Sony 600mm f4 GM & 200 600mm G - hands on review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 чер 2019
- In this video we take a first look at the two new lenses from Sony. The 600mm f4 GM, and the 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G both for E mount
Sony invited me out to the release for these two lenses. I had 24hours of hands on experience with them as we shot a New York Redbull's match, and what wildlife we could find in the area.
you can pick up the 200-600mm here - amzn.to/2KOhwax
#sony, #gearreview, #nickpage - Розваги
I love playing these videos when you're traveling
Finally, good to see a photographer get invited to these events and not just the gear review channels.
The 2 best people on UA-cam to watch standing next to each other for a minute, you and Mark. 😃
Mark is a super nice guy
When words are hard, just make em up like Nick! 😉😆👏🏻 Great brief man. That 200-600 looks PERF!
Seen plenty of the other videos from this shoot, and Nick has by far the best images. Great demo Nick, Thanks.
🙏 thank you!
200-600 going to be a best seller I think, in the wildlife photography world 👍
Great review. Certainly two very capable lenses. Mark Smith with an appearance. Can't wait to see what he can do with these as well
Great releases from Sony, awesome video production Nick 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I've been watching numerous reviews of the 200-600G recently, and it it's fun to see same event from yet another perspective! More of other photographers in this video, and so many familiar faces! 🙂
This was a great video Nick! It was so nice to see all of my favorite UA-camrs in one spot! Now that the new glass is out how do you feel about your switch to Sony? I can't wait to see your in-depth review keep up the good work!
Awesome. OMG you are standing next to Mark Smith! Lucky you. :)
Great review Nick. Sony seem to be killing it. The price for that 200-600 seem so attractive.
in awe at the size of those lenses, absolute units
That's what she said :)
Very cool watching you Mr channel grow! Keep it up man!
Awesome video Nick. That thing is a beast!! (600mm).
Dude that 600 f4 is crazy. Amazing how they made it so light. The 200-600 looks a bit more viable and likely. I'm envious of that beauty. Great video bro. Would be awesome for wildlife photography.
"Amazing how they made it so light?" Plastic, that's how.
Congratulations on your First Sony Press invite (I'm so jelly)
been following you for a long time (off and on) and was not surprised to see you switch to Sony
your 5 years of hard work and passion have paid off and you deserve it (Hope you thank your maker every day)
Content creators such as yourself make me feel confident that I can get where you are someday
Can't wait to see where you are in a year form now (we'll be watching 😘 )
Best regards, Rick
Thanks for the kind words rick!!
Great vid, Nick!
Cool to see, saw you in the background of Mark Smith's video and love you with Gavin!
Awesome video Nick. Love the Sony system.
Nice video Nick. Officially have lens envy :)
Good job on the review Nick.
Nick.....THOSE ARE SOME AWESOME SHOTS!!!!!!
Great review. I have both lenses, and with the a9II they are great for wildlife with a monopod AND a gimbal...
Am a new person to everything Nick and loving it all. Recently I had the opportunity to use the f4 600mm here in South Australia at a wildlife park. Camera used was an a6000 and as an experiment between the 600 and camera I threw in a 2x tele converter. Shooting lions the image quality is stunning and I came away with one I am very happy with among all the other 'good' ones. I already have the 100-400 'G Master' and my friend has the 200-600 'G' now to win lotto..
Great job at showing the benefits and weaknesses of those lenses! Seems like the 200-600 is better for some sports, but the 600mm f4 is ideal for birds in flight!
Sweet! That 200-600 G looks nice!
edit: and, that 600 GM looks like a divorce!
Travis Etherton 😂
Sony is answering its critics and kicking ass and taking names, wow!!!
OH.....MY....GOD, I'm so going to buy one of these. You didn't mention it photographs the dead!! John Candy at 10:42 , soooo amazing and cool. kudos broffa.
New Jersey has a ton of wild life! Tons.
Well if that don’t get Sony users wetting themselves in excitement nothing will. Most impressive tests Nick. They suited a man of your statue well.
thank you for review, it was great, I am interested in that 200-600mm. Do you think that it is usable in Landscapes insted of 100-400mm?
Nick, will you be testing the 200-600 for landscapes by any chance?
I'm already planning on getting the 200-600. The amazing AF and the fact that it doesn't change size as you zoom got me. I'm just waiting to see how the IQ compares to the other lenses in its range. I expect it to be one of the best.
Check the lens comparison tool at thedigitalpicture.com. The 200-600mm is the sharpest 600mm zoomlens on the market. The Sigma 60-600mm is second best.
Just ordered my 200-600!
It’s amazing that you can attach something like that to your camera
Or rather, attach your camera to something like that 😁
Wildlife in NJ - Edwin Forsythe Wildlife refuge on the coast - many many birds. NJ Pine Barrens - Whitesbog . Plenty of wildlife and wide open spaces.
Yep, as a Jersey native, I thought Sony could have taken them to better places to shoot wildlife, even if they didn't want to venture too far!
Great vid Nick, the only thing is with the 200 - 600 it would be interesting to see it paired with an A7 series camera rather than the A9 you was using as I feel the A7 is more suited for the consumer and the focusing is different
Great video did the 200-600 join your stable
Some very nice shots
Not yet. But I suspect I will be picking this one up at some point
Nick, Great video! Sigma sent me their new 60-600mm Sports lens for some testing.... I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on it (if you get to try it). I know the autofocus might be slower with a Sony body, but in terms of sharpness, I was super impressed, considering how big of a range that lens covers. (I tested on a EOS 5Dm4). The IS on that lens is ridiculous.
Nice job Nick! Pretty cool deal for Sony to hook you up like that. Now they need to send you somewhere a little more scenic with some real wildlife.
The price point of the 200-600 is going to sway a lot of shooters me thinks...
Damn! Sony is absolutely killing it right now. When the Olympics is over, we'll have a whole bunch of photographers flying the orange flag.
Nice job Nick! Both lenses seem great but I’d opt for the 200-600. How did you think that lens compares to your 100-400 GM? Would you consider owning both or just one or the other? Thanks 🤙
Nice to see you there. I believe more your opinion that others youtubers I saw, specially because they looks always speaking good about Sony?. Sounds weird to me. Anyway, this 200-600 is what I was waiting for. I was very close to buy the tamron 150-600 which seems the best option before the release of the Sony. I see the G Sony not as sharp as I expected, but lets see in the future a comparation with competitors.
Thanks for the video!
I'm wondering, did you get the 200-600mm? If you did what is your opinion about the lens now?
Cool review! Keep it up! What’s the filter size of the 200-600? 😁
95mm I believe
I returned the 70-200 GM and 2.0 TC because of autofocus issues (forward AND backward focusing). In exchange I got the 200-600 without a TC. I’m very happy with the 200-600. It’s not perfect ALL the time but more often than not I am completely satisfied. Occasionally it isn’t tack sharp and can appear soft but the majority of my shots are very sharp, all the way out to 600. I can’t really afford the 600 GM. The 200-600 is more than adequate in my opinion and has to be the best bang for the buck Sony offers. Easy 9 out of 10. Higher when you consider the cost of upgrading to the 600 GM.
We’re here for RSL!
I need that. My wife says I always overcompensate. And I thought my 70-200 GM was big
13:05 Mark Smith took the picture of the same sparrow with worms. I saw it in his Sony NJ release tour video. May be he was standing besides you 🤔 .... I hear someone like him talking about the sparrow and nest in the background
yeah he was right there with me, as were the Northrups. That sparrow just hung out and posed for us for like 15 minutes.
@@NickPage
Cooool 😮😮
Hey Nick, how does the image quality compare between the 200-600mm versus your current 100-400mm GM? Assuming equivalent focal length that is. Similar settings as well.
Gordon Lau I suspect 100 to 400 will be sharper as well. I think that’s probably an easier zoom range optically. But having shot both and as an owner of the 100 to 400 I’m pretty sure the 200 to 600 is close in sharpness but focuses faster
Nick Page thank for the insight my friend! I’m glad Sony isn’t holding too much back. Great to hear about the fast focusing speed! Looking forward to seeing more content from you soon. 👍
Sold! 200-600 for me. $$$$$$$ are key for me.
Among several vlog videos from this Sony outing, this one touched several points that others missed, such as chromatic aberration-seemingly absent on the zoom?! With its internal zooming, and $2000 retail price, which is cheap, at least, for a Sony lens, this is the first supertelephoto zoom that I actually want.
Question for Nick or anyone:
I have the 70-200 f4. Was considering the 100-400 gm. With the release of this 200-600 does it make it wiser to invest in this 200-600 over the 100-400? I shoot a lot of stuff and have missed out on football (soccer) and wildlife since switching to Sony cuz of the lack of (until now) really long lenses.
How about a comparison between the Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM w/1.4 TC and this 200-600mm. Obviously the aperture is a bit different but wondering about IQ, focus speed and accuracy etc.
I will see if I can get my hands on one and do that review I think that is going to be something a lot of people want to see
Appart from the bigger focal number and internal zoom system, the 100-400mm is still better according to Sony, as you can see they haven't labeled the 200-600mm as G Master. Thats what keeps me from replacing it to the later 🙂
With 1.4 TC, Lets see when Nick Page does the quality comparison 🤔
It’s been a couple years so you probably have already heard but consensus is the 200-600 is sharper at 600 than the 100-400 plus 1.4 TC at full zoom. I have the 200-600 and my dad has the 100-400, both without a TC. I personally don’t care for the telescoping aspect of the GM but image quality is excellent. Then again, I think the IQ of the 200-600 is also excellent. So for me personally, I prefer the 200-600. I give the edge to the 100-400 for video but zooming is awkward. Choose your clips appropriately and it shouldn’t be an issue. Then again, the wildlife video I’m getting out of the 200-600 has that further reach so maybe it’s a toss up.
Surely the "watercolour" like bokeh in those images were a by product of the heat haze. Not a lens charecteristic.
I think you’re exactly right. I wish I had more time with the lens to test it out in different conditions
Nick, did you turn off the electronic shutter
@@laeicawezlar4417 I want to know that too.
I think that may be the issue.
May have something to do with subject focal distance as well
Nice!
7:08 ... i like this picture... goalkeeper is flying...
Great video. Would you recommend the teleconverter with the 200-600 in low light conditions at the stadium?
No, when shooting indoors light is too valuable and you lose too much of it with a Tele converter, the 200 to 600 already has a max aperture of 6.3 on the long end. You need all the light you can get
@@NickPage Thanks!
which camera model did you use?
Hubba Hubba. I think the 200-600 is gonna be in my future. After I get the 70-200.
I'm surprised, I figured they would hand you the lenses at the game.
I cant wait to get that 200-600 on my a6400 #Preordered
Just curious. Where are the lenses made?
I want to see 200-600mm lens with FS5 mark II. Want to see video focusing of this lens with this combination
Thanks Nick! Thoughts on whether you will be swapping out your 100-400 for a 200-600?
I think the 100 to 400 is probably more practical for landscape photography. With the exception of just a few use cases. But if a person shoots much wildlife at all the 200 to 600 is very compelling
@@NickPage That's what I thought you would say! Great job on this vid - but get yourself back out to Scotland ;)
@@NickPage will be interesting to see a 400mm comparison on the 100400GM to 200600G. I'm betting 100400GM is sharper
I love the bokeh on my Nikon 200-500. Hoping the 200-600 competes better in that department than these sample shots show. I prefer to shoot Sony and have pre-ordered the 200-600.
As a few others have pointed out and I failed to notice that the time, it appears that it was just heat distortion from the heat vapor rising off the hot sand
Nick Page good news. I hope that turns out to be the case.
That photo of everyone with a telelens looked luke a group of pelicans
enjoy shooting with it :)
So i feel like the big question for a lot of people now is going to be the 100-400 g vs the 200-600, and I wondering how the sharpness compares? While the sound of 200 more mm sounds nice, I feel like the wide aperture and smaller weight plus the ability to go wider for landscapes makes the 100-400 still a more attractive option for a lot of people. I think for wildlife 5.6 is already a little slow, and 6.3 is just too slow to be appealing to me as a bird photographer, granted I have not used any sony equipment and have nikon 200-500 5.6.
I didn’t have the 100 to 400 with me to test it side-by-side. But I get the feeling the 100 to 400 is a bit sharper but both focus equally fast. I feel like if the 200 to 600 might even focus faster but without shooting them side-by-side it’s hard to tell hopefully I will get to try it out again soon
Stay with Nikon and put that 200-500mm on it :)
I guess, the aperture in the 200-600G is actually wider than in 100-400GM. The longer focal length makes it for a greater f-number though.
@@gregory.chalenko yeah the f-number is what I was meaning to as that what gives a better idea of how the lens performs rather than the literal aperture size.
Don't watch this during a work meeting or you'll end up spewing coffee over your workmates. Too funny!
I was debating on either waiting for the 200-600 or getting the 100-400 to replace my 70-300 G which is really starting to frustrate me at anything over 200mm. I want to thank you, because this video helped make up my mind. There was something nagging at me that this newer, longer lens was still $500 less than the older 100-400... and then you said "It's not the kind of sharpness that just totally blows you away." and that was what did it for me. I want the sharpness to blow me away if I'm going to drop that much on a piece of glass, so I decided that I would go with the 100-400. I pulled the trigger and ordered it this morning. This is a huge purchase for me, I've never spent this kind of money on glass before. Yolo.
Now I just need to decide how much to sell the 70-300 for...
I'm in almost the same boat as you. I have the Tamron 150-600 G2 (A mount with adapter) but am unimpressed with the auto focus. I'd be curious to hear what you think once you receive the 100-400 and have had a chance to use it. I'm leaning that way also. I also have the 70-300, great lens for the price but the lack of a tripod color is driving me mad.
I'm still getting to know this lens, but my early assessment is that is worth every penny I paid for it and then some.
I'm using an a7RII, so my AF won't be as snappy and advanced as the current generation, but even still I find in good to moderate light it focuses nice and quick. In pooer light, it's on par with my 70-300.
One thing I noticed compared to my 70-300 is that the colors are MUCH better straight out of the camera in RAW.
Overall I am extremely pleased, but like I said I've only had the thing for a week. I may hate it next week, but I highly doubt it.
The lack of a tripod collar for the 70-300 never really bothered me, but I also rarely shot with it on a tripod. The few times I did I was usually shooting the moon so it was pointed upward and I didn't have to worry about it drifting downward or (more importantly to me) putting undue stress on the mount. There is an aftermarket collar for around $50, but for a lens I paid $1,100 for, I feel like Sony should've provided one. I wasn't about to pay extra on principle...
What body were you using during this test?
Hello , Between a Sony 200 - 600 mm lens And a Sony 100-400 F 4.5 - 5.6 with a multiplier of 1.4 to use on a Sony A7 IV which of the two solutions is better for sports photos at night with very good lighting?
The strange bokeh you describe with the 200-600m lens is largely down to atmospheric heat haze, which is pronounced at 600mm.
In hindsight you’re absolutely right! I wish I had more time with the lens to test it in different conditions
I assumed you were using the A9? I sounded like it!
LOL all the UTuber posting Photographers are there!!! Nice video, thanks for sharing. The panning was a little too fast at the game, it makes the video choppy while shooting at the crowd but that 600mm has an amazing reach with perfect focusing, it is a dream. I would have to mortgage my house to get it!!
Lord Page was in NJ and I missed it??!!
Very informative video: thanks a lot.
Just purchased the Sony 100-400 GM a couple months ago. Arrgghhh! Great video. Two questions please...Are you getting a 200-600G and if so, will you sell your 100-400?
I’m not sure if I’m going to pick it up. Honestly I don’t know if I shoot enough wildlife to justify it. I see the 100 to 400 as a great landscape photography lens they can do some wildlife shooting. The 200 to 600 is much more geared to wildlife because of the focal length.
That 600 F4 is massive lol.
I have now decided to skip the fourth generation A7 series cameras and work a little further with my A7III, so when I next buy a camera I expect it to be an A7V. In return, I expect to buy 200-600mm. lens as I think this choice is the best for me in 2020
Wonderful! Who's recording video...? Do you have camera man..?
Was thinking the same who ever it was did agreat job .
My girlfriend Annelise came along... it was so nice to have help for a change!
@@NickPage aha! I noticed something different haha. Thank you for the reply.
10,000 ISO looks ridiculously clean.
Sheeeeyit Nick. You really know your shit. What was it like getting on the cool kid bus?
The weird quality of bokeh in some shots is actually the air that is distorted by heat. So I guess the bokeh is pretty good.
You know I think you’re exactly right. That’s probably why it was not in all shots. That’s the downside only having a short time with the lands it’s not enough time to do a full review just a first look
@@NickPage Glad I could chip in ;) Keep doing awesome work Nick! :)
Cool beans bud. Looks a bit pricey to me from where i'm sitting..
I was watching your interesting review and suddenly I was like "hey, Tony and Chelsea Northrup are there too!" (4:32 and a bit further).
where in NJ? that's where I live!
Did they say when the 200-600 would be available? I didn't see it listed as a "coming soon" yet on B&H.
James Johnston August 2019 I believe
@@Old_Smuggler I have already pre-paid for mine. Expected date 8-3.
James Johnston 👍🏼
We have tons of wildlife in NJ.
Lol yes... Yes you do
It's a rogue's gallery of photography UA-camrs!
@ 14:20 I think that painterly bokeh is because there is a huge amount of heat distortion. Other videos from the same place show that.
Yep you are correct. I wish I would have realized this while recording my voice over. That explains why it’s not in all the shots.
Is there a filter insert slot in the 200-600?
No it takes threaded filters
"Impressionist" is what you were looking for
Never thought I'd see Nick Page and Mark Smith in the same video....
We actually got together last year in the Tetons... great guy
How come the 200-600 comes with a cheaper price ofthe 100-400? Might those few f. extra stops affecting that much the cost?
@Børge Indergaard Thanks for the explanation, didn't realise one was a G and the other GM, so fair enough. I see the price difference is not massive so I guess it's up to what really everyone's need the lens for. I bought the Sigma 150-600 and the only thing I love is the 600mm, feel limited with 150mm so I believe with the 200mm minimum focal length is even worst and adding the 1.4 converter doesn't make it easier. I honestly wouldn't know which one to buy,
Your video pop-over said the 200-600g was 2895g. Sony-US says it is 2115g. To my knowledge Sony's numbers are without any accessories (cap, hood, foot). So those accessories come in at 780g?
Sony’s numbers are correct my numbers are wrong. By the time I realized I had the wrong numbers I was Already here in the Faroe Islands with bad Internet and couldn’t fix it!
I hate you Nick. I was mostly set on buying a Fuji XT3, but that 2000 $ 200-600 mm lens is actually exactly what I need for wildlife shooting in my favorite area, the Alps, and so I'm reconsidering now... Damn.
Dont rule out a D500 and a Nikon 200-500mm f5.6...
1st time in NJ?