I just upgraded. I had the A7iii and the 200-600G lens. It was a great combination, but that 200-600G was a beast, I unless I knew I would need it, I chose to leave it behind. I wanted something with reach, so I traded it (and my A7iii) in and got the 100-400GM and an A7Riii. The 100-400GM doesn't have quite the reach of the 200-600G, but the extra resolution of the A7Riii will allow me to maintain acceptable IQ when I crop. It is also now a small enough and light enough package that I won't leave the 100-400 behind. This now gives me a "Long Trinity" of: Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 Sony 24-105mm f/4 G and Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM I have uninterrupted coverage from 16mm to 400mm in 3 lenses. 😃
just purchased both the 100-400 and the 1.4 TC and OMG!!! I do not notice any slow decrease with auto focus and the sharpness is unbelievable! Wish I could drop the photo I took of a squirrel in my backyard. And that was just a test run. Pricey? yes. But I learned a long time ago. You can either buy nice or buy twice. Great review!
“Buy nice or buy twice” is something I have learnt. If you buy second best, will always wish you had spent more and not be fully satisfied until you upgrade
I have both teleconverters but will not use the 2x on the 100-400 unless I really have a need for it. I will never use that combination on the A7Riii because it will switch to CDAF. Works great on the A9. The 1.4x is definitely the better option for my usage and I do like that I have a 280 f/4 with the 70-200 GM. Would love to see Sony release a 300 f/4 that takes the converters.
Great review as always. I had the 2x converter and decided to go down to the 1.4 as I found that autofocus was not good enough with the 2x and there was more hunting. With the 1.4x I am delighted with the autofocus. I also love my 100-400 and am glad I went for that with the converter and not the 200-600 which I did love but was too large for carrying around all the time. the 70-200 and 100-400 are so similar sized that I have a great range with two lenses I can swap around.(plugs an adapter). More love from Scotland.
I have now had 3 100-400 which are good quality but I find the push and pull function can be off putting. It is quite a bit heavier than the 70-200 gm2. However if you need the reach I would recommend this as other lenses in this range are similar design. I recently got the Tamron 150-500 and find it lighter and also a lot smaller than the 200- 600 which I prefer for the balance when adjusting focus, but find too large for my general use. I have chronic fatigue and try to minimise weight.
Based on your review and final verdict, I will buy this extender right now. Heading to the Long Beach Grand Prix in a couple weeks. Going to use this with my 70-200 gm i lens.
Great review. Just bought a 1.4x TC for my 70-200 F4 G II lens. Looking forward to that little bit of extra reach when I need it and a side of 0.7x (1:1.43) macro reproduction.
Also works on 200-600mm, and both 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4. I use it and the 2x with my 70-200mm f2.8 and 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 on my A9 and A7RIV with very little visible image loss. Cheers
Brilliant video as always. A comparison video with the 100-400 Sony vs the 100-400 Sigma would be a fantastic idea for you. With sigma lining up a 2x and 1.4x convertor as well and also that pricing is more in the budget for alot of photographers. much love from scotland my man
That might depend on the mount. Look at the Sigma 70mm macro, it takes converters but only for the L-mount. Hopefully that will not happen with the 100-400.
I have this combo on my a7r iv. The degradation is more noticeable on this camera. If you're pixel peeping. The a7r iv is the great betrayer of bad technique and optical weakness :)
I have it on the a7rii... the image is pretty soft compared to the image without the converter. I won't present the results to my clients. It's good... just not professional quality
...and I just ran a definitive test with this combo on my 7R III and 7R IVA after reading a post about sharpness loss. Shot at f/8, f/13, and f/22. OMG, they were right, in my case at least. Unacceptable image degradation for me, so parting ways with my SEL14. The extra reach isn't worth the compromised images.
@@simonp8088 Ugh. That’s so disappointing. I keep wishing a 1.4 would be a good idea but I always find the comment that recommends against it lol. Thanks for the reply!
I also have this combo. Shot my sons graduation which was outdoors in a football field and I gotta say I was impressed. Not sharp like a prime but like you said that’s expected with more glass and reach. Great video as always.
OK so if u have an older camera like me or even an A7r3 then you'll have a problem with phase detection AF with this. Basically over f8 (which is the TC's minimun) you'll be limited to contrast AF and not phase detection (it's a little different on the a7r3). So in low light and coupling this with contrast based AF a lot of the images aren't very sharp or in focus
Thank you for this review! My favorite lens is my Sony 100-400 GM. It’s amazing that it’s become my all purpose go to lens. I needed a bit more reach when birding and full moon captures but was undecided about the teleconverter. I will be trying it out for the first time after my husband bought it for me as a gift!
I just wish the side by side comparison could have been with a crop view vs. 1.4x view showing in the same scale of the images; so the details could be really compared. I bet crop view would have shown the cleaner and sharper images as I have seen from other reviewers consistently.
Great review. I have the 10-400 with 1.4 mounted on A7iii and use for everything, but principally for my work with a symphony. The results are excellent. One question:does anyone have issues with the fit of the converter to the camera body? Mine has a very slight looseness so that the lens flange doesn't fit tight up against the camera lens mount. The rubber seal on the 1.4 fits tight against the lens, but the fit is not the same on the back end to the camera. Is this an issue with the 1.4? With the body? Lens and 1.4 are new, so I can send 1.4 back for a replacement. Anyone else see this? Thanks for any feedback on this.
superb review - i confess never to have found the 2x a great converter (nikon etc) - 1.4x seems to be the bees knees but has to be original (nikon sony canon etc etc not third party) - the pixel peeping is always good part of the review and just love all the practical advice and tips - the reviews i confess are quite fun to watch too many thanks
Hi Stefan. You have been an expensive boy to me - first 100-400 mm GM and now TC 1.4! I say thank you for your many good reviews where I have learned a lot and saved a lot of money in other areas. Greetings from Denmark, Bj.
@@StefanMalloch Thanks Stefan. I appreciate your youtube channel and I just subscribed. I like to do wildlife photography. I like to do digiscoping. I also have the nikon 1 V3 with the 70-300 with the 1 inch crop censor making it a 189-810. I plan on getting the Sony A7 IV. I was thinking of getting either the sony 200-600 or the G Master 200-400. with the converter and based on your feedback I should get the 1.4 converter. Also I like the compactness of the G Master compared to the 200-600.
I love the 1.4x on the 100-400 on my RIII. I rarely take it off to be honest. I never noticed a difference in picture quality. Now a while back I used to have the 70-200GM and I borrowed the 2x once to see if I wanted to buy it, and I found the image quality to be severely lacking with that converter. I would avoid the 2x but would easily recommend the 1.4x.
@@jamesgkrk Gerald Undone did some tests with the 2x on it, and he said there was a drop in quality, but from what I could see it looked a lot more minimal than it did on the OG lens.
The SEL14TC teleconverter is currently compatible with: Sony 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 GM OSS FE (SEL100400GM) Sony 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G OSS FE (SEL200600G) Sony 400mm f2.8 GM OSS FE (SEL400F28GM) Sony 600mm f4 G OSS FE (SEL600F40GM) Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM OSS FE Lens (SEL70200GM)
What a GREAT review. I had just purchased the 1.4 to go with the 100-400gm and was ready to return it. You helped me understand where it fits best in terms of what I am capturing. I have to say I am blown away with the dog photos.. they are awesome! I have yet to capture that sharpness. Did you use the lens stabilization?? I also have the A7lll. Thanks a again.. I subscribed...
so with 1.4TC and crop mode at 400mm is equivalent to 400 X 1.4 X 1.5 = 840mm? but during post, my picture is only shown at 560mm (400 X 1.4). So which one is correct? thanks
If you have an 'R' variant of the Sony alpha... DONT BUY THIS. I've been out testing for the last 3 days. I mainly do surf photography and I use an A7r2 and the Sony 100-400 which works like a dream. The pictures are so sharp and dreamy out of the camera they're really easy to present to customers who seem to love the way they pop and their amazing contrast. Up and down the focal length they're really nice, but once you put this converter on the camera, it's a whole different storey. The images are in focus, but the focus is really soft compared to the native lens. At the far end of the lens, (and I use a tripod) when you zoom in on the images, obviously there's the expected contrast drop, but also the edges of the image is very poor. Its properly in focus, its just that focus is pretty bad. It's not noticeably better than using the camera in crop. Side by side you can see the difference between the images even before zooming in they're just softer and lack that zing. The TC image is a lot softer, and you certainly don't pay up to £3000 for that kind of result. I'm guessing it might be because of the lack of anti AA filter? who knows. If u need the reach, get the 200-600. The 100-400 is the best lens I've used in the last year, but with the little 'TC' handbrake strapped into that lens you may as well have a kit lens installed...
I just upgraded. I had the A7iii and the 200-600G lens. It was a great combination, but that 200-600G was a beast, I unless I knew I would need it, I chose to leave it behind. I wanted something with reach, so I traded it (and my A7iii) in and got the 100-400GM and an A7Riii. The 100-400GM doesn't have quite the reach of the 200-600G, but the extra resolution of the A7Riii will allow me to maintain acceptable IQ when I crop. It is also now a small enough and light enough package that I won't leave the 100-400 behind.
This now gives me a "Long Trinity" of:
Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm f/4
Sony 24-105mm f/4 G and
Sony 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 GM
I have uninterrupted coverage from 16mm to 400mm in 3 lenses. 😃
just purchased both the 100-400 and the 1.4 TC and OMG!!! I do not notice any slow decrease with auto focus and the sharpness is unbelievable! Wish I could drop the photo I took of a squirrel in my backyard. And that was just a test run. Pricey? yes. But I learned a long time ago. You can either buy nice or buy twice. Great review!
“Buy nice or buy twice” is something I have learnt. If you buy second best, will always wish you had spent more and not be fully satisfied until you upgrade
@@Jonathantuba absolutely. it takes me a little longer to get what i want but i find it worth it in the end.
I have both teleconverters but will not use the 2x on the 100-400 unless I really have a need for it. I will never use that combination on the A7Riii because it will switch to CDAF. Works great on the A9. The 1.4x is definitely the better option for my usage and I do like that I have a 280 f/4 with the 70-200 GM. Would love to see Sony release a 300 f/4 that takes the converters.
Great review as always. I had the 2x converter and decided to go down to the 1.4 as I found that autofocus was not good enough with the 2x and there was more hunting. With the 1.4x I am delighted with the autofocus. I also love my 100-400 and am glad I went for that with the converter and not the 200-600 which I did love but was too large for carrying around all the time. the 70-200 and 100-400 are so similar sized that I have a great range with two lenses I can swap around.(plugs an adapter). More love from Scotland.
I also have the 70-200 gm2 and im considering to buy the 100-400 and to get the tele , how is the quality do you satisfy?
I have now had 3 100-400 which are good quality but I find the push and pull function can be off putting. It is quite a bit heavier than the 70-200 gm2. However if you need the reach I would recommend this as other lenses in this range are similar design. I recently got the Tamron 150-500 and find it lighter and also a lot smaller than the 200- 600 which I prefer for the balance when adjusting focus, but find too large for my general use. I have chronic fatigue and try to minimise weight.
@@duncanmcinnes5613 so you have 70-200 and 100-400 with tele1.4 ? How is that are you satisfied? Can you carry them both in a bag
@@דודסבג-צ4ש They can both be carried in a small backpack and also a Wotangcraft messenger bag.
100-400 is my favourite lens. Absolute beauty . Was thinking about teleconvertor rather than buying the 200-600 too so this was very helpful
Based on your review and final verdict, I will buy this extender right now. Heading to the Long Beach Grand Prix in a couple weeks. Going to use this with my 70-200 gm i lens.
Great review. Just bought a 1.4x TC for my 70-200 F4 G II lens. Looking forward to that little bit of extra reach when I need it and a side of 0.7x (1:1.43) macro reproduction.
Much awaited review! Havnt had such a comparative and real life review on youtube related to TC’s . Ordering mine today . Thanks
Happy to help bud. 🙂
Also works on 200-600mm, and both 400mm f2.8 and 600mm f4. I use it and the 2x with my 70-200mm f2.8 and 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 on my A9 and A7RIV with very little visible image loss. Cheers
Brilliant video as always. A comparison video with the 100-400 Sony vs the 100-400 Sigma would be a fantastic idea for you. With sigma lining up a 2x and 1.4x convertor as well and also that pricing is more in the budget for alot of photographers. much love from scotland my man
That might depend on the mount. Look at the Sigma 70mm macro, it takes converters but only for the L-mount. Hopefully that will not happen with the 100-400.
I have this combo on my a7r iv. The degradation is more noticeable on this camera. If you're pixel peeping. The a7r iv is the great betrayer of bad technique and optical weakness :)
I have it on the a7rii... the image is pretty soft compared to the image without the converter. I won't present the results to my clients. It's good... just not professional quality
...and I just ran a definitive test with this combo on my 7R III and 7R IVA after reading a post about sharpness loss. Shot at f/8, f/13, and f/22. OMG, they were right, in my case at least. Unacceptable image degradation for me, so parting ways with my SEL14. The extra reach isn't worth the compromised images.
What lens did you couple it with?
It was with the Sony 100-400 gm.
@@simonp8088 Ugh. That’s so disappointing. I keep wishing a 1.4 would be a good idea but I always find the comment that recommends against it lol. Thanks for the reply!
Hello, I just ordered one for my 10-400gm paired with my A7RM4A! I had the 200-600g my camera hated it….40% keeper rate in all focus modes!!
I also have this combo. Shot my sons graduation which was outdoors in a football field and I gotta say I was impressed. Not sharp like a prime but like you said that’s expected with more glass and reach. Great video as always.
Just picked up these two. Looking forward to see how it performs. Thanks for the review
great review. i'm thinking about going to the 100-400GM + 1.4TC (already have) instead of my big heavy 200-600mm.
OK so if u have an older camera like me or even an A7r3 then you'll have a problem with phase detection AF with this. Basically over f8 (which is the TC's minimun) you'll be limited to contrast AF and not phase detection (it's a little different on the a7r3). So in low light and coupling this with contrast based AF a lot of the images aren't very sharp or in focus
Thank you for this review! My favorite lens is my Sony 100-400 GM. It’s amazing that it’s become my all purpose go to lens. I needed a bit more reach when birding and full moon captures but was undecided about the teleconverter. I will be trying it out for the first time after my husband bought it for me as a gift!
I just wish the side by side comparison could have been with a crop view vs. 1.4x view showing in the same scale of the images; so the details could be really compared. I bet crop view would have shown the cleaner and sharper images as I have seen from other reviewers consistently.
Great review. I have the 10-400 with 1.4 mounted on A7iii and use for everything, but principally for my work with a symphony. The results are excellent. One question:does anyone have issues with the fit of the converter to the camera body? Mine has a very slight looseness so that the lens flange doesn't fit tight up against the camera lens mount. The rubber seal on the 1.4 fits tight against the lens, but the fit is not the same on the back end to the camera. Is this an issue with the 1.4? With the body? Lens and 1.4 are new, so I can send 1.4 back for a replacement. Anyone else see this? Thanks for any feedback on this.
Ok this is weird, I get the 100-400 and THEN you put out your review. I got my 2x teleconverter last week, and THEN you review the converters.
Great review as always!
I can't wait to make detailed comparison between gm lens and the new sigma 100 400 mm for sony.
Working on it.
@@StefanMalloch Glad to hear that 👍
Stefan, help please. Thoughts about the 1.4 with the Sony G 70-300mm? I use a Sony A7iii. Thanks in advance
Don't think that one is compatible my friend.. Double check on the Sony site though.
Thank you so much for this review! It was very helpful. Unfortunately, I want both the 100-400 and the 200-600 lol Thank you again!
superb review - i confess never to have found the 2x a great converter (nikon etc) - 1.4x seems to be the bees knees but has to be original (nikon sony canon etc etc not third party) -
the pixel peeping is always good part of the review
and just love all the practical advice and tips - the reviews i confess are quite fun to watch too
many thanks
Hi Stefan.
You have been an expensive boy to me - first 100-400 mm GM and now TC 1.4!
I say thank you for your many good reviews where I have learned a lot and saved a lot of money in other areas.
Greetings from Denmark, Bj.
Can't say I'm sorry. I know you'll get a lot of joy out of them! 😉
Q: Can we use the 1.4 teleconverter with 3rd party lenses like the new Sigma 100-400 for the Sony?
Unfortunately not. Only a few Sony lenses are compatible.
Awesome video! Exactly what I was looking for
You’re a Legend Stefan!
Thanks for this - exactly the information I needed.
Glad it was helpful!
Does the minimum focus distance change with the converter?
really helpful video！
Will the 1.4x work with new Sigma 100-400mm lens for Sony cameras ? Please confirm.
It will not.
Why did you not get the 2X converter as it is the same price as the 1.4X
Slower and IQ compromise was more than I was willing to take.
@@StefanMalloch Thanks Stefan. I appreciate your youtube channel and I just subscribed. I like to do wildlife photography. I like to do digiscoping. I also have the nikon 1 V3 with the 70-300 with the 1 inch crop censor making it a 189-810. I plan on getting the Sony A7 IV. I was thinking of getting either the sony 200-600 or the G Master 200-400. with the converter and based on your feedback I should get the 1.4 converter. Also I like the compactness of the G Master compared to the 200-600.
I love the 1.4x on the 100-400 on my RIII. I rarely take it off to be honest. I never noticed a difference in picture quality. Now a while back I used to have the 70-200GM and I borrowed the 2x once to see if I wanted to buy it, and I found the image quality to be severely lacking with that converter. I would avoid the 2x but would easily recommend the 1.4x.
That seems to be the common consensus.
Wonder how the converters will work with 70-200gm2
@@jamesgkrk Gerald Undone did some tests with the 2x on it, and he said there was a drop in quality, but from what I could see it looked a lot more minimal than it did on the OG lens.
How is it with video ?
Im using Sony FE PZ 28-135mm f/4 G OSS Lens
It doesn't work with that lens. It doesn't even work with my 135mm f1.8 GM, which is a major bummer!
Test sharpness at different apertures??
Anyone knows if it works with the Sigma 100-400mm? If so, is it still great, or does it hunt for AF?
It will not.
Great review, thank you so much.
Is the Sony 1.4 FE teleconverter compatible with the Sony 135MM GM lens?
No I don't believe so. There is a list on Sony's website.
The SEL14TC teleconverter is currently compatible with:
Sony 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 GM OSS FE (SEL100400GM)
Sony 200-600mm f5.6-6.3 G OSS FE (SEL200600G)
Sony 400mm f2.8 GM OSS FE (SEL400F28GM)
Sony 600mm f4 G OSS FE (SEL600F40GM)
Sony 70-200mm f2.8 GM OSS FE Lens (SEL70200GM)
Nice job Stefan! I appreciate the insight and informative review.
Awesome review!!
wow nice lens bro...one day i will buy it
Love it on my Riii
400mm+1.4x+apsc mode on my a7riii...😳
What a GREAT review. I had just purchased the 1.4 to go with the 100-400gm and was ready to return it. You helped me understand where it fits best in terms of what I am capturing. I have to say I am blown away with the dog photos.. they are awesome! I have yet to capture that sharpness. Did you use the lens stabilization?? I also have the A7lll. Thanks a again.. I subscribed...
Wish one day i will buy this lens
so with 1.4TC and crop mode at 400mm is equivalent to 400 X 1.4 X 1.5 = 840mm? but during post, my picture is only shown at 560mm (400 X 1.4). So which one is correct? thanks
The focal length is indeed 560mm, but the equivalent focal length is 840mm.
Freakin love this lenssss!!!
excellent video
Thanks for this informative video. According to Jared Polin this kind of accessory is garbage. Maybe it’s time for him to convert his thinking.
Better to have it and not need it if you ask me.
crop and reach
reach and crop
I got “the thing” hahaha
If you have an 'R' variant of the Sony alpha... DONT BUY THIS. I've been out testing for the last 3 days. I mainly do surf photography and I use an A7r2 and the Sony 100-400 which works like a dream. The pictures are so sharp and dreamy out of the camera they're really easy to present to customers who seem to love the way they pop and their amazing contrast. Up and down the focal length they're really nice, but once you put this converter on the camera, it's a whole different storey. The images are in focus, but the focus is really soft compared to the native lens. At the far end of the lens, (and I use a tripod) when you zoom in on the images, obviously there's the expected contrast drop, but also the edges of the image is very poor. Its properly in focus, its just that focus is pretty bad. It's not noticeably better than using the camera in crop. Side by side you can see the difference between the images even before zooming in they're just softer and lack that zing. The TC image is a lot softer, and you certainly don't pay up to £3000 for that kind of result. I'm guessing it might be because of the lack of anti AA filter? who knows. If u need the reach, get the 200-600. The 100-400 is the best lens I've used in the last year, but with the little 'TC' handbrake strapped into that lens you may as well have a kit lens installed...
Did you just call it a “beast”? What is not a “beast” to you?
I don’t think is good idea for 1.4❌ teleconverter