trstahly wrote:
Thanks but that is 2 lbs and 9 x 18 x 8" I want something much smaller and lighter I just ordered one of these the lens is only 4.5 x 12.6"
Think Tank Photo 150 V3.0
Material Exterior: DWR and polyurethane coating, 600D polyester, 300D diamond weave polyester, high-density shock cord, nylon webbing, rubberized laminate, 3-ply bonded nylon thread
Interior: 200D polyester, polyurethane-coated nylon rain cover, closed-cell foam, 3-ply bonded nylon thread
Type of Closure Zipper
Carrying/Transport Options Attaches to optional belt or backpack
Removable shoulder strap
Grab handle
Internal Dimensions (WxHxD) 5.5 x 12.7 x 5.6" / 14 x 32.3 x 14.2 cm
Exterior Dimensions (WxHxD) 5.8 x 13.4 x 5.9" / 14.7 x 34 x 15 cm
Weight 12.8 oz / 362.9 g
I don't think that there would be anything made that is much smaller in length that will fit the lens and the camera attached. The lens with the camera attached is 15". Additionally, this is a backpack so it has the backpack shoulder straps and a minimal waist belt. It can be accessed from either right against your body or from the top. Also the weight includes the extra dividers. My backpack weighs about 1 pound 13 oz including the 1.4 oz rain cover so that would be about 1 pound 11.6 oz without the rain cover.
I don't think that there would be anything made that is much smaller in length that will fit the lens and the camera attached. The lens with the camera attached is 15". Additionally, this is a backpack so it has the backpack shoulder straps and a minimal waist belt. It can be accessed from either right against your body or from the top. Also the weight includes the extra dividers. My backpack weighs about 1 pound 13 oz including the 1.4 oz rain cover so that would be about 1 pound 11.6 oz without the rain cover.
Rich
This is for carrying the lens only on a pd slide strap on my left side while I have a 400 GM or 600 GM on a monopod or tripod on my right shoulder with legs extended. Just a means to having a shorter zoom or BIF lens with me but not naked so it can get dinged up.
I already have a Think Tank Glass Limo if I want something like what you are talking about still has the tags on it.
What I ordered is perfect I may sew some D rings in it for the fight balance point so it hangs right at an angle like I want.
trstahly wrote:
Thanks but that is 2 lbs and 9 x 18 x 8" I want something much smaller and lighter I just ordered one of these the lens is only 4.5 x 12.6"
Think Tank Photo 150 V3.0
Material Exterior: DWR and polyurethane coating, 600D polyester, 300D diamond weave polyester, high-density shock cord, nylon webbing, rubberized laminate, 3-ply bonded nylon thread
Interior: 200D polyester, polyurethane-coated nylon rain cover, closed-cell foam, 3-ply bonded nylon thread
Type of Closure Zipper
Carrying/Transport Options Attaches to optional belt or backpack
Removable shoulder strap
Grab handle
Internal Dimensions (WxHxD) 5.5 x 12.7 x 5.6" / 14 x 32.3 x 14.2 cm
Exterior Dimensions (WxHxD) 5.8 x 13.4 x 5.9" / 14.7 x 34 x 15 cm
Weight 12.8 oz / 362.9 g
I was just about to link you that bag and then saw this post. Let us know how it works out...maybe in the 200-600 thread...we seem to have diverted this 600GM thread a long ways from nice photos
In addition to the other suggestions, I think you said you were using HI+ and, if I remember correctly, in this mode the camera does not change focus after the first shot. With the thin DOF, even slight movement of the bird or the camera could throw off the focus. Also, if the first shot is not in perfect focus, the rest won't be, either.
(Hopefully, I'm not thinking of one of the other cameras 🥺 ).
Kim
trstahly wrote:
I uploaded another anhinga I just did on my 5k iMac rather than my MacBook Pro and it is sharper now that I can see what I am doing.
I don't understand with MF and cable release. Can you elaborate do you imply that cable release has something to do with something and if so what it is. I have the newer Sony remote but sometimes it is quirky on pushing half down for AF I was shooting some of these with AF-C and some with MF now that I think about it more with AF-C than manual but I shot so many different birds I cannot remember which was which and not sure if EXIF shows any of that or not.
Your opinion on electronic shutter vs mechanical on the A7RIII and IV and also A9. I use silent shutter on landscape all the time and a lot of times for birds.
I do think the OSS was a factor and the boards at the wetlands are always an issue that is why I bought a RRS TVC44 for less vibration but have not sent it down for the winter yet. I am also lugging a 5lb bag of shot on a PD Slide on my left side it definitely helps and I should consider 7.5 to 10lbs I have 30lbs for my balcony shots. I had it on a long slide strap almost touching the ground so I had to let it set to stop from swaying and need to hook it up higher and leave the strap on for walking.
As far as focus do you like selective spot small? Or recommend a different setting. What apertures do yo like for shots like this?
kimknapp wrote:
In addition to the other suggestions, I think you said you were using HI+ and, if I remember correctly, in this mode the camera does not change focus after the first shot. With the thin DOF, even slight movement of the bird or the camera could throw off the focus. Also, if the first shot is not in perfect focus, the rest won't be, either.
(Hopefully, I'm not thinking of one of the other cameras 🥺 ).
Kim
I need to play around like I did when I first got the 100-400 GM as I have told others long lenses have a learning curve but it is very satisfying when you get it right. Funny I did really well last winter and spring adapting the Canon 500 F4 and 600F4 both series II with 1.4xextenders.
I got some good shots the other day just not stunning or what I am after. I think it was the wind and shutter speeds and not using OSS personally. I am going to use OSS, unless you are on concrete with no vehicles near by reaching out to 600 to 1200mm I can't see how having it turned on is going to do anything but help and certainly not hurt.
arbitrage wrote:
For interest sake, Colin spent just a couple hours shooting the A9/200-600 and decided to dump his top notch Nikon gear...if that doesn't say something about the Sony system, I don't know what does.
Yes, it's all very interesting. I'm not one to flip around on systems, I would prefer to stick with one, as I was with Canon for several years. But the D850 forced me to abandon Canon (they were just dragging their heels, resting on their laurels and holding back), and now that Sony has come out with a lens that will work for me, they have forced me to abandon Nikon.
Weighing up all aspects of my Nikon kit and the Sony, there were just too many things where the Sony was superior, and I had decided to do the switch even before using the a9 & 200-600 last weekend, but that experience sealed the deal. The AF is jaw-dropping; 20 FPS (whereas a person has to spend $1000.00 on the D850 to bring it up from 7 FPS to 9); smaller; lighter; silent shooting is huge - I was scaring away the birds with the D850; and one of the big things was: I like to get as low as possible when shooting birds in the water, and instead of having to use a pan-pod, angle-finder and knee pads with a larger Canikon big prime (which still put the camera about 8-10" above the ground), with the Sony I was able to flip out the rear screen while hand-holding the bottom of the lens, and be 1/2" above the ground for an even lower, magical perspective, and easily see & shoot the birds.
I've never liked the size & square shape of the Sonys, and the EVFs are horrible, but now we get news of the upcoming a9II, and how much of a beast it is going to be, with the better ergo's of the a7RIV, so that's it, I'm all in. Hopefully they will improve on its EVF.
The D850 and grip has already sold, and now I'm trying to find a new home for the like-new 500 f/4E and a couple of smaller lenses. When the new Sony kit arrives, I will also be able to sell my old Canon 7DII and 100-400II which I kept for use in the kayak. I'll be able to have one body and one lens. (Oh wait, that 600 f/4 Sony is keeping me awake at night - ).
Colin F wrote:
Yes, it's all very interesting. I'm not one to flip around on systems, I would prefer to stick with one, as I was with Canon for several years. But the D850 forced me to abandon Canon (they were just dragging their heels), and now that Sony has come out with a lens that will work for me, they have forced me to abandon Nikon.
Weighing up all aspects of my Nikon kit and the Sony, there were just too many things where the Sony was superior, and I had decided to do the switch even before using the a9 & 200-600 last weekend, but that experience sealed the deal. The AF is jaw-dropping; 20 FPS (whereas a person has to spend $1000.00 on the D850 to bring it up from 7 FPS to 9); smaller; lighter; silent shooting is huge - I was scaring away the birds with the D850; and one of the big things was: I like to get as low as possible when shooting birds in the water, and instead of having to use a pan-pod, angle-finder and knee pads with a larger Canikon big prime (which still put the camera about 8-10" above the ground), with the Sony I was able to flip out the rear screen while hand-holding the bottom of the lens, and be 1/2" above the ground for an even lower, magical perspective, and easily see & shoot the birds.
I've never liked the size & square shape of the Sonys, and the EVFs are horrible, but now we get news of the upcoming a9II, and how much of a beast it is going to be, withe the better ergo's of the a7RIV, so that's it, I'm all in. Hopefully they will improve on its EFV.
The D850 and grip has already sold, and now I'm trying to find a new home for the like-new 500 f/4E and a couple of smaller lenses. When the new Sony kit arrives, I will also be able to sell my old Canon 7DII and 100-400II which I kept for use in the kayak. I'll be able to have one body and one lens. (Oh wait, that 600 f/4 Sony is keeping me awake at night - ).
Colin, I have done the same after almost 40 yrs. with Nikon, I have been using only Sony gears for almost a month now and able to do everything I used to do with Nikon D850 and 600 E FL, and much more. I am sure that you will enjoy it. Welcome!
AGeoJO wrote:
^^^ Welcome to the Sony land, Colin! I will be on the lookout for your images on the N&W forum in the next several days .
You may have to wait a little longer than that...say mid-December, as Colin plans to wait for the A9II and then buy into the system. But in a bold move, he is ditching the Nikon gear early and will settle for the 7D2/100-400II until the A9II is a reality....brave man, brave man.
arbitrage wrote:
You may have to wait a little longer than that...say mid-December, as Colin plans to wait for the A9II and then buy into the system. But in a bold move, he is ditching the Nikon gear early and will settle for the 7D2/100-400II until the A9II is a reality....brave man, brave man.
Whassat!?!? You assured me that the a9II was coming out next week!
Like Charlton Heston said on the beach at the end of Planet of the Apes: "Damn you........damn you all to hell!"
arbitrage wrote:
Funny, as it is keeping me awake at night also....my ongoing internal debate between it, the 400GM or just sticking with the 200-600.
Go with the 400mm, I thought I never would myself, it is just awesome. Granted not for the 1200mm but looking back I do not use that range much, so a nice compromise to get the f2.8, better MFD and a smaller travel package. If I went all in on Sony I would stay the same with the 400mm setup as my Canon setup. Now throw a 600mm PF in the mix
arbitrage wrote:
Have any of the lucky 400GM and 600GM dual owners done any type of controlled testing comparing 400/1.4 vs 600 or 400/2x vs 600/1.4?
If not controlled testing....any subjective opinions on IQ and AF with the A9?
The only active photographer that I know personally that owns both is Alex. I saw him last Sunday at the owl site. He told me that he was considering of selling the GM 400mm. Most of the time, I think even the 600mm feels too short, especially for most flying actions, for sure. But a few weeks ago, at the falcon site, I could get fairly close to perching falcons. For those situations, I just grabbed the 200-600mm. Without that lens, then maybe I would consider getting a 400mm lens. Yes, I love the light gathering capability of the f/2.8 aperture. But if you have to put on the 1.4X or 2.0 TCs pretty much all the time, then the 600mm makes more sense.
My suggestion, grab one that you think would fit your shooting style better and rent the other for a short evaluation. Or rent both .
Colin F wrote:
Whassat!?!? You promised that the a9II was coming out next week! Like Charlton Heston said on the beach at the end of Planet of the Apes: "Damn you........damn you all to hell!"
AGeoJO wrote:
The only active photographer that I know personally that owns both is Alex. I saw him last Sunday at the owl site. He told me that he was considering of selling the GM 400mm. Most of the time, I think even the 600mm feels too short, especially for most flying actions, for sure. But a few weeks ago, at the falcon site, I could get fairly close to perching falcons. For those situations, I just grabbed the 200-600mm. Without that lens, then maybe I would consider getting a 400mm lens. Yes, I love the light gathering capability of the f/2.8 aperture. But if you have to put on the 1.4X or 2.0 TCs pretty much all the time, then the 600mm makes more sense.
My suggestion, grab one that you think would fit your shooting style better and rent the other for a short evaluation. Or rent both .
Are you only looking for the comparison of 400mm+ 1.4 TC, 400mm + 2X TC, 600mm, and 600mm + 1.4 TC ?
I am not big on testing but I will try to shoot the subject with this combination and publish the raw files for you to see, just let me know, what distance you like to have for the subject ?
Please, give me couple of weeks and should be able to do it.
Are you only looking for the comparison of 400mm+ 1.4 TC, 400mm + 2X TC, 600mm, and 600mm + 1.4 TC ?
I am not big on testing but I will try to shoot the subject with this combination and publish the raw files for you to see, just let me know, what distance you like to have for the subject ?
Please, give me couple of weeks and should be able to do it.
Mukesh
Hi Mukesh,
Yeah, I'm mostly interested in how the overlapping focal lengths compare. As far as distance to subject...30-40 feet would be fine....anything would be better than nothing.
I'd appreciate any test you come up with and no worries if you don't get around to it. I always tell myself I'm going to test things and then always find something better to do
I have some attraction to the 400/2.8 end but my main attraction to the 400 over 600 is having a much smaller package to shoot 560 and 800 with. I used a 600/4 IS II for many years as my main lens and I just got tired of the large size out in the field and traveling with it. The weight is obviously improved with the Sony over my older Canon but the size hasn't changed at all. That is what is ever drawing me to a 400/2.8 option instead.
arbitrage wrote:
I used a 600/4 IS II for many years as my main lens and I just got tired of the large size out in the field and traveling with it. The weight is obviously improved with the Sony over my older Canon but the size hasn't changed at all. That is what is ever drawing me to a 400/2.8 option instead.
Yes, one has to really think about not only the size & weight of a 600 f/4, but also the cost. Just think of the trips you could have with a 200-600, instead of staying at home with a 600 f/4 shooting Mallards.
).
.
