I'm still on the fence for this lens
I did try ( hard ) to get closer but I can't between me and the subject I always have obstacles especially water
I guess the only other way it is cropping and / or get longer
I own the 100-400mm and I can get good results when the subject it is pretty close but I notice an IQ loss when used with TC 1.4x
I was wondering if anybody did move from 100-400mm to 150-600mm and regret the change because IQ gain can't really compensate portability loss
No regrets whatsoever. I've owned, and pretty extensively used, both of these lenses. IMHO, the comparison is a bit of a no-brainer, as I've found the 150-600 to be superior to its predecessor in most every way. Even discounting the 50% additional reach that the 150-600 offers, the IQ consistency across its FL range very much favors the newer lens. I've also found the IQ impact of the 1.4 TC to be less noticeable on the 150-600. But in fairness, I've also seen far less of a need to use the TC because of that additional reach.
It's notable that the newer lens is significantly larger in size, however, it's also very light in weight. So, I haven't really encountered any handling issues with the newer 150-600. IMHO, discounting any price considerations, from the standpoint of consistent IQ, reach, and versatility, I think the newer 150-600 wins across the board. But... that's just one guy's opinion.
I’ve made this exact switch.
I really liked my 100-400, but I hated it with the 1.4tc.
The 150-600 is simply better in every way imho
Yeah i wish it was brighter, but then it would be heavier and heavy it isn’t. It’s long though.
Zero regrets. Sold the 100-400 on eBay. I use the 150-600 bare and with a 1.4 TC.
Is it perfect?
No. It’s a bit slow and it’s autofocus can hunt for a bird against a grey sky. BUT, it also is ‘light’ weight and has amazing reach. And isn’t terribly expensive.
Zero regrets. It’s a good lens.
Do you guy use it on a 40mpx sensor or on 26mpx?
Did you notice less background separation?
I use on 26mp XH2S, but I also rented the XH2 for a week. Works fine on both.
The depth of field at 600mm f8 is still very narrow, so plenty of separation. I didn’t notice any difference to the 100-400 although there must be a bit. Mind you the 150-600 is not f8 at 400mm, so the difference is really marginal
I made the switch from the 100-400 to the 150-600 and don't regret it one bit. I was a bit worried of the aperture on the long end (f8) but with modern denoising software its not a big issue. I also find the 150-600 to be sharper. If you can afford it and don't mind a larger lens, definitely switch.
Hi can I ask if any of you are using the XF150-600 to shoot very fast moving action, such as military aircraft flying fast down valleys? I see you are using X-H2S which I have recently upgraded to. Is the slower aperture on XF150-600 still ok for fast jet action, does the lens acquire focus quicker than the older XF100-400 and does it stick on the subject too (I find the XF100-400 hunts and loses focus sometimes but it can be fairly good at zooming while focussing even though it isn’t a parfocal lens). Interested in all your feedback. I’m interested in the XF150-600 but unsure if slower aperture will hinder me compared to brighter XF100-400 lens.
Just to acknowledge your very relevant question... as of yet, I haven't used the lens for action photography or subject tracking with my X-H2s. So, I unfortunately can't share any personal experience with how well it works for that, particularly in comparison to the 100-400, which I owned previously. The majority of my photography with long tele lenses is most often static subjects. Hopefully, someone with some recent experience with BIF (or other subjects in motion) using the 150-600 can provide you with some feedback and a first hand comparison.