Sony FE 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM OSS Review
Review Rating:
Reader Interactions
Reader Comments
Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.
So another Sony problematic product with weather sealing? What is going on with Sony? I am scared to take my A7RIII out even under light rain, now even a super expensive “pro” lens has sealing issues…
Ertan, your A7R III will be fine until the bottom is soaked, so it should be OK in the rain unless you put it in a pool of water. Still, I am surprised that Sony still can’t get it right with weather sealing and it is already the third iteration of the camera. Two features that Sony desperately needs to implement on the fourth generation: weather sealing and losslessly compressed RAW files.
Yes, it was a bit disconcerting to see humidity build up internally on the lens. Especially since otherwise the Sony 100-400mm GM lens is nearly a perfect lens. I hope that I just got a copy that had some issues but you would expect better weather resistance on a lens such as this, especially since Sony has touted it’s weather sealing. If Sony would figure out how to emulate Canon’s weather sealing it would be really nice.
Dvir, I forgot to thank for the excellent review by the way :)
I agree with condensation problem, it happened to me couple of weeks ago and could not figure it out why the image was hazy. After further checking, I see the condensation was between lend and 1.4 TC, ones it was cleaned, everything was back to normal. I love the lens and A9 for it’s amazing performance but was taken back with this incident, will be more careful next time. Also, I used 1.4 TC with my Nikon 600mm and 300mm and never experience this issue so Sony needs to address this weather sealing problem. Congratulation on well descriptive article with beautiful images. thanks,
My camera platform was the Konica Minolta back when Sony acquired the brand. I waited for 6 months with no movement for Sony and so I sold that equipment and purchased a Nikon D200 with the 18-70 kit lens and the 100-400 zoom. How many years has it been, and Sony has just come out with a 400 f2.8 and a 100-400. They have virtually ignored the telephoto market.
Superb review Dvir Barkay and excellent images. I’ve owned this lens since it launched and also written my own review on my site alphashooters.com. I’ve used the lens in both light and heavy showers with my a6500, a7R III and a9 and so far have not suffered any water/moisture ingress issues. However, I’ve yet to test it in a high humidity environment so this could well be a different story. I’ll be taking this lens to Borneo with me next month so I won’t have long to wait to find out. Needless to say, if the lens does suffer the same fate as yours, I will be a little peeved off!
Thank you for the kind words Tim. I hope that the lens holds up for you in Borneo. It should offer a good challenge given the high humidity there though I believe that this behavior is at it’s worst when you subject the lens to drastic changes in temperature and humidity which of course creates this strong condensation. Do write back to us with your results once you test the lens in Borneo as I am sure other readers would benefit from another user experience. Overall, the Sony is a beautiful lens and I really liked it’s functionality, image quality and superb focusing and was unhappy to have this one issue come up as otherwise I felt it an almost perfect lens given the price point.
Any lens that changes volume when focused or zoomed, and this one appears to grow in length when zoomed, is by definition not sealed. Ambient air MUST move into and out of the lens every time it’s zoomed. Seals can be effective at keeping water out, but not air or the dust and moisture it inevitably contains. Drop the temperature of the lens too quickly and the moisture present in the air already inside the lens might condense. If the lens body is substantially constructed of magnesium then I might expect it to transfer heat faster and exacerbate this problem. I have never touched either lens but my understanding is that the Canon 200-400 does not expand when zoomed and therefore is not an air pump like this Sony. But then the Canon is a true pro lens and much more expensive. I’m not defending the Sony but it’s a simple fact the seals are only effective against water droplets and not air. If it was really sealed it would try to compress the air inside when collapsed and thus it needs to be designed to facilitate the free flow of air.
The points you bring up are very valid. Indeed the best weather sealed lenses are those without any changes in size as you zoom them in or out as it is much easier to seal such a lens. As you state, both the Canon 200-400 and 70-200 don’t expand when zoomed and this enhances their ability to withstand difficult weather and high moisture. On this trip I also had a Tokina 12-24 lens with me for some snapshot photography and that lens is a zoom that does not expand when zoomed in or out but Tokina does not list it as weather sealed and indeed it isn’t. The lens suffered a similar problem as the Sony and my intention with this review was not to single Sony out for the quality or lack thereof of their weather sealing as much as it was intended to highlight a potential problem with using the lens in high humidity situations. While it is not full proof comparison, I can say that I have used Canon’s 100-400mm lens in similar situations in the past and didn’t experience the same problems but I cannot make a like for like comparison as I did not have the Canon lens with me on this trip. I hope to test Canon’s 100-400 soon and could possibly do this in Mexico and we can see how well it behaves in this regard.
Dvir-Thanks for the review, overall how did you feel the Sony compared against the Canon 100-400?
James, I would say that they are quite comparable, which I believe says a lot about both lenses. It isn’t an easy comparison to make given that the camera body you use them with makes a big difference. They are both very sharp throughout the entirety of their focal length range. I do believe that the Sony takes teleconverters better than the Canon lens. As an overall package, the Sony system is much lighter and I feel it is more suited for birds-in-flight photography due to this and the Sony A9’s lock on focus whereas I would probably trust the Canon combo in inclement weather much more so than the Sony. I would like to shot them side-by-side one day and I hope to review the Canon 100-400 for photographylife in the near future so keep an eye for that.
Great thanks for the info.
Minor point. The Canon 100-400 lens hood also has a small sliding window for access to the polarizing filter.
Having owned both the Canon and the Sony 100-400 lenses the things that I like most about the Sony it is that it is significantly lighter than the Canon and, in combo with the smaller and lighter a9 body, is much more hand holdable for a full day of shooting than the Canon combo (I was using a 5DM4 body without a battery grip). I am also struck by the sharpness of the Sony images. I thought the Canon was exceptionally sharp, but, subjectively, the Sony seems to take it even further. Very impressive performance.
My only concern about the Sony is that it doesn’t seem as quite as robust as the Canon (true for the camera body as well.) Since I am an enthusiast photographer and not a pro this isn’t a huge concern for me (I virtually never have to challenge the weather sealing on my equipment), but I think that Sony would do well to beef up the robustness of its bodies and lenses if they want to make a big impact in the pro market. Unfortunately, this would probably come at the cost of lightness/handholdability, which is one of the nicest features of the Sony rig. I guess there is no free lunch.
Excellent review with excellent images, thank you!