MedicineMan404 wrote:
Molson I'm noticing more and more into the a9+100400GM fold. Good to see you there too
Did you leave CaNikon or using both now? Just curious.
I can't afford more than one system any more...
Nothing comes close to the 1Dx and 500mm f4L IS II that I sold last year, though.
I was shooting with a 1DXii + 500ISii and a friend had an EOS 800. I tried. I just wasn't strong enough.
Now Sony puts 800mm in my hand, and an 800mm I can hand hold
Perfect? Of course not....that's OK, I'm not perfect either, just old.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I was shooting with a 1DXii + 500ISii and a friend had an EOS 800. I tried. I just wasn't strong enough.
Now Sony puts 800mm in my hand, and an 800mm I can hand hold
Perfect? Of course not....that's OK, I'm not perfect either, just old.
How would you compare the following combo's:
-A9 + Canon 400mmF4 DOII + Canon 2.0IIITC
-A9 + Sony 100-400 + Sony 2.0TC
Is the price premium of the DOII worth it when it comes to pure IQ?
I am on the verge to go for the DOII with both extenders, but am already a Sony shooter with the A7RII. So I am trying to see ahead regarding future Sony lenses/bodies and mirrorless technologies vs. Canon future bodies and technologies. Weight is not a problem with the DOII (I am used to a +3kg supertele), but financially, I would like this to be the last big investment in optics.
Chris not just pure IQ but F4. and F8 with the TC.
Comparing Sony a9+100-400+2.0TC to Sony a9+Metabones+400DOii+2.0.
I think there is a thread somewhere where this has been done before but here's
my opinion.
The Sony combo wins for size/weight/versatility (hard to beat a zoom for 'do-it-all').
The Sony combo wins for packability...think about a flight and where the DOii is to be placed.
The Sony combo wins for pure AF/AF-C tracking.
The 400DOii wins in low light and probably pure IQ, read on.....
I recently updated the Metabones to 0.58, went outside and discovered AF was crap, AF-C was
horrible. I tried on A7Riii and a9. Went back in and downgraded the firmware to 0.57 and back
to decent performance. But how decent? That is what you are really asking and LensRental is
your friend. Point? You have to have an adapter for the DOii.
If you are dead set on the 400DOii (I can understand why, it's the only big Canon I kept) just remember
you can rent it from Roger and see for yourself.
In Florida before starting out each morning (Poof had me walking 6-8 miles every day) I'd grab the DOii because
we were starting right at Sun up. Later in the day I'd switch out to the slower zoom. So Chris also ask yourself
in what kind of light will you be using the combo the most often.
I'm glad you asked about the a9 and the adapted DOii because the a9 can focus a Coke bottle Just teasing
but the a9 can AF and AF-C where the A7Riii is behind.....it can be done with the A7Riii of course but nothing
like the a9 in my experience......which means you should also ask are you dead set on the a9?
When I go through my BIF's album on Flickr my #1 rig for BIFs was the 7Dii + 400DOii. I believe I got more with it than the 1DXii because it was lighter, I could wield it faster/carry it longer/stay on target easier AND the pixel density....why mention this? Because only time before Sony brings out an a7000 (or whatever its name will be).
So to answer your question 'is it worth it for IQ' I'd say no if just using the A7Rii(2)....lot's of factors determine IQ but you have to get the target in focus period. Assuming BIF is a priority? So next question is what are you predominantly going to shoot? You know if it is just BIF the most affordable combo is the D500+200-500mm; it evidently (I've never owned that combo) is still better than the a9 for AF-C but the 200-500mm is not as good as the 100-400GM (I don't think the Nikkor 200-500mm does so well with a 2.0TC but I'm guessing on that).
Would I keep the 400DOii IF Sony put out a 400/4 G? Nope. I'd sell the Canon in a heartbeat.
Something else to keep in mind. My a9 was obsolete the day it arrived....with Sony's turn around rate on bodies you have to think the a9ii is already in the pipeline.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
If I were starting from scratch with Sony I would stick with the 100-400 and the TCs until, as mentioned above, they
issue a 400/4 or 400/4.5.
Too many words. Sorry. Just woke up.
No, thanks for sharing your observations!
It is perhaps a bit of an awkward time for me to decide to spend 10.000,- on a lens and extenders and most likely a body. Simply because things are moving fast at the moment.
Simply put: if Canon made a crop body with a Sony sensor in a mirrorless package, I would buy it with the 400DOII + extenders tomorrow. Because since using the A7RII and seeing where Sony mirrorless is going AF wise, silent shutter wise, IQ wise, I am taken by surprise how difficult I find it to go for a Canon 7DII, which was my original intention. Moreover because of the step back that the sensor will be from my current set-up.
I now shoot the Pentax DA560mm f5.6 on the Pentax KP. When the AF nails it, IQ is no reason to switch, the KP is IQ wise the best 24mp APS-C body that I have used, with FF like low noise and DR. But hopeless tracking, size of the lens (too big for travel) and AF inconsistency have pushed me towards the equivalent 400DOII + ext.
The set-up will have to be allround, so also for dawn and dusk shooting. That's why I searched for the balance of portability and 560mm f5.6 eq. Not any slower.
If Sony made a 400mm f4, I'd go for it with the A7RIII and both extenders and be all one system.
I'll have to exercise some patience. Things will get clear to me I am sure.
