This is what I was looking for
"I think the 100-400/1.4TC is better AF than the 300GM/2xTC. But I think the IQ is fairly close."
and I'm not surprised.
"I feel the 300GM/2xTC is better AF hit rate than the 100-400/2xTC. Just that extra 1.33 stops of light will give it the advantage."
I don't think anyone will expect a slower zoom with 2X will beat one of the best prime with 2X
Thank you
arbitrage wrote:
I feel the 300GM/2xTC is better AF hit rate than the 100-400/2xTC. Just that extra 1.33 stops of light will give it the advantage.
I think the 100-400/1.4TC is better AF than the 300GM/2xTC. But I think the IQ is fairly close.
For just IQ I think the 100-400/1.4TC is about equal to the 200-600 for perched birds. But as soon as you start shooting action I find the 100-400/1.4TC to be way, way better. I was really impressed with the hit rate on the Purple Martins with the 1.4TC. The handling of the 100-400/1.4TC is also way nicer than the 200-600. Only thing I'd give the nod to the 200-600 would be the smoothness of the zoom ring.
The bare lens is really, really good also. I'm not sure how it would compare to the 300GM/1.4TC but I think they are fairly close for IQ and AF speed. I think bare 300GM is still the sharpest and fastest AF I've ever used....Show more →
The IQ with the 1.4x being about the same as the 200-600 is as expected and in line with other tests I've seen. IQ was never a concern with a GM lens. But the news about the AF and tracking prowess is what's most important and it looks like there's no need to worry and the 100-400 could definitely replace the 200-600. I still have no interest in pairing it with a 2x and now pray we can get a excellent 600/800mm prime from Sony that is around the $5-6K mark.
duncangr wrote:
Can you post links to full resolution uncropped files or the RAW files. So far I am not blown away but it's hard to judge anything without seeing the full resolution originals.
A couple of reference images - taken with the old smaller, cheaper, lighter 100-400 - and the A1. Be sure to zoom right in on the eyes - you might have to save the images as a local copy first because FM doesn't seem to allow zooming in on the images.
I doubt any lens can improve much on these but the ergonomics on the new 100-400 with the new zoom ring might make it easier to use.
When I compared my "old" 100-400 to the new one with some backyard test shots today the new lens had a bit more contrast and just slightly sharper. But they are very close. I do have a very sharp copy of the old 100-400...noticeably sharper than the 1st copy I owned.
The new 100-400 is not going to give any meaningful IQ advantage over the old one. The old one is a very sharp lens (copy dependent). I also don't think AF is going to be much different.
The new lens is not a replacement for the old one. They serve different purposes. I won't be selling my old one just because I bought the new one. The old one still has the benefit of smaller footprint and maximum magnification.
You would buy the new one if you want a smoother zoom mechanism and 2/3 stops of extra light to work with.
The biggest problem I have with the new lens is that it is now making me have to decide what lens to go out and shoot with. It has been such an easy choice up until now as I would just grab the 300GM and TCs and be happy. But this lens is fun to shoot with so now I have to think about it. Once the new toy honeymoon period wears off we will see which one I gravitate to more.
arbitrage wrote:
When I compared my "old" 100-400 to the new one with some backyard test shots today the new lens had a bit more contrast and just slightly sharper. But they are very close. I do have a very sharp copy of the old 100-400...noticeably sharper than the 1st copy I owned.
The new 100-400 is not going to give any meaningful IQ advantage over the old one. The old one is a very sharp lens (copy dependent). I also don't think AF is going to be much different.
The new lens is not a replacement for the old one. They serve different purposes. I won't be selling my old one just because I bought the new one. The old one still has the benefit of smaller footprint and maximum magnification.
You would buy the new one if you want a smoother zoom mechanism and 2/3 stops of extra light to work with.
The biggest problem I have with the new lens is that it is now making me have to decide what lens to go out and shoot with. It has been such an easy choice up until now as I would just grab the 300GM and TCs and be happy. But this lens is fun to shoot with so now I have to think about it. Once the new toy honeymoon period wears off we will see which one I gravitate to more....Show more →
How often will you be at 100-399mm? I know with my birding my 200-600 spends 95% of the time at 550-600mm, and only occasionally when shooting large waders do I need to use less than 500mm. This is why I'd love to see a intermediately fast 600mm prime to pair with the 100-400.
Sony missed a golden opportunity with the 300GM in not including built-in 1.4x TC IMO and similarly with the new 100-400. Would have loved to even see them copy OM and have included a built-in 1.25x if not 1.4x.
