Hands-on first-looks review of Sony's FE 600mm f4 super-tele lens! Check prices at B&H: bhpho.to/2X0xynj Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Like Cameralabs? Get the T-Shirt: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Filmed with Sony A6400 and e 24mm: bhpho.to/2CqYrEs Extra footage of Gordon by Brendan Schmidt & Jordan Drake - thanks!
Hi Gordon. Those lenses look great. Great review. It would be very interesting to see everything inside from a dissected type of view. I think the larger lens was the f/4. It was cool to see it sitting inside of the carry case. Having such contrast between the case and lens really puts a great perspective on how large it truly is. When you're at the game it seems as though it's very well ballanced, just as you mentioned. I can imagine that it's ballance helps quite a lot with how quickly fatigue sets in. They look very nice.
Nice review! Which lens I want from Sony? Maybe a mark ii/Sony version of the 24-70 f/4, if possible with slightly longer zoom range (let’s say 24-85) , which in my opinion is the perfect size for a general travel or day-to-day use. The 24-105 has of course a better zoom range but is a little expensive and too large in size ....
True. If it can be small and affordable, they would further tempt people into APS-C E-mount system. Also some kind of mini a9 APS-C would be really nice compliment to Full Frame sports shooters with existing long range lenses, giving people that extra 1.5x reach if they need it.
Great lens! I often shoot pictures of small birds and that requires very long focal lengths. So I'd appreciate if Sony releases a 800 mm F5.6 lens, similar to those of Nikon and Canon (but hopefully more light weight). That would be a nice addition to my collection of lenses! Any chance an 800 mm F5.6 will ever be released by Sony?
Since you have asked, Gordon, can you have a word with Sony and ask them to produce a 500mm f5.6 fresnel lens, which will also take the SEL14 and SEL20. If Nikon and Canon can make fresnel lenses, why not Sony. I used to own a Nikkor 300mm f4 PF ED VR and it was rather brilliant. The Nikkor 500mm version is supposed to be very good, too.
Six different reviews of this lens just popped into my Subscriptions stream - so which one did I choose to watch first? This one, of course, and I wasn't disappointed! [Edit] And since you asked, I'd like a tiny 300mm F4 fresnel lens like the Nikkor, please, as long as it's similarly priced - around £1200 would do nicely.
Agreed Ian looked for Gordon’s review, and would also like the 300mm. Am wondering if when Gordon gets back to Brighton if he’ll pop down the Lanes for a quick vlog of his ear lobe..... 😂
If Sony continuous to do nothing with APS-C for the next 12 months I must consider to switch to something else, maybe Fuji. 5 of my 6 lenses are useless on Sony FF so it will not be cheaper to switch to A7iii.
@@cameralabs Both, I have a Sony a6500 today. I hope for APS-C with better IBIS and battery in a bigger body and a zoom lens better than the 16-70 I use most of the time now. My primes are OK. I have Sigma 16, Sony 35 1.8, Sigma 56 and Sony 85 (FE).
Well, the 300mm f4 is a 300mm f4, whereas this is a 600mm f4, so they are completely different lenses. In full frame terms, the 300mm f4 on a cropped MFT body becomes equivalent to 600mm f8.
Gordon Laing Hi, I mistake for not clarifying my question. I was wondering about image quality and noise comparison. . I am an E-M1 Mark II owner and very familiar with crop factor equivalence. (and I love my Olympus camera) And I guess a follow up question: is the huge size and the massive cost of this lens make an image that is that massively better than the Olympus lens? My mistake for not being clear the first time. Thank you. Love your reviews. They are fantastic. I watch them all the time
@@dvbeattie well the main difference is having two stops shallower depth of field. Being able to address a bigger sensor also means better high ISO performance.
@@Trigger-xw9gq it's a tricky one as Canon and Nikon's pro bodies both have fairly modest MPs too. Maybe the answer is to just improve the AF on the A7r III which I reckon is much more likely.
Similar but not the same optical performance you will find on nikon or canon... yes it's super sharp like the 400mm but it also has awful background rendering like the 400mm.
I'm impressed by your optimism that someone would give a $13000 product to a complete stranger. Plus I don't even have one, it was a loaner for a couple of days.
