FE 400/2.8 v FE 600/4

[Ziggy]

As a bird 'tog I regard a lens of around 600mm on a full frame body as the price of admission and for BIF something like 750-900mm is needed.

That longer length isn't easy to get in the Sony sphere. I didn't like the results of the 200-600* & 1.4x TC. The 100-400 & 2x TC can be OK if the light is good and you're close enough but you're down to f11. The A9 copes with that while the A7R III is slow as it's working on CDAF only.

So I decided on living on porridge in my old age and committed to one of these primes. But which?

These factors were in favour of the 400:

1. Several thousand cheaper than the 600
2. Published photos and reviews showed little IQ loss with the two TCs and that means there's 3 available focal lengths: 400, 560 and 800
3. Though about the same weight as the 600 it's about 10cm shorter and that makes easier clambering in and out of cars and walking with the rig hanging from a straight arm
4. I only handhold and having weight closer to me makes that easier
5. It works as carry-on luggage. In the f-stop Sukha pack with Telemaster ICU it just makes a typical airline spec

About 9 months down the track I'm mostly happy living with the lens and its results. I wasn't planning to use it with the A7R III but have been amazed at the plumage detail possible with this combo.

Being able to shoot at 560mm at f4 opens up the opportunity to blur foreground and background, and that's required getting more familiar with how DOF works on this rig and taking much more care with the focus point. With the 100-400 & 1.4x TC I could mostly just leave it wide open, at all of f8, and that provided focus wriggle room.

The rate of sharp shots of BIF at 800mm isn't as good as I expected and I'm working on this.

The A9 combo with some added bits weighs 4.3 kg and that's manageable handheld.

Those bits include a grip extender for the body, a dovetail extension plate for the foot to take a Cotton Carrier hub, LensCoat, replacement sun hood and cap (printed by a Fred Miranda member), and TCs of course.

I'd like to see the function ring programmable and the OSS mode assignable in software.


Rainbow Lorikeets having a play wrestle

• ILCE-9
• FE 400mm F2.8 GM OSS + 1.4X Teleconverter
• 560.0 mm
• ƒ/4
• 1/3000 sec
• ISO 640

__________________

* Though there appears to be clear copy variation in this model.

 

[Drewid]

Great write up Ziggy, I particularly like your comment about living on porridge as my FA has told me to spend more money! I'm still learning my kit too as only went mirrorless 3 months ago. Have you tried the A9II with your lenses?

 

[Ziggy]

Thanks.
No Drewid. Just Mk I.

 

[Ziggy]

I should add, ironically, that since I got the 400/2.8 it's retail price has gone up by 25% here in Australia, so it would be possible to sell for more than it cost.

Not that I'm recommending speculative lens trading

 

[Ziggy]

Here's some info on accessories ...

1. Foot.
The factory foot isn't A/S dammit. I got an aftermarket replacement from eBay. But the factory version is designed as a handle while the aftermarket unit is smaller and not nearly as good at that.

2. Neoprene cover.
I'm using the Lenscoat which is disappointing in fit and making. The window is too small and too awkward and I've ditched that part. The rings for the rings don't stay put. Some of this is probably inevitable where the ring sits on a shoulder but for my 100-400 I have the UK cover from eBay and the fit and making are clearly better.

3. Cap and hood.
The cap is a semi-rigid thing that needs to be wrestled on with 2 hands and only fits with the hood reversed. Ridiculous. A Fred Miranda member is 3d printing replacement hoods and caps for the 400 and 600 lenses.
The hood is carbon fibre and its replacement cost down under is a grand. Also ridiculous. It's about 120mm long which some users find obstructive but I like because it keeps spray and sand away quite well.

4. Carrying the rig.
It hangs from the hand/arm quite comfortably with a grip extender on the body. When I need the hands free I use either the Cotton Carrier Skout (for short sessions only) or the full harness. An extension plate has to be fitted to the foot to allow the CC hub to be mounted higher so the whole rig doesn't pivot around it.

5. Cases and bags.
The lens comes with a solid lockable plastic case that has recesses for 2 TCs. It doesn't take a fitted body.
I've got one jerry-rigged bag setup for saturating spray or rain involving a drybag pack and padding.
The case I usually use is an f-stop Telemaster ICU that sits in the wagon or will go into an f-stop Sukha pack. I'm not 100% confident in the pack's waterproofness hence the drybag. That ICU will take some extra bits as well as the rig with hood extended (c 58 cm IIRC).
The f-stop XL ICU will take the rig with the hood reversed but with a bulge. I wouldn't want to hit that bulge.


6. I use Button Bumps on the bodies and Shutter Bands on my lenses. https://www.shutterbands.com/

7. For shooting in drizzle I laid in but haven't yet used a large Aquatech cover. https://au.aquatech.net/collections/soft-goods-all-weather-shields

 

[Ziggy]

With my 400/2.8 in for repairs for 3 months now (!) Sony loaned me a 600/4 and it's been a valuable experience.

It's remarkable how light and well-balanced it is for the size, and it's perfectly feasible to handhold shoot with it - except when it's breezy and the thing becomes something of a sail.

I can see why US users have resorted to 3D printing shorter sun hoods as all-up the rig is long and a bit awkward for that reason.

The soft lens cap works much better than that on the 400: it can be added or removed from the sun hood easily with one hand and the hood either extended or reversed. I think it's simply better tailored.

Did it change my mind re the 400? No. I like its relative shortness and having effectively 3 focal lengths will be valuable when I can finally get to the sub-antarctic islands on a boat.

 

[G-FOTO.de]

After 9 months of using it, I can confirm all the mentioned pros and cons.
- for a 400 f2.8 its really light
- f2.8 is 2.8 is 2.8...
- 600 although sharper, its too bulky for me
- accessories like Sony soft lens hood, Sony non-arca foot or 3rd party Lenscoat are not satisfying


Due to the fact that I am just a hobbyist, it makes me wonder from time to time, to sell that ridicolous expensive lens. But when using it only a few minutes, all these ???? are gone... Especially when using it with the A7R4.

Nevertheless I still did not buy the SEL20TC to use it with the 400. Something I intend to change now soon. Although everything I hear about this combo is not the same song, I hear from 600+2xTC - which seems to be excellent. But I always prefer to make up my mind by doing my own review.

I also own the 200-600 and I did a IQ comparison with the 400, the APS-C 70-350 and the Sigma 100-400. I have to admit that the pure IQ of all these lenses is pretty close. Of course the 400 has better micro contrast and beats all of them in terms of AF speed.

We are lucky nowadays to have such a great choice of top quality lenses at all price levels.

 

[Ziggy]

Can you do a post on your IQ comparison?

 

[Reciprocum]

I feel so fortunate to have been bitten by the CIF bug instead of the BIF bug...

FAL-5y-53610_m.jpg

www.alphashooters.com

 

[Ziggy]

Love it. Nice work.

 

[G-FOTO.de]

Can you do a post on your IQ comparison?

Well I will show the essence which is a sid-by-side comparison in 100% view out of LR CC.
In fact was the reason that I bought the new Sigma 100-400 and wanted to know more about the IQ.

This non-scientific test was done on a tripod, OSS off, distance 6m

Sigma 100-400 vs 400 f2.8

Sigma 100-400 vs. 200-600

Sigma 100-400 vs. 70-350

 

[Ziggy]

Images aren't showing.

 

[G-FOTO.de]

Ok replacd by Links from my website.

 

[Ziggy]

Can you add details on the camera, lens and settings?

 

[G-FOTO.de]

Can you add details on the camera, lens and settings?

These are screenshots of 100% view in Lightroom and you can see the EXIF in the top left corner of each image.
Except for the 400 2.8 all lenses were shot wide open. This first test was mainly to compare the Sigma 100-400 to all my other Tele lenses I have.

A few months later I made a second test, where I wanted to see the performance of the 400er against the 200-600 with the A7R4 and see if it makes sense to crop the image or use the TC14 to get the 600mm of the 200-600.

Well, look and judge...

400+TC14 vs 200-600

400 Crop vs 200-600