Sad to see that long standing nest collapsed. That was my backup nest. However, I had some recent pictures sent to me of my main nest and it looks like it wasn't used in the past couple years either (they didn't lay eggs the last year I lived there). All good things come to an end, I guess I moved away at the right time
p.28 #6 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
Sad to see that long standing nest collapsed. That was my backup nest. However, I had some recent pictures sent to me of my main nest and it looks like it wasn't used in the past couple years either (they didn't lay eggs the last year I lived there). All good things come to an end, I guess I moved away at the right time
p.28 #7 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Photo cross posted in the Sony FE Image Thread and taken at 6:23 PM.
Looking at Milk Weed and grasses in Magic Hour in late afternoon light. Early Autumn Color change can be seen behind the Milk Weed and grasses.
Very slightly cropped, tripod mounted FE 200-600mm G set to 600mm and A7rIII, silent shutter.
ISO 400, f11, 1/30 second
Exposure corrected -0.12 Stops
September 27, 2019
At the top of the Trexler Nature Preserve, Schnecksville, PA.
p.28 #13 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Received my copy back in August just started testing it out these past few days here are a few from this afternoon at our place in South Texas. I'm impressed picking up the a7III next week and hopefully also pairing it up with the a6600 when it becomes available.
p.28 #16 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
In order to forget my A9II sorrows, I went out and shot some birds.....
There's woes at other brands also, as you may know...
An honest question: since you have used both: I am starting to think that maybe I should give the 200-600G a chance. I went from the Pentax DA560 on a Sony sensor to the Canon 400DOII on a Canon sensor, and I enjoy the new set-up for BIF and overall agile shooting. But one thing did not turn out as hoped: shooting wading birds in bright daylight over longer distances. The Pentax DA560 trumps the 400DOII there, and I realize that the 400DOII with its diffractive optics cannot handle bright light at certain angles well, and distant subjects get a strange rendering, diffuse and bereft of clarity and sharpness.
Now since I very much enjoy the 400DOII with converters for everything else, I may want to add an affordable lens to use over larger distances in mostly (bright) daylight. The Sony 200-600G + 1.4TC on eg. a Sony A6400 would certainly give me the distance, but does it have the clarity and contrast and sharpness needed to clearly render far off subjects bathed in bright light? I must say from samples here, the lens looks very good, but people only tend to post their best images....
p.28 #17 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
ChrisMak wrote:
There's woes at other brands also, as you may know...
An honest question: since you have used both: I am starting to think that maybe I should give the 200-600G a chance. I went from the Pentax DA560 on a Sony sensor to the Canon 400DOII on a Canon sensor, and I enjoy the new set-up for BIF and overall agile shooting. But one thing did not turn out as hoped: shooting wading birds in bright daylight over longer distances. The Pentax DA560 trumps the 400DOII there, and I realize that the 400DOII with its diffractive optics cannot handle bright light at certain angles well, and distant subjects get a strange rendering, diffuse and bereft of clarity and sharpness.
Now since I very much enjoy the 400DOII with converters for everything else, I may want to add an affordable lens to use over larger distances in mostly (bright) daylight. The Sony 200-600G + 1.4TC on eg. a Sony A6400 would certainly give me the distance, but does it have the clarity and contrast and sharpness needed to clearly render far off subjects bathed in bright light? I must say from samples here, the lens looks very good, but people only tend to post their best images.......Show more →
It is difficult for me to answer that as I haven't seen the affect you are mentioning with the 400DOII at longer distances and bright light. Maybe I haven't really shot the DOII in those conditions. Could you post a couple examples of what you are seeing?
If you are using the 7D2 when seeing these results then I think I can relate because the 7D2 had issues rendering clarity and sharpness at longer distances no matter what lens I threw on it (from my 600II to 200-400/4 to 300II). If you are also seeing this on the A7R2 (?) you have then I'm not really sure.
The 200-600 comes very close in IQ to the 400DOII at similar focal lengths. Close enough that I only noticed the difference when I did some very controlled tests in the backyard. I've never used an A6400 or any pixel dense Sony sensor so I'm not sure how pixel dense Sony sensors behave (I'll have my A7RIV in a couple days to see how that goes). Over the years, despite my love of pixels, I've always been much happier with the rendering from lower MP FF sensors like 1DX, 1DX2, 5D4, A9 vs higher density APS-C or FF sensors (7D2, 5DSR, 80D). The D500/D850 have been the best higher density sensors but even then I don't love the clarity like I do from the lower MP FF sensors.
p.28 #18 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Thanks,
I am not at home this weekend, but will post some samples next week that show the issue, as well as shots that don't, just to show that I don't have a faulty lens. It also shows on the A7RII. When bright overhead light (sun high up), hits at a steep angle from the front, so facing the sun, something strange seems to happen in the 400DOII optics, resulting in a diffuse image with a typical glow, and a loss of a well defined plane of focus.
Since I was used to a lens based on a telescope design, Pentax DA560, that you could throw any kind of harsh, bright light at, and still end up with a sharp 100% crop, this loss of performance with the 400DOII took me by surprise.
Typically you don't shoot in such light, but I do when visiting the Frysian isles when bird migration is on.
Your remarks about lower density FF cameras rings a bell from what I see posted. The EOS-R b.t.w. also looks great from what I see. The 7DII fits my BIF wishes though.
arbitrage wrote:
It is difficult for me to answer that as I haven't seen the affect you are mentioning with the 400DOII at longer distances and bright light. Maybe I haven't really shot the DOII in those conditions. Could you post a couple examples of what you are seeing?
If you are using the 7D2 when seeing these results then I think I can relate because the 7D2 had issues rendering clarity and sharpness at longer distances no matter what lens I threw on it (from my 600II to 200-400/4 to 300II). If you are also seeing this on the A7R2 (?) you have then I'm not really sure.
The 200-600 comes very close in IQ to the 400DOII at similar focal lengths. Close enough that I only noticed the difference when I did some very controlled tests in the backyard. I've never used an A6400 or any pixel dense Sony sensor so I'm not sure how pixel dense Sony sensors behave (I'll have my A7RIV in a couple days to see how that goes). Over the years, despite my love of pixels, I've always been much happier with the rendering from lower MP FF sensors like 1DX, 1DX2, 5D4, A9 vs higher density APS-C or FF sensors (7D2, 5DSR, 80D). The D500/D850 have been the best higher density sensors but even then I don't love the clarity like I do from the lower MP FF sensors....Show more →
p.28 #20 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Not an image -from- the 200-600mm, but an image -of- the lens.
A local video company I work with needed a long lens for shooting speakers at an event being held in a very large room. I suggested they try my 200-600mm. It looks pretty strange mounted on the FS-7 camera, but did a fabulous job. (sorry for the crappy iPhone shot - it was very dark.)
The 200-600mm as a video lens, complete with follow-focus and zoom knobs.
Different eagle.
