If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
I completely understand! Just sharing my experience with the a1 which has led to a system change from Nikon to Sony has been painful enough I don't even want to bother unless someone PM's me which happens often. To me its an eco system and the 600 was what made me decide I should try something else before dropping that much money on a F mount 600. Well as I am sure you can tell how that went lol. One step closer to going to Costa Rica with you!
Enjoy!! Someday , maybe I’ll try the 609mm but not there yet. Still trying to improve my skills with the 500mm
I would be happy just to hold it for a few minutes
I am sure I will be up their next year. I am in TX so not that far actually and my sister in-law lives just north of Denver. At the very least I will be passing through to Yellowstonelol! If you are in Denver I might take you up on that
. Happy to meet up and let you take it for a spin.
I recently tested the Sony GM v Canon 600III in a somewhat controlled backyard test and found the Canon had the slight advantage as a bare lens but with TCs the Sony had the edge. They were very close though. The Canon was providing slightly more magnification at closer distances though.
Interesting. I too found the Sony seemed to have a little focus breathing going on, not much, but at close range the Canon did have slightly more magnification.
Very happy for you, but you don't know how much this fat kid loves cake!
Congratulations. I suspect if is much lighter than the Nikon, on par with the Canon.
and ice cream !!Very happy for you, but you don't know how much this fat kid loves cake!
I am not surprised at that result. Nikon TCs do not have the best reputation (and I find the connection to lens and body is not very firm).
Just curious, if the Sony 200-600 isn't that far behind the 600 f4 GM, how does it compare to the Nikon equivalent (200-500), in terms of IQ? Just asking as I contemplate my future equipment investments.
If you are interested in ML, then the Nikon 200-600 would be lens to compare
I wasn't using the 200-500, so I sold it awhile back. Seat of my pants estimate, the 200-600 is easily the sharper optic. The 200-600 actually looks a bit sharper than the 300PF @ 300mm and the 300PF is sharper then the 200-500 @300mm by a smidgen.
I sold my 500PF when I bought the a1 and 200-600 so I didn't get to compare side by side. What do you think?
That one would be closer. I didn't compare them (didn't think to - I was mostly testing the new Canon 600 to make sure it was sharp). Still, I think the two would be very close. If I had to guess (and that's all this is), I'd guess the 500PF by a hair. When I tested that lens against my 600 F/4, they were really, really close. The 600 edged it out (esp towards the edges), but it was so close I don't think I could tell in actual photos.
I also sold mine for the same reason and didn't compare, my gut feeling is they're very similar?
Did you buy a Canon 600? Is it the RF version?
