arbitrage wrote:
This image gets me a little worried about Canon shenanigans being played here as someone proposed before. Is the “600” just the 400 with TC elements in the rear and a fudged focal length from 560?
Unlike Canon, Sony seems to be willing to develop new lens designs from time to time.
I'll probably get the 600mm f6.3 based on that MFD, as it will be for hummingbirds and other small backyard birds.
I predict that these are going to be sold out for a long time… better get those preorders in. I’ve been waiting for Viltrox to release a 1.4 tc for my Sigma 500, but ill probably switch to the new 600.
this is seriously making me consider giving up a lens that I've been happy with for a long time - the canon 400 f4 do version 2. that is light compared to all the other big lenses and yet it still needs a monopod for a game. the 400mm sony would not.
I have already had almost three weeks to play with new lenses. If you are interested in some sample shots, please follow the link to the wildlife presentation forum, here at FredMiranda:
Rendering looks really, really nice on those images! These look like fabulous lenses!
michal.narozny wrote:
Hey!
I have already had almost three weeks to play with new lenses. If you are interested in some sample shots, please follow the link to the wildlife presentation forum, here at FredMiranda:
Lovely. If you could only own one which and why? Thanks!
michal.narozny wrote:
Hey!
I have already had almost three weeks to play with new lenses. If you are interested in some sample shots, please follow the link to the wildlife presentation forum, here at FredMiranda:
It is hard to tell. Depends on the subjects you shoot most often and lesnes you already have.
For the place where I live - the 400/f4.5. As I take pictures of both mammals and birds this is a more all rounded lens. Assuming that would be the only lens I own.
For instance 600 will be a great addition for anyone who owns a shorter lens - for instance 100-400 or a 300.
I have already had almost three weeks to play with new lenses. If you are interested in some sample shots, please follow the link to the wildlife presentation forum, here at FredMiranda:
arbitrage wrote:
The identical MFDs give TC element (Canon shenanigan) vibes. But then the weights being 1gm apart and the 600 being larger and needing those extra elements means it can't be that simple.
I searched Sony Japan to see if they have published lens diagrams but can't find any yet.
Obvious caveat that I am not a lens designer...BUT: to my eye the different lens elements are in the rear group. The rest of the formula looks the same, and as noted the size and weight are very similar. It doesn't look as straightforward as adding a TC at the rear like the RF lenses and TCs often have more than 2 elements. That said, it looks like it is effectively doing something similar. If you multiple the f/4.5 aperture and the 0.18x maximum magnification by 1.4x you get the 600mm's f/6.3 and 0.25x maximum magnification. I imagine there will be some people who are disappointed that the 600 isn't a more differentiated design, but at the same time I am guessing Sony evaluated a completely new design vs. these two additional elements in terms of size and weight and IQ. If this is not as simple as a rear TC then the cost to do this isn't as simple as the cost of adding a TC, though who knows if it is $1,000 more.
What would be interesting is for a reviewer to compare the 400mm+Sony TC with the 600mm and see if there is a difference in focal length and sharpness. A second comparison I would like to see is the Nikon 600mm 6.3 + 1.4X TC vs. Sony 600mm 6.3 + 1.4X TC and whether this approach paid off with similar IQ and the weight of a 400 4.5.
I'm not buying either, but if I were more into wildlife I would still go with the 600mm over the 400mm+TC based on what I have seen so far.
Well this makes me glad I waited on the 300 f2.8 GM. While that's a super versatile kit, it is heavier and pricier and it's really only versatile above 300mm. If I need something lower I'm still carrying another body/lens.
Now I'm trying to decide between:
70-200mm f2.8 GM II + 400mm f4.5 GM + 1.4 tc as needed -- Currently leaning this way
100-400mm f4.5 GM + 600mm f6.3 -- heavier is the main downside, but also more expensive; does have great zoom range in 100-400 though. And I could drop the 600 f6.3 and potentially a second body if I don't expect to need 600mm much (could use 1.4 tc in a pinch)
70-200mm f2.8 GM II + 300mm f2.8 -- heavier, but slightly faster and 300mm f2.8 is a bonus
I already own the 70-200 so there's some momentum for the 400 f4.5 + the lower cost, but will wait to see reviews on TC performance and comparisons.
i can see the value of the size of the new 600. I just went to Belgium for an airshow and packed my 300 GM with the 2X TC , as small as the 300 GM is, it’s always welcome to have a smaller size. if I don’t fly, the 300 GMs size and weight are already amazing
I have already had almost three weeks to play with new lenses. If you are interested in some sample shots, please follow the link to the wildlife presentation forum, here at FredMiranda:
These look great! Good feather detail. And i agree with one of the previous posts, the rendering looks rather nice.
If I may ask a very obvious question:
Have you had an opportunity to compare the 600 with a 300/2.8 + 2xTC and, if so, what did you conclude?
I have had the 300 for several years and find it excellent, most often using it with the 2xTC. But, if the IQ of the 600 is equally good or better and, in particular, if the AF is materially better (how many motors?), for BIF the weight saving is not to be sniffed at (with my rather modest skills, and even given the impressively low weight of the 300/2.8, I’m sure <1kg would make it quite a bit easier to keep the bird in the centre of the frame). Having the option of 840mm without stacking TCs is another factor.
Douglas L wrote:
i can see the value of the size of the new 600. I just went to Belgium for an airshow and packed my 300 GM with the 2X TC , as small as the 300 GM is, it’s always welcome to have a smaller size. if I don’t fly, the 300 GMs size and weight are already amazing
? DAUM.... 
