What's the deal?

[LePetomane]

Sony announced the release of the E-Mount 200-600 mm lens on June 11 of this year yet no retailers or rental outlets have it in stock to rent or buy.

[DanK]

B&H have it listed as "new order, released in limited quantity," and they have none in stock.

Maybe Sony got ahead of itself. They have been releasing a torrent of new products.

[Manfred M]

Sony announced the release of the E-Mount 200-600 mm lens on June 11 of this year yet no retailers or rental outlets have it in stock to rent or buy.

Earlier in my career, my main role at one of the companies I worked for was new product launches that the factory was producing. We would typically build up inventory in the warehouse for the launch date for several months. In that line of business we would often sell 50% - 80% of annual sales of a new product at launch and then things would settle down to a more manageable production schedule.

The marketing department would issue a forecast and we would work to that. If, one the rare occasions that they were close, the launch would go well. If they were off by a lot, we could generally fill the pre-orders, but could be heavily back-ordered for months on products that moved well. Other times, things went the other way and the take-up in the marketplace wasn't there and the inventory would sit for months while we waited for it to sell.

I suspect this is what you are seeing with the Sony lens. The sales exceeded the launch forecast, so there simply aren't enough lenses to ship. The people that pre-ordered got their products but everyone else has to wait while more product is produced and shipped out. I had something similar happen when Nikon launched the D800. I was one of the first pre-orders, but I knew of someone who had to wait about 6 months before he could get one.

[rpcrowe]

I seldom pre-order a piece of gear but, it can be a salvation when that equipment becomes immensely popular. The 200-600mm Sony seems like a wonderful lens and I can readily see why it has outsold itself.

I did however pre-order the coming Sony 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 G OSS lens from Adorama in New York City. When I sold my Canon gear, that gear included the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS ii lens. In deciding whether I was going to replace that lens with either the Sony 100-400mm or 200-600mm, I took a hard look at how much I actually used the lens. The answer was that because of the weight and size of the 100-400 lens, I didn't get enough use out of the lens to purchase either the 100-400 or 200-600 Sony lenses which are in the same weight and size class as the Canon 100-400mm. I decided that if I really needed that long focal length (airshows, etc.) I would rent it.

However when Sony announced the 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 lens with supposedly excellent image quality and OSS, I decided to go for that lens. Adorama will not charge me for the lens until it is shipped and the proceeds from my 100-400 Canon will pay for that lens with an additional five hundred dollars left over.

Cons and mitigating factors:
50mm shorter - but 30mm wider
Can only be used on APSC - I always used the 100-400 Canon on my APSC 7D Mark-2
Loss of 1/2 stop at maximum focal length - the very decent ISO capability of the A6400 should make up for this loss

Pros:
It is a lot less expensive (half price or less) than either the 200-600mm or 100-400 Sony lenses

What decided me:
The Canon 100-400mm + 7D2 weighed a total of 5.6 pounds or 2,540 grams. The 70-350mm + A6400 weighs 2.4 pounds or 1,088 grams. That is a difference of 3.2 pounds or 1,451 grams.

Since the reason for my limited use of the Canon 100-400 was the weight and size, I think that I may just get a lot of use out of the significantly lighter and smaller 70-350mm Sony lens. I will try it for six months or a year and if I don't use it enough, I'll sell it and consider any loss in value as a rental fee for the time I had the lens...

[LePetomane]

Thanks for the replies. I would probably rent this lens as I wouldn't use it that much.