InFocus2014 wrote:
An internal zoom would make it an instant buy for me; although, the rumor site didn’t mention additional length over the current lens, which likely makes such doubtful. The current 100-400mm that I had barely tolerated x1.4 converters, IMHO. The new lens, with f4.5 and expected better IQ, might better tolerate converters, which would make it highly versatile.
Now, if Sony would just make it a black lens….
Would be nice if it has a built-in 1.4TC, I wouldn't mind the little extra length and weight for the convenience. I will sell the 200-600 for such a lens.
Douglas L wrote:
Would be nice if it has a built-in 1.4TC, I wouldn't mind the little extra length and weight for the convenience. I will sell the 200-600 for such a lens.
Well I already have both TC's...but I also have the 70-200 2.8II, which is my workhorse sports shooting lens. But for field sports I might take a closer look at a 100-400 4.5 if it's released as described.
f4.5 might actually make this lens more interesting to me, if Sony can keep the weight, size, and price down over going to f4. f4 had me thinking this lens would be around 10k based on Nikon's and Canon's 200-400 ish f4 lenses. If they can pull off f4.5 and get the lens in the 4k ish zone, it could be a very nice compromise.
f4.5 would be fine for me as long as the magnification is as good or better than the current 100-400. If that were the case I would part with the 300mm 2.8 which I use almost exclusively with the 1.4x. The MFD on that setup is 6.6' which is a weakness for many use cases
And getting f/4.5 at the long end seems more important than at the shorter end, where a different lens with a larger aperture might fill in for it if necessary. On the other hand... it is only 2/3 of a stop or so larger than the f/5.6 at the long end on some other 100-400 lenses...
arbitrage wrote:
Just saw this latest rumour for the lens:
Internal zoom, similar length to 200-600
Priced around the 50-150 f/2 lens. ($4000 USD)
Yup, if it's internal zoom for sure. Suspected pricing might come in around the 50-150 level so not too surprised if that materializes. Similar length as the 200-600 is a bit of a concern only in regard to space available in my current pelican. Current 100-400 extended is about 1" shorter than the 200-600.
arbitrage wrote:
Internal zoom, similar length to 200-600
Priced around the 50-150 f/2 lens. ($4000 USD)
Oof, the 200-600 is big big lens for most people and I don't think an f/4.5 lens really warrants that? I can see there being some disappointment around that for those that are interested.
I was really hoping that they would have released a variable aperture internal zoom lens. My usage for the new lens would be landscape. I had the 100-400gm and hated the klunky zoom mechanism. It sucked. If this is the offering we will be given, I will probably grab the Tamron 50-300 or 50-400 and call it done, as I was solely looking at landscape usage for this zoom. Even though the Tamrons are external zoom, they are both tiny in comparison. I currently have the 70-200gmii and when I slap a 2x on it I often find myself taking it off to get back to 70mm. I've seen so many great shots from Ross' 2025 west trip with the Tamron 50-300 and 50-400 at landscape apertures that I cannot justify this new offering as a landscape lens, since I'd be shooting f8-f/11 anyway.
What will be interesting is a comparison of this new lens vs the 70-200gmii with 2x. One would assume the new lens should have better IQ than the 70-200gmii with tcs, but I have found that to be a great combo for 140mm-400mm even at 5.6, and so lightweight. The 1.4x makes it a (roughly) 100-280 f4 that sees very little drop in IQ. Even the 2x looks great, but then you are 140 on the wide end.
I have the 300gm and I doubt this zoom will eclipse the IQ of that lens even with tcs. The 300gm is the sharpest lens I have ever had in 49 years of shooting. Naked, it's sharper than my 600gm. If this new lens is heavier than the 300gm, I don't see how it finds a place for my shooting needs.
I hope others (probably sports shooters or safari) will find use for this lens and love it. For me, 400mm is rarely enough for the wildlife I shoot and the 300 is sharp with the 2x and light. Since getting the 300gm, I rarely use the 600gm unless I need f4 or 840mm. Any IQ I may lose by using the 300 with tc's is recaptured by my mobility and ease of following subjects and leaving the tripod at home.
It will be interesting to see how things shake-out when the lens is released. I think the reported weight just saved me $4k.
I think this is more of a replacement for the 200-600mm. Add a TC 1.4 and you get a 180-600mm f6.3 that would probably be just as good, if not better than the 200-600mm f6.3. Take the TC off, and you have a very good 100-400mm lens. If you happen to use both the 200-600mm and 100-400mm lenses, your overall bag can end up even lighter. Add a TC 2x, and you will probably get a good 200-800mm f9 lens. This could be one lens that covers most wildlife needs.
Weight aside, I could also see people pairing this with the 400-800mm. 100-400mm f4.5 for low light and close subjects, and 400-800mm f8 for max reach.
Overall, I think Sony is going more after Nikon's 200-400mm f4 ish lenses. Those lenses are about 8lbs, longer than the 200-600mm, and 10k+. If a 1/3 less of a stop gets us 100mm more on the wide end, a shorter lens, decent weight savings, and less than 1/2 the cost, this lens should be a real winner.
some people, including me, use the 100-400 for landscape shots. if the new 100-400 is as big as the 200-600, it’s a no go for me for such applications, way too big to pack.
