The latest rumored details about the lens from SAR this morning:
As light, if not lighter than my Sony 300 f/2.8 with 1.4 tele attached
Similar in length to my above lens (I held mine up against it), bit thickness similar to the 400 f/2.8,
Zoom ring is large, 3.5-4” in length
Lens foot attachment identical to 4-bolt design of the Sony 400 GM and Sony 600 GM respectively.
Weight is balanced, with most of it towards the camera body.
Has a black damper switch (Smooth-Tight) for the zoom ring
At first glance I thought it was the Sony 400 f/2.8 ( if that gives you any idea of the relative size)
Nikon strikes again....
I also wish all Sony big lenses had built-in TCs. Who knows if they will ever go that route.
Will be interesting to see how the size and weight come in on this lens. The Canon is a bit of a beast (even without a TC) and the F-mount Nikon is a heavy pig.
arbitrage wrote:
Nikon strikes again....
I also wish all Sony big lenses had built-in TCs. Who knows if they will ever go that route.
Will be interesting to see how the size and weight come in on this lens. The Canon is a bit of a beast (even without a TC) and the F-mount Nikon is a heavy pig.
Canon vs Sony FWIW....
While we are at it, it would be nice if Sony makes a 300 f2.8 or a 400 2.8 with a 2X TC built in! .
I am keeping a close eye on this new 100-400. It all depends on how well it takes TCs.
Alan Parker wrote:
Still nobody mentioning OSS for this lens
What's going on there?
I hope it is just a simplification of the label.
Would be very bizarre to not have OSS on a 400mm lens. Haven't seen that since the Canon 400 5.6 and the really old 400/2.8 lens.
I feel like I am in the minority, but this lens doesn’t have enough appeal to me to get me to buy it.
The current 100-400 is just as fast on the short end and only 2/3 stop slower on the long end. The current 100-400 will weigh less too.
If you compare it with a 1.4TC against the 200-600, the 200-600 has a better range (compared to an 140-560) and is faster at points. The new 100-400+TC will be around the same weight as the 200-600.
I am assuming it has to be optically great, but I am missing the great appeal.
I own the canon 200-400 f/4. This lens makes more sense to me with a slightly faster speed and built in TC. I thought Sony would have gone after this more. They missed it though. I am sure the Sony will be lighter and smaller though.
I am not prejudiced toward the Canon. I own the Sony 100-400, 200-600, 400-800 and 300 f/2.8. I would think I would be a prime candidate for their target. I think I will pass unless I learn some real reason to make it worthwhile.
For weight, I think the only semi-modern frame of reference for this lens is the Oly 150-400 f4.5. Obviously different mount and 50mm narrower, however, the weight of the Oly is 4.14lbs. That’s including a built in TC.
If it is truly closer to 4lbs and takes TCs as well as the 300 GM, then I may be tempted to jump on board as well. I miss the Canon 100-500, despite the much darker aperture. The lens was sharp as hell, the AF speed was bananas, and the low weight made handholding for faster BIF shots quite manageable.
I was all set to sell and upgrade my cameras A1 and R4 to the R6 (still have a 7c2 for street) but after thinking about it more I actually think i am more interested in this glass. Need to sell the 200-600 and a few other lenses to do it..... maybe even sell the 70-200 2.8II, but I am getting excited for this glass now and see how the shake out of cameras goes in next cycle
.
