My Sony 600mm f4 GM and A9 ii for bird photography. The Sony 100-400mm goes on my A7R iv for landscape photos. The Sony 200-600mm goes on the A7S iii for bird videos. They each have their uses /strengths.
I also have the Sigma 100-400mm. I'm very satisfied with its performance. Was looking into the GM, but the price was and still is, too high for me. I don't regret getting the Sigma at all. Excellent lens!
I bought Sigma 100-400 but unfortunately it exhibited front focusing at 400mm, less noticeable at shorter FLs. Tried on two different cameras with the same result. Had to return it. Don't have confidence in Sigma anymore. I also wasn't thrilled with its contrast, it was kind of low. Considering Tamron 150-500 now.
Hi Stefan. I'd like to suggest that instead of giving minimum focus distances at both ends of a zoom's range (or of prime lenses), you should give the magnification. It's much easier to compare the magnification given by two lenses than it is to compare focus distances, esp when the lenses don't share the same min and max zooms. Distance is still helpful because, as I'm sure you know, photographers like to know how close they will be to their subjects (some subjects being not as tolerant of close approach as others, so more magnification at greater distance is usually a good thing), but the size of the image at the sensor (magnification) is an absolute measure that permits comparison between all lenses, regardless of their focal lengths.
Would love to see a "Battle of the Tammy's" in this category. Trying to choose between the 150-500 and 50-400. AF is always important but rapid ramp up to 6.3 on the 50-400 compared to just the opposite on the 150-500 is making this choice more of a conundrum than I was expecting. Great content, thanks!
For the lenses that lack dedicated manual focus but have a focus lock button you can set the focus lock button to instead be AF/MF toggle (or hold) to swap between AF and MF without moving your hand. More useful IMO than focus locking.
I’m sticking with the Sigma 150-600 / Mc-11. I don’t shoot birds in flight, and I often need to focus manually in the woods anyways due to branches / obstructions
Honestly, this is the only time I would recommend using a apsc lens on a full frame camera. The 70-350mm is also a good option if you have a a7r camera, you get a 105-525mm equivalent, oss and sony's amazing AF for $900, might even be $800 in b and h right now.
You are assuming most full frame owners have the r series when most don't. It might make just as much sense to buy a used apsc camera body to pair with the lens you mention for those times you want to do birding or wildlife if you don't want to buy something like the Sony 200-600.
I touched on this in another video's comments, but I have the 100-400 GM and 200-600 G and while you'll pry the GM from my cold dead hands, I'm just not sure I'll keep the 200-600. I mean it's a great lens, but I just keep going back and forth with it. I haven't fallen in love with it like I did the GM right out of the box. I have the 1.4TC which, to my eyes, has very little degradation in image quality, and I'm shooting on the RIV so I can still get 26 megapixels in crop mode, so I'm not really sure I need the 200-600 despite the differences in f/stops with the TC. I'm really torn about it. I'm hoping that changes!
I think anyone trying to save some money on the Sigma over the 200-600 is really trying to save over the GM. So here I'd really like to see Sigma's 100-400 in this comparison rather than Sony's 100-400. I think we mostly know it's awesome.
I have the sigma 100-400. For the money it suits me just fine. Images are great. Love the fact you give minimum focus at both ends. Nice touch. The Sony is just too much gold for me. Also and this is really picky. I dislike white lenses. Don't understand why they do that.
Thank you for your no nonsense report on these lens. I myself have the Sigma 100/400mm lens but I am want to move to the biggest one in the range that you talk about. I picked up my lens due to price and very bad shoulders but over time I have got real concerns over the reach. So I am going to try to get the big boy that you talked about. Knowing my limitations already, so I will have to work smart and not snap everything I see in a days outing. One major point on wanting to go to the 200/600 G Master is the point you made about the 1.4 teleconveter. So overall I had know what I wanted to get and money being my major factor in my selections. You have opened up my mind just that little more on where or what direction I should go which is Sony to Sony to Sony. Meaning Sony camera to Sony teleconverter then to Sony lens making it all work together. But I will keep the Sigma 100/400mm lens as it is a great performer and should never be disregarded. Thanks again for a top report on just the matter what was at hand with me.
I do a lot of wildlife photography and after hearing all the great things about the Sony 100-400, I decided to rent one to try it out. I was expecting to be blown away but wasn’t. It was okay, but not amazing. In the end I bought the 200-600 and love it. Maybe I just got a bad copy of the GM 🤷♂️, but in my mind it definitely isn’t worth the price Sony is asking
Check Canon's pricing. I can get a 200-600mm brand new right now on sale for half the price of the half-assed external-zooming f/7.1 lens that Canon's RF100-500 is. Which means I can get a full Sony APS-C setup for the price of just a lens. A6100 + kit lens, 56mm/1.4 Sigma for portraits AND the 200-600 for birds TOGETHER cost less. 2839 Euros total for said combo, 2999 Euros for just the RF100-500. Mindblowing! And the Canon doesn't even reach 600mm...swap the a6100 for a6400 and the whole combo is stil just a *hair more expensive than the Canon "jar". :D *hair - 68 euros more. :D
The lens no one talks about is the 24-240mm (360 in aps-c mode)! Went for the Sigma 150-600 before Sony made one, Sigma has an adjustment block/update that lets you fine tune to your shooting style and tracking/focus at 10 fps (silent mode) on A7iii is superb, but the slide open design can let dirt in. No need for a 1.4x teleconverter in aps-c mode you get 1.5x cropped on sensor with better AF/tracking. Why the Sony 200-600, 1st internal zoom with fastest motors, 2nd Lens Correction ID, on Sigma not good ID, 3rd I said no need for 1.4x BUT with it and the 2x OSS/tracking can be done handheld and at 2x 1800mm in aps-c the moon fills the frame and sharp as a tack even handheld 4th Sony to Sony always the best. A little help, use a large binocular harness (sporting goods) it will hang on your chest without bother and the strong elastic straps will steady the lens best and always at the ready out on a walkabout.
@@kryptoknight66 The 24-240 is a great, great lens small with wide to long range capture and for the price a great starter to learn different mm. At 24 you are wide at 240 (better than 70) you have reach. It is sharp, did a lot of moon and solar eclipse as well as landscapes sunsets/sunrises and walkabout hummingbirds. Had since 2015 great deal today!
I think you should try the sigma 60-600 mmm Sports lense on the black magic design 6K camera and try it on the try it on the Blackmagic design Studio 4k camera and the Bobcats camera and shooting video boy I bet that would be sweet try that I'd love to see you do a video of that
Though i understand the minimum focus distant thing, that's not what you buy a telephoto lens for which is why the 200-600 is the obvious choice especially with internal focusing, tcs and the very useful lens buttons
Great video, you are the first to show that the lens hood decreases on the Sony 200-600. I thought it was permanently installed. I leave a subscription ;-)
I have just hired the Sigma 150-600 and managed a few frames. On the ones that are not blurry because of camera shake, they are great, but I need a better tripod than. the one I currently have. I have particular project in mind for this lens.
Going back and forth between the Tamron 50-400 new at 1,380£ with the tripod collar or a used Sony 100-400 for 1,540£ with 6 months guarantee? In your experience what would be the best? With that small price difference I would lean toward the Sony.
The α1 & α7R IV have higher pixel densities than Sony's current crop sensor cameras. So they produce higher resolution images in crop mode than the APS-C cameras. I've got the crop mode toggle on a button for this purpose.
I've been considering getting a sony camera just for the 200-600 lens, which is pretty cheap here in Europe with 1650€, but sadly there's no reasonably priced camera for my needs. 10 fps max on the A7 IV kind of sucks, and for what it is, it's way too expensive. With canon, it's the other way around, many great cameras for birding but no affordable lenses.
I used an used 60-600mm + MC11 heavy and slow focus, a tamron 150-600mm A-mount so no OSS in de lens+la-ea5 on a monopod or tripod fairly sharp in the hand is a challence .....i have the 200-600mm sony lens since 2 weeks feels great for birding and widlife..... greetings from the Netherlands
I would have to have that picture of that eagle that you took a picture of and hang that on my wall that would make a beautiful poster shot right there
Hey mate! Thanks for the wonderful video. How's Sony 200-600 compare to Sigma 150-600 sports which is recently launched? Which one would you recommend? Thanks mate
Great Video. However as many Sony users use APS-C bodies, including Sony 70-350mm G OSS in this comparison would have been great. I really love combination of 70-350mm on my A6400 for bird photography.
Thank you so much for your review. I am fortunate enough to own both the FE 100-400 GM and FE 200-600 G but I'm now looking for camera less than the new Sony Alpha 1 to pair with them. Spent all my money on glass (here and at other shorter focal lengths) but I currently have the A7R IV and A9. Not sure upgrading to an A9 II is worth it but will see. I wonder if there will be an A9 III in the future.
I'm waiting for the A9iii, if the A7siii would have 18-22mp then I would go for this, but I also enjoy the buttons on my A9. So for now i think upgrading to the A9ii is pointless for me.
G'day Stefan, mate I have a Nikon Z7ii and waiting for the Nikon 100-400S lens but that seems to be more of a unicorn than anything. I keep hearing and reading really good things about the Sony 100-400 GM (which I believe is adaptable to the Z7ii). Thoughts on whether the adapter would have any effect on image quality?
I have three favorite big telephoto lenses: 70-200 GM, 100-400 GM, and the old DSLR designed Sigma 180 f2.8 macro. The Sigma with MC-11 is bigger and heavier than the 70-200 GM. I have both teleconverters for the GM lenses which gives me lots of choices. And with the A1 and A7Riv I have the added advantage of high resolution.
What do you think of the Sigma 100-400 for video? I use a A7C, and I like to shoot cars racing around a track. I was also thinking of the sony 70-350, and I would use my A7C in crop mode for the 70-350
Yes, I don’t like Nikon. Shooting Canon for 30+ years, but Nikon’s PF telephoto lenses are small with fixed aperture us nice. So as Canon DO telephoto. Give Sony sometime.
Thanks for the vid! Can I ask...Will this work when shooting in fast burst mode? Ie can you hold the shutter release button down and it will shoot at 10 frames per second? I want to set it up on a tripod pointerld at a bird perch, and fire off a lot of shots as the bird takes flight. Thanks in advance
Hello Stefan, I have trouble deciding which lens to choose for motorsports, track day, etc. I have 2 lens choices in mind, the 200-600 or the current or the 70-200 F2.8 GM II. Please HELP ME!!! Appreciated
@@StefanMalloch Thank you Stefan, I really do appreciated. Would love to see a video about the 70-200 F.28 GM II, how does it perform in a track race. 😁
i have an A7S3 and doing sport video like youth football and basketball, softball, would the tamron 100-500 be good for that or what 200 or bigger lens would you recommend.
If you've only just bought it, see how often you actually need the reach. Look at a batch of your photos exif data, are you shooting at 300 a lot? I have 70-300 and realised i rarely push out to 300 so I put a long telezoom way down my GAS list 😆
I bought 200-600 first for safari. During the pandemic, I bought sigma 100-400, the image is super sharp, but the oss is terrible. YES, TERRIBLE. TOO MUCH BLUR !! NO KIDDING.
What's is your favorite big telephoto?
I'm currently using that Sigma 100-400, and I love it. Perhaps someday I'll pick up the Sony GM, but for now I'm happy.
My Sony 600mm f4 GM and A9 ii for bird photography. The Sony 100-400mm goes on my A7R iv for landscape photos. The Sony 200-600mm goes on the A7S iii for bird videos. They each have their uses /strengths.
I also have the Sigma 100-400mm. I'm very satisfied with its performance. Was looking into the GM, but the price was and still is, too high for me. I don't regret getting the Sigma at all. Excellent lens!
Sony fe 200-600mm. Very sharp and awesome range.
I bought Sigma 100-400 but unfortunately it exhibited front focusing at 400mm, less noticeable at shorter FLs. Tried on two different cameras with the same result. Had to return it. Don't have confidence in Sigma anymore. I also wasn't thrilled with its contrast, it was kind of low. Considering Tamron 150-500 now.
Hi Stefan. I'd like to suggest that instead of giving minimum focus distances at both ends of a zoom's range (or of prime lenses), you should give the magnification. It's much easier to compare the magnification given by two lenses than it is to compare focus distances, esp when the lenses don't share the same min and max zooms. Distance is still helpful because, as I'm sure you know, photographers like to know how close they will be to their subjects (some subjects being not as tolerant of close approach as others, so more magnification at greater distance is usually a good thing), but the size of the image at the sensor (magnification) is an absolute measure that permits comparison between all lenses, regardless of their focal lengths.
Noted! Thanks for the idea.
Would love to see a "Battle of the Tammy's" in this category. Trying to choose between the 150-500 and 50-400. AF is always important but rapid ramp up to 6.3 on the 50-400 compared to just the opposite on the 150-500 is making this choice more of a conundrum than I was expecting. Great content, thanks!
Ended up buying the 100-400 GM lens. Thanks for the review!
For the lenses that lack dedicated manual focus but have a focus lock button you can set the focus lock button to instead be AF/MF toggle (or hold) to swap between AF and MF without moving your hand. More useful IMO than focus locking.
I’m sticking with the Sigma 150-600 / Mc-11. I don’t shoot birds in flight, and I often need to focus manually in the woods anyways due to branches / obstructions
Honestly, this is the only time I would recommend using a apsc lens on a full frame camera. The 70-350mm is also a good option if you have a a7r camera, you get a 105-525mm equivalent, oss and sony's amazing AF for $900, might even be $800 in b and h right now.
Especially on an a7riv
Don't forget Tamron 70-300.
You are assuming most full frame owners have the r series when most don't. It might make just as much sense to buy a used apsc camera body to pair with the lens you mention for those times you want to do birding or wildlife if you don't want to buy something like the Sony 200-600.
@@hannahdobbs226 to each their own
I tried 70-350 on A7Rii, can't recommend it, the resolution is lacking, aberrations also noticeable. Definitely not good enough for birds.
Now that was a gorgeous beautiful shot of the eagle that you took up that scene remind me of Wild Kingdom back in the early days of the 60 70s
I touched on this in another video's comments, but I have the 100-400 GM and 200-600 G and while you'll pry the GM from my cold dead hands, I'm just not sure I'll keep the 200-600. I mean it's a great lens, but I just keep going back and forth with it. I haven't fallen in love with it like I did the GM right out of the box. I have the 1.4TC which, to my eyes, has very little degradation in image quality, and I'm shooting on the RIV so I can still get 26 megapixels in crop mode, so I'm not really sure I need the 200-600 despite the differences in f/stops with the TC. I'm really torn about it. I'm hoping that changes!
My favorite is still the 100-400 GM
I think anyone trying to save some money on the Sigma over the 200-600 is really trying to save over the GM. So here I'd really like to see Sigma's 100-400 in this comparison rather than Sony's 100-400. I think we mostly know it's awesome.
I have the sigma 100-400. For the money it suits me just fine. Images are great. Love the fact you give minimum focus at both ends. Nice touch. The Sony is just too much gold for me. Also and this is really picky. I dislike white lenses. Don't understand why they do that.
Big white lens stay cooler in the sun than black lens, so they say!
@@seangray4512 makes sense
Like with icecreàm trucks
Hello! Will you be reviewing the new Sigma 150-600 DG dn for Sony E-mount?
I choose sony g master.The best lens I have❤😊🙃
Thank you for your no nonsense report on these lens. I myself have the Sigma 100/400mm lens but I am want to move to the biggest one in the range that you talk about. I picked up my lens due to price and very bad shoulders but over time I have got real concerns over the reach. So I am going to try to get the big boy that you talked about. Knowing my limitations already, so I will have to work smart and not snap everything I see in a days outing. One major point on wanting to go to the 200/600 G Master is the point you made about the 1.4 teleconveter. So overall I had know what I wanted to get and money being my major factor in my selections. You have opened up my mind just that little more on where or what direction I should go which is Sony to Sony to Sony. Meaning Sony camera to Sony teleconverter then to Sony lens making it all work together. But I will keep the Sigma 100/400mm lens as it is a great performer and should never be disregarded. Thanks again for a top report on just the matter what was at hand with me.
This pretty much sums up why I chose the 100-400 over the 200-600. Precious little girl, by the way.
In this comparison where would you put Sony 70-350 on APS-C? It has greater reach then Tamron 150-500, it's smaller and lighter.
you can crop Tamron also, and with better results too
I do a lot of wildlife photography and after hearing all the great things about the Sony 100-400, I decided to rent one to try it out. I was expecting to be blown away but wasn’t. It was okay, but not amazing. In the end I bought the 200-600 and love it.
Maybe I just got a bad copy of the GM 🤷♂️, but in my mind it definitely isn’t worth the price Sony is asking
I own both of them and find the 100-400 to be sharper than the 200-600 with a faster focus. Otherwise they're both pretty good
Check Canon's pricing. I can get a 200-600mm brand new right now on sale for half the price of the half-assed external-zooming f/7.1 lens that Canon's RF100-500 is. Which means I can get a full Sony APS-C setup for the price of just a lens. A6100 + kit lens, 56mm/1.4 Sigma for portraits AND the 200-600 for birds TOGETHER cost less. 2839 Euros total for said combo, 2999 Euros for just the RF100-500. Mindblowing! And the Canon doesn't even reach 600mm...swap the a6100 for a6400 and the whole combo is stil just a *hair more expensive than the Canon "jar". :D
*hair - 68 euros more. :D
The lens no one talks about is the 24-240mm (360 in aps-c mode)! Went for the Sigma 150-600 before Sony made one, Sigma has an adjustment block/update that lets you fine tune to your shooting style and tracking/focus at 10 fps (silent mode) on A7iii is superb, but the slide open design can let dirt in. No need for a 1.4x teleconverter in aps-c mode you get 1.5x cropped on sensor with better AF/tracking. Why the Sony 200-600, 1st internal zoom with fastest motors, 2nd Lens Correction ID, on Sigma not good ID, 3rd I said no need for 1.4x BUT with it and the 2x OSS/tracking can be done handheld and at 2x 1800mm in aps-c the moon fills the frame and sharp as a tack even handheld 4th Sony to Sony always the best. A little help, use a large binocular harness (sporting goods) it will hang on your chest without bother and the strong elastic straps will steady the lens best and always at the ready out on a walkabout.
I think no one talks about the 24-240 because it’s a terrible lens. I bought one and couldn’t wait to sell it. Maybe my worst lens purchase ever.
@@kryptoknight66 The 24-240 is a great, great lens small with wide to long range capture and for the price a great starter to learn different mm. At 24 you are wide at 240 (better than 70) you have reach. It is sharp, did a lot of moon and solar eclipse as well as landscapes sunsets/sunrises and walkabout hummingbirds. Had since 2015 great deal today!
So nice job on the shot of the eagle however I prefer the sigma 60 to 600 mm Sports lens
I think you should try the sigma 60-600 mmm Sports lense on the black magic design 6K camera and try it on the try it on the Blackmagic design Studio 4k camera and the Bobcats camera and shooting video boy I bet that would be sweet try that I'd love to see you do a video of that
Though i understand the minimum focus distant thing, that's not what you buy a telephoto lens for which is why the 200-600 is the obvious choice especially with internal focusing, tcs and the very useful lens buttons
Great video, you are the first to show that the lens hood decreases on the Sony 200-600. I thought it was permanently installed. I leave a subscription ;-)
I have just hired the Sigma 150-600 and managed a few frames. On the ones that are not blurry because of camera shake, they are great, but I need a better tripod than. the one I currently have. I have particular project in mind for this lens.
Tamron 70-300 need a hornorable mention for people just get into telephoto lenses.
Great budget telephoto no doubt!
This is a unique review, Great Job!
YOU HAVE GIVEN NICE ILLUSTRATION FOR CHOOSING TELEPHOTO LENS. VERY VERY USEFUL AND DETAILED INFORMATION AND ADVICE ON CONCLUSION.
Going back and forth between the Tamron 50-400 new at 1,380£ with the tripod collar or a used Sony 100-400 for 1,540£ with 6 months guarantee? In your experience what would be the best? With that small price difference I would lean toward the Sony.
Sony is the better lens. Tamron is more versatile.
@@StefanMalloch Thanks for your reply.
The α1 & α7R IV have higher pixel densities than Sony's current crop sensor cameras. So they produce higher resolution images in crop mode than the APS-C cameras. I've got the crop mode toggle on a button for this purpose.
And Sony’s clear image zoom and teleconverters
Excellent video I can't think of anything that would improve it. You choose the four lenses I was most interested in. Awesome!!!!
Glad it was helpful!
Wow nice bro..I am a huge fan of telephoto lens
I've been considering getting a sony camera just for the 200-600 lens, which is pretty cheap here in Europe with 1650€, but sadly there's no reasonably priced camera for my needs. 10 fps max on the A7 IV kind of sucks, and for what it is, it's way too expensive. With canon, it's the other way around, many great cameras for birding but no affordable lenses.
Which of the Sony ones would you recommend for taking pictures of the moon
What do you say: Get the G-Master 70-200 f2.8 II together with a 2x teleconverter OR just get the Sigma 100-400, save 2.500€ but lose the good f-stop?
I used an used 60-600mm + MC11 heavy and slow focus, a tamron 150-600mm A-mount so no OSS in de lens+la-ea5 on a monopod or tripod fairly sharp in the hand is a challence .....i have the 200-600mm sony lens since 2 weeks feels great for birding and widlife.....
greetings from the Netherlands
My comment “Great job as you always do”. Right to the point. Plenty of pixel peepers out there you keep doing what your doing.
I would have to have that picture of that eagle that you took a picture of and hang that on my wall that would make a beautiful poster shot right there
Thank you, very helpful.
Such a beautiful picture
Hey mate! Thanks for the wonderful video. How's Sony 200-600 compare to Sigma 150-600 sports which is recently launched? Which one would you recommend? Thanks mate
I got the 150-600 and it's absolutely amazing.
Great Video. However as many Sony users use APS-C bodies, including Sony 70-350mm G OSS in this comparison would have been great. I really love combination of 70-350mm on my A6400 for bird photography.
I all so use the 70-350 sony lens with the A6400,it never fails to take out standing photos.
I would like to see some of your images for that lens as I have an A6400 myself. Do you have an instagram?
@@5ryane I would like to see some of your images for that lens as I have an A6400 myself. Do you have an instagram?
Will all of these lens work on a Sony A7rii? Thanks. Jim
Watched this video for lens comparison but found a lot of diving for my surprise 🤣😂😁
Good advices though. Thank you!
Thank you so much for your review. I am fortunate enough to own both the FE 100-400 GM and FE 200-600 G but I'm now looking for camera less than the new Sony Alpha 1 to pair with them. Spent all my money on glass (here and at other shorter focal lengths) but I currently have the A7R IV and A9. Not sure upgrading to an A9 II is worth it but will see. I wonder if there will be an A9 III in the future.
I'm waiting for the A9iii, if the A7siii would have 18-22mp then I would go for this, but I also enjoy the buttons on my A9. So for now i think upgrading to the A9ii is pointless for me.
Did you see any notable difference in sharpness between the two?
Is there any recomen for manual tele lens ?
Around 70 - 200 mm
with f 2.8
Dont have too much budget , the manual lens is ok
G'day Stefan, mate I have a Nikon Z7ii and waiting for the Nikon 100-400S lens but that seems to be more of a unicorn than anything. I keep hearing and reading really good things about the Sony 100-400 GM (which I believe is adaptable to the Z7ii). Thoughts on whether the adapter would have any effect on image quality?
Thanks for the comparison. Can any of the 3rd party lenses do manual focus override on Sony bodies?
I have three favorite big telephoto lenses: 70-200 GM, 100-400 GM, and the old DSLR designed Sigma 180 f2.8 macro. The Sigma with MC-11 is bigger and heavier than the 70-200 GM. I have both teleconverters for the GM lenses which gives me lots of choices. And with the A1 and A7Riv I have the added advantage of high resolution.
TCs suck. Tried it on 100-400GM to avoid getting the 200-600 but the image is way blurry, AF not that great and worse aperture
What about the Sigma 150-600? How does it compare with the Tamron?
What do you think of the Sigma 100-400 for video? I use a A7C, and I like to shoot cars racing around a track. I was also thinking of the sony 70-350, and I would use my A7C in crop mode for the 70-350
Recently i bought sony a6500 but now i dont have to buy telephoto lense. 😭
400 and 600 primes are even more ‘professionaler’, IMO. That said, I’m happy with my 100-400 GM :)
great video sir:) thank you
I am so tired of zoom Lenses, I wish there soon will come some prime tele Lenses like fx 300mm 4.0 (4.5, 5.6) 400mm 4.5 (5.6) and 500mm 5.6
Yes, I don’t like Nikon. Shooting Canon for 30+ years, but Nikon’s PF telephoto lenses are small with fixed aperture us nice. So as Canon DO telephoto. Give Sony sometime.
@@cameraprepper7938 Then buy the 400 and 600GM If you want quality with large aperture, not kiddy telephoto!
Nice job, this helps. Thank you.
What are your thoughts on the tamron 150-600
This was a great comparison for me. Now I have the info, I need to decide. Nice thing is, I really can't go wrong with any of the four. Thanks!
Thanks for the vid! Can I ask...Will this work when shooting in fast burst mode? Ie can you hold the shutter release button down and it will shoot at 10 frames per second?
I want to set it up on a tripod pointerld at a bird perch, and fire off a lot of shots as the bird takes flight. Thanks in advance
Hello Stefan, I have trouble deciding which lens to choose for motorsports, track day, etc. I have 2 lens choices in mind, the 200-600 or the current or the 70-200 F2.8 GM II. Please HELP ME!!! Appreciated
Both great! If you shoot a lot of birds too, I'd go with the 200-600. Huge size and weight diggerence as well.
@@StefanMalloch Thank you Stefan, I really do appreciated. Would love to see a video about the 70-200 F.28 GM II, how does it perform in a track race. 😁
@@TMan-id5qj Check out my review on it!
The sound effects need to be 1/10th the volume, mate.
It's sony g 200-600 for me. It is the best value lens even at $1900.
Thank you so much!
Thank you!
i have an A7S3 and doing sport video like youth football and basketball, softball, would the tamron 100-500 be good for that or what 200 or bigger lens would you recommend.
Great vid!
I just bought the Sony 70-300 G Series, thinking on selling it to get the Sigma 100-400. Do you think is worth it for the extra range?
If you've only just bought it, see how often you actually need the reach. Look at a batch of your photos exif data, are you shooting at 300 a lot?
I have 70-300 and realised i rarely push out to 300 so I put a long telezoom way down my GAS list 😆
13:43 wtf bird??
Tamron 150-500 is quality
I don't know what I would use that for but they look so cool lol XD we need 1000-4000mm lens! Now
I bought 200-600 first for safari. During the pandemic, I bought sigma 100-400, the image is super sharp, but the oss is terrible. YES, TERRIBLE. TOO MUCH BLUR !! NO KIDDING.
Meanwhile I'm using my $200 Minolta 100-400 APO
The sony lens is so expensive. The sigma is calling to me but I heard the sharpness and quality is not remotely close to the Sony
holy affiliate link farm.