p.18 #2 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
Douglas L wrote:
I have the 2X TC on the 300 GM 95% of the time. the new 600 is tempting but the 300 GM’s MFD is 2 meters vs 2.5 meters for the new 600, it may not matter for most but I shoot hummingbirds at very close distance in my yard, and it’s f5.6 vs f6.3, not much, but still… Maybe I will have to wait patiently for a Sony 800 f6.3😂
This is a good point. I also shoot them very close in my backyard. But I'm still far enough for the 600's MFD. Are you really within 2.5m a lot of the time? The 2.5m is measured from the camera's sensor so the lens can still focus really close to things when measured from the lens hood to subject. I was testing this yesterday and found the 2.5m was still closer than I'd want to be to almost any bird.
p.18 #3 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
arbitrage wrote:
I didn't get a good grasp on how the AF was. My subjects were a little too easy for it. The oystercatchers being the fastest and they aren't that fast. I did shoot a KF but it wasn't very close so wasn't a challenge either.
My gut feeling is the AF vs 300/2x isn't much different. But I will need to test more as I didn't test back to back today with the 300/2x (other than a few in my backyard in the afternoon). In the brief comparison I did I just focused to far trees and near flowers...back and forth....the 300GM you can hear the focus motors working, the 600 was dead silent. Speed and confidence was fairly similar though. No swallows around this time of year to give it a really good test. I will try to get some Dunlin or Turnstone in flight.
I did a quick IQ comparison shooting a bank note between the 600GM and the 300/2x and at 200% view there is the slightest of slightest win for the 600. But it is basically nothing.
So far my conclusion is the main value of this lens is the size/weight advantage even compared to the 300/2x which has always been the size/weight advantage winner up until now. It is a joy to shoot with.
I am still having second thoughts about the 400/4.5 being the better option since it would allow me to shoot at 400.
I need to do some more 600 vs 840 comparisons with the new lens and see if the 840 is gaining anything over cropping. If diffraction is eliminating any advantage to shooting 840 then I might as well go for the smaller and cheaper 400 which we have seen is just as sharp at 560 as the 600 is bare....Show more →
My 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter is equivalent—or, according to some comparisons, even slightly better—than my 400mm f/4.5 with a 1.4x teleconverter.
The 300mm f/2.8 has a slight advantage in terms of bokeh.
The 400mm f/4.5 has an advantage when it comes to weight.
Regarding autofocus:
I agree with you about the noise from the 300mm f/2.8’s autofocus, whereas the 400mm f/4.5 is completely silent.
Based on my own testing, the autofocus of the 300mm f/2.8 (at 600mm f/5.6) seems slightly better than that of the 400mm f/4.5 combined with a 1.4x teleconverter.
Thanks for your comparison. If possible, I would love to download some JPEGs comparing the 300mm f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter against your new 600mm f/6.3, so I can form my own opinion.
p.18 #4 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
arbitrage wrote:
I didn't get a good grasp on how the AF was. My subjects were a little too easy for it. The oystercatchers being the fastest and they aren't that fast. I did shoot a KF but it wasn't very close so wasn't a challenge either.
My gut feeling is the AF vs 300/2x isn't much different. But I will need to test more as I didn't test back to back today with the 300/2x (other than a few in my backyard in the afternoon). In the brief comparison I did I just focused to far trees and near flowers...back and forth....the 300GM you can hear the focus motors working, the 600 was dead silent. Speed and confidence was fairly similar though. No swallows around this time of year to give it a really good test. I will try to get some Dunlin or Turnstone in flight.
I did a quick IQ comparison shooting a bank note between the 600GM and the 300/2x and at 200% view there is the slightest of slightest win for the 600. But it is basically nothing.
So far my conclusion is the main value of this lens is the size/weight advantage even compared to the 300/2x which has always been the size/weight advantage winner up until now. It is a joy to shoot with.
I am still having second thoughts about the 400/4.5 being the better option since it would allow me to shoot at 400.
I need to do some more 600 vs 840 comparisons with the new lens and see if the 840 is gaining anything over cropping. If diffraction is eliminating any advantage to shooting 840 then I might as well go for the smaller and cheaper 400 which we have seen is just as sharp at 560 as the 600 is bare....Show more →
I would think nowadays, if the source file is high quality, upscaling by 40% with AI will beat out 1.4x TC, especially if you are getting well into diffraction territory with the TC. Also, would never use a 2x on any lens slower than f/4 and even the Sony big 2 aren't that great with the 2x, they are noticeably weaker than Nikon's big 2.
I would only use the 1.4x on the 600 if I was very FL limited and the shot was worth it. No use upscaling if you don't have many pixels on the subject. 1.4x effectively doubles your pixel count when FL limited. But you could then try AI upscaling the 600+1.4x shot and I suspect it should be better quality than a 600 + 2x shot.
p.18 #6 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
It was about 55 degrees out, slight breeze, and the wildlife showed up today. About 80 pronghorn in various areas, 6 javelina (no shots), 2 hawks, (no shots) 1 coyote (no shots) 3 mule deer, some shots but not worth sharing. It was great to see all the animals out and about.
I messed up and forgot the 1.4xtc... it would have been nice to have for the pronghorn off in the distance. I had the 400-800 with me but today was more about shooting with the 600/f6.3. It's a fun lens to shoot with... I sound like a broken record It's just fun!
p.18 #7 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
How about those who will just not use AI upscaling?
The rest of this is all whatever. Test sheets and pixel peeping and sharpest corners matter so little when everything is already so, so good, that people are just trying to find their justifications to spend or not spend money at this point.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I would think nowadays, if the source file is high quality, upscaling by 40% with AI will beat out 1.4x TC, especially if you are getting well into diffraction territory with the TC. Also, would never use a 2x on any lens slower than f/4 and even the Sony big 2 aren't that great with the 2x, they are noticeably weaker than Nikon's big 2.
I would only use the 1.4x on the 600 if I was very FL limited and the shot was worth it. No use upscaling if you don't have many pixels on the subject. 1.4x effectively doubles your pixel count when FL limited. But you could then try AI upscaling the 600+1.4x shot and I suspect it should be better quality than a 600 + 2x shot....Show more →
p.18 #9 · Sony FE 600mm f/6.3 GM OSS Images Thread
dfreese wrote:
How about those who will just not use AI upscaling?
The rest of this is all whatever. Test sheets and pixel peeping and sharpest corners matter so little when everything is already so, so good, that people are just trying to find their justifications to spend or not spend money at this point.
Then just use regular upscaling.
In fact you don’t need to do any upscaling, your printer driver will upscale for you and you don’t need more pixels for web
Theoretically if the camera is already diffraction limited without a TC, adding a TC doesn’t do anything
It's just fun! 
