DPReview TV: Hands-on with Sony's new super-telephoto lenses

Nikon Fan boy!! I bet you didn't even look at the photos.

Apples/Oranges... if you are seriously in the market for a $12K 600mm f4 for FF, you are not even looking at an m43 setup. Kinda like telling a Ferrari buyer that a Golf R is an alternative choice.

both systems have pros and cons, just depends if what you're shooting hits one of the the cons massively or not, nice to have these kinds of choices and shouldn't be solely judged on weight and size alone

I remember Chris testing out the Em1mk2 at a hockey game and having trouble. I can't remember if he was using the 300mm f4 or a slower lens.

Well, with the Tokyo Olympic games, some interesting lenses should be coming out of Japan. I like my Zeiss 180mm f2.8 Olympic for 6x6, that came out for the Germany 1939 Olympics.

Well in that case you won’t get to see the lenses full potential. The lens is the main topic here. And seriously if you can drop $13k for a fix focal length lens I’m sure you can afford the A9.

If Sony is sponsoring an event and lets you borrow the cameras, why wouldn't you borrow the best? I know I would!

We all know, before Sony nobody could take any pictures of small birds in flight. A true breakthrough or as Sony fans like to call it a "game changer"!

Oh my look it’s NOWHITELENS in an article about TWO white lenses. Lol we all know you have a secret crush for everything Sony.

One can use manual focus and take good images of small bird in flight. Why does this make it less impressive that a camera can track it fast and reliably?

Yeah that will happen. Right when I thought perhaps Sony was going to rest on it's laurels they take it to another level. Now if they will release or even announce a A7RIV I'm on board.

I think it might not be possible to make a mechanically adjustable focus system handle 20+ fps AF. If you say 30 fps for future proofing that means the lens has to be able to focus much faster than 1/30th of a second, probably less than half that time to allow room for focus tracking and exposure. That's 1/60th of a second for the focus motors to drive the focus group to position, all while being light and energy efficient for good battery life (not massive torquey motors) . Every additional gram those motors have to accelerate and move to position is a big deal. The mass, friction, and thus inertia of a geared and clutched mechanism for direct focus ring control would be a massive amount of weight to add to the system.

@Dr_Jon, some of the Zeiss lenses for Sony have that. Probably because they're premium glass and more video focused than these teles.

Xander, the 70-200GM has a hybrid system. Focus by wire with a clutch to the manual focus ring. So the manual focus ring works without power and without focus by wire. But the AF motors don’t move the ring.

However, the newest Sony lenses have multiple focus groups. Multiple. Lott’s moving multiple lens groups. Probably different amounts (and possibly in different directions). Also I suspect linear drive motors are incompatible with traditional mechanical focusing rings (but possibly compatible with a hybrid type system assuming only one lens group is moving.)

I do suspect this is part of the reason these lenses can be sharper than in the past. More complex lens design enabled by more complex focusing systems due to multiple independent focus groups... the mechanical design required to move multiple groups differently with a mechanical focus ring is an unnecessary hurdle now. Focus by wire is the future. The technology is moving on.

homosapiens are the most adaptable species ever to walk the planet
some though fall short of the curve
;-)

Is this some kind of a macho boast, "My hands are SO BIG I can't possibly hold this teeny tiny camera!"

Not being macho. I'd say I have normal hands for a guy. These Sony cameras (and other brands, too) are just too small and blocky to hold comfortably. Make a damn D750-sized MILC.

You need a bigger and more comfortable grip for sport photography.

Speak for yourself: "*I* need a bigger grip for whatever"
I want them to keep the size the same.

1DXII and D5 have vertical grips that are permanently attached, while the A9 has a vertical grip that is detachable. I personally like detachable vertical grips because you don't always want to have a bigger, heavier body. With bodies like the 1DXII and D5, they are always going to be big and heavy, even when using smaller lenses.

One thing that makes me smile is the discrepancy of people moaning about the tiny body camera & at the same time not useing the battery grip Sony made exactly for this use case.

They didn't use it in the video and seem to be fine with the size of the body. I would for sure use at least a grip extension - but it's comfortable to hold that way.

Barely any difference. These superteles are barely affected at all by a 1.4x. I’ve never seen any indication the IQ has dropped when I use a 1.4 on my 500 f/4 and 300 f/2.8. The 2x will show a slight loss of IQ but it’s still excellent even wide open if needed and even stopped down 1/3rd stop helps. 99% of sports journalists use 400 f/2.8 for the reason f/4 is too slow under stadium lights. If it’s a big stadium you’d need the 600 but as said you can turn the 400 f/2.8 into a stellar 560 f/4 when needed.

Disappointed they didn’t also announce the 500 f/4 as that’s my sweet spot in terms of reach, size, weight and price. As the camera sensors get higher pixel density 500mm has become more viable for wildlife and birding and I’d expect a new gen 500mm to come in at 2.5kg maximum, allowing for much longer hand holding at eye level than the 600. I’m sure it’s coming, but clearly not in 2019.

No. A true A9 crop version I envision would be larger, have the bigger A9 battery and have more direct control and function buttons than the tiny A6400.

brendon1000,
Then wait for an A9 successor with a higher rez sensor so that you can crop later...

The A6400 isn't very reliable when it comes to focus tracking. As far as I can tell even the A7RIII is more consistent.

There isn’t such a pixel-dense sensor... yet. But a 400mm f/5.6 can get you there on an A7RM3/D850/5DS.

You make it sound like the only option if you want to shoot at 600mm and want something smaller than the 600mm F4 with less IQ is to switch to a small sensor system.

Why not take the 200-600 for example? It is still faster at 600mm and stopped down to F8 probably a match in IQ. Add to that the advantages of a zoom and you can pretty easily stay with FF.

So why downsize your sensor, when you can downsize your lenses?

Seeing that huge lens on that tinny body made me think the same. I would rather have the Em1x and the 300mm f4. Same exposure settings, much easier to handle.
The Panasonic 100-300 is a great lens if you buy a third party tripod colar.

panther fan - exactly!
Have a look at what ISOs they had to shoot the 600/4 in the stadion ... would not feel cosy with a M43 sensor for that use.
On the other side - when you are shooting safari at daytime you really don't need f4, so the zoom will serve you very well. No need for this monsters. It will still give you more seperation as the m43 combo if needed and actually ... zoom ;-)

Well doesn't sound all that complicated.

Take the 200-600, which is equivalent to a 100-300 F2.8-3.2 and probably replaces both your telephoto lenses.

And pack the 24-105, which is equivalent to a 12-52 F2 and covers all your wide angle needs.

And you have a total lens weight of just 2.7kg. So there is still lots of room for other lenses you might want. Or maybe replace the 200-600 by the 100-400 + 1.4 TC and you are still at 600mm F8 equivalent but even lighter and even more flexible.

And I don't understand your point about physical aperture. 300mm F4 and 600mm F8 have the same physical aperture (75mm diameter)
This article explains it quite well: https://m.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equivalence-and-why-should-i-care/2

There is no way your 40-150 with a 2x converter is sharper than the 100-400 GM with the 1.4x converter.

The 40-150 isn't even as sharp as the GM without any converter.

You are however right that the 12-100 has not much competition in other systems. The Sony E-mount 24-240 3.5-6.3 is the only one I can think of, but that lens misses a lot of features compared to the Olympus and probably has worse IQ.

Doesn't matter as long as Sony sells enough to make some profit...
And even if Sony does not make profit with these superzooms, it just shows pros its ecosystem becomes more and more capable and attractive so that more pros will dive into it. And this is what really matters for Sony, IMHO.

and a really small cat . . .

I still wonder how it compares to the 100-400, Is it as sharp and does it focus similarly as quickly? The all internal moving elements for zoom make me skeptic on its optical quality throughout the range. The 100-400 is pretty good at 400 and I personally find myself using 200-400 more than 400-600 in range. It’s definitely shocking that’s it’s a cheaper lens than the 100-400, I wonder if that has to do with its construction.

Wow f2.8, hate to lug that anywhere or buy it, the only f2.8 in that range I know are 30k, 35 plus pounds and 200-500 not 200-600.

You gotta be kidding about wanting it to be a 2.8.

Just out of curiosity: how many people manually focus a 600mm lens while shooting moving subjects / action? Especially when you have the a9's focus system handy?

@Rishi Sanyal well definitely videographers

Gotcha. The new touch tracking video AF system that v5.0 brought makes AF more practical in video, but of course I can understand for critical shots you may want to quickly adjust manually.

Might also be that Canon lenses are used now, since this is what many videomakers already have, and that some of these lenses will be replaced with native E-mount lenses later.

@GoodKnight: for stills? Why?

Don't the new Canon & Nikon superteles focus by wire?

Rishi, all I have is manual focus tele lenses, Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, FD 500 F/4.5L and FD 800 F/5.6L. What am I missing mate http://www.birdsinaction.com

Do I really need AF. Where's the challenge, where's the feel :)

They have linear focus throw - nobody up to now had tried them for video but everybody is screaming. Some implementations are well to use for video (90mm macro comes to my mind).

These Canon zooms are widely available and work perfectly if you want to use them manual on the sony cams - why not use them?

Makes the EM1X with the 300mm f4 tempting doesn’t it.

@Rex C and how many of the shown shots did you see at 100-400 ISO? most were 1600-2000-4000 ISO... and a 300mm lens isn't a 600mm lens

Jay Jay. The angle of view is the same, as Olympus sensor is smaller than FF.

Nah, just buy RX10 it also has 600mm f/4 lens ;)

@Peter Del that's all that's the same though. Cropping the full frame image taken with a 300mm f4 does not look the same as a shot taken with a 600mm f4, especially when it comes to subject isolation

Jay,

I'm not an Olympus shooter, though seeing these massive beasts prompted me to think exactly as Peter has. I'm not sure I understand your point. You wouldn't need to crop the FF 600 to get the m43 300mm FOV. Do you mean overall cropping ability? I assume subject isolation would be even nicer with a 600mm, but I personally am not willing to break my back for...I dunno...20% better isolation? I just don't think I would really notice it.

Jay Jay, they will be the same, except for depth of field.

"as Olympus sensor is smaller than FF."

Hence two stops more noise. Remember the Olympus 300/f4 works out at a 600/f8 equivalent. That's a sloow lens.

No experience with Oly either but I would think a 300mm even on a MFT size sensor would give you all the subject separation you would want.

Oh dear the Mft camp sure does their level best to try to justify it's existence. Indeed for those running at the lower ISO's it's fine. But I still do NOT see the levels of sharpness or lower noise from ANY Mft product as compared to the current Sony crop of cameras. We have to be real here.........

Probably Olympus/Panasonic body with the 300mm lens can't match a Sony FF with this 600mm lens in terms of IQ. But for 95% of the photographers it would be more than sufficient in all aspects. And way way cheaper, lighter and more compact. The MFT format truly shines with tele reach.

But great that Sony now offer these lenses to it's customers it gives them a big head start over the other MICL FF offerings.

I went through a Mft phase quite a while back. Sure for some results it can do a decent job. But as we move further down the line into being a bit more discerning, the Mft no longer cuts it. For some I suppose it may and good on them if it's all they need or want. Not here however.

Yes, your Galleries really shows... For 95%, and yes even the professionals who earn there money with photographs, MFT is more than sufficient. To bad it didn't work out for you, as this 600mm lens shows, it could have saved you a brand new car on 1 lens.

A friend of mine, professional wildlife photographer, tried the Oly + 300 f:4, but sendt it back. Noise everywhere as soon as the sun went behind clouds. Also, he was not pleased with af speed and precision.

If you really think that a 300mm f4 lens gives you the same effect as a 600mm, then you obviously have never put them both to a comparison.. The whole M43 marking has always been about "oooh look how small i am compared to full frame, a 300mm = 600 on a FF" and it's obviously convinced a lot of you despite how misleading that statement actually is. Not saying anything bad about the m43 system, it has it's place, but people need to stop comparing the incomparable

To bad all the naysayer are proven wrong by professional Olympus shooters like Andy Rouse, Peter Forsgård, Arend Spaans, Joe Edelman and many more.

If it's not your cup of tea, no problem at all just use what you like, but don't come around with BS reasons. That 2 stop difference is not that big of a deal in the real world use.

@ jay jay02: One can use 300 mm with a larger sensor and crop to get the same as from Oly if field of view is the only parameter.

DR is not everything. SNR 18%, the SNR or 'cleanliness' (the opposite of 'noisiness') of midtones in your image, will be far lower on a mFT camera than FF, all else equal. 2 stops cleaner. And at higher ISO, nearly all tones will be 2 stops cleaner.

Whether those 2 stops matter to you or not is the relevant question.

@Magnar W. The idea one can use a 300mm lens on FF and crop to give a f.o.v of a 600mm is true in theory but unless you have a camera that will crop the viewfinder image to make composition more natural it is not really a practical solution.

Trying to imagine what a cropped version of an image will look like from the central part of a larger viewfinder image is not how people want to work.

If you can take the shot with the 300/4 you can make it with the 200-600 zoom.

Only if you CAN't do it any more with these lenses the 600/4 comes into the game ...

I've seen several posts (videos) recently about how "ISO is Fake" and I must say I have also personally noticed that for a given exposure between two cameras using the same lens in exactly the same situation, the more recent camera was showing ISO 12800 and the older one ISO 8000. I think Olympus seem to be one of the "worst" at this game, making their sensors actually look more performant than they really are. Maybe it's a test DPreview could carry out?

Old camera,
OP is right in terms of DOF and S/N...

For the sake of stating the obvious; it would be comparing Olympus small sensor with their new ‘sports’ camera and a 600mm equivalent lens.

looks fine to me. may b you have thanos hands.

@Jonathan F/2
I care for the 20fps, 93% AF coverage, most advanced AF, decent DR at base iso and silent shooting. But hey, everyone got their own priorities.

Its not that they declared war, but rather realize that a full lens set is needed to be competitive. Right now it is not an issue for Canon and Nikon as the AF of their mirrorless cameras is much worse for sports/action compared to their DSLRs, so DSLR lenses . For Sony, their AF for action is on par with Canikon's DSLRs, so it makes sense that they would fill out their telephoto lenses.

@armandino - I care about saving $13K USD. You can pick up a low mileage D5 and 600mm f4 VR for less than $13K on the used market. I shoot Sony mirrorless, but DSLRs work fine in certain situations, no point reinventing the wheel if it works. Plus why would I want to work with fiddly SD cards in a run'n'gun pro environment? SD cards are fine for Instagram portrait photographers, but I'll take the ruggedness of XQD cards any day in these situations!

Go ahead though and have fun culling through 20fps of your kid's birthday party or portrait shoot of your cat. ;-)

you will use monopod at least for this kind of lenses anyway, so the size of the camera body really doesn't matter that much. Even D5/1DxII will be small relatively when mounting on a 600mm lens.

Johnathan, you are living in another world. SD cards really aren’t that fiddle. And in a run’n’gun environment when you can afford a pair of 256GB or larger SD cards, you simply don’t need to remove them.

And we don’t use 20FPS at birthday parties.

I see you feel threatened, but you need to grow up a little. Your negative comments are so petty that it’s clear you have nothing substantially bad to say. That’s good news for Sony.

"Those tiny bodies on those large lenses look so ridiculous. I'd rather take the D5 in this type of shooting environment!"

Once you get to such large lenses you primarily hold the lens as the centre of gravity anyway, with a body attached at the back. Then why not make it a small and light body, rather than an additional 1.5 lb?

Jonathan is all about appearances, it seems...

this will allow a far more tempting lineup for the coming Olympics

They will need to fix their shutter lag and buffer issues before they can compete with the big boys

There is virtually no shutter lag with E-shutter. Do you actually shoot with the A9?

@Jonathan F/2 -

"no point reinventing the wheel if it works."

It's not about reinventing the wheel but rather about smashing the pesky mirror that stands between the lens and the sensor that would allow the camera to work *better*. As long as you have that flapping mirror in the way, you lose out on full-frame focus point coverage, face/eye AF, a microadjust-free focusing system, 20fps shooting speeds, zero viewfinder blackout, silent shooting, etc.

"Plus why would I want to work with fiddly SD cards in a run'n'gun pro environment? "

Why are you changing cards in a "run'n'gun pro environment?" Are you using 2gb SD cards? LOL You can buy huge SD cards these days, which basically negate the need for fiddling with your SD cards during any shoot!

I would agree placing the years of lens adjustments just getting them to meet their maximum sharpness at any given focal length is GONE finally! No more mirrors for me thanks.......no more chimping either. Also no more limiting the focus points in the viewfinder to the central area.

@ Jonathan F/2
"Go ahead though and have fun culling through 20fps of your kid's birthday party or portrait shoot of your cat. ;-)"
You might want to check out others profiles before embarrassing ourselves ;-)
but I guess that gives away the way your judgment is applied.

@MirrorLessHater "may b you have thanos hands."

Or maybe you have Leprechaun hands. Everybody I know (who's not payed by Sony to say otherwise) criticize the way Sony cameras feel in the hand, they are by far the worst in the industry in this regard!

After Sony addresses this inconvenience, they can easily claim to no.1 spot!