01-22-2023 04:10 PM
If you need only one: 200-600 f 5.6-6.3 or 100-400 f 4.5 - 5.6?
01-22-2023 04:27 PM
For me personally, it was the 200-600, for the maximum focal length reach. The reason and way I built my gear line up was due to what I had first and to cover all focal lengths without overlap. I started with 70-200, then 24-70, then 200-600, then 12-24mm to essentially cover the spectrum of 12-600mm adding on the 2.0x TC I can cover up to 1200mm add on crop I think ~1600mm
01-22-2023 06:19 PM
and in terms of quality image?
01-22-2023 06:47 PM - edited 01-22-2023 06:47 PM
I've never used the 100-400 so I can't offer a comparison, but the 200-600 is fast and it has pretty good image quality. Here are some sample images.
01-23-2023 09:43 AM
The 100-400 and 200-600 are very different lenses in use. So it really depends on what subjects you're shooting and how you expect to carry either. The 100-400 carries exactly like a 70-200. Same size and weight. Fits in the same bags. Easily shoulder carried. The 200-600 is very different to carry and use. It's size is more akin to a supertele like the 600 f4 due to the constant length. You need a much longer bag to carry the 200-600. Hiking or simply walking around with it requires a different approach. It's nearly a kilo heavier than the 100-400. I can hand hold the 100-400 all day (and I do). I want a monopod when using the 200-600.