p.1 #1 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
Hi,
I currently use an A1 II with the 400–800, but I’m finding the slow aperture challenging in low light, which often forces me to shoot at very high ISOs.
I’m considering the 400mm f/2.8 as a brighter option for those conditions. Since I primarily photograph birds, I realize 400mm will often be short, so I expect I’d use the 1.4× teleconverter most of the time to reach a more practical field of view.
I’ve looked at the tests on The Digital Picture, read some reviews (though I’m not fully confident in their methodology), and watched a few YouTube videos—including Steve Perry’s, where the results actually looked quite good. Still, I’ve seen some comments suggesting "image quality drops noticeably with teleconverters", which gives me pause.
I’m not expecting the 400 + TC to match the 600mm f/4, but I’d really appreciate hearing from owners of the 400mm f/2.8 about how well it performs with teleconverters in real-world use.
For context, I primarily handhold, shoot birds, and often use the A1 in crop mode.
Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Scott
p.1 #2 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
The 400mm suffers quite a bit when using the TC and I think you can trust Steve Perry on this (and most things). For birds most seem to prefer the 600mm. The few scenarios where a 400mm might be preferred are when in hides (very short distances), when otherwise the MFD of the 600mm is an issue or maybe when shooting rather tame birds. Since you already know Steve Perry's verdict, why do you still consider the 400mm?
p.1 #3 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
I haven't had a 400mm GM but know people have had a lot of success with it and the 1.4TC. I've got the 300mm 2.8 and use it with 2.0TC. incredibly light for what it is. I put a short Zemlin hood on it and carry it in a 16L Tenba Solstice V2 Sling Bag while walking my dog. Amazingly portable. If you shoot in fixed positions rather than walking/hiking check out the 600mm GM before you commit to a 400mm. Look for a good used lens.
scott f wrote:
Hi,
I currently use an A1 II with the 400–800, but I’m finding the slow aperture challenging in low light, which often forces me to shoot at very high ISOs.
I’m considering the 400mm f/2.8 as a brighter option for those conditions. Since I primarily photograph birds, I realize 400mm will often be short, so I expect I’d use the 1.4× teleconverter most of the time to reach a more practical field of view.
I’ve looked at the tests on The Digital Picture, read some reviews (though I’m not fully confident in their methodology), and watched a few YouTube videos—including Steve Perry’s, where the results actually looked quite good. Still, I’ve seen some comments suggesting "image quality drops noticeably with teleconverters", which gives me pause.
I’m not expecting the 400 + TC to match the 600mm f/4, but I’d really appreciate hearing from owners of the 400mm f/2.8 about how well it performs with teleconverters in real-world use.
For context, I primarily handhold, shoot birds, and often use the A1 in crop mode.
Any thoughts or experiences would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Scott...Show more →
p.1 #4 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
The reason I haven’t followed that advice is that I want something reasonably handholdable, since I rarely shoot from blinds. The 400 is shorter, slightly lighter, and focuses closer, which all appeal to me. I’ve used 600mm f/4 lenses in the past, and although the newer versions are much lighter, they’re still large lenses that seem better suited to tripod or monopod use.
That said, if the 400 doesn’t perform well with at least the 1.4× teleconverter, then it’s probably a non-starter for me. I’ve seen the test chart results, but I place more weight on how the lens performs in real field use. Unfortunately, I haven’t been able to find any RAW files to examine closely.
p.1 #5 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
thewiseoldbird wrote:
I haven't had a 400mm GM but know people have had a lot of success with it and the 1.4TC. I've got the 300mm 2.8 and use it with 2.0TC. incredibly light for what it is. I put a short Zemlin hood on it and carry it in a 16L Tenba Solstice V2 Sling Bag while walking my dog. Amazingly portable. If you shoot in fixed positions rather than walking/hiking check out the 600mm GM before you commit to a 400mm. Look for a good used lens.
I thought about the 300, but for birds I think I'd be using it with the 2x all the time, which is still a stop faster than the 400-800 I guess. I do have a line on a good used 400 that is coming up for sale soon. I also have an open box 400 that is essentially in new condition. I'd definitely get the 600 if I was more stationary.
p.1 #6 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
I have similar wishes to you, so I have been reading on this subject a lot myself.
My impression looking at flickr and forum galleries is that the autofocus will be the main issue, more so than sharpness. I feel I can distinguish focus related softness from lens sharpness related softness relatively well.
Hope the successor to this lens does better in that domain.
p.1 #7 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
I'll put my 300/2.8GM with 2XTC up against anyones 600/4...other than one stop and marginally better bokeh on the 600. Is it hands down better? No but weight the cost and weight and then it's another story....but then again, I'm a hack..... 😎
p.1 #8 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
I owned the 400 f2.8 lens for a couple years. The bare lens was fantastic. It performed really well with the 1.4x in regards to sharpness but I did notice a slight drop in AF speed and accuracy but certainly very usable. The sharpness with the 2X was pretty darn good on stationary subjects. But this lens with the 2X was noticeably hampered and less effective regards to AF speed and less accurate, too.
I sold it and now I'm very happy with the 300GM and both teleconverters. I also have the 400-800mm that I use intermittently when 600mm and cropping aren't enough.
p.1 #9 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
There are two aspects of using a TC. Optical, and Autofocus.
Neither 400 or 600 take a TC without an AF hit.
I don't have a 400 but mainly from what I have read on FM, the 400 has more negative optical degradation than the 600 with TC.
On the other hand, the 300 is very good regards optical and AF performance with TC.
An updated 400 that can be combined with TCs and peform as well as the 300 with TCs would sell very well IMHO.
p.1 #10 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
I have owned the 400 and sold it. I currently own the 600 and 300. The 400 is fantastic with the 1.4. I never used the 2x with it. With regards to hand holding the 400 is just a tiny bit lighter than the 600 but for whatever reason I prefer hand holding the 600. I would not hesitate to purchase the 600 over the 400 and since reach is key for you it is the much better choice. Again as reach is key I would also not consider the 300 as a main lens. I would also not put any weight on those saying you are taking a big IQ or AF hit/loss when using the 1.4 with either the 400 or 600. The 600 is amazing with the 1.4 attached. Have a look at my IG and many of the BIF shots and others are with the 600 and 1.4. Get the 600 and forget about any other lens. I use it for the vast majority of my shots and during all of my workshops that I run.
p.1 #11 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
400 with 1.4x tc is heavier than 600f4.
Sony 1.4x TC = 167 grams
Sony 400 f2.8 = 2895 grams
Sony 600 f4 = 3040 grams
IMO it doesn't make sense getting the 400 for birds, either 600f4 or 300 2.8 with TC is a better option.
I've been using 600f4 for the last 3 years and yes while its fantastic, I'm tired of carrying it.
I 100% handhold it, no tripod, no monopod. Its very do-able but just gets tiring walking with it and I don't want to do that anymore so I recently got 300 2.8.
With 2x TC its still very good image quality and for low light its an even better 420mm f4.
Yes I'm one of those people that bought a 300 2.8 and will never use it as a 300 2.8.
If there is good light I have 2x TC on always, if not I put on the 1.4x, f4 is still great for low light and 420mm while not ideal, is a good starting point, esp on high MP body like A1.
If you want max image quality then get 600f4 but you have to lug the beast around. Its very possible but will tax you physically if you like to walk around and be mobile or force you to be tied to tripod/monopod and carry that as well.
If you want still very good image quality,(not quite 600f4, but almost) then 300 2.8 with TC will give you way more mobility and and the option to still have f4 at 420mm for low light shooting conditions.
Since getting 300 2.8 I find my self going out more because its nearly effortless walking around with 300 and 2x TC compared to walking around with 600f4.
Sony 300 and 2x TC = 1677 grams
Sony 600 f4 = 3040 grams
That's 1363 gram or 3 lb difference. Doesn't sound like much, but IMO its a huge difference if you want to walk around.
p.1 #12 · Is the 400mm f2.8 good with teleconverters
My experience is very similar to what pdog109 said above. Love my 600GM but I get tired lugging it around as I handhold all the time. Only a couple situations where I use a monopod throughout the year. I find myself enjoying being out more with the compact and agile 300GM +/- TCs. I use my 300GM at least 80% of the time these days over my 600GM. In the summer months with good light and a lot of kayak shooting I use the 300GM 100% of the time. Only during dreary winter days do I sometimes bring out the 600 just to get the extra stop of light at 600mm.
I used to own the 400GM. I sold it when I bought the 300GM. I found the 400GM to be mediocre with TCs. With the 2xTC I was never happy with the AF consistency. Controlled test shooting in my backyard could produce decent IQ with the 2xTC but in real world shooting of moving subjects it just wasn't up to my standards. With the 1.4TC it was good but not great. It was more consistent than the 2x and IQ was pretty good. But the bare 600GM was a much better solution.
When I first bought the 400GM I was hoping it would be an excellent 560mm and a good 800mm and I planned to sell my 600GM to have a smaller lens. But it just wasn't satisfying me and I kept the 600GM and really only used the 400GM when I wanted to shoot 400/2.8 as the lens is excellent as a bare lens.
I'm not sure if it is AF or optics which hurt the 400GM so much compared to the 300GM or 600GM once TCs are involved?? I think it is more AF but also a bit of odd aberrations with the 2xTC.
As pointed out above, the weight of the 600GM is no heavier than the 400GM/1.4TC so you aren't saving weight. You do get a smaller package and I think it is a bit easier to handhold due to the weight being closer to your body. But otherwise if you want to be at 600-800mm then the 600GM is the best option.
If like myself, you want something nice and compact then the 300GM is awesome. If I was forced to sell either my 300GM or 600GM, I'd sell the 600GM.
Of course if Sony came out with a 400TC that could also take external TCs as well as the 300GM then that would replace my 600GM for sure.
