shac wrote:
Daran wrote:
This has be tested ad nauseam. The 200-600 is optically better than the 100-400 with the TC1.4 installed. Difference is rather noticeable when cropping (or zooming in). At 400mm (and no TC) they are very close to each other, with the GM maybe a hint better (and with somewhat faster AF). The culprit is the TC. It is optically good, but not nearly as good as the naked lenses. I only use the TC when cropping would leave me with too few pixels on the bird.
This is a cropped image using an a9 with the 100-400 + TC1.4 - Just curious but would you expect the 200-600 to be noticeably better?
You are using a low res body where the degradation due to TC has much less impact. Additionally you present a JPEG that has even less resolution. So no, the TC probably did not reduce the IQ of this JPEG in a material way.
Using a TC generally doesn't hurt when you are at a low resolution (whether due to the low res sensor or due to sub-sampling after the fact). So e.g. when not cropping, when recording video or when presenting low resolution images on the internet. In those cases the deviation from best IQ is practically invisible. It will matter when using high resolution sensors and cropping the resulting images as is common when birding.
PS: Nice shot.
[EDIT]
Just noticed that I misread your question. The 200-600 has a MFD of 2.5 meters and is therefore much less capable of macro shots than the 100-400.
Feb 19, 2021 at 07:08 AM
Previous versions of Daran's message #15506774 « Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread »
