lenses out in the wild these days.
Daran wrote:
I agree, given the price it is a steal. Assuming a reasonable copy that is. E.g. the difference in center-sharpness to the 600GM is practically invisible unless you crop a lot. Add sharpening in post (the zoom needs more) and many will call the difference in the center irrelevant.
I agree with what you guys are saying. Sony has been making really sharp lenses lately and it would be odd for that to not continue, especially with a lens where sharpness at the long end will make or break sales for that lens. Many wanna be influencers are not lens testers, so who knows how accurate the "not so sharp" info really is. As for weight, that is a personal thing but I do not find the 200-600 heavy at all, so if the new 400-800 is a little heavier than the 200-600, not an issue for me. If its lighter than the 600GM (plus 1.4xTC), and almost as sharp, then we have another good option to get out to 800mm IMO.
octo wrote:
Owners of A9 and A1 camera series are less likely to be interested in 3rd party lenses specifically because of the 15fps limitation. I'm not buying 3rd party because of that. I really hope the A7V gets a boost in fps, to something above 15 (for ex 20) because then it's going to push Sigma to renegociate with Sony. I think Sony is not getting any royalties with their free licensing terms. For now, most of the users are not interested in >15 fps because most of the Sony cameras sold don't even reach that speed.
It wouldn't hurt if Sony bumped the FPS in the A7V from 10 to 15. Not everyone needs high burst rates enough to justify an A9 or A1 variant but from time to time could benefit from higher bursts than the 10 we've been saddled with for over a decade. Fuji has their speed camera with the X-H2s but even the X-T5 and X-H2 will do 15 FPS mechanical. I know it's a smaller sensor but it would just be nice to see Sony open the A7V up. Even 12 FPS would be a nice improvement.
arbitrage wrote:
That is true, if it is better than the 200-600 with 1.4TC and people are after an 800mm lens then they will gain that 1/3 stop and some sharpness.
But if the rumours are true, this isn't a "cheap" lens like Canon. Canon is $1899, this is rumoured to be $2700-2800. Granted Canon is extending zoom and f/9. Also Canon comes in at 2kg and this thing is supposed to be 2.5kg.
It should outperform the 200-600 at 800 so that will be the one big plus. Also if it takes the 1.4TC okay then you can extend it when needed and should beat putting a 2xTC on the 200-600 if one wants to reach out to 1120mm.
They will surely get some sales. I see a lot of Canon 200-800 lenses out in the wild these days....Show more →
It is an interesting lens in the sense that I don’t think Sony have been particularly interested in covering the more extreme focal length needed for bird photography. Sure, sports and wildlife with the likes of the 600 GM and 200-600 but nothing to really cater 100% to bird photography like especially Nikon does. Maybe they got enough requests to break down and finally manufacture this 400-800, but to be honest I thought they were semi happy to cede the market to Canon and Nikon outside those that can afford a 600 GM + teleconverter.
It is certainly a lens that I did not see coming, but I think the fact that the 200-600G did so well, especially on the A9 when Nikon and Canon were still hard at work getting their first decent mirrorless camera out, has inspired Sony to try and repeat that success.
The Sigma 800/6.3 appears to really be coming according to SAR. When give the choice, I will certainly consider the Sigma first, 800mm is a specialist focal length and I just don't see a f8 consumer zoom producing very attractive images at that extreme magnification. The Nikon Z800PF is a really nice lens judging by the images, helped to a great extent by being a prime higher end prime lens and being f6.3.
Douglas L wrote:
If the 400-800 is light and sharp, it can be a very good lens for airshows, f8 during typical airshow hours is manageable. I will sell my 200-600 which is now only used for airshow.
I hope Sony will make a light 800 F6.3 like the Nikon. My 600GM+1.4TC feels heavy after holding it for a few minutes. I rarely rarely use tripod...
Douglas L wrote:
The 3.5M MFD at 800mm (presumably) is kind of disappointing...
Actually 3.5m is pretty class leading for an 800mm lens. But you will always be better with a 600/1.4TC for MM.
Nikon 800PF: 5m
Nikon 800E: 5.9m
Canon EF800L: 6m
Canon RF800 DO: 6m
Canon 200-800: 3.3m @800mm but does do 0.8m at 200mm where it achieves its 0.25x MM.
Canon RF800: 2.6m (impressive but we all know this is just a 400/2.8 with a 2xTC and that is why it achieves that number)
11 aperture blades
19 lens groups with 27 lens elements
OSS
internal zoom
105mm filter thread
full time DMF switch
minimum focusing distance varies between 1.7m-3.5m
far-mode starting at 8m (instead of the usual 10m)
supports teleconverters
2.475kg
119.8mm wide x 34.6cm long
Shipment start: March
Price: 2999€ (USD price possibly around $2,500)
It may achieve the MM at the short end at 1.7m just like the Canon 200-800 does.
The full time DMF switch is a big plus over the 200-600 for anyone not using one of the latest bodies with that feature via menu.
But I think the biggest downside is the weight.
Also as I've said before the big question is when the aperture numbers change.
Just finished Steve's video (running at 1.5x ).
He is very impressed with the lens.
Sharpness is noticeably better at 800mm compared to 200-600 at 840.
AF speed tests are noticeably better than the 200-600 and the big surprise is this lens at 800mm focuses faster than the 600GM/1.4TC. Impressive. But I'm not surprised as the Sony TCs on 600GM and 400GM aren't great when it comes to AF speeds.
