hello from west texas

[pdog109e]

Hi, new to the forum after googling a bunch of 300mm + 2x TC results lead me here.
Longtime amateur bird photographer that used Canon, but in 2022 I switched to Sony and bought A1 and 600F4. Dream combo and I've been loving it since but I keep reading about how the 300 2.8 with 2x TC is just as good as 600F4 at half the price and weight. Well I already bought the 600F4 (buy once cry once) and its awesome but if I could cut the arm workout in every time I go birding it would be nice. I have traveled to Costa Rica with the 600F4 and it wasn't too terrible, and I only hand-hold, never use tripod or monopod. I use a black rapid strap to hold the camera when not in use/walking around but still have fast reaction time. I've been seeing here, and youtube some folks selling 600F4 and going with 300 with 2x TC. As a 99% bird photographer I would feel like having the 2x glued on the 300 so seems weird and lately i've been using the 1.4x TC more and more to justify my self keeping the 600F4. Anyway, just rambling and saying hi, looking forward to learning more about sony and photography, thank you. Attached is a recent pic of a Dusky Flyatcher, with 1.4x TC on 600F4.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Welcome. I'm another 600f4 user. I absolutely love it, I haven't tried comparing it to a 300mm with 2x. I'd like to think it's as good, but I've never seen any meaningful tests. Always processed and always compressed. Always differing conditions.

Let's say I'm sceptical.

Also, my shoulder has become hardened to lugging it about using a monopod. I literally walk miles with it.

Good luck with your endeavours.

 

[Jonathantuba]

I am one of those wildlife shooters that sold my 600 F4 as I just found I was not using much anymore since getting the 300 F2.8. It just works so incredibly well with the teleconverters, both 1.4x and 2x and is so much more compact to carry (I sometime use a 15L backpack!), half the weight and personally in real life I don't see any less image quality. I did do a comparison test shooting a notice at about 20 yards before selling the 600, and really I could see little difference in quality, so took the plunge. That was a year ago, and I have not regretted for a moment. Of course it does push up my ISO one stop, but the denoising software is so good now, that has not worried me. I am not saying you should change. It all depends on your requirements. For myself, I am in my mid-60's and really appreciate having less weight to carry and I fly a lot, and the 300 is so much easier to pack. Plus for me I appreciate having the flexibility, to have a 300 F2.8, 420 F4 and 600 F5.6 with me to adapted to what I am shooting. For me the 300 F2.8 GM is the lens I use for 90% of my images (with and without TC).

You can see the image quality on my Instagram @Jonathantuba

 

[Unframed Dave]

I am one of those wildlife shooters that sold my 600 F4 as I just found I was not using much anymore since getting the 300 F2.8. It just works so incredibly well with the teleconverters, both 1.4x and 2x and is so much more compact to carry (I sometime use a 15L backpack!), half the weight and personally in real life I don't see any less image quality. I did do a comparison test shooting a notice at about 20 yards before selling the 600, and really I could see little difference in quality, so took the plunge. That was a year ago, and I have not regretted for a moment. Of course it does push up my ISO one stop, but the denoising software is so good now, that has not worried me. I am not saying you should change. It all depends on your requirements. For myself, I am in my mid-60's and really appreciate having less weight to carry and I fly a lot, and the 300 is so much easier to pack. Plus for me I appreciate having the flexibility, to have a 300 F2.8, 420 F4 and 600 F5.6 with me to adapted to what I am shooting. For me the 300 F2.8 GM is the lens I use for 90% of my images (with and without TC).

You can see the image quality on my Instagram @Jonathantuba

A good point that you make about de noise. I don't use it, so iso is still a big issue to me.

 

[Unframed Dave]

That point has clarified things for me a bit.

The answer to the question, if indeed the question exists, is what suits you, the user, best.

Unless you're a professional, ultimate image quality isn't the issue. Very few of us are professionals.

A 600 f4 prime, is going to deliver better image quality than a 300 f2.8 with a 2X TC in terms of sharpness. That is surely physics, unless lens design has altered so much in the time between the two lenses being created. Sharpness however isn't the only factor, we are all looking for an image that pleases us and hopefully any one else along the way.

At the moment, I have the luxury of my own motorised transport, weight and size isn't an issue. I'm reasonably fit and able to carry the extra weight. I don't denoise and I don't artificially sharpen, so I want to squeeze every ounce of light I can out of my subjects reflection.

When I travel by air, I have fewer options and whilst I do have the 300 and the TC, I don't pick them, because I travel with three lenses that cover everything. 24 - 70, 70 - 200, and 200 - 600.

If like me, you post a few images online, print a few to hang on the wall and create photobooks to retain memories. We all over do things already.

Horses for courses. The important thing is to get out there and enjoy your photography.

Juvenile Flamingoe, this afternoon (600 f4, of course).

• ILCE-1
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/5
• 1/2500 sec
• ISO 320