p.12 #1 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
milkod2001 wrote:
It's done in post. looks nice though.
Yes, I understand some of the images presented may have backgrounds smoothed through processing, but my comment was more of a general observation formed from viewing the images posted by multiple users.
p.12 #3 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
AGeoJO wrote:
Mitesh,
Any particular image you are referring to or is that more a general observation?
Joshua
Hi Joshua,
It’s more of a general observation, and I realize the quality of the BG rendering depends on a number of factors. I just notice a smoother look as opposed to a “busy” or harsh look. I suppose a good representative sample of what I’m seeing would be Geoff’s hummers and hawk on the previous page. Obviously Geoff knows what he’s doing, but maybe the 11-blade circular aperture and whatever lens coatings Sony uses are contributing factors as well.
p.12 #5 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Did something a little different this morning with Colin F...went to photograph Pacific Chorus Frogs....they were about the size of a thumbnail. I knew the 2-6 wasn't the best tool but brought it along just for a couple shots and to prove it wasn't the right tool This is all you get from the 2-6...I have a lot more frog shots to post from the 100-400/1.4TC (and the 300PF), both of which were much better frog lenses.
p.12 #6 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
Did something a little different this morning with Colin F...went to photograph Pacific Chorus Frogs....they were about the size of a thumbnail. I knew the 2-6 wasn't the best tool but brought it along just for a couple shots and to prove it wasn't the right tool This is all you get from the 2-6...I have a lot more frog shots to post from the 100-400/1.4TC (and the 300PF), both of which were much better frog lenses.
The MDF of the 100-400 does come in handy when one can get close to the subjects and fills the frame more than the 200-600 (or 560mm?). A couple butterfly shots from this morning. Sometimes I had to step back a bit because of the 200-600's MDF. It was hot and humid this morning so I gave up waiting for the hummingbirds.
p.12 #7 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
kdrk888 wrote:
The MDF of the 100-400 does come in handy when one can get close to the subjects and fills the frame more than the 200-600 (or 560mm?). A couple butterfly shots from this morning. Sometimes I had to step back a bit because of the 200-600's MDF. It was hot and humid this morning so I gave up waiting for the hummingbirds.
The frogs weren't easily spooked so I was actually able to shoot at MFD or very close most of the time. That was also advantageous as you had less leaves in the way as you could just push the lens through to where the frog was.
The 200-600 with 1.4 TC was giving me 0.28x and the 100-400/1.4 was giving me 0.52x. Alternatively the 300PF /1.4TC on the D850 was giving me 0.336x but then factoring in the pixels of the D850 vs A9 it was actually 0.47x. The A9 was better to use with WYSIWYG and I did use MF and Focus Peaking for some of the shots which worked well.
I don't usually do much work near the MFD of the 100-400 so I'm not sure if I should keep it just for these occasional semi-macro opportunities or not??
p.12 #8 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
milkod2001 wrote:
It's done in post. looks nice though.
Your absolute statement is false. My images got their OOF rendering from the lens, no softening in post whatsoever. I'm pretty sure they aren't the only ones.
p.12 #10 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
My 200-600 arrives on Thursday. So many wonderful and inspiring images here. Thank you, I'm very excited. Looking at the images, the A9 shines with this lens when things are moving. I'm using the a7r2 and looking at the a7r4 or the a9. Interesting times ahead.
p.12 #12 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Daran wrote:
Your absolute statement is false. My images got their OOF rendering from the lens, no softening in post whatsoever. I'm pretty sure they aren't the only ones.
No worries Daran. I was talking about image posted by Birdied and honestly it doesn't matter if it comes natural like that or with bit help of post. it's great shot anyway
p.12 #13 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Here are my test shots with the a6400 the 200-600 and the 1.4 tele. Autofocus was quite good with this combo and obviously the reach was good as well. I am also quite happy with the sharpness. I also own the 100-400 and if theres a sharpness difference I am not seeing it. The 200-600 is just as sharp. I also did some bif with the first mentioned combo and I am happy to report that even with the TC the 200-600 handles slow moving birds like herons and ospreys easily. DSC06064a by chrisrudl, on Flickr
p.12 #14 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Does that mean the 100-400 w/TC on the A7Riv will be close to 1:1? And with the x2 TC it would be even more of a macro?
Actually, since the ratio is supposed to indicate size vs. sensor size, it really wouldn't different than the A9, but I agree that, when it is cropped, it would be a better macro.
Or, have I got it all wrong 😕?
Now, if we could just get Sony to add a focus bracketing mode!!
arbitrage wrote:
The frogs weren't easily spooked so I was actually able to shoot at MFD or very close most of the time. That was also advantageous as you had less leaves in the way as you could just push the lens through to where the frog was.
The 200-600 with 1.4 TC was giving me 0.28x and the 100-400/1.4 was giving me 0.52x. Alternatively the 300PF /1.4TC on the D850 was giving me 0.336x but then factoring in the pixels of the D850 vs A9 it was actually 0.47x. The A9 was better to use with WYSIWYG and I did use MF and Focus Peaking for some of the shots which worked well.
I don't usually do much work near the MFD of the 100-400 so I'm not sure if I should keep it just for these occasional semi-macro opportunities or not??...Show more →
p.12 #16 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
milkod2001 wrote:
No worries Daran. I was talking about image posted by Birdied and honestly it doesn't matter if it comes natural like that or with bit help of post. it's great shot anyway
I fully acknowledge that I play with my backgrounds in post . Some stage shots before they take them, I tend to do it in post if needed . However, the 200-600 does render nice out of focus for the price point.
p.12 #17 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
milkod2001 wrote:
No worries Daran. I was talking about image posted by Birdied and honestly it doesn't matter if it comes natural like that or with bit help of post. it's great shot anyway
I see. Not sure I see anything in Birdied's shoots suggesting softening in post either.
p.12 #18 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
birdied wrote:
I fully acknowledge that I play with my backgrounds in post . Some stage shots before they take them, I tend to do it in post if needed . However, the 200-600 does render nice out of focus for the price point.
So, did you need to soften the background in these shots?
p.12 #19 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Daran wrote:
So, did you need to soften the background in these shots?
In one of the shots, the background was actually the brick wall of my home. It was rendered nicely by the lens, but not what I wanted in the shot. So did some blur , cloned out some distractions, yes.
I do not change the subject or the flower it is feeding on. I try to bring attention to them .
I know some do not like doing this and that is okay, to each his own .
p.12 #20 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Trying to follow Douglas' lead on the Swallowtails, sadly I don't have the light.
Using the 2.0 on the 200-600 for 1036mm, Handheld at 1/500 (thank the gods for OSS) ISO 1600.
No denoising, no sharpening. Only resized to 1600 wide for the forum.
This is all you get from the 2-6...I have a lot more frog shots to post from the 100-400/1.4TC (and the 300PF), both of which were much better frog lenses.
