In The Field Review of the Sony 200-600mm Zoom Lens

[@Jessehermansonphoto]

Review starts at 14:50

[@akiabab]

But some really important information in first 14 mins as well!

[@Jessehermansonphoto]

akiabab there is some info there, but for those of us who aren’t too concerned with the first 14, like me. But I did enjoy his review.

[@biogons14]

Excellent comparison. I have some questions to ask you regarding the settings on the camera: -Do you have the lens corrections disabled? (Chromatic, vigneting and deformation issues Raw/jpg) -Do you have the Steadyshot stabilizer disabled? (mode1-2-3 with / out tripod). -What focus mode do you use in AF? -Have you activated the preview with adjusted parameters? (AF with Iris closed). -Do you have the shutter speed coupled to the focal length and a low shutter speed limit?

[@JuanPons]

Thanks, Here are responses to your questions: - no - no, always on - most of the time I am using Center, and then Zone when needed - yes - I have set Minimum ISO to Std or Faster in most cases You may want to check out the video I did on how I configure my camera. I go through all the settings in detail.

[@MannyG32968]

Excellent review and analysis! I’ve got mine along with my A7RIV and it’s an amazing combo!!

[@BizzleByron]

Still went with the 100-400 and TC. It’s much more versatile - smaller/lighter & the focusing distance blows the 200-600 out the water. And because they are a bit older now the price gap isn’t that huge between the two.

[@nightcoder5k]

I bought a g1 from eBay to use with my Sony A7ii with 3 different adapters (haven't tried Sigma MC11). AF didn't work as expected so I picked up a Canon 77D, which works great with the g1. The problem is the live view photo mode doesn't work, but the video mode works. In live view photo mode, the mirror shuts off after a few seconds. Probably, I need to send the lens in for a firmware update, but I'm not willing to do that just yet.

[@mjsbiggestfan1997]

I NEED to get a tripod like what you have! I had my Sony A7R IV and 200-600mm lens mounted on a tripod through the foot. The tripod ended up tipping over and breaking both my camera and lens. The repair fee was about $1,400. The tripod I got said it would support up to 17lbs, but the combination of the camera, battery grip, and lens definitely ain’t 17lbs. I ended up returning the tripod and getting a refund.

[@JuanPons]

Ouch! So sorry to hear that. Here is my setup: RRS TFC-24L Series 2 Mk2 Carbon Fiber Tripod: bhpho.to/2O0JSgz Arca-Swiss Monoball p0 With Fliplock Ball Head: bhpho.to/2KKpUqc I also have the Arca-Swiss quick link that allows the quick removal of the bullhead from the tripod, but that is not necessary. Yes, this is an expensive kit, but so was your repair and this tripod will last you a lifetime. Hope that helps. -J

[@ArthurPJohnson]

This is fantastic, Juan-a REAL review based on real-world wildlife shooting in the field. I’ve obtained the lens myself and agree with you about the sharpness and quality of this lens, although I do miss the filter “window” in the hood. Also, although I understand the technical reasons for Sony swapping placement of the zoom and focus rings, I couldn’t agree more about what a pain the new layout is. Prior to this, my go-to lens has been the 400mm f2.8 with the 1.4x teleconverter. However, I find myself reaching for the 200-600mm more and more, even though the 400mm with teleconverter is a stop and a half brighter. The IQ of the zoom is not quite up to the 400mm, but it’s so close that it’s convenience and carry-ability win out. I think this new Zoom might have been designed as a G-Master, and only demoted for marketing reasons, ceding that status to Sony;s new flagship telephoto, the 600mm f4. It’s that good-so good, that I really can’t justify buying the GM.

[@JuanPons]

I could not agree with you more! Thanks.

[@bruceprosser5445]

Hello Juan, great review! I am trying to decide which lens to buy at this moment. I think if you are a wildlife shooter, definitely the 200-600 makes a lot of sense. If you are a landscape shooter, the 100-400 would be the better lens. It is a tough choice either way.

[@JuanPons]

Thanks for the kind words. I agree with you, I think the 100-400 is the better lens for landscape.

[@njrmax72]

I shoot landscapes, and don't find the 100400 is needed anymore .. use a 70-200f4 and 200600G. 400mm is too short for birding, and the TC degrades sharpness, light and AF. Not worth it

[@Jakevoss96]

Buy both

[@JACKnJESUS]

I'm just thinking out loud here...but what if you put a speedbooster on your lens at 600mm. You should get a 420mm fov at 4.5 aperture. Ever try that?

[@JuanPons]

Never thought about that. May be worth trying.

[@dcmsends]

Thank you very much for the review. One of the better that I've seen on this lens. Was with Colby Brown in AK in June where he had an early copy shooting with A9 & A7. Reviews are on his site. I was quite impressed with the overall sharpness. I'm a Canon shooter on the fence but teetering on swinging over to the Sony system. I like wildlife and BIF so I'll go with the A9. Rumors are the new A9 will demolish both new efforts by Canon & Nikon coming out around the Olympics.

[@CamillaI]

Only had mine for a week on A 9 looking great so far

[@amitavaganguly6919]

Hi Sir, I am using Canon 7D mk ii with 100-400 is ii for mainly Bird photography but want sift Sony system & my budget which permits Sony A7 iii and Sony 200-600, my question is that if shift Sony this combination & how it will work for birding? Means sharpness , low light performance & Focus performance comparison with my recent canon gear?

[@JuanPons]

If your primary subject is birds, I would suggest instead getting the new a6600 (or a9) instead of the a7r III. I am afraid the AF system on the a7r III is not good enough for birds in flight.

[@amitavaganguly6919]

@@JuanPons Sir, how is Sony A7 mk iii for bird photography?

[@JuanPons]

@@amitavaganguly6919 I am afraid the Auto Focus system on the a7R III is not fast enough for birds in flight.

[@amitavaganguly6919]

@@JuanPons ok , Thanks Sir🙏

[@moriartyfan389]

Right now i have nikon d500 and tamron g2 150 600 mm lens...i want shift to mirrorless. Alongwith this lens i want to buy mirrorless camera. Can you suggest a budget and good mirrorless camera which has same properties like d500.

[@anthonyc1883]

Enjoyed the video, Juan. It was my first encounter with you. Subbed. Looking forward to more good work.

[@JuanPons]

Thank you!

[@barryroberts2474]

Have you compared an image at 600mm with the 100-400 cropped? I don't do much telephoto work, since I dropped my 70-400mm G (A series adapted for E mount and repaired, it is not as sharp now.) but am interested in moving back to that kind of photography. I appreciate your experience and your review.

[@JuanPons]

Barry, I have not made that comparison, but I can tell you that since the 200-600 is already sharper than the 100-400 a cropped 100-400 has no chance against an image taken with the 200-600.

[@klackon1]

Swapped my 100 - 400mm G Master for a 200 - 600mm and have to say it works brilliantly with the A9, A7III and A74R4. I am particulary impressed with it when used at 40 - 50 metres with the A7R4.

[@duurann]

Did anyone tested it with A7R4? And Is it tracking with A7R4?

[@JuanPons]

Yes, specially with the latest a7RIV firmware, it does very well. The 100-400 still outperforms it, but it does very well.

[@MrGaborBalla]

Hello, what is that thing on your camera where the strap supposed to be?

[@JuanPons]

Maybe the PeakDesign quick release lugs...

[@JensHauser]

Would it be a big difference with the A7 III instead of the R?

[@JuanPons]

That is a good question, I think it will work well with the a7III, however the AF won't be as responsive as it is with the a9 and the a7RIII.

[@JensHauser]

@@JuanPons i have been reading up on it and i think you are correct. The autofocus on A7 is slower than the other

[@CeyloNi]

@@JuanPons significant in wild life pic

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Haven't compared them head to head so thank you for that direct comparison. I am really enjoying the new 200-600 and found a great back that lets me take both out in the field. The ThinkTANKStreetwalker Pro is working out great for that.

[@JuanPons]

Glad to hear it. The ThinkTank and Mindshift bags are my favorites!

[@davecurtis8833]

Great review. When the A7R4 is available, it would be great to see if there is an increase in AF speed compared to the A7R3.

[@JuanPons]

Yes, that is my plan.

[@touringband]

With the real time tracking, the AF will most certainly be an improvement

[@evenhandedcommentor6102]

I have that lens, the 200-600mm. I also love it. Used it with the 1.4 TC about 95% of the time. I did tests to compare the sharpness between the lens by itself with the test chart cropped vs the lens with the 1.4 TC. The 1.4 TC won over cropping. You do lose a stop of light, so if you need that stop, don't use the TC. As for the hood not locking on...mine does. As you twist it on, it kind of snaps in to let you know it's secure. Seriously, I'm surprised Juan missed that. I replaced the Sony foot with the Wimberley foot. Much cheaper than the RRS foot. You do need a hex wrench to take the foot off with the Wimberley, but not the RRS or the Kirk foot. Not a problem, as I have the RRS L-plate on my camera and it has a hex wrench held in by a magnet. If I want to take the foot off the lens...no problem as the wrench is right there.

[@JuanPons]

Same experience as myself. Thanks for letting us know.

[@njrmax72]

I like the Kirk foot...has the same knob as the RRS foot for tightening the foot. Quality from Kirk is top notch as expected

[@MatthewCuda]

Great review Juan!

[@Celestialrob]

This is an awesome detailed review. Did you try your 200-600 with your TC 1.4? I have just received my 200-600 and hope it works well with the 1.4. Thank you!

[@JuanPons]

Thanks for the kind words. I did not try the 200-600 with the 1.4x TC. I think I may do that this coming week and share my impressions. Thanks.

[@Celestialrob]

@@JuanPons thanks, looking forward to it.

[@sfstate7260]

@@JuanPons That would be great! I'm also very interested in how the 200-600 w/ 1.4x TC compares with the 100-400 w/ 1/4x TC.

[@indysbike3014]

@@JuanPons From looking at the lens comparison tool at thedigitalpicture.com this might be the first long slow zoomlens where you can use a 1.4tc and actually get a benefit from it instead of cropping.

[@cryvee]

Great video, really appreatiate the indepth review. there is one question im interested in, i plan on buying the sony a7rIV . I wonder how this lens is gonna resolve on that body. In that regard, could you maybe test this lens on an aps-c body? this way one could get a feel for the sharpness that will be possibly on the a7rIV

[@JuanPons]

Max, thanks for the kind words. Those are very interesting questions and I guess we won't really know until we actually try it on the a7RIV. You would expect the pixel pitch to be similar between the a7rIV and the a6xxx line, but I am not sure that testing an a6xxx body would be very useful in determining how well the a7RIV will resolve as the sensor tech is very different between the two. It may give us an idea but I am not sure it would be a data point I would hang my hat on.

[@Stefan1968ful]

Max Kluge Well, I am using the Sony A6400 beside my Sony A9 on a Sony 200-600mm. For whatever reason the results are IMO with the A6400 better (regarding image sharpness) on a 200-600mm than on a 100-400mm. For me the 200-600mm is together with the A6400 an excellent combo for Wildlife avoiding a teleconverter. I really can recommend it.

[@echoauxgen]

Very, Very detailed. sad you did not have a better day. The bokeh/blur is very impressive with DOF very good pin point separation. How are the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters say with the A7iii (A9 little brother) or is there really no need say with the 1.4 due to APS-C getting a 1.5 crop at the press of a button.

[@JuanPons]

My experience is that the 200-600 does not perform well with either TC. You lose too much image quality.

[@TimothyAus10]

I have an a6400 and am considering this lens. Want to use it for birds, Formula 1 races, etc. Anyone use this combo? Thoughts on a6400 with this lens as camera does not have IBIS?

[@socratesvela8285]

I think it will marry well. I don't own either, but my understanding the A6400 has a lot of AF similarities to the A9 sensor. As for the no IBIS, the lens should have some OSS, but like Juan P is showing us, he is on a monopod/tripod. If you do shoot handheld the things you are saying, then you most likely will be shooting at 1/2000s, where at those shutter speeds, IBIS and OSS is not that important anyways. Obviously, if you can afford the A9, maybe even a used one, you should get the A9.

[@iTzNicholas]

Plans to test the 200-600 with the 1.4x TC for focus and sharpness?

[@JuanPons]

I don't have plans to do a formal test, but my informal testing tells me that I don't like it. Image quality suffered too much for my liking. Having said that I know people who shoot frequently with the 2-6 and the 1.4x TC and they get good results. I think there is a significant variation between samples of the 2-6 and while mine is super sharp on it's own it does not perform as well as I would want with the TC.

[@DalsPhotography-Daniela]

Juan, let me ask you , how does this lens work with the a 7r IV? this is the pair I am intending to buy, as I mainly focus on birds, but also on macro and landscapes :) Thanks for answering back!!! Regards from Uruguay.

[@JuanPons]

Like I mentioned in the video, it does well and works well for most wildlife, but not too well for birds in flight. for BIFs you will want the a9.

[@DalsPhotography-Daniela]

@@JuanPons Thank you for taking the time to answer back. I am afraid that buying both of them is not in my budget, as bringing cameras down here increases the prices in at least a 40% plus lenses, etc... But with my canon 5Dsr I can't take a single BIF lol, so, any newer camera will make a hug difference! :) Best for you and keep safe , best from Uruguay.

[@JuanPons]

@@DalsPhotography-Daniela Daniela es mi placer. Muchísima suerte.

[@DalsPhotography-Daniela]

@@JuanPons Que divino, respondiste en español :) :) Gracias por todo!!!

[@mspates5982]

A really wonderful vedio! I have the Sony a7r Mark 3 and I'm curious as to how well the camera focuses on birds in flight with the 200-600? Will you be doing a video of that with the a7r Mark 3? We all know how well the A9 focuses there is no question on that.

[@JuanPons]

Hi! Thanks for your comment. Yes I have it on my queue to produce a video on the Sony AF system and how I use it on different scenarios.

[@mspates5982]

Thank you for the reply! I can't wait to see how that lens works on the a7r Mark 3

[@islandsnow]

How did you get the camera to save the files with date as part of the name?

[@JuanPons]

I rename my files in Lightroom

[@dalefrolander3583]

Great review. Many people think that because one is GM and the other is G, then the GM has to be sharper, but that's not necessarily the case. For example, the 90mm macro is one of the sharpest lenses Sony makes and yet it's only a G lens for other reasons like mediocre autofocusing.

[@JuanPons]

@Dale, I agree 100%. The GM designation, like the L designation for Canon, means a bunch of different things, from more rugged construction to better weather sealing, etc. Thanks for chiming in.

[@charlesmann2042]

Fantastic review and wonderful photography. I primarily photograph small to medium sized birds. I now use thevA7RIII with the 100-400 with 1.4 teleconverter - mostly in crop mode. Have you tried the 200-600 in crop mode with your A7Riii with or without the 1.4? By the way I have the A7RiV on backorder so I can use the 1.4 with the 200-600.

[@JuanPons]

Charles, I don't use the crop mode, because I can accomplish the same thing by cropping the image in Lightroom. I am also looking forward to the a7RIV with it's 60 MegaPixel files so that I can crop even more.

[@charlesmann2042]

@@JuanPons Thanks - I use the crop mode to better see very small birds in viewfinder.

[@stephanpoulin1308]

Great review! Tks! What are your focusing setting for bird photography? I've some problem whit the 200-600mm and a7r3!

[@JuanPons]

Hi! This is a topic that would take a whole video. I will make sure to add it to my list of videos to record. But here is a VERY quick rundown. Continuous Drive (fast), AF-C, Zone Focus, Responsive AF Setting, Back Button Focus.

[@ArthurPJohnson]

Juan Pons please do make that Bird Photography video!

[@ajschot]

Thanks for the review! It seems like a great deal from Sony... lens is cheaper then the 100-400 alone... only heavier...

[@mykelphotography]

A fabulous detailed review Juan, Thank you for doing this, I have the same set up in both cameras and lenses, I found pretty much the same results you have, I was hoping to be able to sell my 100-409 GM. But I do a lot of BIF and have found on small birds the 200-600 G does drop quite a few images that the 100-400 never did, large slower birds not a problem, it’s an amazing lens for the value I think and would highly recommend it as you do to I am sure.

[@JuanPons]

This is great, another person reporting the same results I saw. And you also saw the same AF performance. the 100-400 edges the 200-600 in AF by a slight margin and in certain situations. Thanks!

[@anulearntech]

if you use the A7RIII, its the slowest of the bunch of newer bodies, including my A7III. So maybe that's the reason. to see the same differences on a faster body, I guess we will need much more challenging situations, perhaps faster than BIF.

[@JZaraInSight]

Juan, how are you? I would like to know what camera did you use to produce this video? Thank you very much Very nice video..

[@Leo-jd2ny]

Do you can made one more Test with the a6600?

[@JuanPons]

I don't own an a6600, but I will try to get my hands on one and see how the lens performs with it.

[@arikleib]

First of all, thanks for the explanations and examples:) I shoot with the Sony A6400 and Canon lens 500F4 + METABONE adapter. I thought of selling the Canon F4 500 lens and buying the Sony 200-600. What do you think ?

[@JuanPons]

@Arik, I would switch as soon as possible. I did the same, shot with the Metabones and the Canon 500 f/4 for quite a while, once the 100-400 came out I switched to that and my 500mm f/4 has not seen the light of day in 2 years. Now with the 200-600 released (but hard to get a hold of at this point) I would absolutely sell the 500 and switch to the 200-600. Best of luck!

[@vladepast4936]

Personally I think you are ill.

[@Teeb2023]

Must troll harder.

[@RonaldLYork]

Just saw your review. Question, are you keeping the 100-400 and adding the 200-600 or will you go with one lens. Sounds like you really like the 200-600. I have both and considering selling the 100-400. Thoughts?

[@JuanPons]

Good question. I am not yet sure what I will do. If I do sell the 100-400 it would mean I would have a gap in coverage between 105 (from my Sony 24-105) and 200. I think I will end up selling the 100-400 in the end as I can't really justify carrying both lenses. And knowing that the 200-600 is sharper, I am not sure I will opt to using the 100-400. I will keep the 100-400 for a few months and see how much I am using it.

[@njrmax72]

@@JuanPons interesting,. I'm keeping the 100-400 in addition to the 200-600. Why? It's MFD ...with extension tube it's a great walk about nature macro lense

[@JuanPons]

@madmaxx72 you are absolutely right the 200-600 has more than twice the Minimum Focusing Distance. I have also used the 100-400 as a on the spot macro, but there is nothing like the Sony 90mm Macro, probably the sharpest lens Sony makes.

[@njrmax72]

@@JuanPons my only issue with the Sony 90mm macro is it's too slow to focus on small moving critters where the 100400 is very fast. With an extension tube it's a superb alternative for faster moving subjects. I'm keeping both 100400 and 200600 for different use cases. Both are too good to part with... Tough decision for anyone who has to choose between them

[@Anderssisco]

Thank you for doing this! Im currently on the A6400 camera and i use the Sony 70 - 350mm lens for birds and animals. I like it for sure but alot of times i feel like some more range would be nice for Buzzards and birds like that. Do you think this lens would work well with the A6400? :)

[@JuanPons]

Yes I think it would do very well with the 6400

[@nielsaerts9971]

I'm currently in the same boat. Did you buy the lens already? And what were your experiences (if yes)?

[@Anderssisco]

@@nielsaerts9971 Yes i bought it! I really enjoy using it. I find it really sharp and i like the fact that the lens does not extend when zooming. You can check out some of the recent photos i took with it on my instagram. Instagram.com/jnj.pixel

[@anulearntech]

Nice review, I wanted to know how good this lens will perform with the A7III, which I happen to own. I know that the A7III is a bit better at tracking than the A7RIII in general.

[@robwasnj]

In your video comparison to my eyes the 100-400 looked better, surely more contrast. I own both, maybe I'll do my own tests, just go the 200-600 today, have been using the 100-400 for about a year, my copy at least is very very sharp.

[@JuanPons]

Nothing like doing your own tests. One of the challenges of Sony lenses are the variability between copies of the same lens. Some folks claim their 200-600 is not sharp at all where as mine is super sharp.

[@robwasnj]

@@JuanPons I sometimes wonder about the copy variation... my 200-600 is extremely sharp and I have 2 friends with the same lens and theirs are also extremely sharp, that doesn't mean we don't get out of focus photos, motion blur or other bad techniques marring some images. I see people reporting things like 3 bad copies in a row yet we all only ordered one with no issues. I'm in Florida right now doing a lot of shooting, I shared some quick edits on facebook and have people asking me what lens I'm using because they're amazed at the quality, most of the images are from the 200-600 but the 100-400 is just as good. I've been handholding most of the time but I use trees, ground or anything to brace myself and press the shutter like I used to pull the trigger when I shot guns, literally so it surprised you when it goes off. If I get excited and punch the shutter button the images are always degraded from camera shake even at very high shutter speeds. The only issue I see with both lenses are in lower contrast situations they do this pulsing microfocus thing and everything is blurry under those conditions unless you let off the AF-ON button then manually focus. I'm surely not trying to berate anyone but I find it hard to believe so many people got bad copies of these lenses.

[@JuanPons]

@@robwasnj This is not something people are making up. Just peruse some of the Sony lens reviews done by Roger Cicala, the owner of lens rentals. When he does lens reviews he evaluates about 10 different lenses to measure samples-to-sample variability and he has said more than once (and his results also show it) that Sony has significant variability between copies of lenses. At this point Roger is considered to be one of the most persnickety lens evaluators out there.

[@robwasnj]

@@JuanPons That is unfortunate, nobody wants to go through the hassle of returning and having to test every lens. Hopefully Sony improves quality control, I certainly wouldn't be happy had I gotten an unsharp lens but likely would have just assumed that's how they all were. It makes me wonder if there's variability on the 10,000 dollar primes as well.

[@JuanPons]

@@robwasnj Almost all manufacturers have gone thru this at one time or another. For many many years if you wanted to get a sharp Sigma lens you needed to purchase 3, test them out and return two to make sure you got a sharp copy. Sigma has largely overcome these issues. Sony is doing much better recently, but they are also under intense pressure to manufacture more and more so that can sometimes affect quality control.

[@vladepast4936]

Thank you for the video! the last test 100-400 to 200-600 kind of nailed it for me. I never thought 100-400mm is sharp and if the new lens is as sharp as the 100-400mm then it is no go for me. I really hoped I'll have an affordable long native lens :(.

[@JuanPons]

That is too bad. Many of us find the lens sharp, not as sharp as a price, but the tradeoff of having a zoom and a smaller lens more than makes up for it.

[@vladepast4936]

@@JuanPons That is OK! :) Many of you never really used a sharp glass that is why "many of us..." are happy with it. :) But as soon as you are happy with the glass who am I to tell you otherwise! Just looking at the Sony related products reviewers one might say 90% of them, at best, are former Canon Rebel shooters and the rest of them were iPhone shooters. That is why most of the Sony users are easily excited about things like animal yey autofocus. There is no way in hell Sony or anything else can focus on a yey of an Osprey in flight from the 90 feet away. Like here: www.flickr.com/photos/133606804@N04/48112130011/in/dateposted-public/ www.flickr.com/photos/133606804@N04/48285875401/in/dateposted-public/ www.flickr.com/photos/133606804@N04/48261925476/in/dateposted-public/ It is just a sale trick for iPhone users to buy a Sony camera because they do not understand or know any better. I also use/have a Sony camera, I think it is an OK product. I like it for what it is and it is not great. And the Sony glass is not great (mostly) ether. I did not really try all of it but what I tried (rented for a week) it is ok I guess. For Rebel/iPhone users it might be great and it is OK with me. Cheers! Keep shooting. Forgot! Here is one more example of the Sigma ($900) lens on Sony camera from at least 60 feet away at dusk: www.flickr.com/photos/133606804@N04/45224251824/in/dateposted-public/

[@gauthierpeel5620]

For birds I use the a6400 + 100-400 GM. Have you done the comparison between a6400+ 100-400 + x1,4 vs a6400 + 100-600 ? I would love to see that ! And really thank you for your valuable test, it is really THE test I was waiting for.

[@JuanPons]

Fortunately I don’t own a 6400. But I would expect it to perform very well with this lens based on the excellent AF performance of this camera.

[@ajschot]

I saw one review from I think it was Dustin Abbott that did a focus vomoarison of the lenses on different bodies and one of them was the 6400, if i remember it was the same as with a7r3 (better then 100-400 with teleconverter)

[@prathapvlogsyt]

Sony A7R iii + 200-600mm what you think about this combinations? I have doubt about noise, your review please 🙏

[@JuanPons]

This is a great combination and one I have used since the 200-600 came out. The a7RIII is one of cameras with the best image quality. Less noise than just about anything else out there. Check the DXO marks rating if you are skeptical.

[@orbitaljellyfish808]

Great vid 👏👏 Wondering how the lenses compare at proportionate zoom levels (0, 50, 100%). (My hunch is 100-400 is cleaner overall) Any approximations of this in your testing?

[@JuanPons]

I did the comparison at at different focal lengths in my "Sony 200-600 vs. 100-400 comparison" video. Here is the link: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fJnWdImvbrCHi7M Spoiler, at the long end the 200-600 outperformed the 100-400

[@davej6838]

Great info thank you!

[@haouarimonjo9551]

Excellent reportage animalier bravo est merci pour cette belle vidéo

[@jeffbittner1019]

Thanks for this review. It was also very convincing. If we run into each other in Yellowstone, chances are I'll be shooting the A9 with this lens attached. (With better light, I may be shooting the A99 II with the Tamron given the greater resolution).

[@JuanPons]

Awesome!

[@acme9538]

How do you think this lens would perform with the Sony a6500 ? Great review by the way. Thank you.

[@JuanPons]

I am sure it will work very nicely with the a6500

[@petercasey3738]

Hi Juan, great vid & automatic sub really enjoyed, I’m a newbie to photography & got A7Rii about a year ago, have this lens over a month but AF is not so good on moving subjects with A7Rii, stationery subjects wow, if I may my question is: I have A9 arriving Monday & finding it difficult to decide on which SD cards to get for it, any help I will really appreciate

[@JuanPons]

Hi! Yes the AF performance of the a7RII left quite a bit to be desired. The a9 will blow you away. Without a question these are the cards you want for the a9: bhpho.to/30y6E4H These are the fastest cards available on the market and work perfectly with the a9.

[@petercasey3738]

Juan Pons, Thanks Juan, usually I get an email or notification if my answer was replied to but not in this case, have your recommendation (sd card) on order so looking forward, expensive but probably worth it, have you thought about out of interest a setting up guide to the A9 for best settings ( all round ), I followed one but the IQ was no where near good, 200-600 lens used, reverted back to factory settings & better, yes I’m new to this & massive learning curve but I’d nearly lift the A7Rii over the A9 as I know it better, if you jump into the deep end it’s sink or swim, I’m threading water now with A9, the AF tracking amazing but the IQ of my pics not so good, any help appreciated from this newbie, watched 5 biggest mistakes & 4-5 is me so far, enjoy your channel keep it up & thanks for replying

[@daran0815]

Just to confirm your findings, I also did a sharpness comparison between the 100-400GM and the 200-600G and found pretty much the same: the G is slightly sharper, even at 400mm.

[@JuanPons]

Thanks for reporting in, it's good to hear someone else get the same results.

[@njrmax72]

I'm finding similar... Lookup Tim mayos tests on alpha shooters. He found the same results with examples on his website

[@markrigg6623]

Thats at the centre only? What about edge sharpness. Everyone seems to ignore this.

[@njrmax72]

@@markrigg6623 doesn't matter much for Wildlife... If your shooting landscapes you probably don't need 600mm anyway.

[@markrigg6623]

@@njrmax72 I dont get what you mean doesnt matter much for wildlife??

[@gbee8888]

Good to place a face to the voice. Been listening to the recompose podcast for ages. For stalking wildlife I guess white is the wrong color. Lens really neads the camo treatment.

[@JuanPons]

Hi, thanks for the comment. After more than 20 years shooting wildlife, I have never seen wildlife be bothered by the color of a lens. It’s always nice to have a Lenscoat on the lens to protect it though. I am waiting for mine to show up. Take care.

[@camerashy44]

What are you using for the tripod mount/head? My 200-600 is ordered and on the way.

[@JuanPons]

This is the tripod I use: bhpho.to/30HVB9h and this is the bullhead: bhpho.to/2KKpUqc I highly recommend both of these. They are top of the line accessories that will last a lifetime.

[@climbbike1234]

Anyone have raw files? I’m finding it VERY difficult to believe this is sharper at 400mm than the 100-400mm. If so, I might need to reconsider getting it.

[@climbbike1234]

When I made that comment I hadn’t made it to the end of the video yet where you do the close up comparison. Wow. Very impressive. I suppose with the 100-400mm, I’d be shooting at a slightly lower ISO, which would probably make it the same or shaper but then with he 200-600mm, i can go to 600mm. Now I have some thinking to do. Good video. Thanks

[@njrmax72]

I own both and can say they are very very sharp...not sure id base decision on that alone. I think the 200-600 is better for birding....but the MFD on the 100400 let's you get real close to small critters and really fill the frame. I'm going to keep both for different shooting situations

[@JuanPons]

@jeremiah actually with the 200-600 at 600 you are at f/6.3 where as with the 100-400 with the 1.4x tele (to get to 560mm) you are at f/8 so you do have more light and therefore potentially lower ISO with the 200-600 vs the 100-400. At 400mm the roles are reversed. However one 1/3rd of a stop different is not a real difference. So I would consider them equals in this regard. The 200-600 starts at f/5.6 at 200mm but quickly goes to f/6.3 at 300mm.

[@whatmattersmost6725]

Hi Juan, very good job on your review! 1 note mirrorless cameras have front focus or back focus as the focusing is on the sensor but with a DSLR which you may have used does have front & back focus. Also with the A7R3 and A9 the AF is more accurate of focus than you can get with focus peaking or visual at hi mag because the focus by wire is not a accrate as the cameras AF. Please share more again great video!!

[@Leo-jd2ny]

GREAT VIDEO!

[@JuanPons]

Thank you!

[@markrigg6623]

I suspect the edge sharpness wont be as good on the 200-600. Thats the test I'd like to see. Its a common trait of cheaper lenses to be good in the centre only. The test was done at 400mm so it could directly compare to the g master. The problem with this is that most people are buying this lense because it goes to 600! Its how sharp it is at this focal length thats going to matter to most people. A comparison at 600 to the g master at 400 would be more helpful to me. The g master at 400 would create some sort of reference to judge the other lense by - even though its at a shorter focal length!.

[@JuanPons]

For us wildlife shooters the center is the most important. We are not as nitpicky as landscape photographers about the ends for super telephotos. Having said that Super Teles do usually perform quite well on the edges as the don't need to bend the light as much around those edges. Looking at my tests with the 200-600 the edges are almost as sharp as the center which is what I would have expected with a super tele lens. Doing a comparison as to how sharp the 100-400 is at 400mm vs how sharp the 200-600 at 600mm is is kind of a moot point. We would not be comparing apples to apples.

[@djz2308]

Just curious, what's this accent and where did you hear that the r4 will have better dynamic range than the r3? I believe they're the same.

[@JuanPons]

The improved DR was implied in the Sony Press event. Some recent tests have it better at some ISOs and not at others. I am originally from Puerto Rico but have been in the states for over 30 years so my accent is not really Puerto Rican, just an amalgamation.

[@leoleong4639]

Hi Juan what do you think this len with Sony A6600 for wildlife photography any advise thank.

[@JuanPons]

@Leo From everything I have read I think this will be a spectacular combination. I have not had a chance yet to try an a6600 so I can't advise you from person experience, but otherwise it looks like it will be a winner. Hope that helps.

[@kumardoctor3583]

very use-full brilliant i have alpha 7 II WITH A 24 - 240 3.5 i want to buy A LENS for birds and wild life is 100- 400 with a 1.4 tele convertor better idea than the 200m- 600 to avoid the frame drops which i noticed I have used the 100 too 400 for two trips to TANZANIA found that always i did not have the reach FELT needed to go out further did not have the TC ur images have good sharpness u did not care much about the frame drops am a eye doctor not a professional photographer the difference between the G AND THE G MASTER APPRECIATE THE REPLY WOULD PREFER A 200 600 G MASTER LENS

[@JuanPons]

For general wildlife, I would pick the 200-600. But for birds in flight the 100-400 WITHOUT a tele converter. The AF is faster with the 100-400.

[@petermoller9235]

Hallo Juan, ich fotografiere mit der Sony a7R IV und mit dem 100-400 +1,4 teleconverter. (840mm mit Crop F8) ich werde mir das 200-600 ausleihen und hoffe ,dass das Ergebnis noch besser wird . (900mm mit Crop F6,3) etwas mehr Reichweite und Licht mfg Peter

[@Anarki2U]

Get used to the 200-600mm and sell the 100-400mm :)

[@marcosagueromulero9114]

No podrías hacer videos en castellano?

[@JuanPons]

Eso es muy buena idea, y me lo han sugerido otros. Lo he pensado, pero por ahora no tengo tiempo. Quien sabe si en futuro lo podría realizar. Gracias.

[@cuuppaajoe]

Use uncompressed RAW! :/

[@ernreeders5583]

Thanks for the review. Given copy variation it's important to be saying 'my copy of this is sharper than my copy of that'. So my copy of the 200-600 isn't as crisp as my copy of the 100-400 with 1.4 TC. It isn't as sharp as my copy of the Nikkor 200-500mm on my D500 which is a 20 mp APS-C, and it's *double* the price. So my summary is: overpriced consumer-grade zoom. And I'll be selling it.

[@JuanPons]

@ern, not sure if you watched the entire review, but I did make it a point to say "My copies of these lenses" Having said that your experience seems very different than everyone elses. Perhaps you got a bad copy of the 200-600. Also, the Sony 200-600 is not double the price of the Nikon 200-500. That lens is $1250 where as the Sony is $2,000. Not quite double. In any case, if you are shooting with Sony cameras not sure how good having a Nikon 200-500 is going to do for you since the AF performance will be abysmal compared to using a native lens.

[@njrmax72]

I went through 3 of these lenses to get a sharp copy ! So believe it, copy variation is real. My 3rd copy is razor sharp...1st was terrible. Sony - step up your QC! I will say I just sold off my 100400GM... The last copy is just as sharp

[@somewhatwickedful]

Never ever use teleconverters with zoom lenses. A zoom lens is a compromise to start with. Use the 100-400 on its own and the 600 with a converter if needed.

[@JuanPons]

@Richard, I have always thought the same until the Sony 100-400 and their 1.4x TC. The 1.4x is SO good that it barely registers when you do bench tests with it and when used in the field. This has been the first time in 20 years that I have recommended the use of a TC with a zoom to my clients.

[@indysbike3014]

Check out the lens comparison tool at thedigitalpicture.com. I think with 1.4x the quality is very good and the best I've seen from a slow zoomlens.

[@JuanPons]

Interesting about the comparison too, there samples show the 100-400 edging out the 200-600 at 400mm which most of us disagree with. Wonder why that is.

[@dickhorner]

15 minutes "in the field" just talking about stuff that could have been covered while he sat at his desk.

[@rikace_shots]

too much of talking

[@vimalneha]

You took 10+ minutes to show single image. So thumb down!

[@JuanPons]

This is a video about the USE of a 200-600 lens, not a video to showcase pretty images. Are you aware that it is virtually impossible to judge the quality of a lens on a KZbin video? If so what exactly does showing pretty images accomplish?

[@vimalneha]

@@JuanPons It is not about showing the picture. It is like letting the audience waiting for the main VERB until you speak 20 sentences in between. it is about poor presentation. What you are intending is good, that's why people stayed 10+ minutes. The way you did show is below your ability in photography. I have removed dislike. You can get some cue from kzbin.info/www/bejne/hWiQg2unh9eId8k

[@jbush4917]

You lost me with all the garbage about bench testing- GET TO THE POINT. This was REALLY BORING!