I’ve given up on getting the Nikon 100-400 lens and wanted to get some feedback on the sony 100-400. The online reviews seem similar for both lenses. Any input appreciated, thanks.
Anyone have the sony 100-400?
- Thread starter sh1209
- Start date
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 would like a smaller lens at times for hiking and I’m 33 on the list to get the Nikon. Sick of waiting on everything from Nikon honestly.
They get outstanding reviews on places like Amazon. I’m considering pulling the trigger on one.
I think that focal length would be fantastic in the summer for insects, flowers and have the long end for birds and such. Seems very versatile. I had a 70-300 with dslrs and liked it.
I’ve used my 500pf for tons of insect images as well as flowers
I have one and have used it with a 1.4 TC. I didn't find it quite as sharp as the 200-600, but maybe that's just my use. I can't really handhold the 200-600, so it's always supported somehow, but I do handhold the 100-400. I'm not all that steady with it, though. So I guess I'm not much help.
It is internal zoom right?
Yep I have had one for 3 years, love it. It works well enough as macro. Its compact and relatively light, it's sharp and takes a X1.4 TC well. Put it this way, I'm not getting rid of mine any time soon.
No,
That’s fine especially since the 200-600 is so well balanced. It looks to be really short retracted.
RikWriter
Well-known member
I love mine. Very fast and accurate focus and tack-sharp.
arbitrage
Well-known member
I've owned two copies (sold my first when I bought R5/100-500 as that served the same purpose but then bough a 2nd copy after selling my R5/100-500). Great lens for semi macro. Faster AF motors than the 200-600.
My first copy of the lens was about on par with my 200-600 at 400mm and my 200-600 was superior at 560/600 compared to the 1-4 with TC. Now my 2nd copy of the 100-400 is even better. It is clearly better than my 200-600 at 400mm and comparing 560/600 it is about identical now. Caveat...who knows how good or bad my 200-600 is in the overall scheme of things.
My first copy of the lens was about on par with my 200-600 at 400mm and my 200-600 was superior at 560/600 compared to the 1-4 with TC. Now my 2nd copy of the 100-400 is even better. It is clearly better than my 200-600 at 400mm and comparing 560/600 it is about identical now. Caveat...who knows how good or bad my 200-600 is in the overall scheme of things.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
abc123brian
Well-known member
I’ve seen posts on DPR where people are getting the Z100-400mm in about 3 weeks ordering direct from Nikon. I know that doesn’t help with you question on the Sony but throwing it out there. A friend of mine has the Sony 100-400 and he seems to like it.
I have it on pre order at 4 different places and have since December
Very nice
abc123brian
Well-known member
it’s crazy it’s backlogged that bad. I might need to order through Nikon if I decide I want it before I head to the Smokies. There are times where the zoom is nice but most of the time there my 500mm PF is perfect.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
i shot one for about a week and a half. it’s nice
lablover27
Well-known member
I know this is a little off topic but I put a 2x tc on the new 70-200 GM and it’s the cats a$$. Might be something to consider. Pretty light too
Do you find the 100-400 focal length to be useful?
RikWriter
Well-known member
I love the lens for hiking. The 200-600 isn't heavy but it gets a little awkward when you have to scramble up or down slopes. I suppose I could put it in a backpack but I like having the camera to hand for opportunistic birds and wildlife.
Doug Herr
Well-known member
The Sony 100-400 is an excellent lens. Not quite 600 GM excellent but quite good, and very handy for semi-macro & compact enough for long hikes.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
MikePapple
Well-known member
For birding you want the 200-600.
The 100-400 has many good traits. Sharp, fast focussing, light-weight, close focussing distance (0.98meters), works well with 1.4xTC. The only thing I don't like is the external zooming.
I received the 100-400 a couple weeks ago and I can say I’m very impressed with the IQ, lens build quality, weight and size. The focus speed and accuracy are amazing on this lens. I would give it a 10/10
I like the fact that it’s a few hundred dollars less than the Nikon as well. I was never able to acquire the Nikon 100-400.Only knocks I see with it are the lens foot, which I know you fixed already and the external zoom. It's real dusty out here with Mt St Helens ash and Loess soil so the external zoom is bound to suck a little in eventually. Other than that it's a great lens from what I see.