Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sony FE100-400 review
Review in multiple parts, e.g.:


But I'm a bit puzzled. The evaluation of sharpness is on par with a first class lens (quite expensive, BTW: 2.900€...); but there are a few animal shots @400mm, and honestly my Sigma 150-600 C looks sharper... Maybe because the reviewer shot them at ISO 1000 - I keep the ISO at lower levels, but it's also true that a Sony A7RII should have a comparable, if not better, performance at ISO 1000 that my a6{0,3}00 one stop less sensible. And it doesn't look like micro-blur (the reviewer shot hand-held).


Sony a6300, Sony a6000, Sony NEX-6, Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS, Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS, Sony FE 70-200mm F4 G OSS, Sigma 150-600mm Æ’/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, Samyang 12mm Æ’/2, Sigma 30mm F2.8 DN | A, Meyer Gorlitz Trioplan 100mm Æ’/2.8, Samyang 8mm Æ’/3.5 fish-eye II | Zenit Helios 44-2 58mm Æ’/2 
Plus some legacy Nikkor lenses.
Shitty NR is used, so trying to judge sharpness of the lens is not worth the effort.

Another review

DXOmark reviews are mostly nonsense. Not a good source.

You might find this comparison informative:


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)