10 reviews for Sony FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS Super Telephoto Zoom Lens (SEL200600G)

1. 

   5 out of 5

   Ivan – January 23, 2020

   Now it is my go to lens for birding.I’ve been using the 100-400GM before, with 1.4x teleconverter. Also used longer Canon primes with Metabones and Sigma adapters.I moved to Canons because of better peak picture quality at farther distances, but autofocus isn’t too great.This lens has good AF, 600mm and longer reach with a teleconverter and picture quality of my Canon lenses.I wish they replicated same build quality as 100-400GM, with more metal parts.

2. 

   5 out of 5

   home remodelerhome remodeler – March 19, 2020

   I am really impressed by this lens. It has some features that one almost never sees such as programmable function push buttons that can be customized (if your camera body supports this). The default function is a focus lock, but I configured them to be a “back button” focus.The lens is also unusual in that when you zoom in, the length of the lens remains the same. The zoom mechanism is internal. You can go from 200 mm to 600 mm in only 1/4 of a turn of the focus ring. On some brands it takes a lot more rotational movement to go from wide to zoomed in. There is very little rotaional resistance so zooming is nearly effortless.A slide button offers three different image stabilization modes for normal, panning, and sports. A separate slide button allows you to turn the image stabilization off which is what is recommended if you are using a tripod.The mounting shoe is threaded for both 1/4″ and 3/8″ SAE threads.The lens hood is sturdy and locks firmly onto the lens.The white finish on the lens body is in my opinion more than just a cosmetic feature, on a hot summer day it should reduce heat buildup compared to a black finish. But the white finish looks great.The quality of construction is outstanding. I consider this a really good value for what you get. If you buy this lens you will be assured to get a lot of lens envy from other photographers.

3. 

   5 out of 5

   Pedro V.Pedro V. – March 19, 2020

   Not many would say this was the first major lense they’d purchased but I knew I had to get my hands on a 200-600 after I got my Sony a7iii. I had originally rented a 70-300 Tamron to see if I liked it and used it for my first wildlife outing. I was happy with the results but it just made my hungry for the 200-600. I did some heavy thinking and thought, why the hell not. I’ve used this lense for Sunrise, and wildlife photos and have NOT been let down.The internal zoom is probably my favorite feature as it prevents dust and moisture from getting into the lense unlike Sigma or other 3rd party lenses.If you’re looking for an incredible lense for wild life or nature, look no further.It’s worth the price and you won’t be let down by the quality.Check my Instagram visualsbypedro for more examples!

4. 

   5 out of 5

   jacobsen1jacobsen1 – April 23, 2020

   This is a great telephoto zoom with an amazing range. I’ve owned the 70-300, tamron 150-600 with adapter (both ways, sony a mount with the sony adapter and canon EF mount with a sigma MC-11) and the sony 100-400mm with a teleconverter. The 100-400 is a great lens as well and the fact it’s smaller and covers wider focal lengths might make it better for some people. But for me I need more range all the time and my 100-400 had a TC on it all the time. The 200-600 is a less expensive option and has that range all the time. For me I pair it with a a7riv giving me 26mp in crop mode at an effective 900mm range. Because of this resolution and ability to switch with the press of a button I’ve avoided using teleconverters with this lens and camera combo which has been great.For me the fact the lens has internal zoom makes it much easier to handle in use because its balance stays the same at all focal lengths. This helps with hand holding as well as balancing on a gimbal/ball head. The short throw on the zoom is also nice to make it easy to go from 200 to 600 with only a 90° turn. One knock on it’s construction is the 100-400 has a lock on the hood which is awesome. I know the 100-400 is a “GM” lens and the 200-600 is only a “G” but with such a massive hood it’d be nice to have it locked in place. I’ve read some reviews that say it’s “loose”, I’m not sure I’d say it’s any different than any other lens with a non locking hood but I’ll agree it does feel like it’s easier to bump when it’s as large as it is. I’ve added a silicone wrist band (like those livestrong bands) up against the hood and it makes it snug, an inexpensive fix.OSS and image quality are top notch with this lens. I will say when using a lens that’s 12″ on it’s own and ~18″ when on a body with the hood, you’ll need some good technique to hand hold a lens this size even with OSS. Depending on what your shooting using a tripod and ball head or gimbal might be needed. But when you get a good subject you’ll get some amazing images. The one negative about this lens’ image quality would be it’s background blur or “bokeh”. It can be a bit busy at times (so can the 100-400 though) and this lens really rewards you for getting some distance between your subject and the background.

5. 

   5 out of 5

   Jessica DelashmitJessica Delashmit – May 17, 2020

   This review is for hobbyist photographers looking into this lens. It’s expensive. This is 2 months rent for most people I know. It was scary waiting for this to arrive given that it is sensitive equipment. The lens came inside a box with padding and it was also in an Amazon box with bubble pouches. No damage to the boxes.Here is the important part: if you don’t know if this lens is right for you, look it up in YouTube. Mark Smith, Jared Polin, Alpha Shooters. Take your pick. This lens isn’t new. It’s been around for years and there are so many people who have taken it out and used it and reviewed it.We had a great experience getting it through Amazon. The lens works, it’s a stunning piece of gear that we find very versatile. If you have the money then please buy one! The investment is worth it!If you got your first mirrorless camera last week, wait. Play with it a year. Buy a 70-300 mm and just use that until you understand it. Then come back and look at it then.

6. 

   5 out of 5

   Amanda R.Amanda R. – July 2, 2020

   I have had this lens for a year now and OH MY GOSH, such a good investment. Perfect for wildlife, portraits, dog photography, landscape, travel, it’s perfect for everything and anything. The compression at 600mm is 👌. I have never had a problem with the Autofocus, build quality is fantastic, the glass elements look great!

7. 

   5 out of 5

   David N. – July 12, 2020

   I expected far worse AF performance considering it’s just a G lens, but it works just as well as my 70-200 GM as far as I can tell on my A9ii. Great image quality and surprisingly comfortable even handheld.

8. 

   5 out of 5

   naturalist_feelingsnaturalist_feelings – July 23, 2020

   Absolutely amazing lens, very impressed by the crystal clarity of images it produces. Other reviews attest to this.Despite mixed pixel peeper opinions of the 2X teleconverter I decided to give the combination a try, who wouldn’t want to DOUBLE the reach of this amazing glass? My experience using an A7RII body, a sturdy tripod and a wired shutter release has proven very positive, blown away by the extreme reach and crispness this combo can produce. Seems to me some of the negative sentiment around the 2X teleconverter may come from people expecting too much, yes the reach is doubled but it’s not going to turn your camera into the hubble telescope(!), limitations remain how far away a subject can be while retaining clarity. Stopping the aperture down a few steps and doing everything possible to eliminate any source of movement or vibration makes a significant difference. The sandhill crane images attached to this review illustrate what’s possible, shot from around 50 yards distance. All subsequent images are cropped from the first (shot @ 1200mm f16), showing how much detail is retained until the sensor has no more pixels to give. Truly amazing.Would recommend this lens with zero reservations to anyone interested in nature photography, using meticulous technique even better with the 2X teleconverter.

9. 

   5 out of 5

   WU.WU. – January 11, 2021

   What’s there to say? It costs 20% of what the 600mm F4 costs, it’s far more versatile, easier to carry, and with today’s post-processing tech, you won’t be able to tell the difference after the fact.Takes excellent pictures; tac sharp resolution and snappy autofocus. A must if you intend to do wildlife photography.

10. 

    5 out of 5

    GatorowlGatorowl – February 10, 2021

    UPDATE Jan 2020: I finally took the lens out in the field–no more static test shots. The lens performed excellently, and I’ve upgraded my rating from 4 to 5 stars. In my original review, I complained about the bulk. Well, relative to the 500mm and 600mm f/4 monsters that other birders were toting, my kit felt absolutely lightweight. I had no problem carrying and shooting it handheld for a nearly 3-mile hike. I’ve posted some bird shots. The focus speed, accuracy, and lock-on using an A7RIV were much better than my Nikon kit (D850 and 200-500mm zoom). The 200-600mm keeps up well with the 61MP Sensor, and cropping produces excellent results. Not quite at the level of the exotic long primes, but very close for $8-$10k less! For stationary shots (see the egret shots), the lens is amazingly sharp in good light. I couldn’t ask for more from in-body and in-camera IS. However, I wonder if I can extract a bit more sharpness from BIF shots with the OSS turned off. I will experiment. Anyway, for stationary birds, shots up to 400mm are incredibly sharp (as sharp as any 100-400mm lens). However, images are slightly softer at 600mm.—– (original review follows)I guess I’m a fan of consumer super zooms (see my reviews of the Nikon 200-500, Sigma 60-600, Tamron 150-600). In short, this is the best so far (not surprising; it’s the latest). However, it’s not a dominant winner. I would not trade the Nikon for the Sony unless I was moving to Sony (which I am). Frankly, I’d pick the Sigma as the best (sharp over its entire range with reasonably fast AF) except that I prefer to shoot handheld. The Sigma is nearly 6 lbs, which is just too big to shoot handheld. The Sony and Nikon are both less than 5 lbs. For me, that pound makes a huge difference.Sharpness is not a distinguishing factor between these lenses. At 500 or 600mm, throw a blanket over the Nikon, Sigma, and Sony (the first generation Tamron trails all three). I have an excellent copy of the Nikon, and really struggle to see a difference between it and the 600mm lenses. Both the Sigma and Sony provide more resolution at the longest focal length (I think the Sigma marginally more than the Sony, but they’re really close), but differences between the 3 lenses is marginal. Most will be disappointed by how little the additional 100mm buys you. The Canon (and presumably the Sony 100-400 GM) have a certain “crispness” (micro-contrast) at 400mm not present in the Sony long zoom at 600mm. This is not surprising. I expect a bit more for professional-level lenses. The 200-600 is a (very small) step down but does provide noticeably more resolution.Handling is the distinguishing factor. The Canon (shot on a Sony A7r3) handles like a pancake lens relative to the other behemoths. The IS (image stabilization) locks on like a clamp, and there are few misses. The Nikon’s VR (vibration reduction) also locks on during focus, but seems to jump around during shooting. I get more out-of-focus shots with the Nikon, but still a very high proportion in focus. The Sigma is comparable to the Nikon. The Sony’s OSS trails the pack. It’s OSS Jumps around during focusing and shooting. I get more misses with the Sony than with any other lens. This doesn’t mean the OSS is bad–the target was small and 60-70 meters away, so a very difficult test–, it just means that for best focus, use a tripod. For most normal size targets (small birds will be larger and closer than my test target), the OSS should work just fine.A lot has been made of the internal zoom, which is nice. But the result is a 12.5 inch package. I think that my focusing difficulties are directly attributable to the length. Even though it’s not extremely heavy, the length makes it hard to hold the kit steady especially compared to the “compact” 100-400. The Canon 100-400mm is slightly more than 8″ with adapter. Because the Sony doesn’t telescope, I must extend my left hand further out when focusing. I suspect that the difference in arm extension could be 6 inches, a substantial difference.Miscellaneous observations: the internal zoom is nice, but handling might be better if it telescoped like other lenses in this class. The other negative is that the bulk might discourage you from traveling with this lens. I love the short throw of the zoom ring. It takes half a rotation to go from 200 to 600mm. By contrast the Nikon takes about two full rotations to go from 200 to 500mm.ConclusionOverall, this is a very nice offering for Sony wildlife shooters. It is on par with other lenses in this class, but it is not substantially better. The IQ is excellent, albeit a step down from the quality expected from professional-level and exotic primes but clearly better than the first generation Tamron 150-600mm . A Sony shooter with the 100-400GM would be better served adding a 1.4x TC than buying this lens. The 200600 will just add bulk without increasing your keeper rate or IQ. Nikon shooters have no reason to envy this Sony. The Sony probably has faster AF (I will add comments once I test), but the IQ is comparable. However, for Sony nature shooters who can’t afford the over $3k 100-400GM + 1.4x TC, this is an “affordable” option that will allow you to get shots that were previously unavailable in Sony mirrorless without major compromises. Accordingly, I highly recommend the Sony as an affordable alternative to the exotic primes, but it is not perfect.