Assuming that you are being serious, which most proably you are not, that wouldn't work as you would have the wheel at the opposite end to the heavy weight that has to be carried and all the mathematics is against you.Just take the seat off a unicycle and replace it with a ball head?
myphs (cue Seinfeld)How do you know the Sony at 600mm (f/6.3) is as sharp as the Canon 100-400mm at 400mm (f/5.6)?
There is no published comparison side by side. As I wrote above, the MTFs published by Sony are not real in practice ones but arbitrary theoretical curves that do not take into account diffraction or real life features and are just based on Sony software and are not validated by CIPA or anyone. That is not evidence to compare two lenses from different manufacturers products. Also direct observation from the Optyczne review is that there is a real observable increase in sharpness on stopping down.
As for all lenses improving on stopping down, I have had 3 copies of the 100-400mm II and all have been sharpest wide open, and decent testing sites find no significant improvements in their MTF tests, and they are about the same at f5.6 and f/8.
You are accusing members of CR posting myths from the internet, but where is your real evidence?Best digital cameras and lens reviews. If you are looking for the information about digital cameras and lenses you are in a right place. We have many professional tests of digital photography equipment.www.lenstip.com
If I was forced to trade my passion for the craft and my artistic eye for the technical merits of the hardware, just shoot me. True, you could possess both but since I don't have the knowledge and understanding of what your posts indicate (and have zero interest in learning something which I believe to be mind numbingly boring) I stand firm on my point. I get what it's like to be a geek about your passions, I do it with cycling and music as well but even in an elitist sport such as road cycling, it never gets anywhere as condescending as the photo universe.As per already available MTF charts Sony 200-600 performance at 600mm is on par with Canon 100-400 L II at 400mm and very close to Sony 100-400GM at 400mm and noticeably better than Canon 100-400 with 1.4x extender.
So 200-600 most probably would be better option than any (sony or canon) 100-400 with 1.4x extender just per optical perfomace.
Also Sony 200-600 AF speed and precision probably would be better than for Canon 100-400 with 1.4x extender, not sure about Sony 100-400GM which has superfast AF system found only on latest GM lenses.
But what is really important for image quality is 2/3 stops more light for f6.3 compared to f8.
If for 600mm at f6.3 if you shoot at ISO6400 and get acceptable images than you need ISO close to 10000 for the same using 100-400 with 1.4x extender so resulting image quality wil be noticably worse. At high ISO range changes in captured amount of light have much higher impact on resulting image quality compared to low ISO range.
Also overall system resolution for lens+camera_sensor is reverse function of ISO. The higher ISO the less is overall system resulution due to the added noise. So even if lens optical resolution is equal system resulting image would have higher resulution for system using lower ISO just due to the better signal to noise ratio.
From what i see on forum not too many members understands this basic fundamental thing, just could count few members who has this understanding.
At the end of the day what is matters is overall system performace.
I think that Sony 200-600 might have very big success.
I am sure that similar Canon lens with the same or better performace than Sony one would be also very popular among Canon users.