As a life-long prosumer, practitioner and tennis afficionado, I can see this as an ideal lens for sideline shooting in indoor tournaments. Although the flare weakness you noted might be problematical in arenas with lots of specular accent lighting, on the a9 III just announced, with its global shutter, freezing round, rapidly moving balls instead of yellow ovals should be fairly easy.
I'm looking forward to playing with this 300mm lens. For it to be light thus making it easy to use and carry is a huge bonus for me! It's a great addition to Sony lens lineup. Being able to use it without a monopod is another added bonus.
I am a sports and performing arts photographer for a local high school. Prior to this year my preferred set up during the last several years for a super telephoto was the sigma 120 to 300 mm F2.8 with the MC 11 adapter and a Sony a 6600. That set up works well for close-ups with performing arts, events and football, etc. I need silent shooting for the performing arts events and have not been completely happy with either the Sony a 6600 or my canon R7 due to their slower sensor read out speed and some issues with distortion and banding. The R7 performed poorer than the a6600 related to distortion and banding. I tried to use the R7 with silent shutter during basketball games and the shots were unusable. I had to use only the mechanical shutter when shooting sports with the R7. I didn’t use my a73 for sports because I wanted more reach with an apsc camera. So I decided to get an a9 due to its high sensor read out speed for shooting and used price of $1,600. I own a Canon 300mm f2.8 and paired it with the a9 for the football season with the MC11 adaptor. That setup worked so well that it has become my preferred setup for sports. It has no issues with electronic shutter use with sport shooting. I mapped the a9 c1 button to the Apsc mode and switch between the 300mm and 450mm focal lengths depending on the scene framing I want. I like the a9 with the canon 300mm over the sigma 120-300mm due it weighing less and it gives me better subject separation. I am considering getting the Sony 300mm f2.8 which would be lighter and have faster focusing. But getting the a9iii too would take some serious reflection. 12k for that setup is a lot of money but it would be like shooting with lighting.😂
From an enthusiast-level bird photographer, this lens at first look does not really offer much. However, you really see its versatility when you start thinking of permutations and combinations when used with tele-converters and crop modes (especially with the A1), which give you the optimal focal lengths, apertures and possibly resolution for snapping birds.
what would you think of Canon's RF 100-300 2.8 for birds.wildlife? with or without 1.4x or 2x converter? it's heavier than this Sony 300/2.8, by quite a bit, but, it is a zoom, so I guess that's a plus for some photographers.
@@lohikarhu734 I’ve never used Canon gear but I can guarantee that heavy lenses can get tiresome really quickly. I own the Sony 200-600mm and while being fantastic, it’s heavy. On long walks it can sap your energy - creative and otherwise. I almost always a monopod. While weight is good for some use cases, today’s mirror less bodies have great image stabilisation. So it really doesn’t matter much from an image quality perspective.
I did some bird photography with Nikon and now I switched to sony with A7IV cuz I needed a hybrid I don't have any glass except 28-70 3.5-5.6, I don't think I am ever going to get this I might get 70-200 2.8 , 400 2.8 or 600 f4 with teleconverter
I disagree. It offers a lot. The fact it weighs less than similar offerings from other brands, it’s perfectly balanced in the hands due to the optical design and glass orientation, has a programmable function ring, dual linear motors, has a quick release hood, and retains sharpness all the way to edges makes it as close-to-perfect sample of a 300mm 2.8 for stand alone use. Then, couple that with the extenders and it is the ideal base to start with.
Gerald, I know you (and a lot of others) test these lenses almost exclusively on the A1 or cameras of that level, but I'd really like to see some more testing of high-end lenses on mid-grade FF or even mid-to-high-end APS-C bodies, since the general advice given to photographers is always to get the body you can afford and upgrade your glass until your skill level surpasses the hardware itself. So for someone like me, who's going from a ZV-E1 to (soon) an A6700 and DOES, in fact, have a potential use case for this lens, the segment about stabilization would turn out VERY differently. I wonder if a lot of gear reviewers, yourself included, take that into account. Sure, most people buying these lenses are using them for work. But a not-insignificant portion of the market will be hobby shooters like myself that are far more discerning in which lenses they choose to shoot, because the body itself is a significant limitation as to what features available on the lens will work.
Same. Shooting motorsports, I have waited for this lens since switching to Sony in 2016! The Canon 300mm 2.8L IS II is razor sharp whenever I look back at my photos during my Canon days, I miss my 300mm. Now this is perfect for motorsports!
Looking forward to your in depth review of the A9 III, I wasn't expecting a global shutter on that to be honest, maybe a 1/500s rolling shutter but wow, really
I applaud your patience, waiting 10 years for this lens only not needing it. Personally, I'm stuck on my 200-600 zoom. I'm stuck on zooms now, almost a situation where I live on zooms but there's that 11mm 1.8 for aps-c and 90mm macro that gets a lot of use.
As a wildlife photographer I have a definite need for a lens like this combined with the 1.4x or 2x converter. I use large zooms and they are extremely heavy and unwieldy in the field and at the end of a day's work they reduce my capacity to get good images. I have other lenses (and bodies) for the ranges below 300 mm and with my big zooms (tamron, sigma) ending up being used most of the time at the long end of their range. So a light prime would be a godsend, however, the massive problem is the price, $6,000?
Apparently the bigger part of the price is spent to reduce weight. If you look at the 3 iterations of Canon EF 400mm F2.8 it was 5.8kg, then 3.8kg and lastly 2.8kg with prices going from 7kEUR to 10.5kEUR and then 13.7kEUR!
@@kevinbalmer427not with the existing teleconverters...they are junk on the 70-200GMII and they will be junk on the 300GM. They will not release the teleconverters made for the GMII glass because the 100-400GM & 600GM are dead if the 2x GMII teleconverter drops
Are you making a vid about the A9iii? I know it’s still impossible to get a hands on but your analysis are so detailed and at least for me you always bring up every possible point of the gear, so would be very welcome!
I don’t really mind cat’s eye bokeh, I think it often looks beautiful and centers the image naturally. Sure, a ton of it can be distracting but usually it’s a tasteful touch on most lenses nowadays. Honestly edge to edge bokeh having absolutely none kind of looks unnatural when lenses do have that wide open @ ƒ2 or faster.
Thanks, Gerald - great review as always. However, you do have some strange birds up there in Canada. I don't remember seeing anything like that when I lived there.
I’ve always shot the 300 and 400 2.8 for sports/action. I am guessing many people looking for these super teles also shoot similar fast moving subjects. I was hoping you may have shot some action oriented subjects to showcase the AF speed/accuracy. Hopefully you’ll have more time to make a new video with these type of subjects? I’m personally waiting for a Sony 500mm F4 as that’s what I usually use for Motorsports when I shot Canon.
At 13:15, this made me laugh! For sure I’ve been in similar situations more than once😅Also, those swirly bokehs reminded me of the old Helios 44 lenses with their crazy bokeh. Great review, Gerald, ty!
I haven't really been looking for a 300mm but the small size really makes me interested. I wouldn't use it as my main lens during sports shoots but the option to put in on a 2nd body and hang it from my belt (the way I currently use my 70-200) is tempting. The small size and light weight makes this possible.
Great job on the video Gerald! Thanks for making it. I have a lot of customers that are interested in this lens already. We don't have a lot of birders in Vegas, but we have a number of air shows that folks love to capture.
Finally found out I have to Google for the words filter holder to find out if there are any existing internal filters for my Minolta (Alpha) 500mm F8 (mirror) objective. Cheers to Gerald Undone!
Great review on this lens. Made me think about if I could use a lens like that. And really like the fact you went back to having the opening and closing! The set and Undone Show work! "I'm Gerald Undone and please remember to exit through the gift shop."
I don't need the lens, as I have an OM-1 and 150-400 Pro lens for long lens projects, but, as always, I am interested in every GU review! Well done, great examples, expertly presented.
Hello ! I have the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II lens but also the 200-600mm G OSS - I am very happy with them and I will definitely buy the 300/2.8 GM as well. GM objectives are worth all the money!
I think you are the right person to this question,Stack stack sensor vs Global Shutter sensor difference please, i haven't found anything from Google.thanks for ur time.
Yes, me too. I want one. Cost aside (a key factor), one major caveat is just how well in practice it performs with a 1.4 (which I already own) a d a 2.0x (which I'd buy too if I bought this lens).
I feel like with Canon having made a 100-300 2.8 there are many more use cases for a lens like that. that focal length for me would be a perfect hockey or softball lens.
I've heard of fashion photophers using 300mm f2.8 for tight headshots - increases working distance, flattens persepctive and blows the background right out. Real bokeh. I spent a couple of years with Nikon 180 mm F2.8 on D7000. That makes it the equivalent of about 270mm f2.8. A very neat combination that is very easy to handle.
I had a Canon 300mm f4 which I bought used, loved that lens, ran it with a E-EF converter on my NEX-7 as I was changing systems. But honestly, I didn't find a lot to shoot with it since I don't do sports. So, not a focal length I would use. For wildlife (zoo), I recently picked up the 70-350 E mount which is working out great on my A7rV. Still, great to see Sony continue to fill out the line-up. I've been shooting Alpha 7rs since the days of "but there are no lenses for that system".
Nice, would have loved to see this compared to a 70-200m 2.8. What are you really getting beyond just cropping in a bit on a lens you already have? For such a crazy price it seems like one you wouldn't use very often.
Definitely a niche lens.. I only shoot high school and some NCCAA sports occasionally but I’ve always said that I wanted to buy one pimp lens for sports and I wouldn’t ever spend $12k for a 400 2.8 but rather I just set a personal limit at $7500 no matter how awesome the lens so when the rumors said $7500 I hoped and prayed but when it came out at $5999, for me it went from I’ll get it one day to I’ll definitely get this within 6-8 months .. the canon and Nikon equivalents are $3k more and twice the size and weight.. and to be able to hand hold it as opposed to the big “stick” is tremendous. Cheers friend! I will also say I’ve borrowed the 70-200 GM II and it’s an amazing upgrade over the mark 1 I own in every way.. highly recommend it. Super sharp, light, and fast
I shoot both R5 and A1's if I had my choice I'd dish out the extra cash for the RF 100-300mm 2.8 for the extra versatility even with the extreme weight and size trade off.
Just ordered mine, may even come at the end of the year, as one of the frist ones. I am a wildlife photographer and shoot a lot with my 600mm. But for some subjects and situations I need less, not often but some times. So the 300mm for this price and this weight is just perfect. Looking forward to shoot with it.
My family’s cat lived for 16 years. I never realized cats HAD eyelashes. I needed to watch a Gerald Undone lens review to find that out. I’ll have to do some thinking... :D
I bit the bullet and bought this lens and don't regret it at all. In fact, I moved from Nikon to Sony just for this lens. It is worth every penny. It's crazy sharp across the frame, has outstanding rendering, but most importantly it is so light that it gets used. It fits in a backpack with enough room for another body. It can be handheld all day with no soreness or fatigue. It is truly a remarkable piece of optical engineering.
I am with you what to plan and use it for? I am a adjustable telephoto person and there are many less costly options 1. The 24-240 in APS-C you get 36 to 360 and if you AF to the small square center you get great milky bokeh and great DOF separation, it is a great lens and have used for solar eclipse getting a super small sun but then at 360 a great a colorful diamond ring and ring of fire getting stars with each, this when a zoom lens is great for only a couple of minutes of operatunity 2. The greater than great 200-600 the boss at 300mm looks the same size and again if AF using the small or even mid size square at center putting subject at center there is great DOF as well as bokeh. 70-200mm the same results in APS-C mode. The beauty of APS-C mode is center of sensor getting snap fast AF. A lot use the 600mm for sports and fast action. I believe a lot of photographers are still in the old cameras outputs were 2.8 helped a lot even in the day of film. A Sony camera will give great results and fast ISO's when on auto ISO with very low noise output but then software today is super better to rid noise in just the last few years. Not to reduce sales but for those who want it but can not afford a compare of other lenses that can also get 300mm in a number of ways even using the the 2X teleconverter - no need for the 1.4X because APS-C is a fast 1.5X. Just saying help someone get that 300mm by showing other way with other lenses!! A lot of shots are cropped then enlarged with the new SW anyway!!! There is no metadata to be seen on a print so whos to know lens mm even camera info.
Yes, I have been waiting for this lens for a long time. I have been asking Sony for this lens. I have been adapting a Canon 300 2.8 to my A9 and it has been super frustrating. Thanks Sony. Also, thanks for the firmware updates for the A1 and A7SIII.
I'd be really interested in this for bird photography. Especially for less than ideal lighting conditions. Sometimes pared with a 1.4x or 2x. Be even more tempted if Sony were to make a crop sensor version of the new A9iii because birds tend to be tiny and seldom occupy the full frame of a full frame. Just can't get close enough.
Hey Gerald, love your work. Just one little nit-pick- 3:30 dampening is to dampen; to wet. Damping is the word you are after 😃 hello from Melbourne, Australia!🤙
I recently went for an old 150/2.8 macro which is a 300/2.8 cropped on mft - for a specific video purpose (macro slo mo shots). After doing the job (yeah it got the job done amazingly well) I actually ended up using it for shooting photos and i will not be getting rid of this as planned - having a lot of fun with it albeit being bulky, mf and hard to use. Never thought this focal length as usable but i was wrong :)
Ohhh and about the swirly bokeh effect. It’s actually cool and really appreciated on old vintage lenses like helioses and other rehousings - i don’t mind it at all. When the background has to be noisy and this cannot be avoided i believe swirly is better than regular garbage in the bg ;)
Have you seen the TTArtisan 500mm f/6.3 Lens for Sony E? I have been looking at it as a more budget lens, but I would love to see what you thought of it.
That was my same reasoning for wanting this 300.. I can’t bring myself to spend that much on a 400 2.8 but at 60% less I’ll take the hand holdable 300 all day long in crop mode on a a7RiV or a1 .. the fact that it’s $5999 versus the rumors of $7500 is just icing on the cake..
Good review and kudos for pointing out the good and bad. I've been spoiled owning a Nikkor 200-400mm and now GF 250mm and have been fortunate to also test allot of long Z glass. The Sony just doesn't compare imho. The lightness is probably it's biggest strength/selling point but that bokeh swirl makes it unacceptable for me personally. I was actually dizzy by the end of the video.
Hello gerald, I am not sure Sport photographers will use this lens. I think they might probably be much more happy with a 200-400 . Tele converters do not replace the versatility of a zoom apart if the converter is in the lens itself.
I use the 400mm f/2.8 for wildlife photography when I travel. I am small and light and old. I thought the 400 was something I could handle, but it’s a monster for me. I never considered a 300mm, but watching your review and Mark Galer’s review has me thinking I might sell my 400 and reinvest in the 300mm. I am usually photographing large mammals and the possibility of getting more of their environment into the shot is attractive and with the new upscaling ai I can also crop in. I use the a1 as my camera body. I also have 1.4x if I feel I really need the length. I come from the fine art world and I love the swirly bokeh, what can I say? Do you use the 400mm? What do you think?
Like you I use the 400mm f2.8 for wildlife and love it, but I agree it’s a hell of a thing to lug around, especially with weight restrictions on light aircraft so am considering a switch to the 300mm. I am just a bit worried about the reach.
I just bought it. For wildlife. The plan is to replace the 200-600 which in my eyes is unreliable. The idea is to use it with 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters (which it works great with) so i get 300, 450 and 600 primes in my bag - very light for traveling and the quality 😅😅
Thank you for this review. I appreciated your comments and tests on the background bokeh. The background swirl effect is very similar on the 70-350 APS-C lens. I'm sure it doesn't bother everybody but I find it distracting and less than ideal for a lens at this price point.
If price isn’t an issue and you wanted 600mm distance in a travel size form factor - would you get this with a 2x teleconverter or the 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter or the 200-600.
You're going to lose all that speed you're paying for with the tele-convertors anyway, so I'd go with the 200-600 myself. I'm poor, so if money is no object (as you say) you have to decide on the importance of weight vs. dimensions. The new 300 with a convertor is probably best balance, if you don't mind being stuck at 300 and 600. Your only other option is to go APS-C to get out to 600mm. It's definitely the best travel option if you don't mind the caveats of the format, and of course shooting at f5.6 (Sony 100-400) or at f6.3 (Sigma 100-400).
Thanks Gerald, this looks to be another very impressive GM optic. I think I want one. The size and heft look to be major plus points, leaving aside the obvious tack sharp and fast focus features that should be a given on any lens like this, whatever the brand. I need to start saving (I'm an indulgent amateur hobbyist rather than a pro paid shooter, for whom this will be a 'no brainer'). Hard to spend that much as a hobby shooter, but I'm sure I can justify it to myself - to my wife, well that's harder, but at least she realises I could have worse uses for my funds. Used with a hi-res body (a1 or a7rv) and perhaps my uber compact 1.4x then you have a super fast 420mm (APS-C punch-in) and a high performing 600mm f4. For sports and wildlife (mostly sport) this will be a useful but expensive alternative to my 200-600. I might even take this out more often than my 200-600 too (eg travel) if it's similar size/heft to the mk1 70-200 (nb mk2 so much better). Yes I think it's a great addition to the Sony arsenal and certainly gets my attention and interest.😢
Hey Gerald! Finally, u don't have to be Undone anymore: The One Lens U have been waiting for the the Last 10 Years has finally been released. All of those many camera bodies, super duper bodies of various releases which have been sitting on your garage shelves the last ten years will be able to catch up with the million shots & pics they meant to get during the last ten years will be able to be in go-go mode now. God Save the King & Queen, Thanks to the timing of the New Coronation in Mother England, now step-daughter Canada will be able to celebrate with the new Lens & millions of pics to come forth in the next few days, weeks & months, Canada now finally has hope shining brightly. Amazing what One New Lens in Ten Years can Provide! 😎😎
I am intrigued as to what this lens is like with the teleconverters. The way I see it is that it could effectively give you a ~400mm F4 (yes I know 420mm), and a 600mm F5.6, at a very light and compact weight (almost like the Nikon PF lenses). To only be one stop off the 400mm F2.8, and 600mm F4 lenses for less than half the price is sort of appealing, but of course... it's not ideal to be buying a lens if the only reason it is appealing is for use with a teleconverter.
As someone mostly using 35-150mm and sometimes 70-180mm, I would rather consider 70-200mm as a possible update of 70-180mm AND 100-300mm F2.8, if such a lens existed, but the main problem would be its price, because this lens would have a very limited use for me compared to the other two. I just notice there are cases I would like to be able to extend to 300mm without losing image quality on noise due to cropping, but if I had to pay for a bit better quality... maybe Topaz would give about the same, yet cheaper.
Looks like a great performer. I think an interesting question is how it performs with a 2x teleconverter compared to the 200-600. With the price point, I don't see myself replacing my 200-600 with it for wildlife shooting, but for someone wanting a little bit of a wider aperture and a slightly lighter setup, it could be a decent wildlife option (assuming it performs well with the teleconverters).
If I were a Sony guy with deep pockets (you have to buy a new camera every year since there are obsolete nr. of updates with usable features) this would be the one. With the new A9 III >1º of purchase for low light tele...something that still bugs me is that the old DSLR lenses 200 F2, and 400 F2.8... were fairly well priced considering today's pricepoint of high-end lenses.
At 15:02 despite being excellent I think is an example of minor flaring that can pop up. Squirrel has a bit of haze on its face. Either way the lens is simply amazing. Can I afford it? No. But still nice to look at.
After all the "finally! I've waited forever for a 300mm" comments I'm not sure what the use case is for this. Most of the stuff I want to shoot with a long telephoto prime wants 400 or 600. If I want to use it for much more portability, honestly the 70-200 f4 ii seems brilliant for camping/hiking. The 300 seems limited to specific sports, played in constrained spaces. Great for that, but hard to use otherwise.
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
This video would have been a lot better with my elbow in the frame.
#BringTheElbowBack
🤣🤣 Yes... I'm Famous.. Gerald and Patrick saw my comment!!💥. Love all your content guys... Keep it up...
@@KylehallphotographyI saw both of your comments but I’m so out of the loop. Was there another video where his elbow was in frame?
@@likebliss it was the only star of the show. The video was on the Nikon zf
Send me a picture of your elbow and I’ll edit and re upload this video. Let’s make it happen
As a life-long prosumer, practitioner and tennis afficionado, I can see this as an ideal lens for sideline shooting in indoor tournaments. Although the flare weakness you noted might be problematical in arenas with lots of specular accent lighting, on the a9 III just announced, with its global shutter, freezing round, rapidly moving balls instead of yellow ovals should be fairly easy.
I'm looking forward to playing with this 300mm lens. For it to be light thus making it easy to use and carry is a huge bonus for me! It's a great addition to Sony lens lineup. Being able to use it without a monopod is another added bonus.
This video is much better without Patrick Tomasso's elbows in the frame. Thanks
I am a sports and performing arts photographer for a local high school. Prior to this year my preferred set up during the last several years for a super telephoto was the sigma 120 to 300 mm F2.8 with the MC 11 adapter and a Sony a 6600. That set up works well for close-ups with performing arts, events and football, etc. I need silent shooting for the performing arts events and have not been completely happy with either the Sony a 6600 or my canon R7 due to their slower sensor read out speed and some issues with distortion and banding. The R7 performed poorer than the a6600 related to distortion and banding. I tried to use the R7 with silent shutter during basketball games and the shots were unusable. I had to use only the mechanical shutter when shooting sports with the R7. I didn’t use my a73 for sports because I wanted more reach with an apsc camera. So I decided to get an a9 due to its high sensor read out speed for shooting and used price of $1,600. I own a Canon 300mm f2.8 and paired it with the a9 for the football season with the MC11 adaptor. That setup worked so well that it has become my preferred setup for sports. It has no issues with electronic shutter use with sport shooting. I mapped the a9 c1 button to the Apsc mode and switch between the 300mm and 450mm focal lengths depending on the scene framing I want. I like the a9 with the canon 300mm over the sigma 120-300mm due it weighing less and it gives me better subject separation. I am considering getting the Sony 300mm f2.8 which would be lighter and have faster focusing. But getting the a9iii too would take some serious reflection. 12k for that setup is a lot of money but it would be like shooting with lighting.😂
"I'm Gerald Undone, and focus pulls are my love language."
From an enthusiast-level bird photographer, this lens at first look does not really offer much. However, you really see its versatility when you start thinking of permutations and combinations when used with tele-converters and crop modes (especially with the A1), which give you the optimal focal lengths, apertures and possibly resolution for snapping birds.
what would you think of Canon's RF 100-300 2.8 for birds.wildlife? with or without 1.4x or 2x converter?
it's heavier than this Sony 300/2.8, by quite a bit, but, it is a zoom, so I guess that's a plus for some photographers.
@@lohikarhu734 I’ve never used Canon gear but I can guarantee that heavy lenses can get tiresome really quickly. I own the Sony 200-600mm and while being fantastic, it’s heavy. On long walks it can sap your energy - creative and otherwise. I almost always a monopod. While weight is good for some use cases, today’s mirror less bodies have great image stabilisation. So it really doesn’t matter much from an image quality perspective.
@@lohikarhu734 RF100-300 is more for stadium photogs with fixed position and tripod/monopod.
That RF is not heavy for a f2.8 tele zoom
I did some bird photography with Nikon and now I switched to sony with A7IV cuz I needed a hybrid I don't have any glass except 28-70 3.5-5.6, I don't think I am ever going to get this I might get 70-200 2.8 , 400 2.8 or 600 f4 with teleconverter
I disagree. It offers a lot. The fact it weighs less than similar offerings from other brands, it’s perfectly balanced in the hands due to the optical design and glass orientation, has a programmable function ring, dual linear motors, has a quick release hood, and retains sharpness all the way to edges makes it as close-to-perfect sample of a 300mm 2.8 for stand alone use. Then, couple that with the extenders and it is the ideal base to start with.
Finally a lens by Sony with some character! I love that semi-swirly bokeh! Well done!
I'd never buy a 300mm. But I had to watch your fabulous presentation of it :)
Gerald, I know you (and a lot of others) test these lenses almost exclusively on the A1 or cameras of that level, but I'd really like to see some more testing of high-end lenses on mid-grade FF or even mid-to-high-end APS-C bodies, since the general advice given to photographers is always to get the body you can afford and upgrade your glass until your skill level surpasses the hardware itself. So for someone like me, who's going from a ZV-E1 to (soon) an A6700 and DOES, in fact, have a potential use case for this lens, the segment about stabilization would turn out VERY differently. I wonder if a lot of gear reviewers, yourself included, take that into account. Sure, most people buying these lenses are using them for work. But a not-insignificant portion of the market will be hobby shooters like myself that are far more discerning in which lenses they choose to shoot, because the body itself is a significant limitation as to what features available on the lens will work.
Same. Shooting motorsports, I have waited for this lens since switching to Sony in 2016! The Canon 300mm 2.8L IS II is razor sharp whenever I look back at my photos during my Canon days, I miss my 300mm. Now this is perfect for motorsports!
Looking forward to your in depth review of the A9 III, I wasn't expecting a global shutter on that to be honest, maybe a 1/500s rolling shutter but wow, really
No one got the camera beforehand. Sony kept it a secret to everyone. If there is a review, it will mostly be a few weeks.
@@ABP8214 Yeah, I was just saying, that's an interesting camera and I'm waiting for it's review but no pressure
Auto focus will still suck and just like the A1 Sony will never fix it with a firmware update. Yep, I’m in a grumpy mood.
@@derrickrr5516 Cap. I mean, well, half cap. Autofocus bad? Nah. Firmware update never coming? Yeah
I applaud your patience, waiting 10 years for this lens only not needing it. Personally, I'm stuck on my 200-600 zoom. I'm stuck on zooms now, almost a situation where I live on zooms but there's that 11mm 1.8 for aps-c and 90mm macro that gets a lot of use.
As a wildlife photographer I have a definite need for a lens like this combined with the 1.4x or 2x converter. I use large zooms and they are extremely heavy and unwieldy in the field and at the end of a day's work they reduce my capacity to get good images. I have other lenses (and bodies) for the ranges below 300 mm and with my big zooms (tamron, sigma) ending up being used most of the time at the long end of their range. So a light prime would be a godsend, however, the massive problem is the price, $6,000?
Well they will cripple you because the current teleconverters are not sharp enough for the 70-200GMII or 300GM.
Apparently the bigger part of the price is spent to reduce weight. If you look at the 3 iterations of Canon EF 400mm F2.8 it was 5.8kg, then 3.8kg and lastly 2.8kg with prices going from 7kEUR to 10.5kEUR and then 13.7kEUR!
I think exactly the same... but worry about how sharp it is with a 2X attached?
@@kevinbalmer427not with the existing teleconverters...they are junk on the 70-200GMII and they will be junk on the 300GM. They will not release the teleconverters made for the GMII glass because the 100-400GM & 600GM are dead if the 2x GMII teleconverter drops
@@adamginsburg9909 My 1.4 works perfect with my 600, no complains of sharpness
Are you making a vid about the A9iii? I know it’s still impossible to get a hands on but your analysis are so detailed and at least for me you always bring up every possible point of the gear, so would be very welcome!
I don’t really mind cat’s eye bokeh, I think it often looks beautiful and centers the image naturally. Sure, a ton of it can be distracting but usually it’s a tasteful touch on most lenses nowadays. Honestly edge to edge bokeh having absolutely none kind of looks unnatural when lenses do have that wide open @ ƒ2 or faster.
Thanks, Gerald - great review as always. However, you do have some strange birds up there in Canada. I don't remember seeing anything like that when I lived there.
I’ve always shot the 300 and 400 2.8 for sports/action. I am guessing many people looking for these super teles also shoot similar fast moving subjects. I was hoping you may have shot some action oriented subjects to showcase the AF speed/accuracy. Hopefully you’ll have more time to make a new video with these type of subjects?
I’m personally waiting for a Sony 500mm F4 as that’s what I usually use for Motorsports when I shot Canon.
The test subject for focusing seemed a little unsteady. Perhaps a nap was due? 😅
Cant wait for the a9iii video
At 13:15, this made me laugh! For sure I’ve been in similar situations more than once😅Also, those swirly bokehs reminded me of the old Helios 44 lenses with their crazy bokeh. Great review, Gerald, ty!
2nd that on the Helios.. crazy neat swirls for sure..
I haven't really been looking for a 300mm but the small size really makes me interested. I wouldn't use it as my main lens during sports shoots but the option to put in on a 2nd body and hang it from my belt (the way I currently use my 70-200) is tempting. The small size and light weight makes this possible.
Great job on the video Gerald! Thanks for making it. I have a lot of customers that are interested in this lens already. We don't have a lot of birders in Vegas, but we have a number of air shows that folks love to capture.
the first Sony lens that makes me want to rent Sony kit for shooting sports
Finally found out I have to Google for the words filter holder to find out if there are any existing internal filters for my Minolta (Alpha) 500mm F8 (mirror) objective. Cheers to Gerald Undone!
Great review on this lens. Made me think about if I could use a lens like that. And really like the fact you went back to having the opening and closing! The set and Undone Show work! "I'm Gerald Undone and please remember to exit through the gift shop."
Yada yada yada… all images look awesome! Am I excited? For a Canon user, surprisingly yes! Nice video 👍
Squirrel transition ending was dope!!
It's always fun to have a lens with a large front element to intimidate people.
14:55 love this photo of this “bird” 😂
Love the art motion at the end.
I don't need the lens, as I have an OM-1 and 150-400 Pro lens for long lens projects, but, as always, I am interested in every GU review! Well done, great examples, expertly presented.
Hello !
I have the 70-200mm f2.8 GM II lens but also the 200-600mm G OSS - I am very happy with them and I will definitely buy the 300/2.8 GM as well.
GM objectives are worth all the money!
I actually like the warping in the bokeh with wide open prime lenses, gives character to the image.
You make the best Reviews on Earth, love you and your Channel ❤
I think you are the right person to this question,Stack stack sensor vs Global Shutter sensor difference please, i haven't found anything from Google.thanks for ur time.
Yes, me too. I want one. Cost aside (a key factor), one major caveat is just how well in practice it performs with a 1.4 (which I already own) a d a 2.0x (which I'd buy too if I bought this lens).
I love that Gerald says “bokeh” almost exactly like that vine of the African dude awkwardly saying “okay”
I feel like with Canon having made a 100-300 2.8 there are many more use cases for a lens like that. that focal length for me would be a perfect hockey or softball lens.
Three times the cost and double the weight though, so apples and oranges really
@@Platformticketsit’s not 3 times the price 😅
Only double the price 😅😅
I've heard of fashion photophers using 300mm f2.8 for tight headshots - increases working distance, flattens persepctive and blows the background right out. Real bokeh. I spent a couple of years with Nikon 180 mm F2.8 on D7000. That makes it the equivalent of about 270mm f2.8. A very neat combination that is very easy to handle.
I had a Canon 300mm f4 which I bought used, loved that lens, ran it with a E-EF converter on my NEX-7 as I was changing systems. But honestly, I didn't find a lot to shoot with it since I don't do sports. So, not a focal length I would use. For wildlife (zoo), I recently picked up the 70-350 E mount which is working out great on my A7rV. Still, great to see Sony continue to fill out the line-up. I've been shooting Alpha 7rs since the days of "but there are no lenses for that system".
Nice, would have loved to see this compared to a 70-200m 2.8. What are you really getting beyond just cropping in a bit on a lens you already have? For such a crazy price it seems like one you wouldn't use very often.
Definitely a niche lens.. I only shoot high school and some NCCAA sports occasionally but I’ve always said that I wanted to buy one pimp lens for sports and I wouldn’t ever spend $12k for a 400 2.8 but rather I just set a personal limit at $7500 no matter how awesome the lens so when the rumors said $7500 I hoped and prayed but when it came out at $5999, for me it went from I’ll get it one day to I’ll definitely get this within 6-8 months .. the canon and Nikon equivalents are $3k more and twice the size and weight.. and to be able to hand hold it as opposed to the big “stick” is tremendous. Cheers friend! I will also say I’ve borrowed the 70-200 GM II and it’s an amazing upgrade over the mark 1 I own in every way.. highly recommend it. Super sharp, light, and fast
I appreciated the squirrel at the end. Good job.
I shoot both R5 and A1's if I had my choice I'd dish out the extra cash for the RF 100-300mm 2.8 for the extra versatility even with the extreme weight and size trade off.
Like you I've been waiting for a decade for this lens. They've just come in stock in the UK, and I had to have it.
Just ordered mine, may even come at the end of the year, as one of the frist ones. I am a wildlife photographer and shoot a lot with my 600mm. But for some subjects and situations I need less, not often but some times. So the 300mm for this price and this weight is just perfect. Looking forward to shoot with it.
My family’s cat lived for 16 years. I never realized cats HAD eyelashes. I needed to watch a Gerald Undone lens review to find that out. I’ll have to do some thinking... :D
I bit the bullet and bought this lens and don't regret it at all. In fact, I moved from Nikon to Sony just for this lens. It is worth every penny. It's crazy sharp across the frame, has outstanding rendering, but most importantly it is so light that it gets used. It fits in a backpack with enough room for another body. It can be handheld all day with no soreness or fatigue. It is truly a remarkable piece of optical engineering.
The ending “swirly squirrel” animation was psychedelic dude, I love it😂 Also great review of this lens, if only I had an extra $6k to get one lol
The telephoto petzval. I love the swirling bokeh. Would be cool as a black and white.
You are not seeing cats eyes…. Cat: Am I a joke to you? 😂
I am with you what to plan and use it for? I am a adjustable telephoto person and there are many less costly options 1. The 24-240 in APS-C you get 36 to 360 and if you AF to the small square center you get great milky bokeh and great DOF separation, it is a great lens and have used for solar eclipse getting a super small sun but then at 360 a great a colorful diamond ring and ring of fire getting stars with each, this when a zoom lens is great for only a couple of minutes of operatunity 2. The greater than great 200-600 the boss at 300mm looks the same size and again if AF using the small or even mid size square at center putting subject at center there is great DOF as well as bokeh. 70-200mm the same results in APS-C mode. The beauty of APS-C mode is center of sensor getting snap fast AF. A lot use the 600mm for sports and fast action. I believe a lot of photographers are still in the old cameras outputs were 2.8 helped a lot even in the day of film. A Sony camera will give great results and fast ISO's when on auto ISO with very low noise output but then software today is super better to rid noise in just the last few years. Not to reduce sales but for those who want it but can not afford a compare of other lenses that can also get 300mm in a number of ways even using the the 2X teleconverter - no need for the 1.4X because APS-C is a fast 1.5X. Just saying help someone get that 300mm by showing other way with other lenses!! A lot of shots are cropped then enlarged with the new SW anyway!!! There is no metadata to be seen on a print so whos to know lens mm even camera info.
Yes, I have been waiting for this lens for a long time. I have been asking Sony for this lens. I have been adapting a Canon 300 2.8 to my A9 and it has been super frustrating. Thanks Sony. Also, thanks for the firmware updates for the A1 and A7SIII.
I'd be really interested in this for bird photography. Especially for less than ideal lighting conditions. Sometimes pared with a 1.4x or 2x. Be even more tempted if Sony were to make a crop sensor version of the new A9iii because birds tend to be tiny and seldom occupy the full frame of a full frame. Just can't get close enough.
Hey Gerald, love your work. Just one little nit-pick- 3:30 dampening is to dampen; to wet. Damping is the word you are after 😃 hello from Melbourne, Australia!🤙
cat's eye part got me laughing 🤣
I recently went for an old 150/2.8 macro which is a 300/2.8 cropped on mft - for a specific video purpose (macro slo mo shots). After doing the job (yeah it got the job done amazingly well) I actually ended up using it for shooting photos and i will not be getting rid of this as planned - having a lot of fun with it albeit being bulky, mf and hard to use. Never thought this focal length as usable but i was wrong :)
Ohhh and about the swirly bokeh effect. It’s actually cool and really appreciated on old vintage lenses like helioses and other rehousings - i don’t mind it at all. When the background has to be noisy and this cannot be avoided i believe swirly is better than regular garbage in the bg ;)
Have you seen the TTArtisan 500mm f/6.3 Lens for Sony E? I have been looking at it as a more budget lens, but I would love to see what you thought of it.
Good lens , IQ very good, Lightweight and with 1,4 teleconverter still fast (f 4). Very happy with lens.
I feel the same about bird photography. Nice shot of the duck by the way.
I think it’s too late to convert anyone. But it’s a welcome option for those who need it and might help reduce the cost of used 400mm f2.8
That was my same reasoning for wanting this 300.. I can’t bring myself to spend that much on a 400 2.8 but at 60% less I’ll take the hand holdable 300 all day long in crop mode on a a7RiV or a1 .. the fact that it’s $5999 versus the rumors of $7500 is just icing on the cake..
Good review and kudos for pointing out the good and bad. I've been spoiled owning a Nikkor 200-400mm and now GF 250mm and have been fortunate to also test allot of long Z glass. The Sony just doesn't compare imho. The lightness is probably it's biggest strength/selling point but that bokeh swirl makes it unacceptable for me personally. I was actually dizzy by the end of the video.
The audio in this video was perfect
Hello gerald, I am not sure Sport photographers will use this lens. I think they might probably be much more happy with a 200-400 . Tele converters do not replace the versatility of a zoom apart if the converter is in the lens itself.
My Nikon 300mm 2.8 vrii is my "big" lens. Looking forward to seeing how Nikon changes its mirrorless version, I'd love to see an f2 🤞🏻
I use the 400mm f/2.8 for wildlife photography when I travel. I am small and light and old. I thought the 400 was something I could handle, but it’s a monster for me. I never considered a 300mm, but watching your review and Mark Galer’s review has me thinking I might sell my 400 and reinvest in the 300mm. I am usually photographing large mammals and the possibility of getting more of their environment into the shot is attractive and with the new upscaling ai I can also crop in. I use the a1 as my camera body. I also have 1.4x if I feel I really need the length. I come from the fine art world and I love the swirly bokeh, what can I say? Do you use the 400mm? What do you think?
Like you I use the 400mm f2.8 for wildlife and love it, but I agree it’s a hell of a thing to lug around, especially with weight restrictions on light aircraft so am considering a switch to the 300mm. I am just a bit worried about the reach.
Haven't watched a GU video in the new studio. Audio sounds amazing!
I’d love to see the use of a more standardized focus chart for these videos vs just playing cards.
I just bought it. For wildlife.
The plan is to replace the 200-600 which in my eyes is unreliable.
The idea is to use it with 1.4 and 2.0 teleconverters (which it works great with) so i get 300, 450 and 600 primes in my bag - very light for traveling and the quality 😅😅
Thank you for this review. I appreciated your comments and tests on the background bokeh. The background swirl effect is very similar on the 70-350 APS-C lens. I'm sure it doesn't bother everybody but I find it distracting and less than ideal for a lens at this price point.
this lens probably has a fresnel element that saves a lot of weight, but produces massive flare in some situations
The little toss at 1:12 made me nervous hahahaha
If price isn’t an issue and you wanted 600mm distance in a travel size form factor - would you get this with a 2x teleconverter or the 100-400 with a 1.4 teleconverter or the 200-600.
You're going to lose all that speed you're paying for with the tele-convertors anyway, so I'd go with the 200-600 myself. I'm poor, so if money is no object (as you say) you have to decide on the importance of weight vs. dimensions. The new 300 with a convertor is probably best balance, if you don't mind being stuck at 300 and 600. Your only other option is to go APS-C to get out to 600mm. It's definitely the best travel option if you don't mind the caveats of the format, and of course shooting at f5.6 (Sony 100-400) or at f6.3 (Sigma 100-400).
Thanks Gerald, this looks to be another very impressive GM optic. I think I want one. The size and heft look to be major plus points, leaving aside the obvious tack sharp and fast focus features that should be a given on any lens like this, whatever the brand.
I need to start saving (I'm an indulgent amateur hobbyist rather than a pro paid shooter, for whom this will be a 'no brainer'). Hard to spend that much as a hobby shooter, but I'm sure I can justify it to myself - to my wife, well that's harder, but at least she realises I could have worse uses for my funds.
Used with a hi-res body (a1 or a7rv) and perhaps my uber compact 1.4x then you have a super fast 420mm (APS-C punch-in) and a high performing 600mm f4. For sports and wildlife (mostly sport) this will be a useful but expensive alternative to my 200-600. I might even take this out more often than my 200-600 too (eg travel) if it's similar size/heft to the mk1 70-200 (nb mk2 so much better). Yes I think it's a great addition to the Sony arsenal and certainly gets my attention and interest.😢
Hey Gerald! Finally, u don't have to be Undone anymore: The One Lens U have been waiting for the the Last 10 Years has finally been released. All of those many camera bodies, super duper bodies of various releases which have been sitting on your garage shelves the last ten years will be able to catch up with the million shots & pics they meant to get during the last ten years will be able to be in go-go mode now. God Save the King & Queen, Thanks to the timing of the New Coronation in Mother England, now step-daughter Canada will be able to celebrate with the new Lens & millions of pics to come forth in the next few days, weeks & months, Canada now finally has hope shining brightly. Amazing what One New Lens in Ten Years can Provide! 😎😎
The ending of your videos always deliver 😂
*12:04** "...So this is a great example of the Little Undone kid..."*
Imagine if m43 had one of these. Not a 150 2.8 with same FOV, but a proper 300 2.8, with 600mm equiv FOV. Would be glorious.
I am intrigued as to what this lens is like with the teleconverters. The way I see it is that it could effectively give you a ~400mm F4 (yes I know 420mm), and a 600mm F5.6, at a very light and compact weight (almost like the Nikon PF lenses). To only be one stop off the 400mm F2.8, and 600mm F4 lenses for less than half the price is sort of appealing, but of course... it's not ideal to be buying a lens if the only reason it is appealing is for use with a teleconverter.
This will be perfect for my next talking head video.
As someone mostly using 35-150mm and sometimes 70-180mm, I would rather consider 70-200mm as a possible update of 70-180mm AND 100-300mm F2.8, if such a lens existed, but the main problem would be its price, because this lens would have a very limited use for me compared to the other two. I just notice there are cases I would like to be able to extend to 300mm without losing image quality on noise due to cropping, but if I had to pay for a bit better quality... maybe Topaz would give about the same, yet cheaper.
Looks like a great performer. I think an interesting question is how it performs with a 2x teleconverter compared to the 200-600. With the price point, I don't see myself replacing my 200-600 with it for wildlife shooting, but for someone wanting a little bit of a wider aperture and a slightly lighter setup, it could be a decent wildlife option (assuming it performs well with the teleconverters).
Price wise... I think 300mm F2.8 is a good price performance ratio with additional TC 1.4x or 2x. I am getting one to be pair with sony a9 m3.
I'm using Canon EF 300mm f2.8 II, this Sony lens is 2 lbs lighter. Amazing
ɑ9 III is the much bigger announcement imho, please review that
2:33 hey you've just created a drum and slapped it
What in the squirrel acid trip was that? LOL! Nice review buddy.
Need to test back lit subjects. I shoot into the light all the time and lens coating makes a huge difference.
Now whenever Gerald looks left before he says "let's get undone." we know he's looking at Teddy
Epic end of the video, Gerald)))
Excited for the a9iii review from you
If I were a Sony guy with deep pockets (you have to buy a new camera every year since there are obsolete nr. of updates with usable features) this would be the one.
With the new A9 III >1º of purchase for low light tele...something that still bugs me is that the old DSLR lenses 200 F2, and 400 F2.8... were fairly well priced considering today's pricepoint of high-end lenses.
At 15:02 despite being excellent I think is an example of minor flaring that can pop up. Squirrel has a bit of haze on its face. Either way the lens is simply amazing. Can I afford it? No. But still nice to look at.
well timed. just finished the Sony presentation. lol. Now if only Sony would provide C2PA for the A7RV...
Hey Gerald, how did you do those vfx at the end? Please make a how to video about that, thanks man 🙌🏻
Great video Gerald!
Damn so much effort for so few seconds of film. Saw the movie yesterday and cant even remember the storm and the explosion.
You've always been able to use the A-mount version, so Sony did really have a 300mm F2.8 (2 actually).
There has been a first-party Alpha 300mm F2.8 since 1985. Sony released the last updated version 12 years ago.
After all the "finally! I've waited forever for a 300mm" comments I'm not sure what the use case is for this. Most of the stuff I want to shoot with a long telephoto prime wants 400 or 600. If I want to use it for much more portability, honestly the 70-200 f4 ii seems brilliant for camping/hiking. The 300 seems limited to specific sports, played in constrained spaces. Great for that, but hard to use otherwise.
"Nothing in terms of conventional, quick, getting it off and on protection. So, definitely rock the hood"
- Gerald