Late to the show, but I found this to be a very good real world review of the lens both positive and minuses. I find myself in need of a longish zoom and I like the 100-400 GM more than the 200-600 G, I’m very glad to know that I need to take the quality of the weather sealing into account in inclement weather. For me the positives are enough (coupled with it’s pretty much the only game in town). I will buy the lens and use it with care in humid or poor conditions. Glad the 1.4 teleconverter is useful too. Maybe there will be a 100-400 GM Mark II before long addressing Dvir’s sealing concerns.
Random Person
July 9, 2020 1:47 pm
To be fair to their weather sealing, the 100-400mm Sony is an externally zooming lens with variable volume, compared to the Canon lenses you mentioned which are internal zooming lenses with fixed volume. The Sony inherently has to move air in and out of the lens, there’s no way around that, which allows it to ingest moist air in humid conditions and would explain why it developed that condensation.
I understand that condensation comment completely, however I cannot agree with you, this is a very expensive bit of glass, and for that money, and considering what most buyers would be using it for (outdoor, long range work in variable weather conditions) there is no excuse for it. They should have gone with a sealed internal focus model if this one is suceptible to fogging. As any driver knows, the inside of the windshield of a car only has to get condensation on it just once or twice before noticeable marks are clearly visible. You can wipe a windshield, but you cannot get inside this lens to clean it can you!
Sony need to rethink this one. At this price level, that problem is far from understandable – I would go as far as to say, unacceptable. A lens costing over two thousand pounds! no way!
I know this is an old post but check out the Canon 100-500 – it will have the same problem. You want something light, small and portable or perfectly sealed like the Sony 200-600 ? You should know that a ‘pumper’ will always be able to suck in moisture and dust – no matter if it is a pro level lens or not. Next time leave the lens outside to acclimatise properly before extending it so the internal elements are not colder than the outside air and don’t cause condensation. Biggest risk of internal moisture is mould. Water vapour does not leave marks once it has evapourated. Your car window experience is not comparable since the car window has condensed plastic ‘plasticisers’ from the dash – which can be difficult to remove without a solvent. But a ‘pumper’ is a pumper even if it is designated Pro glass.
Ziggy
March 28, 2019 11:47 pm
Just a BTW, Panasonic also have some bodies and lenses each with IS, that work together. Eg G9 & 100-400mm.
Yeshe Dorje
October 17, 2018 2:33 pm
Dvir–Thank you so much for your wonderful and very comprehensive review. If I tried to comment on your stunning photos I fear no words would suffice or do justice to your extraordinary talent. I have had the FE 100-400 GM for a year now and it has managed to surprise me almost every time I have made use of it. Although I have never had this condensation problem you ran into (with this GM lens), I have found that very same issue when I was living in Nepal. If the temperature where you store your gear (in very humid environments) is significantly different from where you are shooting, the condensation can really make a mess of many cameras–at the sensor–and most lenses. I am skeptical that any manufacturer has found a perfect fix for this under all conditions. If you are able to just open your gear in the exact location where you will be shooting and let it acclimatize there for a period before use there is far less chance of condensation being a problem. One question I have for you which you did not cover or mention at all in your review. Did you shoot any photos w/o the adapters but with the camera set to APSC mode? I often use this to change the lens from a 100-400 to a 150-600 mm equivalent. I would be very interested to know if the 1.4X or 2X adapters produced far superior results to the cropped factor shooting mode.
Ramon Morales
August 27, 2018 9:18 pm
Dvir, Thanks for the review. I am considering getting this lens with the A7iii. Perhaps I missed it but I did not see any comments in your post about the autofocus performance of the lens when using the teleconverters. Could you discuss your findings on that? Thanks
The performance with the Sony FE Teleconverters is under the “Sharpness and Features” section. Here is an excerpt from that section regarding performance with Teleconverters;
“) With the SEL1.4TC (1.4x) tele-converter
The lens performs exceptionally well when it is coupled with the SEL14TC 1.4x tele-converter, losing very little sharpness and contrast. I did not notice any differences in autofocus performance either, so if you need to get closer to your subject, you can use this combination with full confidence. Keep in mind that you lose a stop of light, so the lens becomes an f/8 lens on the long end. If you have sufficient light, then it is not a problem and you can keep the teleconverter mounted to the lens at all times. However, if you shoot in low-light conditions, then the lens by itself is going to give you the best autofocus accuracy. 6) With the SEL20TC (2.0x) tele-converter
Initially, I was somewhat skeptical of how well the SEL20TC teleconverter would work with the Sony 100-400 GM. On paper, adding the teleconverter creates an impressive 200-800mm stabilized lens, but the 2-stop loss of max aperture means you are working with an f/9-11 max aperture range. Such narrow apertures greatly limit the camera’s focusing system, and most cameras won’t even properly autofocus with a lens that has a narrower aperture than f/8. Surprisingly, the Sony Alpha 9 can focus with the Sony 100-400 GM with the added teleconverter and even does so surprisingly well when used in good light. You lose most of the A9’s ability to track small and/or erratic subjects, but you can still follow larger birds moving in a constant direction with ease and even speedier subjects such as flying Frigate Birds can be tracked adequately in good light. If you are photographing a still subject, the focusing capabilities of the 100-400GM/SEL20TC combo are quite reliable (especially when you utilize the Focus Limiter) and I was able to use with combination with good success. Overall, the focusing capabilities of the lens and camera take quite a hit with the Sony FE 2x Teleconverter in place, but the combination remains highly usable under the right conditions.”
I believe that this lens will make a wonderful combination with the Sony A7III and it is highly recommended.
Jose E Hernandez
August 27, 2018 7:41 am
Just returned from Pantanal where I used this lens with the A9 exclusively because the 100-400 range turned to be outstanding for photographing jaguars. I had rain and drizzles and experienced not condensation problems. I purchase a Arca-Swiss type foot from a RRS and solve that shortfall. I experienced repeated problems with the AF system freezing and having to turn camera on/off to getting it working again but this may be a camera issue and not the lens. The AF system also repeatedly failed to autofocus when photographing fish hawks while striking the water to catch prey. Use several AF modes with no improvements. My Canon gear has delivered better AF performance but this may be due to the 2.8 aperture versus the Sony 5.6. Maybe the new Sony 400 will have better AF performance than the 100-400 mm. I also had my 400 Canon 400 2.8 MKII with the IDxii which I did not to take them out of the bag. The 100-400 and A9 combination & lightness of weight permitted me to use them without need for a monopod or tripod. That is a great advantage. But the bottom line is image quality and those I obtained without focusing issues were outstanding.
Tom B.
August 8, 2018 7:31 pm
Excellent review with excellent images, thank you!
Kirk Moon
August 7, 2018 9:51 am
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.
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.
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.
Late to the show, but I found this to be a very good real world review of the lens both positive and minuses. I find myself in need of a longish zoom and I like the 100-400 GM more than the 200-600 G, I’m very glad to know that I need to take the quality of the weather sealing into account in inclement weather. For me the positives are enough (coupled with it’s pretty much the only game in town). I will buy the lens and use it with care in humid or poor conditions. Glad the 1.4 teleconverter is useful too. Maybe there will be a 100-400 GM Mark II before long addressing Dvir’s sealing concerns.
To be fair to their weather sealing, the 100-400mm Sony is an externally zooming lens with variable volume, compared to the Canon lenses you mentioned which are internal zooming lenses with fixed volume. The Sony inherently has to move air in and out of the lens, there’s no way around that, which allows it to ingest moist air in humid conditions and would explain why it developed that condensation.
I understand that condensation comment completely, however I cannot agree with you, this is a very expensive bit of glass, and for that money, and considering what most buyers would be using it for (outdoor, long range work in variable weather conditions) there is no excuse for it. They should have gone with a sealed internal focus model if this one is suceptible to fogging. As any driver knows, the inside of the windshield of a car only has to get condensation on it just once or twice before noticeable marks are clearly visible. You can wipe a windshield, but you cannot get inside this lens to clean it can you!
Sony need to rethink this one. At this price level, that problem is far from understandable – I would go as far as to say, unacceptable. A lens costing over two thousand pounds! no way!
I know this is an old post but check out the Canon 100-500 – it will have the same problem. You want something light, small and portable or perfectly sealed like the Sony 200-600 ?
You should know that a ‘pumper’ will always be able to suck in moisture and dust – no matter if it is a pro level lens or not.
Next time leave the lens outside to acclimatise properly before extending it so the internal elements are not colder than the outside air and don’t cause condensation.
Biggest risk of internal moisture is mould. Water vapour does not leave marks once it has evapourated. Your car window experience is not comparable since the car window has condensed plastic ‘plasticisers’ from the dash – which can be difficult to remove without a solvent.
But a ‘pumper’ is a pumper even if it is designated Pro glass.
Just a BTW, Panasonic also have some bodies and lenses each with IS, that work together. Eg G9 & 100-400mm.
Dvir–Thank you so much for your wonderful and very comprehensive review. If I tried to comment on your stunning photos I fear no words would suffice or do justice to your extraordinary talent.
I have had the FE 100-400 GM for a year now and it has managed to surprise me almost every time I have made use of it. Although I have never had this condensation problem you ran into (with this GM lens), I have found that very same issue when I was living in Nepal. If the temperature where you store your gear (in very humid environments) is significantly different from where you are shooting, the condensation can really make a mess of many cameras–at the sensor–and most lenses. I am skeptical that any manufacturer has found a perfect fix for this under all conditions. If you are able to just open your gear in the exact location where you will be shooting and let it acclimatize there for a period before use there is far less chance of condensation being a problem.
One question I have for you which you did not cover or mention at all in your review. Did you shoot any photos w/o the adapters but with the camera set to APSC mode? I often use this to change the lens from a 100-400 to a 150-600 mm equivalent. I would be very interested to know if the 1.4X or 2X adapters produced far superior results to the cropped factor shooting mode.
Dvir, Thanks for the review. I am considering getting this lens with the A7iii. Perhaps I missed it but I did not see any comments in your post about the autofocus performance of the lens when using the teleconverters. Could you discuss your findings on that? Thanks
Hello Ramon,
The performance with the Sony FE Teleconverters is under the “Sharpness and Features” section. Here is an excerpt from that section regarding performance with Teleconverters;
“) With the SEL1.4TC (1.4x) tele-converter
The lens performs exceptionally well when it is coupled with the SEL14TC 1.4x tele-converter, losing very little sharpness and contrast. I did not notice any differences in autofocus performance either, so if you need to get closer to your subject, you can use this combination with full confidence. Keep in mind that you lose a stop of light, so the lens becomes an f/8 lens on the long end. If you have sufficient light, then it is not a problem and you can keep the teleconverter mounted to the lens at all times. However, if you shoot in low-light conditions, then the lens by itself is going to give you the best autofocus accuracy.
6) With the SEL20TC (2.0x) tele-converter
Initially, I was somewhat skeptical of how well the SEL20TC teleconverter would work with the Sony 100-400 GM. On paper, adding the teleconverter creates an impressive 200-800mm stabilized lens, but the 2-stop loss of max aperture means you are working with an f/9-11 max aperture range. Such narrow apertures greatly limit the camera’s focusing system, and most cameras won’t even properly autofocus with a lens that has a narrower aperture than f/8. Surprisingly, the Sony Alpha 9 can focus with the Sony 100-400 GM with the added teleconverter and even does so surprisingly well when used in good light. You lose most of the A9’s ability to track small and/or erratic subjects, but you can still follow larger birds moving in a constant direction with ease and even speedier subjects such as flying Frigate Birds can be tracked adequately in good light. If you are photographing a still subject, the focusing capabilities of the 100-400GM/SEL20TC combo are quite reliable (especially when you utilize the Focus Limiter) and I was able to use with combination with good success. Overall, the focusing capabilities of the lens and camera take quite a hit with the Sony FE 2x Teleconverter in place, but the combination remains highly usable under the right conditions.”
I believe that this lens will make a wonderful combination with the Sony A7III and it is highly recommended.
Just returned from Pantanal where I used this lens with the A9 exclusively because the 100-400 range turned to be outstanding for photographing jaguars. I had rain and drizzles and experienced not condensation problems.
I purchase a Arca-Swiss type foot from a RRS and solve that shortfall. I experienced repeated problems with the AF system freezing and having to turn camera on/off to getting it working again but this may be a camera issue and not the lens. The AF system also repeatedly failed to autofocus when photographing fish hawks while striking the water to catch prey. Use several AF modes with no improvements. My Canon gear has delivered better AF performance but this may be due to the 2.8 aperture versus the Sony 5.6. Maybe the new Sony 400 will have better AF performance than the 100-400 mm.
I also had my 400 Canon 400 2.8 MKII with the IDxii which I did not to take them out of the bag. The 100-400 and A9 combination & lightness of weight permitted me to use them without need for a monopod or tripod. That is a great advantage. But the bottom line is image quality and those I obtained without focusing issues were outstanding.
Excellent review with excellent images, thank you!
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.
The Sony GM has that window for adjusting polarizer filter too.
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.
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.