Sony 300mm 2.8 GM + TC2 vs 200-600mm: Which is Better?

[@boostedgixxer]

Yes, for sure do a video with the 1.4x TC🙏

[@dca2267]

I love your videos so much that I ended up buying a 200-600 g oss and it's the best purchase of my life

[@munrana]

I have the a6700 and i'd like to get 200-600 some day ✌

[@darek_koralewski_photo]

It would be so great to have 300mm with inbuilt x1.4 TC. As always, great video😊

[@dhscaresme]

Yes this! ☝️

[@polmestra]

I love my A7IV + 200-600 😊 You helped me decide on this setup, not perfect but so good for the money. Specially because I got both second hand.

[@tofayelalomraihan]

I like your overall explanation. No negativity, no adult scene, no Brain sucking things. Watching you with a cup of Coffee, All anxiety gone. Now My Mind relaxed ☺☺Keep going and give us this type of video. I know i never afford this Camera & Lenses . Still Watching You☺☺Take love from your little fan from Bangladesh 🇧🇩

[@_systemd]

your peace-loving comment is in stark contrast with your nuclear hazard profile picture.

[@tofayelalomraihan]

@@_systemd Haha you are right. Actually as a Physics department student this Radio active logo i like 😊

[@ollenilssonen]

@@tofayelalomraihan Thanks for the support!🙏🏻

[@RonaldPlett]

So I'm not the only one who is disturbed when all you wanna see is a lens review and they show a bunch of adult content.

[@tofayelalomraihan]

@@RonaldPlett you are right 👍.

[@LisaSaffell]

I haven't used my 200-600 since I got the 300 2.8. The photos with the 1.4 TC are absolutely beautiful! I have been using the 100-400 and the 300 2.8 with the TC's.

[@FernandosWildlifeAdventures]

I’m in the same boat. I sold my 200-600. I realized it never left the house. I carry my 300 and 70-200 gmii along with teleconverters.

[@SamKnutson]

Same my 200-600 used to live on my main body. It has sat in the closet since I got the 300. The image quality is better. It is a fun fast lightweight lens to shoot. I often shoot at 420mm equipped with the 1.4tc or second most often at 300 bare. I have used the 2tc and it works but I only use for wildlife where I can’t get close at all.

[@clarasdk]

I would love a video with the 200-600 and the 1.4 TC. It would also be super cool if you could test that setup with a A6700. With a crop sensor that would be equal to 1260mm :)

[@alperenakdemir]

It is 1260mm but I tried it and sharpness is not so great.

[@clarasdk]

@@alperenakdemir ok that was what I thought. Good to know 👌

[@_systemd]

​@@clarasdk beyond 600 you get into a challenging territory. check the focal lengths of the big primes. on FF cameras, those can get you beyond 600 with some penalty (400+2x, 600+1.4x, 800 prime is an exception), all the way to 1200 with a reasonable quality. There's no way a crop sensor + consumer zoom + tc is going to give you good image quality at 1260mm.

[@DomBarker]

I have the 1.4 and with the 200-600 its very soft and autofocus is very slow. Can only real use it for video or bird id

[@KurtisPape]

I have the 200-600mm and 1.4x TC. It's soft on fullframe so it definitely wouldn't be worth using on APC-C. I have managed to get some good results using the 1.4x, I need to shut the aperture from F9 to F11 for it to sharpen up to a useable image. An example of the TC working was I had a Stilt bird 10 meters away, with the bare lens to crop out a portrait from 50MP I was left with 7 megapixels, just not enough. With the 1.4x I was left with 15 megapixels but a soft image. Downsized the 1.4x TC image to 10 megapixels and it sharpened up and was usable, so the TC can make a shot possible when it wasn't with the bare lens, but the resulting image is just average, so it's hardly ever worth it.

[@TheLDunn1]

200-600 owner here, but been seriously considering the 300/2.8 I think the amazing thing wasn’t that the 300+converter was just about as sharp as the 200-600, to me, it was the other way around, that the more affordable zoom was as sharp as the top end prime with a converter. Clearly, sharpness between these two is not a deciding factor, so what is: Weight. 450g saving in favour to the prime, however, if you are going to carry both the 2x & 1.4x around with the 300, then the advantage drops to ~250g (the 1.4x is 167g plus a couple of caps) Size. The 300+2x converter is a bit shorter, this might make a difference in some bags. Low light. The 300+2x is a stop faster @600mm, & 2 stops faster @300. Note: 200-600 switches from f5.6 to f6.3 at 300mm Bokeh. The 300+2x has a slight advantage @600mm, & at 300mm a considerable advantage. AF performance. I expected the 300 to be superior here, but, according to the findings in this video, the 200-600 seemed slightly better maybe. IS performance. Not mentioned in this vid, let’s assume they are roughly equivalent, may also change depending upon camera used. Convenience. 200-600 zoom is very convenient for locating subject and zooming in, or taking an environmental shot then zooming in. 300+2x is not convenient as you have to juggle switching the converter on/off the camera when you want more/less reach or a lower light option. Cost. 300 + 2x converter is ~£6000 in UK, 200-600 is currently under £1400 Have I missed anything??? For me: I’d probably want the flexibility of carrying both the 2x & 1.4x converters around, so, the weight saving would be the ~250g The size/length saving would be appreciated, the 200-600 with body attached is a snug fit in my Shimoda insert, I can get it in, but I do have to push the ends of the insert. Low light - the high iso performance of current cameras, plus latest denoise software capability, has extended low light shooting to the point where I feel there is less requirement for me to have a faster lens - I can get by / live with a slightly slower lens. Bokeh - this to me is the main reason for wanting a faster lens these days, for subject isolation. The 300+2x converter was smoother than the 200-600 @600 for sure, & would be even better if shooting both at 300mm. You might be able to use software to slightly improve the look of the 200-600, but this is usually not as effective as software denoise, I’m thinking how you chose to process your image, more than specific bokeh effects software here. @600mm the 200-600mm was not too bad or offensive with its bokeh anyway. AF/IS seems roughly the same. Convenience, I guess if you were always focal length limited, which shooting wildlife you probably are a lot of the time, then you won’t be juggling converters much & always shooting at 600mm, so the zoom only has the advantage to help you acquire the target to start with. If shooting video, then the zoom may be more convenient to help capture a setting scene followed by close up. I really want to justify the 300mm purchase to myself, but, I’m really struggling to make a clear advantage case for it. Even if you take cost out of the equation, there are pros & cons of both, maybe slightly tipped in the favour of the 300, but it’s not huge in my mind if a lot of the time you would be shooting at 600mm. The 300/2.8 just ‘feels’ desirable, like something one aspires to own, rather than it being something that will bring real shooting advantages. Let’s look at it another way, suppose you already have the 200-600, and shooting on say an A7iii / A7iv / A7Riii, iv / v / A1 / A9 /A9ii, would you increase your shooting capability more by spending £6000 to get the 300/2.8 & converter, or, would you be be better by spending £6000 on an A9iii or up coming A1 ii. I’m thinking the more advanced AF, the improved handling due to body/menus, the multi axis LCD, the pre-capture feature, & in the case of the A9iii, the ultra high fps. I think I would argue that spending the £6000 on one of these two cameras might offer significantly more than spending it on the 300/2.8 Another scenario, let’s say you didn’t have the 200-600, but had around £8000 to spend on a camera/lens for wildlife. You could get an A9iii/A1ii & 200-600 or, you could get the 300/2.8, 2x converter and A7iv or A7Riv. Again, I think I’d argue that the 200-600 & better body would offer greater options. …..but, part of me still wants that 300/2.8 😂……help me!!!

[@Hobbies4Hire]

Great job on the video Olle! Thanks for making it.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@Hobbies4Hire Appreciate that. Thanks 🙏🏻

[@lostworld4252]

Exact video I needed but for the Canon side. AMAZING VIDEO!

[@meibing4912]

We need a 300mm f/2.8 from Canon first. Preferably as small and light as the SONY.

[@videolecturesnet]

I absolutely love what you are doing. Your previous video review of the 200-600 convinced me to buy the lens. Thx for a lot of fun experience Dont stop!

[@teashii]

Amazing video, as always! Cant stop watching em. Personally, Id still take the 200-600 over the 300mm lens, since its a zoom lens, and in most cases, I preffer zooms over primes.

[@jakub.slovacek]

Your channel is so great. So much knowledge. Thank you for your time and willingness to share your hard earned knowledge. I'm looking forward to the next part and also to rebuild my T-case during winter time. I'm looking for 4,16 or 4,9 gear ratios for my SJ419. Anyway, cheers from Czech Republic 😉

[@geographerix7104]

Thank you. At what distance were the comparision shots taken? In my experience, the distance of the subject to the camera is very important for such a comparison. At close range (3-20 m), or when you can fill the frame, the 200-600 is sharp. But when you have to shot at 25 m or more and later crop in (like 100%) on the subject you want to show (little bird in flight) there is a difference between the "cheaper" lenses and the very expensive primes. It is not just the max. apperture, it is also the quality or the resolving capabilities of the glas. I use the 200-600 on an a1 and once had the chance to use a 600mm f4 prime lens for some hours. Taking pictures of ducks on a lake at 20+ meters the pictures taken with the 600m prime were significantly sharper and "cropable" than the the ones taken with the 200-600. Same conditions and technique (handheld or on a beanbag, 1/2000 shutter speed f/8). So my question would be: Is the 300 f2.8 + 2TC for long distance subjects (or small birds in flight) closer to the 600mm f4 prime or the 200-600 in terms of image quality?

[@helencogan2187]

Another great video! I have the 200-600 and use the 1.4 tele for videoing. Not a good low light set up but a fantastic reach with great quality.. I was so hoping you were going to say the 300 and 2.0 tele CRUSHED the 200-600..LOL... giving me a good reason to buy it...oh well!! Thank you... I love your channel!

[@rodrigomartin-hidalgo1592]

Love this lenses and equipment comparisons! Keep it coming!

[@ollenilssonen]

@@rodrigomartin-hidalgo1592 Appreciate that you’re commenting to say this! Cheers bud!

[@Richcovephoto]

Great video thank you for putting it together and comparing the lens.. interesting👍🏻

[@PetOnYoutube]

using A tc 1.4 for my 200 600 will try a 2x later. and im enjoying ur content bro.

[@dhscaresme]

Great review and 100% inline with what I have experienced! I also purchased the 300 w/ a 2x. I’ve since acquired a 1.4x and that’s where the sweet spot is. And when it gets dark access to 2.8 is *chefs kiss*! The 2x is just good to have on hand. My dream prime setup is the 300/2.8 (with TCs in the bag) and 600/4. OTOH, I’d rather use that 600/4 money on a big trip!!

[@ollenilssonen]

@@dhscaresme Thank you! That’s fantastic, it’s such a powerful combo! That sounds like a great priority where to put the money, totally agree on that!

[@ShirleyHowarth]

I have the 200-600 and the 1.4 and love to do moon shots. Would love to see a video with that combination.

[@robertdouglas9345]

Enjoyed your real world, honest review. God Bless and keep up the good work!

[@TerezaBarloon]

I didn't have very good luck with the 2x teleconverter. I used it with my 70-200 gmii and I couldn't get a sharp picture out of it to save my life. Granted, I didn't have much time to really explore it, but since I'd heard mixed reviews of it, I wanted to test it before deciding if I'm going to keep it or not and ended up returning it before my 30 days ran out. I really wanted to like it but it just wasn't working for me. I got my money back and used it towards the 16-35 gmii, which I absolutely adore :)

[@canmtb4676]

thanks for the video that has convinced me to stick to 200-600 with A93.

[@jacobbostrm]

Har ett förslag på film, att du gör en review på kameran ”Light L16” kameran 😁 en kamera med 16st linser. Hade varit roligt och se dig använda den. För övrigt är dina videos sjukt bra! Längtar tills varje gång du släpper ny video ☺️👍🏻

[@ollenilssonen]

@@jacobbostrm Bra tips! Stort tack 🙏🏻

[@deanlowe2580]

this is a testament to the 200-600 G being one of the best wildlife if not thee best wildlife zoom out there, also what sold me is the ability to zoom out to grab a target before zooming back in is much easier than trying to pick stuff out on the long tele primes.

[@ph_anto]

Just curiosity, are you using it with an apsc sony camera? I'm asking that because the first time I use the 200-600 I was on a a6400 I had to do that in and out technique, but when I switched to full frame I had no zoom out and the zoom in problems. Now I'm always be able to centre the subject at first try. So I attribuite this problem to evf, which is on the side on the Sony's apsc cameras, and not centered like full frames. That little offset means the world at 900mm equivalent!

[@KungPowEnterFist]

You mean of the almost non-existent Sony wildlife lens lineup. In the overall ranking of wildlife lenses that are currently available to be purchased as new, the E 200-600 is somewhere in the #40's...maybe.

[@ph_anto]

@@KungPowEnterFist I don't understand the point of your comment. Are you criticizing the undeniably most important wildlife zoom lens ever made just because... It's not currently a best seller? And in which list? Just because everyone already owns it, it doesn't mean that it's not the best quality budget zoom choice for wildlife, still 🤣 "Non existent" Sony wildlife lineup. Tell me which indispensable lens I can find in other brands. Sony has 50-400, 100-400, 150-500, 150-600, 60-600, 200-600, 300 2.8, 400 2.8, 500 5.6 and 600 4. Tell me what you cannot do with that lineup and I explain you why it's probably a user problem, not gear 🤣 Could Sony have a better lineup? Of course, because everything can be improved. I'm just waiting for a native 600/5.6, but just for fun, not for need, because I already have the best 600/5.6 ever made: the 300 2.8 + 2x tc. Come on, I'm waiting, explain me why the 2,65kg Canon 100-300 that cost 12k euros is a better choice 🤣. Over 3kg and over 13k euros with 2x Tc for a 200-600 not ever a stop better than 1,3k euros 2,3 Kg Sony's 200-600. Or the overpriced 200-800, more expensive and worse in quality than the 200-600 with 1.4x 🤣 OR THE F11 TELESCOPE AHAHAH And in order to not inflict more pain, I'm not talking about the 800mm that is just the old reflex 400 2.8 IS 3 already mirrorless adapted with just a fixed duplicator inside. That for 20k euros. Your choice 🤣 Nikon has a good lineup, I can tell. But man I don't want that AF in the world. They have a nice 400 4.5 but 600 and 800 6.3 are diffractive, it means great compromises in bokeh, TCs and against light, so it's hard to consider them due to their costs, over 6k both. Let me know what I forgot 😘

[@KungPowEnterFist]

@@ph_anto You are delusional if you think the Sony E 200-600 is "one of the best if not thee best wildlife" lenses out there. You are asking me which list? You are the one that made the claim. But I see now that your claim is changing to "best quality budget zoom." What'll it be next? The best white colored zoom lens which is at least 200mm at the wide end but no more than 600mm at the long end and it must have an "G" sticker somewhere on the lens? Don't be ridiculous. BTW, Sony doesn't have a 50-400, 150-600, 60-600, or a 500 f5.6. Those are Sigma/Tamron lenses. Sony doesn't make those and they are not part of their lineup. But if you want to expand this into "and anything I can mount to my camera," Nikon Z mount takes all 1st and 3rd party E mount lenses in addition to all the many far superior F and Z lenses (and EF lenses). What good is a slightly better sports action AF if you can't mount the best glass. I am glad you like the E 300 f2.8G lens. I wouldn't pay a dime over $1000 for it. It's merely the best 300mm lens you can get for E mount. That's not saying a lot.

[@SylvainGirardot]

Hi, I am very surprised by your findings. I also have the SONY A7R5 with the 200-600 and the 300 kit + teleconverter X2 and my findings are quite different. The sharpness is really better with the 300 X2 according to my findings.

[@fromia1]

Very nice comparison! Now that the 1.4tc is coming, would really appreciate if you could compare and pixel peep the image quality between 2x vs 1.4x vs no tc. I hear that color saturation suffers on the 2x but less of an issue on the 1.4x.

[@AcharyaVision]

You are my inspiration😍. Can't thank you more. ❤

[@ollenilssonen]

@@AcharyaVision Thank you, I really appreciate it!🙏🏻

[@Photqe]

Bro your videos are amazing and inspiring ❤

[@ollenilssonen]

@@Photqe Thank you, I really appreciate it!🙏🏻

[@MeAMuse]

Great video. I recently got the 200-600 to supplement my 100-400. I was definitely wondering whether the 300mm would be worth it. I definitely think I am going to skip it now though (what I really want is a 400mm F4). If I were you I would compare the 300 F2.8 with 1.4 TC with both the 200-600 and the 100-400.

[@EliasHes]

Hello Olle i must say amazing video i really enjoyed it. More videos please. And can we see a video about you how are you cleaning your lens sensor camera what products are you using to clean camera gear and so on thanks bye and stay great. 😉

[@ajnyc22]

Thanks, Olle - that was awesome and very helpful! 😊

[@ollenilssonen]

@@ajnyc22 Glad you enjoyed it!🙌

[@jesoothingproductions6121]

Can you recommend a tripod not too expensive for the 200-600mm? Thank You in advance

[@kingghidorah8106]

I don't care about the focal length, give me the fattest lenses!! i love your vids man, you were the guy that ensured me that the A7IV was totally worth going for. I'm IN LOVE with these 120 AF calcs per second. Only missing with screwdriver lenses.

[@ZPLAYSFN]

Could you try a canon EOS M50 I’m just getting into birding and need some help maybe settings and tips!

[@LUITESLIFE]

Mmm ok 300mm f2.8 (with converter) looks sharper to me @2:15 - or it could be the contrast. Tiny difference though. The 200-600mm performs insanely well for the price.

[@MatthewMKF]

Only have the 200-600 currently but love the video

[@ollenilssonen]

@@MatthewMKF It’s such a great lens!

[@MatthewMKF]

@@ollenilssonen I know, I love it!

[@cameramoods1]

Great Comparison! In my Experience the out of Focus is something the A7RV likes to do especially if teleconverters are attached. All in all both Combos stand no Chance against the 500mm F4 Sigma, that has Sharpness of another level. That's why i ditched my 200-600, was pretty underwhelming on the A7RV honestly. And with the 2x TC the 300mm looses a lot. Still has the Weight and Size Advantage though. The 1.4 TC is much much better in this regard, also usable on the 200-600.

[@terje5723]

Thx Olle, was curious about this comparison. While the F5.6 does have somewhat better bokeh, the sharpness etc. of the 200-600 is very impressive. For an amateur as myself upgrading makes absolutely no sense. Would love to see if the 300 fares better with the 1.4x converter which I suspect it will

[@AndyLSB]

So what you're saying is that I NEED BOTH 300 F2.8 and the 200-600 to be happy ? 🤔 Sounds about right 🤭 who needs a house or a car or food am I right ? 😂 lol Great video, both are fantastic lenses, its a complement to each other IMO, the 200-600 its a fantastic lens and will STILL be a tool for professionals who want versatility but when the moment is right, the 300 will shine and show EXACTLY why it is that expensive, I would have 2 bodies ready, one with the prime and the other with the Zoom.

[@dstekel]

Thanks again for the upload, loving your style and it motivates me to grab my 200-600mm and go out more. Any thoughts on the A7RV? Been considering to upgrade from A7III..

[@gussa23]

Great comparisson, commited through the whole video even though I'll never have the budget for a 300mm prime :D One thing though, for a fair comparisson, espessially for the bokeh, the aputure should be the same for the photos. A side point can be that the prime can open up more for better bokeh and light, but when comparing the quality they should have the same settings. Might be why you didn't get the same focus result on the branch aswell, since the focus field is smaller on the 300mm :)

[@cameraprepper7938]

A 2x teleconverter has to be extreme good to perform well, so most Lenses with a 2x does perform ok, but not really good. 1.4x can be nearly as good as without a teleconverter. I went for the excellent very compact and light weigh Sigma DG DN OS Sports Lens which is sharper than the Sony 300mm 2.8 GM with a 2x, I do not have 600mm, but I have spent less than half the money than the Sony + teleconverters. The 500mm Sigma and the Sony 135mm 1.8 GM Lens are a perfect combo for me, with 60 megapixels Cameras you can crop a lot when using the 135mm, I have several times cropped to the equivalent to a 300+mm Lens !

[@stanlygaston3305]

To be very sincere and honest with you, I bought my 200 600 lens thanks to you showing it in one of your videos and what it can do, excellent, that's why I came to the conclusion of buying it. I also have the teleconverter and I really don't regret this purchase. If I could buy another one it would be the 600 mm F4, but the price is practically unattainable for me at this moment since I am a father and the expenses with a child are very high.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@stanlygaston3305 The 200-600 is such a fantastic lens. great decision on getting it! Yes the 600 f4 would be a dream, but I agree. It’s very expensive and having food and clothes for the kids is a wise priority 😁

[@_systemd]

having a kid is really unfortunate, I hope some day you get to your 600mm f4 dream!

[@stanlygaston3305]

@@_systemd I appreciate your comment. I love my daughter more than anything in this world and my wife equally. A lens and a camera are something that I can buy at some point. Of course, I have a dream and it would be sometime to be able to buy a 600 mm F4, but for now it is not something that takes away my calm or my patience. The most important thing for me is to bring bread home every day and see my daughter happy playing with her teddy bears.

[@BennyGangsters]

your photos are unreal!!

[@Theforestdeer]

hi, I love your videos and photos, I'm also a little photographer with the same passion as you. I was wondering if by any chance you could advise me or tell me what app you use to best edit your photos?? A thousand thanks

[@konstantin_redeker]

Like your mustache! 🙂 Cool video as well!

[@ollenilssonen]

@@konstantin_redeker haha thanks!!

[@SymbiotAlpha]

I've been hearing this around KZbin a lot lately. I really love the idea of having the 300mm at 2.8, 420mm with 1.4 tc at F4, 600 with 2x tc at 5.6. but the price is just wild considering at 600mm there isn't too much of an advantage of at all besides weight.

[@KurtisPape]

And if you shoot small birds you will always naturally want to use the 2x converter, which will make you wonder why got a similar performing lens for 4 times the price.

[@SymbiotAlpha]

@@KurtisPape yeah the 300 2.8 would be so nice for larger animals and what not for sure! Hell 420 at F4 would be amazing. Especially if you have an a1 or a7r5 and use with the apsc mode. And probably still have some ability to crop.

[@stretch90]

@@KurtisPape The performance really isn't that similar. For birds in flight especially the autofocus of the 300 and 2x is significantly better than the 200-600. I don't really agree with the results Ollie got because I find the sharpness also significantly better with the 300 and 2x. And besides that there are lots of scenarios where you're close to birds and don't need to be at 600 so the 300 will be more useful.

[@SymbiotAlpha]

@@stretch90 yeah I mean that's totally fair to point out. However the thing to consider is with both telecoverters the price difference is more than 3x. Not to mention in order to "zoom" you need to switch out the telecoverters. This might not be possible in certain scenarios. In the perfect situation where you are mounted on a tripod waiting for a specific bird or animal, great. If you are just out walking around and trying to capture whatever happens then it far more challenging. Losing out on the 200-300 focual lengths does kinda suck. Let's also be fair that the 200-600 isn't junk. At the end of the day it boils down to money and how you capture your photos. But if money wasn't an issue we would all have A1's, a7r5 or the a9iii. The a7iv with the 200-600 is cheaper than the 300 2.8. close to what the a7r5 costs. Less than a1 in price alone or the a9iii.

[@Trident_Media7104]

Surely we are due a Sony FE 200-600mm Mkii soon? 😍

[@funnybeingme]

I doubt it. It's a very good lens despite the age, better than the 100-400GM (this one needs an update badly).

[@Jonathantuba]

I got the 300 back in March and honestly have not bothered using the 200-600 since, although I am purely a photographer and don't take videos. For mis-focusing with the 2x I have not experienced. However I am using with the A9iii, so that issue could be something specific with the A7Rv combination? I know there was something similar with the 200-600 when it first came out until a firmware update.

[@Shot_by_anishbalaji]

hi can you make a video with sigma 60 to 600mm 10X lens ?

[@Cheryl407]

I sold my 200-600 because it was too long for my to carry around. I love my Sony 300 and use it all the time. Now I am travelling to photograph the manul cat and I've been advised to use the 600mm. I shoot still and video also. Carrying both lenses is out of the question. It seems to me that the 300mm+2x tc should be a fair trade with the 600mm, which is an F/4. What do you think?

[@_Suzuka_Joe]

curious if the 100-400GM is sharper than the 300GM with 1.4x TC.

[@irbis8801]

I think, 300 mm lens only have advantage when you can get close to wildlife. If you can’t- you should crop or use teleconverter. For me it’s better to have lens , which I will use in his native focal range most of the time. If Sony will do the lens like nikkor 400 mm f4,5 it will be better I think, because it’s lightweight and you have more focal range in native glass.

[@alexavramescu]

Do you encounter some chromatic aberration on the edge of the subject with 200-600? To me in bright sun happens every time. Great video btw!

[@DevinWxChase]

I recently upgraded to the 300mm + 2xTC combo from the 200-600mm and honestly, it's been a night and day difference for me personally. The autofocus on the 300mm is absolutely insane and has greatly outweighed the fixed focal length issue for me even with the 2xTC on, and being able to take off the TC and have an insane f2.8 telephoto lens for owls has been a game changer for me. I'll be selling the 200-600mm soon probably, I just don't feel a reason to even carry it with me anymore.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@DevinWxChase It’s a fantastic setup. It’s been on since I got it so I agree with you. The performance with the 1.4x is mind blowing. Performs like a 400mm prime lens which is insane! Congrats on your purchase!

[@DevinWxChase]

@@ollenilssonen Yeah getting a 1.4xTC is next on the list. It's such a fun lens to use!

[@frostybe3r]

Your focus acquisition issues are due to the A7RV, not the lens, that camera even has issues with the 200-600 when compared to an A1 or A9iii.

[@Mindaugas4]

hey, thanks for bringing that up - it's something I've noticed on my A7RV + 200-600mm combo - it just misses the focus on the subjects which are further away - more often than I'd want - I even brought both - camera and the lens to official Sony approved service, they did some optimization, it was a bit better maybe, but the issue still persist. And I think I almost never have the issue with 70-200 GMII combo, so I think Your point might be valid :) I was always wondering if I received some "defected" copy or is it a issue in general, especially after the camera was promoted as superb autofocus capable camera by multiple review channels

[@frostybe3r]

@Mindaugas4 I sold my A1 for an A7RV for a month and instantly regretted it as I mainly do wildlife and BIF, the A7RV had constant issues with focusing for fast moving subjects, despite what Sony and other reviewers say.

[@Mindaugas4]

yeah, especially if someone , person or animal , is moving towards You, even if it's just a regular walking speed - focus is almost always behind, it just fails to keep up - subject in the first photo is in focus and sharp, but then the rest photos are blurry (I mean subject is out of focus) - same as on my Sony A7IV - don't know why - perhaps because of slow sensor readout speed, or maybe because it's doing black-outs when shooting continuously , but what i saw from other videos, cameras like A1, A9, Nikon Z9 or Z8 does not have such issues with subjects moving directly towards them.

[@Jimmiehammarstrom47]

So, the versatility on the 200-600 is better? zoom plus the sharpness. 300 prime, blurrier background, prime quality. 600 with tc. But what is the price differens on the two? If you only could choose one of them, zoom or prime? 😎🤓

[@mihavet]

Hello, je suis français et me pose la question si je dois garder mon sigma 500mm f5.6 dg dn os sport ou le vendre pour acheter le Sony 300mm f2,8 sachant que j’ai le 200_600mm……..Je fais de l’animalier principalement……difficile pour moi de suivre la vidéo 😅

[@runepehrsson73]

Thanks for all good videos. 1.4 with the 200-600 would be really nice to see 👍

[@pdog109]

what about Sony 300mm 2.8 GM + TC2 vs Sony 600mm F4?

[@imanolcamblor]

A video of the 1.4x on the 300 and also on the 70-200 f2.8 (98-280 f4)

[@luispiovani9542]

Just came back from the jungle. It was a nightmare to try to get pictures of birds in really low light with the 200-600. The high iso ruined most of the pictures. But that one us the only environment in which the lens suffer, and an external flash could help a little.

[@AndreaCanins]

Your videos just 🤩

[@Hawke-YT]

Whats a good camera and lens under 500?

[@princeuzieri4548]

😂😂😂

[@davidsherrington59]

300 with 2x is sharper. Look at the tiny dust spots on the paper and they are more visible than the 200-600. I have both lenses and find the 300 outperforms the zoom in all regards. I also found it to be on par, if not slightly better, than the 600 f4 GM in my tests

[@_systemd]

one of the following is wrong - your 600 f4 or your testing methodology. It is true though that you don't specify in what metrics it outperforms the 600 , so maybe it sounds better when you knock it over, I don't know.

[@JWS-66]

nice comparing video, how do you like the A7R V and the 200-600 combo? for example wildlife and birds? with photo's and video's, thanks

[@Attya-y2y]

So if I understood correctly : 200-600 : more versatile, more convenient to use especially for video, easier to get shots, no need to swap a converter and expose the camera sensor when out filming. Way cheaper 300 : Able to get the best quality shots when at 300. Better in low light conditions. Gets similar results to 200-600 when at 600 with a 2x TC. Harder to get the right focal length for the shot, less convenient for videos. You have to expose camera sensor while out filming when switching from 300 to 600. A lot more expensive. In other words, the 200-600 can allow you to get more shots, more easily, except in low light, but if you want to get the top tier quality shots you need the 300. Kind of a tradeoff between quantity and quality I guess

[@sayantanmondal1998]

Just got my first camera and lens 2 days back (a6700 and 200-600mm). Wanted know one thing. Do you use any uv filter on these lenses for protection?

[@ollenilssonen]

@@sayantanmondal1998 Congrats on an awesome camera setup, I’m excited for you!! No I don’t use any filerts😊

[@cking74sg]

Prime lens is not on every one list, 3x the price (maybe 4x). Then on top of that, unless into wildlife photography, else can forget it. If getting the 300mm, best to invest on A9 mk3, perfect match :P Anyway, I do own the 200-600mm, I use for eclipse and wildlife with apsc camera. :D

[@richardbedford5558]

The 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4x tc gives great image quality and speed. It's like my 600mm f4 but at 420mm f4.

[@jshorts637]

Also the price difference is crazy 😅it's around £6300 for the teleconverter setup but £1500 for the 200-600 - still a great video though

[@Weezlie0806]

The 200-600 mm with the tc x1.4 or x2 ?

[@GJHuman]

How does the 300m f2.8 compare to your Sigma 500mm f4? They are more in the same league. Especially if the Sony has the 1.4x TC.

[@deecee284]

What location were you where seeing those owls ?

[@sohamsolanki1523]

Love from India. What gears do you use for filming your self ..

[@jbiha453]

I wish to try VIVO X200 pro mini phone is amazing for photographie and focus with IA

[@jkejules]

Hey, I've been watching you for quite a while now. I'm really into animal/wildlife photography and I'm thinking about getting my first telephoto lens (I currently use the Tamron 28-200). I've been watching reviews and I'm thinking about getting the Tamron 150-500mm FE instead of the 200-600 as the tamron is a lot more lightweight and affordable. I'm curious to know if you or anybody has used that lens and has any feedback or suggestions. thanks :)

[@KYOS_dnb]

bought a used 200-600 for the price of a new tamron and im very happy with it

[@aergl]

I like your hat. Is it your apparel? Where can I grt it?

[@TomatenDK]

Which of the 3 "modes" on the lens are you using for the bird on the branch ? I either get unsharp og huge iso noise (auto iso). Really frustrating that I struggle so much with this lens :( I know Im not a pro....but still....

[@ollenilssonen]

I 99% of the time use the full focus distance. Auto ISO is very convenient, but I find the camera to often overexpose the images. So if you haven’t, try to underexpose on the exp-compensation wheel to about -1.3/1.7. it could you you achive a bit sharper photos!

[@TomatenDK]

@@ollenilssonen thank you for that tip. BTW I ment which "focus modes" on the lens :) F.ex I was shooting dogs running and playing and couldnt get super sharp shots. Maybe cause of the light end of afternoon. But what mode would you use for that maybe ? Panning (mode 2) ? Or should mode 1 be just fine ? And what mode for birds ? 2 for panning or 3 for erratic movement ?

[@torimidokoro]

@@TomatenDK I think your idea is spot on. When it's stationary, 1 When it's moving sideways, panning -2 When it's irregular, 3 And for the 200600G, the most important thing is brightness. If the dog is running in low light, an F1.8-2.8 lens is preferable. This is a translation from Japanese by software, so there may be some problems with the expression. Thanks.

[@RadioSounds_Berlin]

bring the sigma 500mm f5.6 into play. might also be of interest to some people.

[@laurenlash9603]

such a cool lens!

[@Daveswildlife]

Most people find the 300 GM + x.20 to be sharper and has more contrast than 200-600. I did. Perhaps you have a really good 200-600?

[@RichardLarssen]

Great video. I use the 200-600 G and I am wondering about replacing it with the 300. Have you tested it with the 1.4X teleconverter also? I have that, so that would "make" it a great 420mm F/4. A video of that would be great. I have heard the 1.4X is stellar with this lens, much better than the 2X.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@RichardLarssen I’ve so far only tested it for about 10 minutes in the backyard. The sharpness is outstanding with 1.4x! Excited to give it a real try soon

[@RichardLarssen]

@@ollenilssonen Great, and will you make a video?

[@ollenilssonen]

@@RichardLarssen Most likely!

[@RichardLarssen]

@@ollenilssonen Supert, ser frem til den :)

[@DAVE_WHITE]

different tools for different jobs. Use what works for you my 200-600 gets the call a lot on the a9 and a6700

[@tonysvensson8314]

You didn´t mention the bad magnification due to distance to the subject and focus brathing on the 200-600. If you shoot under 15-30 m distance with the 200-600 the maximal focal length of that lens is 500-550 mm. For me that would be a problem and you can see the problem in the images that you presented here. Just a comment to a splendid comparison video of two fantastic lenses.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@tonysvensson8314 Thank you for the valuable input!

[@Bo_Hazem]

200-600mm is superior for filmmaking as it can take matte boxes. But photography needs usually higher shutter speed when you can getaway with 1/50s for 24fps or even 1/250s for 120fps.

[@KurtisPape]

Just the video I needed! I think the 300mm F2.8 would perform better with a 1.4x TC, for me 420mm would just be too short and would only be good as a birds in flight lens. I think I will stick to the 200-600mm and wait for a Sony 500mm or 600mm lightweight prime.

[@Piku-f3f]

Would like to see a video like this with iphone 16 pro max....

[@TomMasonPhoto]

I've said it for years the 300mm 2.8 is the GOAT.

[@finduspeterson3325]

I LOVE your Videos

[@akan7336]

riview a7c mark 2 for wildlife

[@DarkHAS13L-x9o]

i want you to try vivo x200 pro plssssssssss

[@Trk-El-Son]

Hej Olle! I love your content. Question: I have the 200-600mm and will be getting the 70-200mm f2.8 II very soon (for other reasons than wildlife/birding, though). But the 70-200 will be useful to complement the 200-600 at dusk and dawn. Having those two, would you not say that the 1.4x TC would be a purposeful addition (and moreso than the 2.0x TC)?

[@marutialtolxi]

Thank you Ollie.using the 200-600 for the last 4 years.Thought of 300 2.8 will replace it.But not now afer seeing your episode

[@funtaril]

200-600 seems to have larger angle of view, so it's probably actually less than 600mm at closer and medium distances

[@BADHON_.M]

Try s24ultra plz plz ❤❤

[@CamillaI]

You need the 1.4 TC yesterday. A 420mm f4 is what I tend to start with these days . I have found the sharpness and speed of focus with the 2x TC superior to the 200-600 . Just the stop of light alone slows the 200-600mm after 300mm you are shooting at f6.3 rather than F5.6. Also the compactness of the 300mm means less distance for the linear motors to travel. Two physical aspects which certainly play a role in the Superiority of the 6K lens. The flexibility of the zoom comes at a cost. Again as mentioned the physical weight for a lot of people is a reason alone to go for the 300mm plus TC. Unless video shooting 90% of your average photographers shots are at the long end . I know at least two pros now who shoot Sony with two 300mm lens with the A9III. Still A1 2 coming so lots more decisions to make going forward . Fun times for Sony shooter 🤔

[@anulearntech]

The 300 GM f2.8 costs 4 times more than the 200-600. And it does f5.6 at 600mm with the 2x TC.

[@ollenilssonen]

@@anulearntech Yes, correct

[@fredlar9421]

In theory, if two lenses have the same focal length, the physically longer one has the better optical quality. It's simple, the shorter lens needs to bend the light at greater angle than the longer one. Of course it may not be 100% correct, the elements material and precision can over turn the above. When the two lenses are at the same grade, for example 600/4, Sony=Canon, and better than Nikon who is the shortest.