p.38 #2 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
I have been experiencing some strange bokeh with this lens and I was hoping you guys could tell me if I'm doing something wrong. In some of my photos the bokeh seems to "double" or create a "ghost" rather than produce a blur. A few cropped examples:
https://i.imgur.com/JvxhTu2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/8cy409C.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HYRHqbO.jpg
The lens is clean, no filters, I've tried with and without OSS and IBIS on, and with both AF and MF. It seems to be something the lens just does. Is this something it just does? Or is there some other setting I need to try?
Otherwise the lens seems to function normally, very sharp, OSS smooth, etc.
p.38 #3 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Dangle, I don't have a good feeling about your lens. That first shot, well I can't think of any normal simple answer for that one. If still in the return period I'd say exchange. But some of the more knowledgeable members here might have, hopefully, a simple fix.
p.38 #5 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Danglesnort wrote:
I have been experiencing some strange bokeh with this lens and I was hoping you guys could tell me if I'm doing something wrong. In some of my photos the bokeh seems to "double" or create a "ghost" rather than produce a blur. A few cropped examples:
https://i.imgur.com/JvxhTu2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/8cy409C.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HYRHqbO.jpg
The lens is clean, no filters, I've tried with and without OSS and IBIS on, and with both AF and MF. It seems to be something the lens just does. Is this something it just does? Or is there some other setting I need to try?
Otherwise the lens seems to function normally, very sharp, OSS smooth, etc.
That looks pretty odd to me...I can't recall seeing anything like that from my 200-600 or any lens I've owned over the years. I'm not sure what is causing that (is it just shooting conditions?). Hopefully someone else with better optics knowledge chimes in. But if you are able to return it, I'd seriously consider that. I'd also consider starting a separate thread on this so more knowledgeable members might see it and give you advice.
p.38 #6 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
To those of you shooting the 200-600 with and without 1.4X TC on both A9 and on A7R IV... Are you finding that A9 images look sharper than the A7R IV images? My A7R IV images especially with any movement aren't quite what I would expect. Good, but not as nice looking as A9 images posted here.
Is the consensus of users with both bodies that this lens needs an A9?
p.38 #7 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Have you tried with EFCS on and off?
Danglesnort wrote:
I have been experiencing some strange bokeh with this lens and I was hoping you guys could tell me if I'm doing something wrong. In some of my photos the bokeh seems to "double" or create a "ghost" rather than produce a blur. A few cropped examples:
https://i.imgur.com/JvxhTu2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/8cy409C.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HYRHqbO.jpg
The lens is clean, no filters, I've tried with and without OSS and IBIS on, and with both AF and MF. It seems to be something the lens just does. Is this something it just does? Or is there some other setting I need to try?
Otherwise the lens seems to function normally, very sharp, OSS smooth, etc.
p.38 #8 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
billsnature wrote:
To those of you shooting the 200-600 with and without 1.4X TC on both A9 and on A7R IV... Are you finding that A9 images look sharper than the A7R IV images? My A7R IV images especially with any movement aren't quite what I would expect. Good, but not as nice looking as A9 images posted here.
Is the consensus of users with both bodies that this lens needs an A9?
I could be completely wrong here, but I keep thinking that perhaps 24 MP images will look sharper than 61MP images when shooting handheld (depending on how steady your hand is). Have you tried shooting a static subject with the 200-600 with both cameras set on a tripod to see if the sharpness discrepency goes away?
p.38 #9 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
saxguy wrote:
I could be completely wrong here, but I keep thinking that perhaps 24 MP images will look sharper than 61MP images when shooting handheld (depending on how steady your hand is). Have you tried shooting a static subject with the 200-600 with both cameras set on a tripod to see if the sharpness discrepency goes away?
I am shooting off tripod with Wimberly gimbal head with 1/2000 to 1/2500 shutter speed. Camera/lens does fine on subjects near minimum focus distance like butterflies and humming birds, but images of bald eagle in flight look to be in focus, but seems less sharp than 20MP Canon files from prior years.
Part of that may be zoom vs prime, part of that may be A7R IV is close but not quite perfect focus tracking. I didn't expect A7R IV to equal A9, but I did expect it to equal 1Dx or 1DxII. Near min focus distance it does equal or better old Canon equipment. At longer distance.. not looking great, but I want input from others with both cameras and maybe both 600mm and 200-600mm
p.38 #10 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
' but I did expect it to equal 1Dx or 1DxII' I never would have expected it to be 1DXii level in this discussion....same as a comparison with the a9. The a9 and the 1DXii are both pixel starved urchins compared to the Riv, so starved they are will to do anything to help milk an image out of even shots taken with not enough shutter or aperture. The Riv is so pixel wealthy it is demanding in that we pay homage to it with sacrifices (shutter speed more than we'd want) (aperture smaller than we'd want).
No to me the 1DX, ii, iii to be are speed demons like the a9. Not cameras I'd compare to the Riv, just two different genres. Why not compare the 5Ds, 5Dsr, the D850. We all add up numbers in our own way and that's the way that makes sense to me.
Or, wait!! You could compare it to the a6400/6500/6100/6600.............
p.38 #11 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
billsnature wrote:
To those of you shooting the 200-600 with and without 1.4X TC on both A9 and on A7R IV... Are you finding that A9 images look sharper than the A7R IV images? My A7R IV images especially with any movement aren't quite what I would expect. Good, but not as nice looking as A9 images posted here.
Is the consensus of users with both bodies that this lens needs an A9?
Nope. The a9 images have less noise and one would need to up/downsample to make any conclusions. I have some pretty sharp images right OOC. Here's one...
p.38 #12 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
Danglesnort wrote:
I have been experiencing some strange bokeh with this lens and I was hoping you guys could tell me if I'm doing something wrong. In some of my photos the bokeh seems to "double" or create a "ghost" rather than produce a blur. A few cropped examples:
https://i.imgur.com/JvxhTu2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/8cy409C.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HYRHqbO.jpg
The lens is clean, no filters, I've tried with and without OSS and IBIS on, and with both AF and MF. It seems to be something the lens just does. Is this something it just does? Or is there some other setting I need to try?
Otherwise the lens seems to function normally, very sharp, OSS smooth, etc.
p.38 #13 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
MedicineMan404 wrote:
' but I did expect it to equal 1Dx or 1DxII' I never would have expected it to be 1DXii level in this discussion....same as a comparison with the a9. The a9 and the 1DXii are both pixel starved urchins compared to the Riv, so starved they are will to do anything to help milk an image out of even shots taken with not enough shutter or aperture. The Riv is so pixel wealthy it is demanding in that we pay homage to it with sacrifices (shutter speed more than we'd want) (aperture smaller than we'd want).
No to me the 1DX, ii, iii to be are speed demons like the a9. Not cameras I'd compare to the Riv, just two different genres. Why not compare the 5Ds, 5Dsr, the D850. We all add up numbers in our own way and that's the way that makes sense to me.
Or, wait!! You could compare it to the a6400/6500/6100/6600................Show more →
Fair enough.. if you want that comparison... Images do not seem as sharp as those I was getting from the 5Dsr when I owned one or even those from the 5D IV which is not a pixel queen or speed merchant.
My concern is that A7R IV may be "pixel wealthy" and AF foolish at this point in its firmware development. I have never owned a D850 or an A9, but I probably will end up buying one of the two in the near future unless I can figure out how to make the A7R IV sing like I hoped it would. I really hoped the A7R IV with 200-600 or the 36MP A9II (that never happened) would be ideal set up over D850 and 500mmPF. At this point not so sure since 24MP seems light and 60MP is challenged. That is what I was hoping to learn from this thread. Do you find that you like your A9 images better than your A7R IV images?
p.38 #14 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
billsnature wrote:
To those of you shooting the 200-600 with and without 1.4X TC on both A9 and on A7R IV... Are you finding that A9 images look sharper than the A7R IV images? My A7R IV images especially with any movement aren't quite what I would expect. Good, but not as nice looking as A9 images posted here.
Is the consensus of users with both bodies that this lens needs an A9?
The A7RIV is surely sharper when it hits. But it has so many tiny misses that for the most part my A9 images do look better and sharper, more fine edge detail because the focus actually works consistently. I'm much, much happier with my A9 images over my R4 images. I don't think I've hit the "X" key in LR while culling so many times since my 7D2 days
I would almost say that high-MP cameras are just not my forte as I could never get great results out of 7D2 or 5DSR either on a consistent nature and always preferred my 1DX, 1DXII and 5D4 images despite being pixel starved. However, the D850 and D500 bucked that high-MP trend as I had no issues getting great shots in all conditions without raising my SS and without stopping down just like I do on the ~20MP bodies. So I think the AF is more of the culprit than the MPs.
p.38 #15 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
I had the same problem with my 1st lens. Later realized that it was totally faulty- tested vs 100-400mm Sony. Exchanged within the 30 days.
2nd lens is perfect.
Danglesnort wrote:
I have been experiencing some strange bokeh with this lens and I was hoping you guys could tell me if I'm doing something wrong. In some of my photos the bokeh seems to "double" or create a "ghost" rather than produce a blur. A few cropped examples:
https://i.imgur.com/JvxhTu2.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/8cy409C.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/HYRHqbO.jpg
The lens is clean, no filters, I've tried with and without OSS and IBIS on, and with both AF and MF. It seems to be something the lens just does. Is this something it just does? Or is there some other setting I need to try?
Otherwise the lens seems to function normally, very sharp, OSS smooth, etc.
p.38 #18 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
More Bittern vs Bullfrog...
Great series Geoff.
I've imaged one Bittern at Merritt Island so I know their size. That bullfrog is a tanker!
Surely not many of those would make a hearty meal.
p.38 #19 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
arbitrage wrote:
The A7RIV is surely sharper when it hits. But it has so many tiny misses that for the most part my A9 images do look better and sharper, more fine edge detail because the focus actually works consistently. I'm much, much happier with my A9 images over my R4 images. I don't think I've hit the "X" key in LR while culling so many times since my 7D2 days
I would almost say that high-MP cameras are just not my forte as I could never get great results out of 7D2 or 5DSR either on a consistent nature and always preferred my 1DX, 1DXII and 5D4 images despite being pixel starved. However, the D850 and D500 bucked that high-MP trend as I had no issues getting great shots in all conditions without raising my SS and without stopping down just like I do on the ~20MP bodies. So I think the AF is more of the culprit than the MPs....Show more →
Geoff, did you ever say/can quantify the difference in FF vs. cropper on the hit rate for the Riv? If so I missed it. I'm thinking that cropper will have the advantage because of more complete sensor coverage....but here in cloudland few opportunities for BIF. I'll get to try in Fla. February
p.38 #20 · Sony FE 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G Image Thread
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Geoff, did you ever say/can quantify the difference in FF vs. cropper on the hit rate for the Riv? If so I missed it. I'm thinking that cropper will have the advantage because of more complete sensor coverage....but here in cloudland few opportunities for BIF. I'll get to try in Fla. February
I really don't think there is any difference as nothing actually changes with the AF system. The AF points cover the same area of a subject no matter if one is in crop mode or not. The only thing I could think of that might favour the crop mode in a given situation is the magnified view in the EVF may allow one to more precisely position a Flex Spot point on the intended eye of the subject.
