p.17 #1 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
buffalowolff wrote:
Some fast birds this weekend.... the Raptor stole the show for me
Nicely done! The F-22 IMHO is one of the most photogenic jets. I wish I had seen the F-14 Tomcat flying though. I was at the different airshow in another part of New York on the same weekend. Here is a few more from the show on Saturday. Sometimes dark clouds could make it more dramatic than bright blue sky.
p.17 #2 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
kdrk888 wrote:
Nicely done! The F-22 IMHO is one of the most photogenic jets. I wish I had seen the F-14 Tomcat flying though. I was at the different airshow in another part of New York on the same weekend. Here is a few more from the show on Saturday. Sometimes dark clouds could make it more dramatic than bright blue sky.
The only airshow I have around here is the one the Ibis put on when they occasionally fly over . I'll spare you more than one shot . These 2 really flew around on the thermals of an approaching storm . They kept in synch and what fun to watch.
p.17 #3 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
birdied wrote:
More amazing airshow shots !!! Very well done.
The only airshow I have around here is the one the Ibis put on when they occasionally fly over . I'll spare you more than one shot . These 2 really flew around on the thermals of an approaching storm . They kept in synch and what fun to watch.
Thank you Roberta! In case you become interested in going to at least one airshow, Barksdale AFB in your state has an airshow almost every year, usually with top notch lineup.
p.17 #4 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Thanks @kdrk888 . I was debating going to the New York international show instead but it didn't work out. Rochester was good. Much smaller and no F35. The Thunderbirds do a good show but would have loved to see the red arrows
p.17 #7 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
cpe1991 wrote:
There are so many superb bird shots in this thread. Congratulations! What are your thoughts now versus the 100-400mm?
I have both and will keep both. They are for different usage. The 100-400 is very good for compressed landscape, foliage, buildings...It's much lighter and smaller (when zooming all the way out). The 200-600 gives you longer reach and slightly more light compared to the 100-400 + 1.4 TC, AND the 200-600 can take the 1.4 TC and get you to 840mm at F9. Obviously the 200-600 is heavy and bigger. I would not choose one over the other based on the sharpness or AF. They are all good in these aspects.
p.17 #8 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
cpe1991 wrote:
There are so many superb bird shots in this thread. Congratulations! What are your thoughts now versus the 100-400mm?
As a blanket statement, just as good.
200600 longer, heavier, less macro capable, more pack space, much faster to zoom
100400 much shorter, lighter, superb pseudo macro capable, dream for when the pack is small.
IQ on either is top notch.
Build quality is top notch.
Both take TCs 1.4 and 2.0 surprisingly well.
100400 takes the 2.0 a little better in my copies, and can't say how the 200600 approaches BIF since
no opportunity.
Pick your pleasure, really cannot go wrong with either.
p.17 #9 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
MedicineMan404 wrote:
As a blanket statement, just as good.
200600 longer, heavier, less macro capable, more pack space, much faster to zoom
100400 much shorter, lighter, superb pseudo macro capable, dream for when the pack is small.
IQ on either is top notch.
Build quality is top notch.
Both take TCs 1.4 and 2.0 surprisingly well.
100400 takes the 2.0 a little better in my copies, and can't say how the 200600 approaches BIF since
no opportunity.
Pick your pleasure, really cannot go wrong with either.
Thanks for your response. I think the 100-400 will fit better to my personal circumstances of wanting less weight and size and using close ups on hikes.
p.17 #10 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Brian over at The Digital Picture has his test chart shots of the 200-600 up on his lens comparison tool. Looks like it holds up very well in the center against almost any other lens out there, including the 600 GM, but begins to show a little weakness mid-frame and toward the edges.
p.17 #12 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
840 is blowing me away on this lens....still having issues with getting consistently sharp 1200mm shots but I know the glass is up to it because I have some....it is either AF inconsistency or my technique. I put it on a gimbal/monopod and thought maybe my keeper rate increased at 1200mm but not good enough. I've also considered that until FW 5.0 the A9 didn't even support f/13 AF so maybe I'm asking too much out of the AF consistency in AF-C??
Stopping down is helping improve keeper rate of 1200mm shots but not sure if that is just improving the sharpness or the increase in DOF is resulting in more shots having critical focus on the head/eye?
But 1200mm aside, 840mm is top notch, excellent AF consistency, was able to track swallows and still excellent sharpness. The Sony 1.4TC is so tiny that it really adds nothing to length/balance of the setup and very little weight increase. Before the 200-600 I was mostly using my 400DOII and 2xTCIII to get 800mm....but that Canon 2xTCIII really throws off the balance, extends the lens by a lot and is on the heavy side. It was also fairly useless for BIF. I'm pretty sure I will retire the 400DOII now...but I have an odd attachment to that lens so can't bring myself to sell it yet
p.17 #13 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
What do you think about 500PF vs 200-600? I know it's not an apples to apples comparison. But curious. I do have D500 & 500 PF and also have A9. At this moment I'm not planning to get 200-600 especially because of size and weight (family situation). Anyway curious. I know some here have both combos. Did anyone compare them for sharpness and success rate for BIF? Thanks in advance..
p.17 #14 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
kdrk888 wrote:
Nicely done! The F-22 IMHO is one of the most photogenic jets. I wish I had seen the F-14 Tomcat flying though. I was at the different airshow in another part of New York on the same weekend. Here is a few more from the show on Saturday. Sometimes dark clouds could make it more dramatic than bright blue sky.
p.17 #17 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
840 is blowing me away on this lens....still having issues with getting consistently sharp 1200mm shots but I know the glass is up to it because I have some....it is either AF inconsistency or my technique. I put it on a gimbal/monopod and thought maybe my keeper rate increased at 1200mm but not good enough. I've also considered that until FW 5.0 the A9 didn't even support f/13 AF so maybe I'm asking too much out of the AF consistency in AF-C??
Stopping down is helping improve keeper rate of 1200mm shots but not sure if that is just improving the sharpness or the increase in DOF is resulting in more shots having critical focus on the head/eye?
But 1200mm aside, 840mm is top notch, excellent AF consistency, was able to track swallows and still excellent sharpness. The Sony 1.4TC is so tiny that it really adds nothing to length/balance of the setup and very little weight increase. Before the 200-600 I was mostly using my 400DOII and 2xTCIII to get 800mm....but that Canon 2xTCIII really throws off the balance, extends the lens by a lot and is on the heavy side. It was also fairly useless for BIF. I'm pretty sure I will retire the 400DOII now...but I have an odd attachment to that lens so can't bring myself to sell it yet...Show more →
Performance with extenders will change with very higher resolution sensors like on the ARIV. You really start getting into diminishing returns with apertures narrower than about f/5.6. Your DO II might start getting back into its own at f/4 native and f/5.6 with a TC. How does it compare with the 400mm DO II at 560mm?
p.17 #18 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
FotoBuf78 wrote:
That shot of #6 is very nice! Love the sun reflection and dark cloud contrast.
Thank you. I actually deleted these shots because of the dark clouds, glad I recovered them. I was thinking of getting a CPL for the 200-600 to reduce the this type reflection, but for this particular shot, I prefer to have the reflection. I just saved myself $200.
. I'll spare you more than one shot . These 2 really flew around on the thermals of an approaching storm . They kept in synch and what fun to watch.
