Merci beaucoup! Je viens d’acheter le a9 III et le 300mm et j’espère ne pas être déçue. je projette d’utiliser le 300 souvent avec le TC x2. Le lien de téléchargement des images en raw n’est plus valide malheureusement. merci pour cette vidéo.
Thank you for your comparison video. There really isn't anything on You Tube like this and it may really help someone making a decision. I actually bought the 300 GM about 2 months ago after mulling it over for quite awhile. I had been shooting with a Sony 200-600 for over 3 years but craved the IQ of what could be accomplished with a prime. Some of the friends I shot with had the 600 F4 and of course the IQ is amazing! But I wasn't really wanting to plunk down 13 to 14K for a prime. So when the 300 GM came along at a light 3 lbs I wanted to know how it would do with the Sony TCs and Mark Smith actually has a very good video out there showing some of the IQ obtained. That plus the fact I also had a good friend who actually had the 600 F4 get one with both TCs and gave me a thumbs up, made me decide to get one. I have not been disappointed. Your video is a good validation for those of us who may want to save money and still get decent IQ in shooting birds or wildlife. Actually the money I saved I spent towards 2 new camera bodies. The A9 III & the A7RV. I had been previously shooting with an A7 IV for 3 years but ended up selling it. So far I'm very pleased with this set up and I still have my 200-600 if I ever needed the flexibility of a zoom. Thanks again for this well made and helpful video!
Thank you. So glad you enjoyed it, and yes, @MarkSmithphotography has a couple of really good videos on the subject. Yes, I love this lens so much that I had to buy it. The A9iii is a great camera as well I love the speed and the small file sizes. I am heading to Yellowstone with the 300mm, teleconverters, Sigma 60-600mm A9iii, A1, and my A7iv that I use for videos. I now have to decide which lens to sell my 400mm or 600mm I really don't think I have a need for all 3 primes but will see.
The only processing I did with the dog pictures was globally Raw images are so blah I just addd contrast shadows and highlights. no noise reduction. The other images were processed but very little .
If you have a very good prime Lens, then a 1.4x can be recommended, but you lose a lot with a 2x, so it can be better to just crop in post. I have the excellent Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN OS which is sharper than a Sony 300mm 2.8 GM with a 2x.
Well, I guess it's too good to be true. The primes without the TC definitely looked sharper, better contrast, just overall the images pop. But, if you didn't put them side by side nobody would say the 300+TC images weren't sharp. I do wonder how the 300 and TC's would compare to the 200-600 and 100-400 both of which I own. If it's anything like the 135 or 90 there's a huge difference. Haven't taken the jump to long primes yet, I truly enjoy the close focusing of the 100-400 but wish it was a faster lens for indoor events.
I have the 300mm f 2.8 with both TC, to my modest opinion with 1.4 tc the result are top, but also the 2x tele give unexpected good images. I have the 200-600 zoom, and IQ is not at the same level (zoom,price tag no suprise) the 300 mm is very light and you can follow fast movening object hand held (point of gravity of the lens is close to the camera body),
Thanks for this quite helpful video! Seems to confirm that sharpness is not the issue however the bokey may suffer vs. the primes w/o tc at comparable focal lengths. However, if the weight savings is important to you this will be acceptable.
I have the sigma 500mm 5,6 dg dn also amazingly sharp but no t/c option i am thinking about the 300mm f2.8 but not sure there is room for the sigma and sony also in my kit ,i have been shooting aircraft and the 300mm f2.8 would be really useful or 420mm f4 with t/c actually the 500mm sigma was a bit long in some situations ,funnily when i tried breifly tried the 400mm f2,8 the focus was slower than my 70-200mm gm mk2 ,but once locked on it did fine .The 600mm f4 i have no experience with but it does not have a good close focus ,but looks the best optically for distance ,i still would like to know your preference for the sigma 60-600mm over the sony 200-600mm is the wider fov gain it gives you or anything optically.
Very interesting on the 400mm I had borrowed one from Sony years ago and it was the same way soI was reluctant to purchase so i borrowed another 400mm and it did amazingly well quick just like the my 600f4. My 300mm is also very quick to focus. In my option the 200-600 vs 60-600mm I prefer the Sigma 60-600 due to the range and I think they are equally as sharp possible the sigma image wide a tad bit sharper. I have been shooting with both lenses trying to do a video on the 2 lenses.
Good review!!! I have the 300mm f 2.8 with both TC, to my modest opinion with 1.4 tc the result are top, but also the 2x tele give unexpected good images. I have the 200-600 zoom, and IQ is not at the same level (zoom,price tag no suprise) the 300 mm is very light and you can follow fast movening object hand held (point of gravity of the lens is close to the camera body), Take the lens with you for a day hiking super!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! It's awesome to hear how you like the lens. I ended up buying it and heading to Yellowstone with it and the teleconverters for some lightweight traveling.
How would you compare autofocus speed with 200-600 at the 600 mm range, vs the 300 mm + x2.0 teleconverter, and also the IQ? My 200-600 have some troubles with hunting at 600 mm, like.. image is completely blurry because autofocus doesn't hunt anything, then I need to back zoom to 400 mm, lock he autofocus, and then zoom in again to 600 mm.. I guess that doesn't happen even with x2.0 TC on the 300 mm lens?
@@pentagramyt417 Hi, since i have the 300 with tele I prefer to use this instead of my 200-600, but indeed at 600 mm and at f 6,2 it becomes difficult to track BIF, this problem you dont have with the 300 + 1,4 tele at all. Also the the 2 x tele end up at f 5,6. And is performing a lot better than the 200-600. On BIF I have a better hit ratio, for 2 reasons, better lens focusing system and the weight balance alows me to handshoot a lot faster. I have to admit in the beginning to aim a 600mm was difficult, but after some time you get used to. 😎
@@Christianschaguene yes but actually it is 450mm with crop with 30 mp image which when I use on my A1 that’s how I use it with a quick push of a button I am at 450mm
Nice work with the three lens. I have been shooting since 1971, so as a professional, I would ask you what your thoughts are. With money not being a object of concern. I will certainly trust your younger eyes. Please be honest?
I can tell you this , I took the 300mm only with me to Costa Rica and came home with amazing images and will take it again to the Tetons and Yellowstone I love the compact and weight for traveling vs the big lenses I do not see a difference in the images at least enough to worry about. Thanks for watching
Thanks for the Samples! But the 400mm F2.8 and 600mm F4 shots seemed to be focused on the nose so it's hard to compare. The 300 F2.8 with converters looks amazing. I wish you had the 200-600 to compare for us peasants :)
Thanks for watching I am going to review the pictures again. I can compare the 60-600mm sigma to it with teleconverters. I sold my 200-600 to buy the sigma I like it a lot more and the range is incredible. Although I might be able to borrow a friends we will be in the Tetons together later this week I will swap her my 600mm for her 200-600 for a day.
@@wtfstop I have the 200-600 and want to take the next step up. I also have a 1.4 so just trying to talk myself into it! I'm also in Texas and was down in Port A last month :)
@@dustinscott2089 I love the 300mm Lens I decided to buy it and add it to my gear bag that is how much I loved it. I think the 300mm with teles is sharper than the 200-600mm lens or I had bad luck with mine I sold it and replaced it with the 60-600mm sigma love the range and clarity.
@@wtfstop Central Texas close to the Golden Cheeks :) I like to bird and take sports photography of my kiddos which I guess I can consider wildlife LOL
Am against using teleconverter 😂I sold my tele 1.4 x because I think it's just a scam. I used it with a 70 200 gm2 lens+a7rv and it wasn't worth, slow auto fucus, not sharp images . I think I'll make some money for 400mm f2.8 😅
It's important to find the right equipment that suits your needs and style of photography but I have not had any issues with teleconverters on my 400mm, 600mm, 300mm and 70-200mm f2.8 MIII The only issue I ever had was with the Sony A7r4 and the A7r5, which had the same issues. It never handled low light very well, and anything above 2000 ISO was noisy. Maybe the problem is the camera
Merci beaucoup! Je viens d’acheter le a9 III et le 300mm et j’espère ne pas être déçue. je projette d’utiliser le 300 souvent avec le TC x2. Le lien de téléchargement des images en raw n’est plus valide malheureusement. merci pour cette vidéo.
Do Sony Teleconverters work with the Sony a6400 and 70-350mm lens?
Thank you for your comparison video. There really isn't anything on You Tube like this and it may really help someone making a decision. I actually bought the 300 GM about 2 months ago after mulling it over for quite awhile. I had been shooting with a Sony 200-600 for over 3 years but craved the IQ of what could be accomplished with a prime. Some of the friends I shot with had the 600 F4 and of course the IQ is amazing! But I wasn't really wanting to plunk down 13 to 14K for a prime. So when the 300 GM came along at a light 3 lbs I wanted to know how it would do with the Sony TCs and Mark Smith actually has a very good video out there showing some of the IQ obtained. That plus the fact I also had a good friend who actually had the 600 F4 get one with both TCs and gave me a thumbs up, made me decide to get one. I have not been disappointed. Your video is a good validation for those of us who may want to save money and still get decent IQ in shooting birds or wildlife. Actually the money I saved I spent towards 2 new camera bodies. The A9 III & the A7RV. I had been previously shooting with an A7 IV for 3 years but ended up selling it. So far I'm very pleased with this set up and I still have my 200-600 if I ever needed the flexibility of a zoom. Thanks again for this well made and helpful video!
Thank you. So glad you enjoyed it, and yes, @MarkSmithphotography has a couple of really good videos on the subject. Yes, I love this lens so much that I had to buy it. The A9iii is a great camera as well I love the speed and the small file sizes. I am heading to Yellowstone with the 300mm, teleconverters, Sigma 60-600mm A9iii, A1, and my A7iv that I use for videos. I now have to decide which lens to sell my 400mm or 600mm I really don't think I have a need for all 3 primes but will see.
Awesome!! Great video and thanks for making the files available!! Did you apply any noise reduction or do any processing to the files?
The only processing I did with the dog pictures was globally Raw images are so blah I just addd contrast shadows and highlights. no noise reduction. The other images were processed but very little .
If you have a very good prime Lens, then a 1.4x can be recommended, but you lose a lot with a 2x, so it can be better to just crop in post. I have the excellent Sigma 500mm 5.6 DG DN OS which is sharper than a Sony 300mm 2.8 GM with a 2x.
Thanks for this video. I just wonder how this 300 GM lens will work with Sony A7iv?
Works great, I have that camera as well. Thanks for watching
Well, I guess it's too good to be true. The primes without the TC definitely looked sharper, better contrast, just overall the images pop. But, if you didn't put them side by side nobody would say the 300+TC images weren't sharp. I do wonder how the 300 and TC's would compare to the 200-600 and 100-400 both of which I own. If it's anything like the 135 or 90 there's a huge difference. Haven't taken the jump to long primes yet, I truly enjoy the close focusing of the 100-400 but wish it was a faster lens for indoor events.
I like the combos. I Will be taking on my next trip to Wyoming wish me luck 😎
I have the 300mm f 2.8 with both TC, to my modest opinion with 1.4 tc the result are top, but also the 2x tele give unexpected good images. I have the 200-600 zoom, and IQ is not at the same level (zoom,price tag no suprise) the 300 mm is very light and you can follow fast movening object hand held (point of gravity of the lens is close to the camera body),
Thanks for this quite helpful video! Seems to confirm that sharpness is not the issue however the bokey may suffer vs. the primes w/o tc at comparable focal lengths. However, if the weight savings is important to you this will be acceptable.
Yes exactly and there are times when I wanna light!
Thanks so much for this! My lottery dream would be the 70-200 2.8 II + 300 2.8 + 2X. I think that would be epic.
That would indeed be an epic combination!
I have the sigma 500mm 5,6 dg dn also amazingly sharp but no t/c option i am thinking about the 300mm f2.8 but not sure there is room for the sigma and sony also in my kit ,i have been shooting aircraft and the 300mm f2.8 would be really useful or 420mm f4 with t/c actually the 500mm sigma was a bit long in some situations ,funnily when i tried breifly tried the 400mm f2,8 the focus was slower than my 70-200mm gm mk2 ,but once locked on it did fine .The 600mm f4 i have no experience with but it does not have a good close focus ,but looks the best optically for distance ,i still would like to know your preference for the sigma 60-600mm over the sony 200-600mm is the wider fov gain it gives you or anything optically.
Very interesting on the 400mm I had borrowed one from Sony years ago and it was the same way soI was reluctant to purchase so i borrowed another 400mm and it did amazingly well quick just like the my 600f4. My 300mm is also very quick to focus. In my option the 200-600 vs 60-600mm I prefer the Sigma 60-600 due to the range and I think they are equally as sharp possible the sigma image wide a tad bit sharper. I have been shooting with both lenses trying to do a video on the 2 lenses.
Good review!!!
I have the 300mm f 2.8 with both TC, to my modest opinion with 1.4 tc the result are top, but also the 2x tele give unexpected good images. I have the 200-600 zoom, and IQ is not at the same level (zoom,price tag no suprise) the 300 mm is very light and you can follow fast movening object hand held (point of gravity of the lens is close to the camera body), Take the lens with you for a day hiking super!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! It's awesome to hear how you like the lens. I ended up buying it and heading to Yellowstone with it and the teleconverters for some lightweight traveling.
How would you compare autofocus speed with 200-600 at the 600 mm range, vs the 300 mm + x2.0 teleconverter, and also the IQ?
My 200-600 have some troubles with hunting at 600 mm, like.. image is completely blurry because autofocus doesn't hunt anything, then I need to back zoom to 400 mm, lock he autofocus, and then zoom in again to 600 mm.. I guess that doesn't happen even with x2.0 TC on the 300 mm lens?
@@pentagramyt417 I did not have any issues with it trying to focus and images quality as a whole is great.
@@pentagramyt417 Hi, since i have the 300 with tele I prefer to use this instead of my 200-600, but indeed at 600 mm and at f 6,2 it becomes difficult to track BIF, this problem you dont have with the 300 + 1,4 tele at all. Also the the 2 x tele end up at f 5,6. And is performing a lot better than the 200-600. On BIF I have a better hit ratio, for 2 reasons, better lens focusing system and the weight balance alows me to handshoot a lot faster. I have to admit in the beginning to aim a 600mm was difficult, but after some time you get used to. 😎
@@wtfstop Thank you! :)
HI with a A7R4 whe can have 420mm with crop AT 2.8?
@@Christianschaguene yes but actually it is 450mm with crop with 30 mp image which when I use on my A1 that’s how I use it with a quick push of a button I am at 450mm
@@wtfstop cool thx for the answer
@ Yw
Nice work with the three lens. I have been shooting since 1971, so as a professional, I would ask you what your thoughts are. With money not being a object of concern. I will certainly trust your younger eyes. Please be honest?
I can tell you this , I took the 300mm only with me to Costa Rica and came home with amazing images and will take it again to the Tetons and Yellowstone I love the compact and weight for traveling vs the big lenses I do not see a difference in the images at least enough to worry about. Thanks for watching
@@wtfstop Oh my wallet is screaming. How do you like the a9 III? I am already dreading your answer, lookout savings account.
@@allenfutrelle9090 well I hate to inform you but……… I ❤️❤️❤️❤️it!!!
Do you find the a9iii resolution to be an issue?
@@JCorrea813 I have had no issues with resolution at all been very happy with it
Thanks for the Samples! But the 400mm F2.8 and 600mm F4 shots seemed to be focused on the nose so it's hard to compare. The 300 F2.8 with converters looks amazing. I wish you had the 200-600 to compare for us peasants :)
Thanks for watching I am going to review the pictures again. I can compare the 60-600mm sigma to it with teleconverters. I sold my 200-600 to buy the sigma I like it a lot more and the range is incredible. Although I might be able to borrow a friends we will be in the Tetons together later this week I will swap her my 600mm for her 200-600 for a day.
@@wtfstop Awesome! I was in the Tetons last year loved it!
@@cmacclel my favorite place in the USA
@@cmacclel I am going to redo the photos I will let you know when I get them done
@@wtfstop interesting can you tell me why you prefer the sigma 60-600mm more is it just the range is better or are their optical preferences
Thanks for doing this :)
your very welcome I loved every minute of it!
@@wtfstop I have the 200-600 and want to take the next step up. I also have a 1.4 so just trying to talk myself into it! I'm also in Texas and was down in Port A last month :)
@@dustinscott2089 I love the 300mm Lens I decided to buy it and add it to my gear bag that is how much I loved it. I think the 300mm with teles is sharper than the 200-600mm lens or I had bad luck with mine I sold it and replaced it with the 60-600mm sigma love the range and clarity.
What part of Texas are you from? I spend a lot of time in Port A chasing birds..😀
@@wtfstop Central Texas close to the Golden Cheeks :) I like to bird and take sports photography of my kiddos which I guess I can consider wildlife LOL
Am against using teleconverter 😂I sold my tele 1.4 x because I think it's just a scam. I used it with a 70 200 gm2 lens+a7rv and it wasn't worth, slow auto fucus, not sharp images . I think I'll make some money for 400mm f2.8 😅
It's important to find the right equipment that suits your needs and style of photography but
I have not had any issues with teleconverters on my 400mm, 600mm, 300mm and 70-200mm f2.8 MIII
The only issue I ever had was with the Sony A7r4 and the A7r5, which had the same issues. It never handled low light very well, and anything above 2000 ISO was noisy. Maybe the problem is the camera