Loving these detailed reviews and comparisons. I got the A1 + 600 F4, really considering getting the 300 2.8 to have along. And also use it with the 2X on hikes
The 300 GM has been my favourite lens ever since coming out and I now use considerably more than my 600 GM. I agree with all your comments, but one thing I would add is the 300 GM plus 2x has considerable advantage over the 600 when hand holding waiting for action like a bird to take off. I can only hold up steady the 600 for seconds, while the 300 I can for several minutes if need be. Also I feel the AF is actually faster with the 300 GM. Image quality wise, I have never been disappointed with 300 - in real life I can’t see the difference, other factors such as shutter speed, accuracy of focus and atmospheric distortion have far greater effect. For myself I have not used the 200-600 since getting the 300 GM, image quality is clearly better and it is so much more pleasurable to use, not just being lighter, but the weight being closer to the camera. If I was to buy one lens for wildlife photography, it would now be without hesitation the 300 GM with the 1.4x and 2x TC
Good review!!!! ik have the 300mm and 200-600mm, (the 600 mm f 2.8 is not 0n my list today as most wanted) But it is logical that the 600 mm is optical a smal step up, compared to the 300mm with 2 x teleconverter. But with the 1.4 tele on 300mm the results are outstanding (420mm and f 4,2). And wat makes to me this 300 mm the first choice lens is: 1) this versatile (300,440 and 600mm), lightweight, good weight balance. 2)Optic is good and fast. 3)Fantastic to take with you on a hiking trip. Also to take with you in the plain . But for realy lowlight situation the 600mm f 4 is the winner but with 6,7 pound it is for very specific users. So my ranking is 1. 300mm f 2,8, 2. 200-600 5,6- 6,3 3. and for people with deep pockets an shooting from tripod the 600mm
In relation to the photo comparisons between the 600mm f4, the 200-600mm and the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc, I have seen your photo comparisons on your website and downloaded the images, thank you. I think the 200-600mm is slightly better than the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc in the centre with better retained detail and better contrast. I appreciate that around the edges it's a different story and also that at greater distances and in real world shooting conditions the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc might perform slightly better than the 200-600mm. I also appreciate differences in focus speed, weight, the amount of light coming into the lenses and the versatility of both the 300mm and 200-600mm in different situations. I do find myself spending 95% of my time using the 600mm f4, however. By next week, I'll have all three lenses and look forward to doing some testing with birds in flight. All great lenses...Thanks again, Arash!
I've been struggling (for some time now) to accept that putting a large bit of alien glass (a 2x tc) in front of an engineered prime lens like the 300mm f2.8 can still produce images close to the 600mm f4, it just seems so amazing to me. I am going to go for it (buy the 300mm f2.8) , I think, as I am a great believer in quality glass (I already have and love the 600mm f4 and also the 200-600mm, which for the money is superb imo). I would have been interested to see the comparison between the 300mm at 600mm and the 200-600mm at 600mm just like you did with the 600mm f4 - visually, in the form of the feathers photos. Thanks again!
Great video, very informative! When shooting at 600mm with high ISOs do you still prefer the 300 with 2X converter over the 200-600? I know you get a little more light with the 300 2X setup, but converters magnify everything including noise I assume? Thanks!
thanks, convertor does not impact noise. the 300 f/2.8+2X TC is slightly faster (f/5.6) that means you can use 1/3 lower ISO, it is also slightly sharper which means less sharpening may be needed. all of this means the image looks cleaner or less noisy than the 200-600
Thank you for the review. My question to you is regarding the difference that you have experienced between the 1.4x and 2x converters on the 300mm in terms of sharpness and focus speed? Do you prefer using one over the other? Have you used any third party lens caps on the 300mm? Thanks for your response.
Thank you for the comment. The 1.4X is tad sharper as expected but the difference is small, no noticeable difference in AF speed with A1. I use the TC based on the focal length I need. I think you are referring to 3rd party lens hood, I prefer to use the stock lens hood that's made of carbon fiber, higher quality and sturdier than 3rd party usually. I rest the lens on the hood when placing the rig on the ground.
I was referring to lens caps not hoods. The supplied cap is rather inconvenient so I noticed traditional lens caps are available from third parties. The one I saw was from Zemlin Photo. I don’t understand why Sony would not provide a traditional lens cap for this lens. Just wondering if you have ever seen or used them. Thanks
@@iwcpilot1151 Not to steal Arash's thunder, but he thought that you were asking about lens hoods. Once I took my 300mm f/2.8 out of the box, I never use a lens cap. The hood serves to protect the front element. For air travel, it goes in a sewed up hockey sock.
400 GM is not a good choice for bird photography because it costs and weights almost the same as the 600 GM but it has significantly less reach. in certain conditions the f/2.8 might by useful but I would definitely opt for 600 GM first.
Loving these detailed reviews and comparisons. I got the A1 + 600 F4, really considering getting the 300 2.8 to have along. And also use it with the 2X on hikes
The 300 GM has been my favourite lens ever since coming out and I now use considerably more than my 600 GM. I agree with all your comments, but one thing I would add is the 300 GM plus 2x has considerable advantage over the 600 when hand holding waiting for action like a bird to take off. I can only hold up steady the 600 for seconds, while the 300 I can for several minutes if need be. Also I feel the AF is actually faster with the 300 GM. Image quality wise, I have never been disappointed with 300 - in real life I can’t see the difference, other factors such as shutter speed, accuracy of focus and atmospheric distortion have far greater effect. For myself I have not used the 200-600 since getting the 300 GM, image quality is clearly better and it is so much more pleasurable to use, not just being lighter, but the weight being closer to the camera. If I was to buy one lens for wildlife photography, it would now be without hesitation the 300 GM with the 1.4x and 2x TC
Good review!!!! ik have the 300mm and 200-600mm, (the 600 mm f 2.8 is not 0n my list today as most wanted) But it is logical that the 600 mm is optical a smal step up, compared to the 300mm with 2 x teleconverter. But with the 1.4 tele on 300mm the results are outstanding (420mm and f 4,2). And wat makes to me this 300 mm the first choice lens is: 1) this versatile (300,440 and 600mm), lightweight, good weight balance. 2)Optic is good and fast. 3)Fantastic to take with you on a hiking trip. Also to take with you in the plain . But for realy lowlight situation the 600mm f 4 is the winner but with 6,7 pound it is for very specific users. So my ranking is 1. 300mm f 2,8, 2. 200-600 5,6- 6,3 3. and for people with deep pockets an shooting from tripod the 600mm
Great video, thank you. Imagine if Sony started putting in built-in tcs!!!
In relation to the photo comparisons between the 600mm f4, the 200-600mm and the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc, I have seen your photo comparisons on your website and downloaded the images, thank you. I think the 200-600mm is slightly better than the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc in the centre with better retained detail and better contrast. I appreciate that around the edges it's a different story and also that at greater distances and in real world shooting conditions the 300mm f2.8 plus 2x tc might perform slightly better than the 200-600mm. I also appreciate differences in focus speed, weight, the amount of light coming into the lenses and the versatility of both the 300mm and 200-600mm in different situations. I do find myself spending 95% of my time using the 600mm f4, however. By next week, I'll have all three lenses and look forward to doing some testing with birds in flight. All great lenses...Thanks again, Arash!
I've been struggling (for some time now) to accept that putting a large bit of alien glass (a 2x tc) in front of an engineered prime lens like the 300mm f2.8 can still produce images close to the 600mm f4, it just seems so amazing to me. I am going to go for it (buy the 300mm f2.8) , I think, as I am a great believer in quality glass (I already have and love the 600mm f4 and also the 200-600mm, which for the money is superb imo). I would have been interested to see the comparison between the 300mm at 600mm and the 200-600mm at 600mm just like you did with the 600mm f4 - visually, in the form of the feathers photos. Thanks again!
Thanks for the very thorough review.
great vid , very detailed and informative. thx!
A question : when shooting distant subjects do the 300mm+2x keep up with the resolving of the 600f4 ?
thank you, it is similar to test images I show in the video.
Great info and ability to understand!!
Great video, very informative! When shooting at 600mm with high ISOs do you still prefer the 300 with 2X converter over the 200-600? I know you get a little more light with the 300 2X setup, but converters magnify everything including noise I assume? Thanks!
thanks, convertor does not impact noise. the 300 f/2.8+2X TC is slightly faster (f/5.6) that means you can use 1/3 lower ISO, it is also slightly sharper which means less sharpening may be needed. all of this means the image looks cleaner or less noisy than the 200-600
Thank you for the review. My question to you is regarding the difference that you have experienced between the 1.4x and 2x converters on the 300mm in terms of sharpness and focus speed? Do you prefer using one over the other? Have you used any third party lens caps on the 300mm? Thanks for your response.
Thank you for the comment. The 1.4X is tad sharper as expected but the difference is small, no noticeable difference in AF speed with A1. I use the TC based on the focal length I need. I think you are referring to 3rd party lens hood, I prefer to use the stock lens hood that's made of carbon fiber, higher quality and sturdier than 3rd party usually. I rest the lens on the hood when placing the rig on the ground.
Are you asking about lens caps or the lens Hood?
I was referring to lens caps not hoods. The supplied cap is rather inconvenient so I noticed traditional lens caps are available from third parties. The one I saw was from Zemlin Photo. I don’t understand why Sony would not provide a traditional lens cap for this lens. Just wondering if you have ever seen or used them. Thanks
@@iwcpilot1151 Not to steal Arash's thunder, but he thought that you were asking about lens hoods. Once I took my 300mm f/2.8 out of the box, I never use a lens cap. The hood serves to protect the front element. For air travel, it goes in a sewed up hockey sock.
@@iwcpilot1151 I use a LensCoat XXL soft lens cap with the same camo pattern as the lens coat for the 300, I don't use the one that comes with it.
I could probably get only one. Why not choose the 400 GM instead?
400 GM is not a good choice for bird photography because it costs and weights almost the same as the 600 GM but it has significantly less reach. in certain conditions the f/2.8 might by useful but I would definitely opt for 600 GM first.
@@ArashHazeghi Thank you!