Michael Everet wrote:
Who are These Guys? (Birds)
The white ones look like a White Ibis, but the color of the beak seems wrong. Don't know about the black one in no. 3 or the first two. All in Tallahassee Florida.
The white bird is a Snowy Egret in breeding plumage. The dark bird I believe is a Glossy Ibis.
A few recent birds - just to show I do sometimes take photographs. Nothing exciting photographically (haven't had much luck lately - or haven't made much luck) but the birds are beauties!
Michael Everet wrote:
Thank you, Rich. I never thought of the Glossy Ibis because we don't we many in Tallahassee, even though it is on the migration route (barely)
Quick question for anyone using adapted glass, specifically the Canon 800mm/5.6 or the Canon 600mm/4 v2 or v3: how do you find the autofocus speed and accuracy on your Sony body? Follow-up: if you had your choice of one of those 3 lenses, which would you choose if the use case is small birds, some hiking but not a ton with the lens (I have the GM 100-400 for that), and the occasional large mammal such as bison, elk, mountain sheep, etc? Is the 600mm v3 worth the extra cost for the drop in weight? I've read through this thread and a similar one on the Canon forum, and I'm in the market for one of these and would love to know your thoughts using one of these on a Sony body. I have an a9 and an a7iii.
StonePhotog wrote:
Quick question for anyone using adapted glass, specifically the Canon 800mm/5.6 or the Canon 600mm/4 v2 or v3: how do you find the autofocus speed and accuracy on your Sony body? Follow-up: if you had your choice of one of those 3 lenses, which would you choose if the use case is small birds, some hiking but not a ton with the lens (I have the GM 100-400 for that), and the occasional large mammal such as bison, elk, mountain sheep, etc? Is the 600mm v3 worth the extra cost for the drop in weight? I've read through this thread and a similar one on the Canon forum, and I'm in the market for one of these and would love to know your thoughts using one of these on a Sony body. I have an a9 and an a7iii.
I've never used the 800L. I've used the 600II on my A9 and I've used the 600III for a few hours on my A9. I currently adapt the 400DOII to my A9. I sold my 600II. The 600III was borrowed for those hours.
As far as lens choice I would personally not consider getting the 800L. The 600II and III have been shown to equal it in IQ with the 1.4TCs on them at 840. So no point giving up the 600/4 end of things for your mammals and lower light stuff. Also 600s have closer MFD. If you do the majority of your photography handheld then surely the 600III is worth it if you can stomach the price. But if you do a lot with tripod and/or monopod then I would get a used 600II...they are now selling for great prices (high 6s, low 7s). A year ago they were selling for $9K easy.
The updates to A9 and MC-11 over the past year have improved AF performance a lot. I sold my 600II before some of the biggest improvements, I tested the 600III before FW 5.0 and before some of the latest MC-11 updates.
I would say AF accuracy is amazing....if the camera starts focusing on your subject, accuracy is every bit as good as the native 100-400GM. Speed of AF is fairly good also but not as fast as the GM lens. The biggest issue is sometimes it won't move focus from a very far to very near target but again, that is improving all the time. Now with my 400DOII bare lens the AF is pretty close to the 100-400GM. But I usually use the 400DOII/2xTC and that combo still has instances where it just won't drive to where I want fast enough and I miss a shot. But if I'm already focused close to the subject distance than AF locks fast and accuracy/consistency is excellent.
The 400DOII always worked a little better than my 600II so I assume it still works a little better than the 600II/III. But the day I tried the 600III, I was able to get the shots I wanted of perched birds and ducks. I didn't try BIF. I have done some BIF with the 400DOII and it works but AF doesn't always keep up as good as the 100-400GM so I still don't do my BIF work with the adapted lens.
However, if 800mm is enough and you don't need 1200mm from a 600/2x I would spend the 600III type money on the 400GM. People have shown excellent results up to 800mm with that lens.
This mom and her baby hung out in the marina and I spent about 45 minutes watching them and mom watching me at times. I should have had my 16-35 at times as the 100-400 was way too tight when they swam just a few feet from me as I sat on the sea wall just above them. It was pretty fantastic.
I've never used the 800L. I've used the 600II on my A9 and I've used the 600III for a few hours on my A9. I currently adapt the 400DOII to my A9. I sold my 600II. The 600III was borrowed for those hours.
As far as lens choice I would personally not consider getting the 800L. The 600II and III have been shown to equal it in IQ with the 1.4TCs on them at 840. So no point giving up the 600/4 end of things for your mammals and lower light stuff. Also 600s have closer MFD. If you do the majority of your photography handheld then surely the 600III is worth it if you can stomach the price. But if you do a lot with tripod and/or monopod then I would get a used 600II...they are now selling for great prices (high 6s, low 7s). A year ago they were selling for $9K easy.
The updates to A9 and MC-11 over the past year have improved AF performance a lot. I sold my 600II before some of the biggest improvements, I tested the 600III before FW 5.0 and before some of the latest MC-11 updates.
I would say AF accuracy is amazing....if the camera starts focusing on your subject, accuracy is every bit as good as the native 100-400GM. Speed of AF is fairly good also but not as fast as the GM lens. The biggest issue is sometimes it won't move focus from a very far to very near target but again, that is improving all the time. Now with my 400DOII bare lens the AF is pretty close to the 100-400GM. But I usually use the 400DOII/2xTC and that combo still has instances where it just won't drive to where I want fast enough and I miss a shot. But if I'm already focused close to the subject distance than AF locks fast and accuracy/consistency is excellent.
The 400DOII always worked a little better than my 600II so I assume it still works a little better than the 600II/III. But the day I tried the 600III, I was able to get the shots I wanted of perched birds and ducks. I didn't try BIF. I have done some BIF with the 400DOII and it works but AF doesn't always keep up as good as the 100-400GM so I still don't do my BIF work with the adapted lens.
However, if 800mm is enough and you don't need 1200mm from a 600/2x I would spend the 600III type money on the 400GM. People have shown excellent results up to 800mm with that lens....Show more →
I really appreciate your thorough reply, @arbitrage, thanks.
Regarding your final point, if I were to decide to plunk down $12k for a lens it would be for the 600mm v3, just so I could have the option of getting to 1200mm in a relatively light kit. However, for just over half the price of the v3, the 600mm v2 is very tempting. I've read that optically they are very similar and the main difference is obviously the weight and how the new lens balances (more weight near the mount). Either way, put me in the camp of those people wanting a 600/4 GM in the near future.
Photo cross posted in the Sony FE image thread and taken at 0813 AM.
Looking at a Male Cattle Egret in Breeding Plumage
Horizontal image turned into a Vertical and cropped; tripod mounted Sony 100-400mm f4-f5.6 GM set to 288mm and A7rIII.
ISO 100, f5.6, 1/125 second
Exposure corrected +0.24 Stops
May 11, 2019
At Gatorland, Orlando or Kissimmee, FL
I took a walk today up the Deschutes River in Bend Oregon and found what I was looking for, Williamson's Sapsucker and a surprise (not really , it is in their calving area)...a very pregnant cow elk in amonst the herd
Nothing exciting photographically (haven't had much luck lately - or haven't made much luck) but the birds are beauties! 
