Sony 600F4 GM - The Everything About It Thread...

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).

FB101

Well-known member
Supporting Member
I have used the 200-600 Sony, I was shocked by sharp it is. 600 F4 going by your pics & all the pics that I seen on the Internet seems to be the best 600 F4 out there. All the pics seem good enough for big prints. Congratulations.
Best is a very relative term when talking about 600 f:4 by any brand - they are all optically stunning and they are all built to last under severe professional use (abuse?) . Size, weight and weight balance are more the battlegrounds these days and maybe AF speed marginally.
 

FB101

Well-known member
Supporting Member
The Sigma 500mm f4 of course is a F4 lens, but comparing it to the 500PF at the same aperture f5.6, the Sigma still has much better bokeh and subject isolation (3D effect)
I expect the 600GM to do as good or better than the Sigma 500, but my feeling is that the 200-600G will be more 500PF territory.
Just curious to hear from those that own and use both
I actually find OOF areas on the 200-600 and especially transition from focus to oof to be smoother than with the 500pf. Not by a huge margin, but the Sony doesn't tend to emphasize bright edges as much in the oof backgrounds.
The Sony 200-600 is also a bit sharper bothat close and far focusing distances.

The are two areas where the 500pf wins clearly, size and weight is one, and chromatic aberration in strong backlit shots - but it’s very easy to correct in LR so not a big deal.

All in all, they are close, I like the optics of the Sony better by a hair. The trade off is zoom vs handling.

i don’t have the 600 f:4 yet. Shot it once and loved the handling but I don’t have enough experience to comment on image quality vs the zoom.
 

arbitrage

Well-known member
Back shooting A9/A9II I would have put the 200-600 neck and neck with the 600GM when the light was favorable. However, once shooting on a higher MP sensor (first A7RIV and now A1) I see a significant difference and the 600GM has that magic sharpness and rendering. I rarely use my 200-600 anymore as I'm just too addicted to the 600GM. I also rarely use my 600GM with TCs anymore as I'm also just too addicted to the rendering of the bare lens. Maybe I'll use TCs a bit more once we head into Spring/Summer with more light. These winter days I'm usually craving f/4 and wish I had a 600 f/2.8 ;)
 

ChrisM

Active member
Back shooting A9/A9II I would have put the 200-600 neck and neck with the 600GM when the light was favorable. However, once shooting on a higher MP sensor (first A7RIV and now A1) I see a significant difference and the 600GM has that magic sharpness and rendering. I rarely use my 200-600 anymore as I'm just too addicted to the 600GM. I also rarely use my 600GM with TCs anymore as I'm also just too addicted to the rendering of the bare lens. Maybe I'll use TCs a bit more once we head into Spring/Summer with more light. These winter days I'm usually craving f/4 and wish I had a 600 f/2.8 ;)
Thanks for confirming what I already believed to see in the image threads. I think it is a clear choice, albeit an expensive one.
 

Hut2

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Back shooting A9/A9II I would have put the 200-600 neck and neck with the 600GM when the light was favorable. However, once shooting on a higher MP sensor (first A7RIV and now A1) I see a significant difference and the 600GM has that magic sharpness and rendering. I rarely use my 200-600 anymore as I'm just too addicted to the 600GM. I also rarely use my 600GM with TCs anymore as I'm also just too addicted to the rendering of the bare lens. Maybe I'll use TCs a bit more once we head into Spring/Summer with more light. These winter days I'm usually craving f/4 and wish I had a 600 f/2.8 ;)
Making me more and more tempted to pull the trigger 🤠
 

BillW

Well-known member
Supporting Member
My best long telephoto has been the Nikon 500 mm PF. I have not had one of the exotics. I expect that from an optical standpoint, I’d like any of the top exotics from Nikon, Sony and Canon. What particularly impresses me about the Sony 600 mm is that it is so light. If I have my numbers correct, I think it weighs a couple of ounces less than the Nikon 500 mm f4. And way less than the Nikon 600 mm f4.

I hope that Nikon slims down the new Z mount exotics. If so, I might try one. But kudos to Sony for this lens.
 

Doug Herr

Well-known member
My best long telephoto has been the Nikon 500 mm PF. I have not had one of the exotics. I expect that from an optical standpoint, I’d like any of the top exotics from Nikon, Sony and Canon. What particularly impresses me about the Sony 600 mm is that it is so light. If I have my numbers correct, I think it weighs a couple of ounces less than the Nikon 500 mm f4. And way less than the Nikon 600 mm f4.

I hope that Nikon slims down the new Z mount exotics. If so, I might try one. But kudos to Sony for this lens.
There's also the weight distribution. The CG is closer to the camera body.
 
Top