p.5 #1 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
Another interesting thing with the 1-4 is it can achieve the same magnification at the 100mm setting vs the 400mm setting. It just uses a closer MFD.
I think the 100mm setting might give you the highest magnification.
Woodland Skipper (Ochlodes sylvanoides) and Coneflower (Echinacea)
ILCE-7RM6FE 100-400mm F4.5 GM OSS lens100mmf/4.51/640s800 ISO0.0 EV
p.5 #3 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
Cliff L. wrote:
I think the 100mm setting might give you the highest magnification.
Yes, I believe you are correct. It is slightly higher MM at 100mm. I think the quoted 0.25x is at 100mm. I haven't seen what the measured MM is at 400mm.
Mark Galer showed this example in his 100-400 review which shows the difference.
p.5 #6 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
First time out with the 100-400, white-tailed eagles, a few other seabirds and a golden eagle on the trip
Only 1 trip and not ideal conditions but I agree with the overall sentiment on this lens and can see why a lot of people would give it a miss; at the same time, I see why a relatively small number of people would highly value it
The one I used for this trip was a rental; mine arrived whilst I was away - will see how it goes
p.5 #8 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
i own a 400 2.8, 300 2.8, and 300-600 f4 from sigma. This lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing. the versatility along with IQ and size/weight is what sells it for me.
p.5 #9 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
turbodude wrote:
i own a 400 2.8, 300 2.8, and 300-600 f4 from sigma. This lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing. the versatility along with IQ and size/weight is what sells it for me.
Excellent set! The lens looks like is working well!
p.5 #10 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
his lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing
I've got pretty much your same lens lineup. The flexibility of the 1-4 is intriguing. I've got the 300-600 as well and f4 really pushes my limits on HS fields. Have you shot your 1-4 at HS fields yet and what are your thoughts?
turbodude wrote:
i own a 400 2.8, 300 2.8, and 300-600 f4 from sigma. This lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing. the versatility along with IQ and size/weight is what sells it for me.
p.5 #11 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
timgangloff wrote:
his lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing
I've got pretty much your same lens lineup. The flexibility of the 1-4 is intriguing. I've got the 300-600 as well and f4 really pushes my limits on HS fields. Have you shot your 1-4 at HS fields yet and what are your thoughts?
While I’m guessing the Sony is noticeably better, how are you finding the AF between the Sigma 300-600 and the Sony 100-400 f4.5?
p.5 #12 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
Oh, I don't have the 100-400. That's what I was intrigued by. Can it work at poorly lit HS fields is my question? The 300-600 vs 400 2.8 is proving to be a interesting question. I used both this weekend at the UT vs UT game. Noon kick so good light. The extra reach of the 300-600 was great for a game largely played between the 30's, but the AF speed and accuracy of the 400 2.8 was also great at times. I'm still torn and say there was nearly an equal number of keepers with both lenses. I shot the 400 2.8 for the first half and the 300-600 for the second. The 300-600 f4 is at the outer limits of the ISOs I like to use at HS fields night games. So, was wondering if f4.5 makes a difference or are they so close it doesn't matter?
robert614 wrote:
While I’m guessing the Sony is noticeably better, how are you finding the AF between the Sigma 300-600 and the Sony 100-400 f4.5?
p.5 #13 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
timgangloff wrote:
Oh, I don't have the 100-400. That's what I was intrigued by. Can it work at poorly lit HS fields is my question? The 300-600 vs 400 2.8 is proving to be a interesting question. I used both this weekend at the UT vs UT game. Noon kick so good light. The extra reach of the 300-600 was great for a game largely played between the 30's, but the AF speed and accuracy of the 400 2.8 was also great at times. I'm still torn and say there was nearly an equal number of keepers with both lenses. I shot the 400 2.8 for the first half and the 300-600 for the second. The 300-600 f4 is at the outer limits of the ISOs I like to use at HS fields night games. So, was wondering if f4.5 makes a difference or are they so close it doesn't matter?
The 1/3 of a stop is probably negligible if the two lenses had the same zoom range. But the Sony is much shorter
If a lot of your shots are in the 400-600mm range when you use the Sigma. Then you’ll be cropping a lot of pictures when using the 100-400. Not only will you be getting a 1/3 stop more noise from the 4.5 aperture. After you crop, you’ll be magnifying that noise even more
Apreciate your thoughts on the Sony 400 f2.8 vs Sigma. I sometimes get frustrated the Sigma doesn’t have native Sony AF consistency. But it’s such a cool unique lens, I don’t see myself parting with it anytime soon. Unless Sony comes out with one of course 😊
p.5 #14 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
timgangloff wrote:
his lens is allowing me to sell my 400 2.8. I hand hold it on the sidelined paired with a 50-150 f2 and its amazing
I've got pretty much your same lens lineup. The flexibility of the 1-4 is intriguing. I've got the 300-600 as well and f4 really pushes my limits on HS fields. Have you shot your 1-4 at HS fields yet and what are your thoughts?
------------------------------
robert614 wrote:
While I’m guessing the Sony is noticeably better, how are you finding the AF between the Sigma 300-600 and the Sony 100-400 f4.5?
i dont shoot much HS football, but Ole Miss stadium was pretty dark to my standard of NFL and other pro sports, and i found the AF faster and "stickier" than my 300-600, and didnt feel a noticable difference between the 100-400 and 400 2.8. the 300GM on the otherhand blows away the entire lot for speed, but its lighter and has less glass so its to be expected.
between the 100-400 and the 300-600, i would say its negligible, at fixed focal lengths. however when a player is coming at me, thats where the native sony shines, the sigma doesnt focus while zooming, so when i rack the zoom, i have to do a half step more af button push, more so that i use the 300-600 more as a fixed lens, set it and forget it kind of solution for specific plays or distance to the players. is it worth a 5k "upgrade" to the 600 f4 GM? to me, no. i dont shoot enough things where 600 is a necssity that i feel a real problem with it. i have considered getting a nikon z8 with a megatap to see how it reactes to the 300-600 without sonys naive handicap. to me the weight savings on my body and space in my bag outweighs all. so the 100-400 is a perfect lens solution for me, im willign to move the field more than lugging around my 400 with a mono. plus the combo of 50-150 f2 and 100-400 4.5 is PERFECT for sideline football. handholdable, nimble (relatively speaking) and sharp across all the zoom range.
p.5 #15 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
Thanks, Interesting that while the college stadiums are lit better than HS, they still are not fantastic compared to the professional level. Tennessee's stadium is OK, not great. As for zooming with the 300-600, i've gotten used to half pressing as I zoom to keep the AF moving. But yeah, while not always a fixed zoom, I do find myself staying at a fixed focal length more than zooming. Maybe I'll see about getting a 100-400 from Sony as a loaner.
turbodude wrote:
------------------------------
i dont shoot much HS football, but Ole Miss stadium was pretty dark to my standard of NFL and other pro sports, and i found the AF faster and "stickier" than my 300-600, and didnt feel a noticable difference between the 100-400 and 400 2.8. the 300GM on the otherhand blows away the entire lot for speed, but its lighter and has less glass so its to be expected.
between the 100-400 and the 300-600, i would say its negligible, at fixed focal lengths. however when a player is coming at me, thats where the native sony shines, the sigma doesnt focus while zooming, so when i rack the zoom, i have to do a half step more af button push, more so that i use the 300-600 more as a fixed lens, set it and forget it kind of solution for specific plays or distance to the players. is it worth a 5k "upgrade" to the 600 f4 GM? to me, no. i dont shoot enough things where 600 is a necssity that i feel a real problem with it. i have considered getting a nikon z8 with a megatap to see how it reactes to the 300-600 without sonys naive handicap. to me the weight savings on my body and space in my bag outweighs all. so the 100-400 is a perfect lens solution for me, im willign to move the field more than lugging around my 400 with a mono. plus the combo of 50-150 f2 and 100-400 4.5 is PERFECT for sideline football. handholdable, nimble (relatively speaking) and sharp across all the zoom range. ...Show more →
p.5 #16 · Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5 GM OSS Image Thread
timgangloff wrote:
Thanks, Interesting that while the college stadiums are lit better than HS, they still are not fantastic compared to the professional level. Tennessee's stadium is OK, not great. As for zooming with the 300-600, i've gotten used to half pressing as I zoom to keep the AF moving. But yeah, while not always a fixed zoom, I do find myself staying at a fixed focal length more than zooming. Maybe I'll see about getting a 100-400 from Sony as a loaner.
used it for hockey last night, and again, fantastic, easy to move around, as well as loose enough if stuff happens. 400 2.8 was always too tight for hockey, 300 was too loose at times. 100-400 is just right
