Mini trip to test out M.Smith's recommended setting changes on the Riv.
Closest place to me to do this is St. Augustine, and that's good because we like Spoonbills.
I shot Riv+100400+1.4TC and Riv+200600.
Lens didn't matter but Mark's suggested change(s) did.
I went from 55-65% keeper rate to 85-90% if of course I did my job.
I considered my previous keeper rate fine, me considering this just part of sacrifices one
accepts with a huge sensor.
Many many shots that were 'Flickrs', e.g. good enough for me to post on my regular page (but on my regular Flickr I never post sequences like this.
Thanks Douglas. It was a great excuse to throw the boys (3 cats) into the campevan and head to northern Florida. It's an easy day drive for us. While there we checked out the old Spanish fort during our early morning walkabout (4 miles). I played with the Rok 18/2.8, Rok 24/2.8 and Rok 45/1.8 while waking so that was good. On the way back we walked (5.2 miles) on Cumberland Island....carried the D500 set up there.
I for some reason think this is just a wildlife thread
Here's one from the Riv+Rok 18mm (so light!)
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I shot Riv+100400+1.4TC and Riv+200600.
Lens didn't matter but Mark's suggested change(s) did.
I went from 55-65% keeper rate to 85-90% if of course I did my job.
I considered my previous keeper rate fine, me considering this just part of sacrifices one
accepts with a huge sensor.
I'm seconding the request above about which settings in Mark's settings were different than your previous ones. Just thought I'd quote you so you may see it sooner.
I have been trying Tracking Sensitivity to 5 and not using Tracking modes as much but I still need lots more time to see if it is better than the way I shoot A9 (Tracking at 1 and using Tracking a 50% of the time). Was the TS the main change for you or anything else?
My initial impressions were the 600GM is way better on the A7RIV than the 200-600. With the 200-600 in perfect light, keeping ISO at the dual-gain 320 level and shooting 1/2500 or faster, I was able to get some keepers of challenging head on ducks IF but really hit rate was maybe 2/10 as most had focus on the body...just too slow to keep up with the head (which the A9 does way better). For static ducks floating shots the A7RIV and 200-600 seemed much better to me than my experience back in October but still as soon as clouds came in and ISO went to 800-1600, the hit rate on the "sitting ducks" started to also disappoint me.
I'm really up in the air about the RIV but I'm planning to do a lot more shooting with it this weekend to get a handle on its limitations and when it is worth using it over my A9II.
arbitrage wrote:
I'm seconding the request above about which settings in Mark's settings were different than your previous ones. Just thought I'd quote you so you may see it sooner.
I have been trying Tracking Sensitivity to 5 and not using Tracking modes as much but I still need lots more time to see if it is better than the way I shoot A9 (Tracking at 1 and using Tracking a 50% of the time). Was the TS the main change for you or anything else?
My initial impressions were the 600GM is way better on the A7RIV than the 200-600. With the 200-600 in perfect light, keeping ISO at the dual-gain 320 level and shooting 1/2500 or faster, I was able to get some keepers of challenging head on ducks IF but really hit rate was maybe 2/10 as most had focus on the body...just too slow to keep up with the head (which the A9 does way better). For static ducks floating shots the A7RIV and 200-600 seemed much better to me than my experience back in October but still as soon as clouds came in and ISO went to 800-1600, the hit rate on the "sitting ducks" started to also disappoint me.
I'm really up in the air about the RIV but I'm planning to do a lot more shooting with it this weekend to get a handle on its limitations and when it is worth using it over my A9II....Show more →
One of the reasons to use a higher mp body over a lower mp body was always the ability to crop. Now with the exceptional TC's (1.4 or 2x) attached to sony cameras that is no longer an issue. So i wonder what it is that draws your attention to the higher mp body for wildlife. Just curious. I find the Canon 600 F4 IS II to resolve an amazing amount of detail on the R4, but the files are not as clean to play with as e.g. i was used to with the 1dxII, even with noise reduction tools. When normalizing the image to a 20mp one, it does come close however, but then you still have a better AF system on the a9/a9II.
therealthings wrote:
One of the reasons to use a higher mp body over a lower mp body was always the ability to crop. Now with the exceptional TC's (1.4 or 2x) attached to sony cameras that is no longer an issue. So i wonder what it is that draws your attention to the higher mp body for wildlife. Just curious. I find the Canon 600 F4 IS II to resolve an amazing amount of detail on the R4, but the files are not as clean to play with as e.g. i was used to with the 1dxII, even with noise reduction tools. When normalizing the image to a 20mp one, it does come close however, but then you still have a better AF system on the a9/a9II. ...Show more →
In my case, the teleconvertors are just "meh." Ok in a pinch, but the the resolution of the a7r4 is way better than my a9m2 with a teleconvetor, if I nail the focus with the a7r4, and that is an "if" because the a7r4 is not as accurate as the a9. But when you nail the focus, it's magical. I was shooting this weekend with my a9m2, the 400 2.8GM and a 1.4x and it was just not great, so ended up taking it off and just shooting the 400 bare and cropping in post.
Geoff, LBJ...looking back (glad it was just 2 days ago), all I did was change Tracking Sensitivity to 5 (I thought it was Minus 5, but I think it is just '5'....nothing else.
Granted I was in Florida sun and big bierds. In the Spoonbill's defense when going/coming close in a small arc window they are a bit faster than one might think....you all know that anyway.
I thought I'd even try going down to Mid in fps, but kept it at H (never H+) the whole time.
NO tracking mode(s). Just AF-C Zone.
It worked on these white bierds with the green smudge on their nose too. I did shoot several of them but the focus was the big pink bierds. (I just love the Spoonbills, so prehistoric but not as much as the Storks, their glide pattern, the sound the flapping wings make when taking off, etc.)
OH OH OH. Steady shot was ON, corrected. I thought it was off
And Geoff your ducks straight on I believe are a much bigger challenge then these big Spoonies.
Very strange having the a9 in the camper and taking it out only once (sunrise at Titusville) by mistake!
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Geoff, LBJ...looking back (glad it was just 2 days ago), all I did was change Tracking Sensitivity to 5 (I thought it was Minus 5, but I think it is just '5'....nothing else.
Granted I was in Florida sun and big bierds. In the Spoonbill's defense when going/coming close in a small arc window they are a bit faster than one might think....you all know that anyway.
I thought I'd even try going down to Mid in fps, but kept it at H (never H+) the whole time.
NO tracking mode(s). Just AF-C Zone.
It worked on these white bierds with the green smudge on their nose too. I did shoot several of them but the focus was the big pink bierds. (I just love the Spoonbills, so prehistoric but not as much as the Storks, their glide pattern, the sound the flapping wings make when taking off, etc.)
OH OH OH. Steady shot was off.
And Geoff your ducks straight on I believe are a much bigger challenge then these big Spoonies.
Very strange having the a9 in the camper and taking it out only once (sunrise at Titusville) by mistake!
I lied about something
I just went out to shoot hawks (3 dancing way up in the sky) and SS was on for the Spoons and the white bierd pictured above.
LBJ, you might know, but if you click my Flickr link it takes you to one of my Flickr pages where that bierd is, then click to load that image THEN click again to zoom in a lot more.
