AGeoJO wrote:
Mark, I am sure you know that there is thread dedicated to the G 200-600mm, right? Just in case you don’t know, here is the link: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1608204. I do have both and I have been impressed with the IQ of that zoom lens. However, I didn’t do any side-by-side comparison. From casual comparison though, the IQ of both is not that far apart but more the DOF for cleaner bokeh and better isolation in favor of the prime. To me, that zoom lens is the best value money can buy for approximately $2K for wildlife. It is ironic that I didn’t like the IQ I got from the Nikon 200-500mm; I ended up selling that lens in about a month after that trial period over a year ago. More recently, I tried the 500mm f/5.6 PF on the D850 (before Sony announced the G 200-600mm and GM 600mm) but I couldn’t get used to DSLR anymore, I guess. I am 100% sold on mirrorless and I am sticking to that. ...Show more →
Folks,
I just came back from 2 weeks trip to Arizona and only had 200-600 and couple other lenses for landscape purpose. I was fortunate to find park closed to my hotel and able to shoot wildlife for 3 days, while my wife was working. I am amazed by the performance of the 200-600 for casual wildlife purpose, It is very sharp and focus fast enough for the BIF with A7RIV and A9. I hardly use this lens because at home I used 400mm GM or 600 GM but this trip forced me to use this lens and I am happy to report that, it is great lens for travel around with it. I thinks other than fstop and great bokeh with prime , the sharpness of the zoom is respectable, even with 1.4 TC.
Also, I have used 200-500 with D850, great lens for close distance subject but not that great for distance subject, was never happy with it performance for that reason. The 200-600 is far superior for it's ability for the distance subject and it's image IQ with TC. Especially the zoom ring on 200-600 is outstanding compare to 200-500mm. Anyway, when I get a chance, I will post some pics on 200-600mm thread or in wildlife section.
I went back and did some shots in the backyard and got better results especially on still objects. I think I might have not had optimal AF settings for BIF.. as my previous work was with the Nikon D850 and 500mm f4 and 200-500. M
ke3vg wrote:
Folks,
I just came back from 2 weeks trip to Arizona and only had 200-600 and couple other lenses for landscape purpose. I was fortunate to find park closed to my hotel and able to shoot wildlife for 3 days, while my wife was working. I am amazed by the performance of the 200-600 for casual wildlife purpose, It is very sharp and focus fast enough for the BIF with A7RIV and A9. I hardly use this lens because at home I used 400mm GM or 600 GM but this trip forced me to use this lens and I am happy to report that, it is great lens for travel around with it. I thinks other than fstop and great bokeh with prime , the sharpness of the zoom is respectable, even with 1.4 TC.
Also, I have used 200-500 with D850, great lens for close distance subject but not that great for distance subject, was never happy with it performance for that reason. The 200-600 is far superior for it's ability for the distance subject and it's image IQ with TC. Especially the zoom ring on 200-600 is outstanding compare to 200-500mm. Anyway, when I get a chance, I will post some pics on 200-600mm thread or in wildlife section. ...Show more →
The Sony 200-600 MTF charts are very good even for some older Prime Super Teles. So likely a 1.4 TC would work well. However, with such a slow lens a 2.0 TC wouldn’t be very useful. So the major difference is DOF and light gathering.
The 600mm F4.0 GM MTFs are Incredible-essentially a straight across the top of the chart and only a tiny difference between F4 and F8.0. Indeed, one could speculate upon what field conditions might allow the 600 to achieve it’s max IQ and why the 200-600 compares well.
Joshua, Mukesh, Sha Lu these are fantastic shots. I have been researching this lens (600/4) on and off and I must say I am impressed with the shots. Having gotten out of Canon last year and barely into Nikon (D850 + 500pF + 24-85 VR), I am still conflicted if I made the right choice. No time right now due to work commitments, but I might get into Sony for my next trip since the cash from all those sales is still available... Hmm more options is always good. Thank you for posting images, keep them coming.
Vivek wrote:
Joshua, Mukesh, Sha Lu these are fantastic shots. I have been researching this lens (600/4) on and off and I must say I am impressed with the shots. Having gotten out of Canon last year and barely into Nikon (D850 + 500pF + 24-85 VR), I am still conflicted if I made the right choice. No time right now due to work commitments, but I might get into Sony for my next trip since the cash from all those sales is still available... Hmm more options is always good. Thank you for posting images, keep them coming.
I have been there and do understand your position. I shot Nikon for 40 yeras and had significant investment but after using it parallel with Nikon D850,D5, 600 E FL, 500 PF, etc. I finally pulled the plug on Nikon when they announced the 600 GM, I may have mentioned here in forum here, I could not sleep for couple of weeks, till I tried the 600 GM for day and came back very happy. I am not regretting my decision now and in future if Nikon come out with some fantastic setup, I may go through this scenario all over again..! -
Vivek wrote:
Joshua, Mukesh, Sha Lu these are fantastic shots. I have been researching this lens (600/4) on and off and I must say I am impressed with the shots. Having gotten out of Canon last year and barely into Nikon (D850 + 500pF + 24-85 VR), I am still conflicted if I made the right choice. No time right now due to work commitments, but I might get into Sony for my next trip since the cash from all those sales is still available... Hmm more options is always good. Thank you for posting images, keep them coming.
Thank you very much, Vivek! I just arrived in Ecuador on a birding trip and for the very first time, I am using all native lenses this time around. And, yes, I will be posting images I will be taking with the 600mm here.
Yeah, I’m aware of that but, want to hear from someone who has done it. Google it and can’t verify it. I know the dimensions don’t include the padding.
Several of the photos in this thread, particularly a few of Joshua's first few Burrowing Owl photos, show what I'd describe as 'nervous' bokeh, is this typical for the 600? What about color fringes in OOF areas?
telyt wrote:
Several of the photos in this thread, particularly a few of Joshua's first few Burrowing Owl photos, show what I'd describe as 'nervous' bokeh, is this typical for the 600? What about color fringes in OOF areas?
In my experience I find the phenomenon you see in those BO shots on Page 1 to be reproducible with every lens I've owned if you have the right distance to background and the right amount of turbulence in the air. Even with no air anomalies you can get that with the right distance from focal plane to background.
Now I did find that with the Canon 100-400 (original) that you got double lined bokeh (probably an IS thing more than optics) which looked worse than the phenomenon in Joshua's BO pics. But otherwise that affect can happen on any lens.
Thanks Mukesh, that makes me not feel totally stupid . So now, I just need to find the time to do the right thing and if I come to the conclusion that Sony works for me, then I will likely do what you've done. If only I had the time to pull it off.
Thanks Joshua. Ecuador is my favorite place (especially Galapagos and the Mindo area for birds). Looking forward to your photos of birds.
arbitrage wrote:
In my experience I find the phenomenon you see in those BO shots on Page 1 to be reproducible with every lens I've owned if you have the right distance to background and the right amount of turbulence in the air. Even with no air anomalies you can get that with the right distance from focal plane to background.
Now I did find that with the Canon 100-400 (original) that you got double lined bokeh (probably an IS thing more than optics) which looked worse than the phenomenon in Joshua's BO pics. But otherwise that affect can happen on any lens....Show more →
True, it can happen with any lens but as you've pointed out w.r.t. the original Canon 100-400 some lenses are more susceptible to this than others. In my experience the distribution of light intensity across the diameter of the circle of confusion is a bigger factor than optical stabilization or shape of the diaphragm. The light intensity distribution is influenced primarily by aberrations, in particular spherical aberration while color fringes in the OOF areas are influenced by spherochromatism and LoCA.
Photos made with this lens showing OOF point light sources both foreground and background would go a long way toward resolving my questions.
