E-M1II + M.Zuiko 300/4 VS α7ΙΙΙ + 200-600G @600mm?

Has anyone done a direct comparison between the two?

A direct 100% side by side would help (not Northrup's).

Having compared the Sony 70-300 G - 100-400 GM & 200-600G the 100-400 is the sharpest by far, followed by the 200-600 and then the 70-300

Here's a comparison at 100% crop between the Sony A7m3 24.70 f4 vs Em1 mk2 12.40 2.8 400iso 50mm f5.6

Thanks, but my concern is for the specific lens, the Μ.Zuiko 300/4 on the Ε-M1II, how it compares to the Sony 200-600/A7III combo.

I already have the Olympus combo, as well α7ΙΙΙ (+α6400) with various lenses, including 135/1.8GM, 70-200/2.8GM, so I don't need a 100-400.

If the A7+200-600 at 600mm is near the quality I get with the E-M1II+300/4, I will sell the Olympus set.

The Olympus' stabilization can't be beat; handheld video at 600mm еq. is no problem.

But I will sacrifice that, as long as I won't lose (much) quality with the Sony 200-600, if any.

flashingr said:

Thanks, but my concern is for the specific lens, the Μ.Zuiko 300/4 on the Ε-M1II, how it compares to the Sony 200-600/A7III combo.

I already have the Olympus combo, as well α7ΙΙΙ (+α6400) with various lenses, including 135/1.8GM, 70-200/2.8GM, so I don't need a 100-400.

If the A7+200-600 at 600mm is near the quality I get with the E-M1II+300/4, I will sell the Olympus set.

The Olympus' stabilization can't be beat; handheld video at 600mm еq. is no problem.

But I will sacrifice that, as long as I won't lose (much) quality with the Sony 200-600, if any.

Click to expand...

Output from the 200-600



Output from the 100-400



Output from the 70-300


https://www.flickr.com/photos/77738411@N00/48860605971/in/dateposted-friend/

200-600G looks very promising at 600mm!

Chances are high that the IQ will be quite similar to the E-m1II + M.Zuiko 300/4 combo.

I have shot extensively with the Oly EM1 Mii with the 300f4 for bif . Great combo with above average AF. I also own the Sony a9 and have spent a few days with the new 200-600 and my initial impressions are very positive. Seems very sharp at the long end and has a very short throw on the telephoto zoom ring making it the best zoom telephoto I have ever used. The A9 has better AF for my purposes than the Oly . F4 vs F6.3 for the same reach isn't a problem because the high iso performance of the a9 is far better than the Oly. My max iso with the OLy was 800-1000. The 9 can do 3200 without any issues. Just my two cents

flashingr said:

Thanks, but my concern is for the specific lens, the Μ.Zuiko 300/4 on the Ε-M1II, how it compares to the Sony 200-600/A7III combo.

I already have the Olympus combo, as well α7ΙΙΙ (+α6400) with various lenses, including 135/1.8GM, 70-200/2.8GM, so I don't need a 100-400.

If the A7+200-600 at 600mm is near the quality I get with the E-M1II+300/4, I will sell the Olympus set.

The Olympus' stabilization can't be beat; handheld video at 600mm еq. is no problem.

But I will sacrifice that, as long as I won't lose (much) quality with the Sony 200-600, if any.

Click to expand...

Don't think you'll notice a difference in IQ. Weight and size are different though. I just sold my 300f4 and em1m2. Have had the 200-600 since August and have been very pleased with the results on a9 and A7r iv. Hated to sell the Olympus setup but I have too many cameras lenses as it is...

Leo3 said:

flashingr said:

Thanks, but my concern is for the specific lens, the Μ.Zuiko 300/4 on the Ε-M1II, how it compares to the Sony 200-600/A7III combo.

I already have the Olympus combo, as well α7ΙΙΙ (+α6400) with various lenses, including 135/1.8GM, 70-200/2.8GM, so I don't need a 100-400.

If the A7+200-600 at 600mm is near the quality I get with the E-M1II+300/4, I will sell the Olympus set.

The Olympus' stabilization can't be beat; handheld video at 600mm еq. is no problem.

But I will sacrifice that, as long as I won't lose (much) quality with the Sony 200-600, if any.

Click to expand...

Don't think you'll notice a difference in IQ. Weight and size are different though. I just sold my 300f4 and em1m2. Have had the 200-600 since August and have been very pleased with the results on a9 and A7r iv. Hated to sell the Olympus setup but I have too many cameras lenses as it is...

Click to expand...

Iso performance is much different but IQ with the Oly was fine. How would you compare your A9 to the A7R IV in terms of AF and IQ ?

Steve Paradise said:

Leo3 said:

flashingr said:

Thanks, but my concern is for the specific lens, the Μ.Zuiko 300/4 on the Ε-M1II, how it compares to the Sony 200-600/A7III combo.

I already have the Olympus combo, as well α7ΙΙΙ (+α6400) with various lenses, including 135/1.8GM, 70-200/2.8GM, so I don't need a 100-400.

If the A7+200-600 at 600mm is near the quality I get with the E-M1II+300/4, I will sell the Olympus set.

The Olympus' stabilization can't be beat; handheld video at 600mm еq. is no problem.

But I will sacrifice that, as long as I won't lose (much) quality with the Sony 200-600, if any.

Click to expand...

Don't think you'll notice a difference in IQ. Weight and size are different though. I just sold my 300f4 and em1m2. Have had the 200-600 since August and have been very pleased with the results on a9 and A7r iv. Hated to sell the Olympus setup but I have too many cameras lenses as it is...

Click to expand...

Iso performance is much different but IQ with the Oly was fine. How would you compare your A9 to the A7R IV in terms of AF and IQ ?

Click to expand...

If we go by full frame having a 2 stop advantage in ISO over micro 4/3 the Olympus is at F4 while the Sony is F6.3 at 600 mm equivalent so 1 1/3 stops is the negated so it's only really two-thirds of a stop advantage in ISO for these camera/lens combos. I've only had the a7r iv for a week so I don't feel qualified to make a judgment between it and the a9 for af performance. I'm hooked on all the megapixels of the A7r iv. But i'm also hooked on the blackout free viewfinder of the A9. But I also love the new ergonomics of A7r iv over the A9. That's why I was bummed the A9 ii didn't have more megapixels. Then again if one camera had it all these forums would be boring

Leo3 said:

Olympus is at F4 while the Sony is F6.3 at 600 mm equivalent so 1 1/3 stops is the negated so it's only really two-thirds of a stop advantage in ISO for these camera/lens combos. I've only had the a7r iv for a week so I don't feel qualified to make a judgment between it and the a9 for af performance. I'm hooked on all the megapixels of the A7r iv. But i'm also hooked on the blackout free viewfinder of the A9. But I also love the new ergonomics of A7r iv over the A9. That's why I was bummed the A9 ii didn't have more megapixels. Then again if one camera had it all these forums would be boring

Click to expand...

All science aside with my Oly EM1 MK II I never went above iso 1000 . While I am new to the A9 it looks like iso 3200 is better than my Oly was at 1000. I shoot birds exclusively

Steve Paradise said:

Steve Paradise said:

Olympus is at F4 while the Sony is F6.3 at 600 mm equivalent so 1 1/3 stops is the negated so it's only really two-thirds of a stop advantage in ISO for these camera/lens combos. I've only had the a7r iv for a week so I don't feel qualified to make a judgment between it and the a9 for af performance. I'm hooked on all the megapixels of the A7r iv. But i'm also hooked on the blackout free viewfinder of the A9. But I also love the new ergonomics of A7r iv over the A9. That's why I was bummed the A9 ii didn't have more megapixels. Then again if one camera had it all these forums would be boring

Click to expand...

All science aside with my Oly EM1 MK II I never went above iso 1000 . While I am new to the A9 it looks like iso 3200 is better than my Oly was at 1000. I shoot birds exclusively

Click to expand...

I believe it, ISO 1000 plus 2 stops : ISO 4000 so that makes sense iso 3200 on A9 looks better than em1m2 at iso 1000. was just making a note that the aperture is different on these lenses so that's going to effect the ISO advantage.