Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.21 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 G OSS ($1,998) | |
shadow9d9 wrote:
Why don't you consider it virtually the same? Close enough to me. One might be better, as we will see in reviews, but a 40mm difference and 2/3 of a stop isn't much. And weight/size matters too. If I need to switch, I will. It is just weird to have to trade monetarily in a downwards direction for something better. For similar reasons, I feel bad for Sony users who spent $10k on the 400 2.8 if they really would have preferred the new 600 f4.
No, for wildlife the a7riii is not good enough imo. It is why I bought the A9 afterwards. The autofocus is lacking, the tracking is lacking, and it has blackout. The a9 is completely silent and shutter shake free, great tracking, 20fps and blackout free. I would never shoot with the a7riii for birds. I've done it. I don't like it. It would work for landscapes, but for me at least, I am talking about birds in flight.
With the way Sony has gone about releasing lenses, I honestly don't see a 500 PF competitor in the future. Fingers crossed though.
It is funny, I have spent the past 2 days(I am on the opposite side of the world right now, so the news broke midday for me), what I would do with the 600 f4. I've gone birding with my friend who uses the d850 and one of the Nikon 600 F4s. It is just a monster and is always carried with the additional weight of a tripod. When something comes at an odd angle, there is just no way to adjust. It is cumbersome to say the least, even with a high end and smooth moving tripod. I could just move, crouch, etc, and he couldn't. Also, by the time he put down the tripod and moved it around, some shots were gone. It just goes against my personal style to give up mobility. I mean, I get that it works for some people, my best friend included, but I still have to shake my head(As I am sure people do when they read my posts!)....Show more →
As to why I don't think 2/3rds of a stop is the same, it is the same reason that I don't think and f/1.8 lens is the same as an f/1.4 lens. That is 2/3rds of a stop too. An f/1.4 lens is a lot bigger than most f/1.8 counterpart lenses as well. Two thirds of a stop gets you faster shutter speeds when it is needed or let's you keep the ISO lower. And in my experience 2/3rds of a stop is nothing to sneeze at in real practical shooting. Sure if you shoot in bright light all the time, it may not matter but near dusk or dawn that 2/3rds of a stop really comes in handy when you are pushing the limits of the system.
You may want a stacked BSI APS-C camera, but right now such a sensor does not exist as far as we know. If you are Sony do you want to develop a 24MP APS-C stacked BSI sensor or a 42MP FF 35mm stacked BSI sensor. If anything the latter sensor may be easier to make because Sony doesn't even have a 24MP APS-C BSI (non-stacked) sensor and they have a 42MP FF 35mm BSI sensor. I think the FF sensor will make them a lot more money too. I don't think we are going to see the development of high end APS-C sensors, but I could totally be wrong. As pixel density on FF cameras gets close to APS-C pixel density there is less and less pulling people to APS-C. Note Canon's APS-C mirrorless cameras don't even share the same mount as their FF 35mm cameras and they are definitely lower end. Nikon doesn't even have a mirrorless APS-C camera, and Sony hasn't even made a BSI for their APS-C camera. Put this together with decreasing sales of APS-C cameras to the phone market and APS-C does not have a bright future with the big three (although it does have a firm place with Fuji).
|
