New 100-400 lenses
p.14 #1New 100-400 lenses
duncangr wrote:
I can easily get sharp shots handheld at 1/40s at 840mm with the 200-600 and have never set the manual steady shot settings.
Trick with slow shutter speeds is to use a burst because any subject movement will cause motion blur. Usually a few shots in the burst will catch a moment when the subject is not moving.
Small little hoppity birds in dark undergrowth are particularly problematic but even they are momentarily stationary occasionally.
Even with that technique, you should try the manual steady shot and maybe you get more keeper from the burst.
MfG L.E.
I can easily get sharp shots handheld at 1/40s at 840mm with the 200-600 and have never set the manual steady shot settings.
Trick with slow shutter speeds is to use a burst because any subject movement will cause motion blur. Usually a few shots in the burst will catch a moment when the subject is not moving.
Small little hoppity birds in dark undergrowth are particularly problematic but even they are momentarily stationary occasionally.
Even with that technique, you should try the manual steady shot and maybe you get more keeper from the burst.
MfG L.E.
May 20, 2026 at 12:42 AM
p.14 #2New 100-400 lenses
Found this review of both the A7RVI and the new 100-400. He had the combo for 35 days. They seem to work great for safari. This guy got some amazing footages. It's in Chinese.
May 20, 2026 at 06:09 PM
p.14 #3New 100-400 lenses
aCuria wrote:
scott f wrote
Pixel Perfect wrote
billsnature wrote
I am a hard pass on the 100-400 f4.5I would have rather had a 100-300 f4 GM that had really great IQ and was reasonable in size and weight. If Sigma is listening, they made a good one back in the day.
I would still love to see a 500mm f4 but I am pretty sure that will never happen.
For me the 70-200 f/2.8 GM II is so good with the 1.4x that the resulting 98-280 f/4 is all I need. I get f/2.8 when needed and 0.49x magnification with the 1.4x!
Don’t forget that is a very old lens now, I’m sure modern tech would get that weight down a long way.
May 21, 2026 at 07:21 PM
p.14 #4New 100-400 lenses
Back during SLR days AF was not reliable after 5.6. So this lens wasn't great with TC. Sigma had similar lens and that was my first long lens with auto focus. Good old days 
scott f wrote:
I would have rather had a 100-300 f4 GM that had really great IQ and was reasonable in size and weight. If Sigma is listening, they made a good one back in the day.
I would still love to see a 500mm f4 but I am pretty sure that will never happen.Given how good the Nikon 400 f/4.5 at crazy light weight, they should do a big brother 500 f/4.5 and I'll bet it's still under 1.7kg. That 1/3rd of a stop makes huge difference to price, size and weight but not so much to IQ.
For me the 70-200 f/2.8 GM II is so good with the 1.4x that the resulting 98-280 f/4 is all I need. I get f/2.8 when needed and 0.49x magnification with the 1.4x!Canon used to make a 500mm f4.5. That was a beauty of a lens, very compact and light compared to the 500mmf4. I'd love to see that made by Sony.The 500/4.5L (3kg) is double the weight of the 300GM..Don’t forget that is a very old lens now, I’m sure modern tech would get that weight down a long way.
scott f wrote:
aCuria wrote
scott f wrote
Pixel Perfect wrote
billsnature wrote
I am a hard pass on the 100-400 f4.5I would have rather had a 100-300 f4 GM that had really great IQ and was reasonable in size and weight. If Sigma is listening, they made a good one back in the day.
I would still love to see a 500mm f4 but I am pretty sure that will never happen.
For me the 70-200 f/2.8 GM II is so good with the 1.4x that the resulting 98-280 f/4 is all I need. I get f/2.8 when needed and 0.49x magnification with the 1.4x!
May 22, 2026 at 04:02 AM
p.14 #5New 100-400 lenses
Did anyone catch from the reviews if this foot uses the bolt pattern from the 400/600 or is it the one from the 400-800?
Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
May 22, 2026 at 05:58 AM
p.14 #6New 100-400 lenses
aCuria wrote:
Your are confused, we were discussing the combination of the 100-400/4.5GM + 300/2.8GM
Sony does not make a 400 f/4.5 prime.
Um I think you are the one that is confused if you can't keep up with the premise.
Your are confused, we were discussing the combination of the 100-400/4.5GM + 300/2.8GM
Sony does not make a 400 f/4.5 prime.
Um I think you are the one that is confused if you can't keep up with the premise.
May 22, 2026 at 06:44 AM
p.14 #7New 100-400 lenses
I remember seeing in one review that it's the 400/600 primes. Don't sue me if I misquoted it
arbitrage wrote:
Did anyone catch from the reviews if this foot uses the bolt pattern from the 400/600 or is it the one from the 400-800?
Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
arbitrage wrote:
Did anyone catch from the reviews if this foot uses the bolt pattern from the 400/600 or is it the one from the 400-800?
Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
May 22, 2026 at 07:04 AM
p.14 #8New 100-400 lenses
Jemini wrote:
I remember seeing in one review that it's the 400/600 primes. Don't sue me if I misquoted it
Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
Yeah, I remember someone saying it used the same bolt pattern as the 400/600mm primes. Although, I can’t remember who it was at the moment
I remember seeing in one review that it's the 400/600 primes. Don't sue me if I misquoted it
arbitrage wrote
Did anyone catch from the reviews if this foot uses the bolt pattern from the 400/600 or is it the one from the 400-800?Looking at the foot style it looks like it will be the 400/600 (which is also the same as Canon super-tele EF/RF).
I hope it is the 400/600/Canon pattern as I already have a bunch of feet lying around
Yeah, I remember someone saying it used the same bolt pattern as the 400/600mm primes. Although, I can’t remember who it was at the moment
May 22, 2026 at 09:07 AM
p.14 #9New 100-400 lenses
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hoS1l8DpDvwwAmA0ZEotxaG6AzXQGjNZ/view?usp=share_link
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
May 22, 2026 at 10:22 AM
p.14 #10New 100-400 lenses
GraysonLake1987 wrote:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hoS1l8DpDvwwAmA0ZEotxaG6AzXQGjNZ/view?usp=share_link
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
Wow! Is this how pros use camera?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hoS1l8DpDvwwAmA0ZEotxaG6AzXQGjNZ/view?usp=share_link
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
Wow! Is this how pros use camera?
May 22, 2026 at 02:26 PM
|
p.14 #11New 100-400 lenses
Oswald74 wrote:
Trick with slow shutter speeds is to use a burst because any subject movement will cause motion blur. Usually a few shots in the burst will catch a moment when the subject is not moving.
Small little hoppity birds in dark undergrowth are particularly problematic but even they are momentarily stationary occasionally.Even with that technique, you should try the manual steady shot and maybe you get more keeper from the burst.
MfG L.E.
Worth a try I suppose but usually it is the subject that is out of focus or the subjects head/eyes while the rest of the body or branch is in focus. This seems to indicate that its motion blur on moving parts rather than motion blur from the lens movement.
For stills shooting the stabilisation seems to be excellent - I shoot 99.9% handheld and don't have a problem getting sharp images. For handheld video at long focal lengths it's not great so a tripod is really needed but usually I am shooting action so stabilisation is not really helpful and a tripod is more a hindrance than a help.
duncangr wrote
I can easily get sharp shots handheld at 1/40s at 840mm with the 200-600 and have never set the manual steady shot settings.Trick with slow shutter speeds is to use a burst because any subject movement will cause motion blur. Usually a few shots in the burst will catch a moment when the subject is not moving.
Small little hoppity birds in dark undergrowth are particularly problematic but even they are momentarily stationary occasionally.
MfG L.E.
Worth a try I suppose but usually it is the subject that is out of focus or the subjects head/eyes while the rest of the body or branch is in focus. This seems to indicate that its motion blur on moving parts rather than motion blur from the lens movement.
For stills shooting the stabilisation seems to be excellent - I shoot 99.9% handheld and don't have a problem getting sharp images. For handheld video at long focal lengths it's not great so a tripod is really needed but usually I am shooting action so stabilisation is not really helpful and a tripod is more a hindrance than a help.
May 22, 2026 at 03:56 PM
p.14 #12New 100-400 lenses
I had high hopes for this lens but after watching Steve Perry’s review, I’m not impressed.
May 22, 2026 at 07:01 PM
p.14 #13New 100-400 lenses
scott f wrote:
I had high hopes for this lens but after watching Steve Perry’s review, I’m not impressed.
Steve himself said he's buying the lens and is review is at odds with several others I've seen. I think he has a sharp 200-600G and had a softer 100-400. Also his stopwatch based AF tests aren't really what I'd put much stock in as to real world performance.
I'd just sit tight and let's see how the lens pans out once it's in the hands of a lot more field testers.
I had high hopes for this lens but after watching Steve Perry’s review, I’m not impressed.
Steve himself said he's buying the lens and is review is at odds with several others I've seen. I think he has a sharp 200-600G and had a softer 100-400. Also his stopwatch based AF tests aren't really what I'd put much stock in as to real world performance.
I'd just sit tight and let's see how the lens pans out once it's in the hands of a lot more field testers.
May 22, 2026 at 07:20 PM
p.14 #14New 100-400 lenses
duncangr wrote:
Worth a try I suppose but usually it is the subject that is out of focus or the subjects head/eyes while the rest of the body or branch is in focus. This seems to indicate that its motion blur on moving parts rather than motion blur from the lens movement.
For me, that sound like a really bad calibrated lens.
With my copy of the 200-600 I can shoot a flying buzzard ~2km or a small bird ~3m away and everything is tak sharp.
Did exact that today in my garden, with the really slow A7RIV.
MfG L.E.
Worth a try I suppose but usually it is the subject that is out of focus or the subjects head/eyes while the rest of the body or branch is in focus. This seems to indicate that its motion blur on moving parts rather than motion blur from the lens movement.
For me, that sound like a really bad calibrated lens.
With my copy of the 200-600 I can shoot a flying buzzard ~2km or a small bird ~3m away and everything is tak sharp.
Did exact that today in my garden, with the really slow A7RIV.
MfG L.E.
May 23, 2026 at 08:37 AM
p.14 #15New 100-400 lenses
GraysonLake1987 wrote:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hoS1l8DpDvwwAmA0ZEotxaG6AzXQGjNZ/view?usp=share_link
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
Thanks for sharing.
I've exported the ones shot at f/4.5, ISO 800 or lower, as JPEG of quality 97% due to Imgur's size limit. It's worth noting that some of those files have EXIF data saying "f/2.0" for some reason. I did not choose those photos.
https://imgur.com/a/K1GsTd4
And here are two 1800 x 1200 crops of the tree photo, in PNG:
Note on workflow: I used Adobe Digital Negative Converter to convert the raw files to DNG, and then exported them through Darktable with no edits.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hoS1l8DpDvwwAmA0ZEotxaG6AzXQGjNZ/view?usp=share_link
I found some RAW files from FB shared by someone who participated Sony events but results seem awful to me.
Thanks for sharing.
I've exported the ones shot at f/4.5, ISO 800 or lower, as JPEG of quality 97% due to Imgur's size limit. It's worth noting that some of those files have EXIF data saying "f/2.0" for some reason. I did not choose those photos.
https://imgur.com/a/K1GsTd4
And here are two 1800 x 1200 crops of the tree photo, in PNG:
Note on workflow: I used Adobe Digital Negative Converter to convert the raw files to DNG, and then exported them through Darktable with no edits.
May 24, 2026 at 02:37 AM
p.14 #16New 100-400 lenses
Well I had high hopes the 100-400 would become my new "tree bark" lens but I guess I'll stick to the 300 f2.8 for shooting that.
Seriously if this lens doesn't provide $4K+ GM quality I'll send it back.
Seriously if this lens doesn't provide $4K+ GM quality I'll send it back.
May 24, 2026 at 09:15 AM
p.14 #17New 100-400 lenses
Petapixel just put out their 100-400 f4.5 GM video
May 25, 2026 at 08:18 AM
p.14 #18New 100-400 lenses
Too bad he didn’t try it with tcs. I want this lens but I’m going to wait until this sharpness issue gets ironed out, not to mention copy variation.
May 25, 2026 at 04:01 PM
p.14 #19New 100-400 lenses
It seems that my Sony GM 100-400/4.5 is arriving next tuesday.I'm still not 100% convinced though.
May 30, 2026 at 01:35 AM
p.14 #20New 100-400 lenses
scott f wrote:
Too bad he didn’t try it with tcs. I want this lens but I’m going to wait until this sharpness issue gets ironed out, not to mention copy variation.
I'm never an early adopter, I will happily wait 6-12 months before deciding whether this lens could replace a 200-600.
I just wish Sony would do either a new 150-600 f/4.5-6.3 GM with the same upgrades as the 100-400: 4 XDL motors, much better OS, improved mfd, and excellent IQ and AF with a 1.4x TC or a 600 f/5.6 GM.
Too bad he didn’t try it with tcs. I want this lens but I’m going to wait until this sharpness issue gets ironed out, not to mention copy variation.
I'm never an early adopter, I will happily wait 6-12 months before deciding whether this lens could replace a 200-600.
I just wish Sony would do either a new 150-600 f/4.5-6.3 GM with the same upgrades as the 100-400: 4 XDL motors, much better OS, improved mfd, and excellent IQ and AF with a 1.4x TC or a 600 f/5.6 GM.
May 30, 2026 at 06:41 AM