p.2 #1 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
am wondering if there is a way we can come up with a group letter to Sony saying that (a) we own/use and very much like the 200-600; (b) we own/use several other Sony long lenses - we have experience using Sony telephotos on different Sony bodies; (c) BUT we strongly believe there is currently a problem with the Sony 200-600 and specifically when used on the A7R4. In our experience the combination does not consistently achieve acceptable focus, and maintain it in a series of images (about 2-3 of every 10 shots in a series are in critical focus). When shooting this lens with the A9 or A7R3 the percentage of images in critical focus is 4-6 per 10 (?); (d) we feel that a firmware update is needed - currently we cannot confidently use the 200-600 with the A7R4 and believe we will get the shot - and that is even with stationary (perched birds) or slowly moving subjects (ducks moving left to right to on the water); (e) we request Sony look into these focus issues as soon as possible and provide their assessment of the situation, and a timetable for the correction of the problem, if Sony determines there is a problem.
We collectively sign the letter as Sony users - and use the power of this forum (Fred Miranda), and perhaps even DPR to send the letter/email to Sony.
I'd be happy to draft a letter and do my best to incorporate suggestions/ideas...and work on a strategy together.
p.2 #2 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
I found the same with the 100-400 and 1.4 tc.
I almost put the 7R4 for sale until I got the 600GM. Since then it hasn't come off and I sold the 7Riii.
I think the problem is more complex than Boeing a 7Riv / 200-600 problem. As I have posted in other threads, I find the small focus point it does not always confine itself to the small square area that it covers.
Wife saying "hurry up, we need to go birding, now!"
p.2 #3 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
rdcny wrote:
am wondering if there is a way we can come up with a group letter to Sony saying that (a) we own/use and very much like the 200-600; (b) we own/use several other Sony long lenses - we have experience using Sony telephotos on different Sony bodies; (c) BUT we strongly believe there is currently a problem with the Sony 200-600 and specifically when used on the A7R4. In our experience the combination does not consistently achieve acceptable focus, and maintain it in a series of images (about 2-3 of every 10 shots in a series are in critical focus). When shooting this lens with the A9 or A7R3 the percentage of images in critical focus is 4-6 per 10 (?); (d) we feel that a firmware update is needed - currently we cannot confidently use the 200-600 with the A7R4 and believe we will get the shot - and that is even with stationary (perched birds) or slowly moving subjects (ducks moving left to right to on the water); (e) we request Sony look into these focus issues as soon as possible and provide their assessment of the situation, and a timetable for the correction of the problem, if Sony determines there is a problem.
We collectively sign the letter as Sony users - and use the power of this forum (Fred Miranda), and perhaps even DPR to send the letter/email to Sony.
I'd be happy to draft a letter and do my best to incorporate suggestions/ideas...and work on a strategy together.
p.2 #6 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
In my view, one should first test the lens mounted on a sturdy tripod (I mean really sturdy; holding a 600mm steady is no joke) and on a static subject to see if the variation in focus between individual shots is still present when the subject and camera are not moving at all. From that one can then proceed to testing with living subject with lens still on tripod, and try to figure out where the problem is. I think it's clear that in a supertele in this price class, there will be some compromises. I suspect in a hand-held operation, the position of the subject in the frame will vary quite a bit from moment to moment, and if the lens doesn't focus instantly, just the camera shake alone is likely to introduce some focus variation from shot to shot.
Long distances can also cause this kind of problems as the air fluctuates. Also, the waves in the water when photographing birds in the water cause some additional movement.
61 MP is a ridiculously high resolution to expect to be perfect at the pixel level when hand-holding a 600 mm lens. I would consider using a tripod and either gimbal or fluid head instead of hand-holding to reduce the focus variations between shots, or, if necessary to hand-hold, shoot more frames to get enough good shots.
p.2 #7 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
ilkka_nissila wrote:
In my view, one should first test the lens mounted on a sturdy tripod (I mean really sturdy, 600mm is no joke) and on a static subject to see if the variation in focus between individual shots is still present when the subject camera are not moving at all. From that one can then proceed to testing with living subject with lens still on tripod, and try to figure out where the problem is. I think it's clear that in a supertele in this price class, there will be some compromises. I suspect in a hand-held operation, the position of the subject in the frame will vary quite a bit from moment to moment, and if the lens doesn't focus instantly, just the camera shake alone is likely to introduce some focus variation from shot to shot.
61 MP is a ridiculously high resolution to expect to be perfect at the pixel level when hand-holding a 600 mm lens....Show more →
--------
Ilkka - good ideas and caveats...and through the years on many different fora (photo.net and Bjorn's site are two that come to mind), Ilkka you have always been thoughtful and given good ideas/advice - calmly.
That being said, several of us are using the A7R4 with 400 with TC (=560mm approx), the 600...the A9 with the 200-600 - and are NOT having problems from one shot to the next. In my Harlequin Duck sequence, one shot would be fine, the next two or three way off...and it is not because the subject is moving radically...or we are having the "shakes" holding the combo...It seems as though the A7R4/200-600 combo is not properly tuned...the combo is selecting focus points further (or nearer) than the subject independent of where we select the focus to be...
Hopefully someone already has images of a perched (not moving) bird or some other subject (butterfly?) to see if the same problems occur with stationary subjects - good idea!
The 200-600mm lens is made to be hand-held...and I think if it cannot test well in that situation most people would like to know that so that they can shop for an alternative...
p.2 #9 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
rdcny wrote:
That being said, several of us are using the A7R4 with 400 with TC (=560mm approx), the 600...the A9 with the 200-600 - and are NOT having problems from one shot to the next.
Right, but the 400/2.8 and 600/4 have faster focusing motors than the 200-600, and thus they perform corrective actions faster and this can help maintain focus more consistent from shot to shot. The focusing speed is important also when the subject is not moving quickly, as if the subject slightly moves to a different position in the frame (laterally, because of waves that rise the bird up and down and hand-shake), and the texture of the waves changes, the camera has to process the changed situation quickly and it may give instructions for the focus motor to do something. Faster motors follow instructions more quickly and do not allow the focus to drift off. The A9 can read the AF data more quickly and more frequently, and perform faster corrective actions. I've understood that the A9 can continue to use PDAF sensors with smaller-aperture lenses than the A7 series cameras do. If the camera resorts to CDAF (due to a combination of small maximum aperture and low light) then the corrective actions can be slower and less elegant.
I find that when photographing birds with a long lens, I'm much happier with the consistent focus that I get when the lens is mounted on a tripod, even though it's a light weight lens. It could be an issue with my limited skills, but I find that when panning a subject, if I'm holding the lens freely, I tend to miss the bird in the up/down direction more often than when the lens is on a tripod. I am sure with more skill and experience, hand-held results would improve as well, but I find the tripod to be a big help with those skills that I currently have. Also, it allows me to wait for something to happen for long periods of time without my arms getting fatigued. Even if I had a fast long prime, I would still be carrying the tripod and the total weight would be greater so the weight savings from the lighter weight lens are still significant. Carrying the gear in the forest and hills on my way to the shooting location, I find the weight savings from the lightweight lens decisive. Finally, I love to take it easy and relax and wait, with my hands free. It could take 15-30 min before the bird does anything, and then I am relaxed and ready to take action.
But I understand that people are different and the tripod that I love may be a pain to another photographer.
p.2 #10 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
ilkka_nissila wrote:
I think it's clear that in a supertele in this price class, there will be some compromises.
Getting consistent in-focus shots with static subjects should not be a compromise in a supertele in this price class. My $1200 Nikon 200-500, which compared to the 200-600 focuses quite slow, hits at least 90% on static subjects in AF-C. Both 200-600's I had hit maybe 50% at best with the a6400 and A7R3 when shooting at the long end. And I never use a tripod with the 200-500.
p.2 #11 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
Snce many have already proved that the 200-600 focuses just fine in acquiring and locking onto BIF's when using the A9, it should be obvious the problem is with the A7R4.
So know idea what shooting on a tripod would prove.
p.2 #12 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
It could come down to the focusing motors in the lens combined with the A7RIV only sampling AF data 20x per sec where as the A9 may make up for the slower motor by sampling at 60x per second. 100-400GM has a better linear motor than 200-600 and the 400/600GM lenses have an even better dual-linear motor. But I'm hoping that isn't the full reason as that may not be fixable with FW.
p.2 #13 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
arbitrage wrote:
It could come down to the focusing motors in the lens combined with the A7RIV only sampling AF data 20x per sec where as the A9 may make up for the slower motor by sampling at 60x per second. 100-400GM has a better linear motor than 200-600 and the 400/600GM lenses have an even better dual-linear motor. But I'm hoping that isn't the full reason as that may not be fixable with FW.
The a7 iii doesn't seem to have any issues though, it also samples 20x not 60, it really feels like there is a lens to body calibration issue, I don't quite understand why or how, but it seems to be only this body and only this lens.
p.2 #14 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
I've not noticed any AF issues with stationary birds with the A7R4 and the 200-600 at 600mm bare or with a 1.4x. My experience with fast-flying birds was that the camera is well behind the A9 in performance, enough so that I don't use it anymore for that application.
p.2 #15 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
buffalowolff wrote:
The a7 iii doesn't seem to have any issues though, it also samples 20x not 60, it really feels like there is a lens to body calibration issue, I don't quite understand why or how, but it seems to be only this body and only this lens.
I hope that is the case because then it probably can be fixed via either body or lens FW. When it hits focus it is a super sharp combo. It just felt like I was back to my 7D2 days of inconsistency when anything was even slowly moving.
p.2 #16 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
buffalowolff wrote:
The a7 iii doesn't seem to have any issues though, it also samples 20x not 60, it really feels like there is a lens to body calibration issue, I don't quite understand why or how, but it seems to be only this body and only this lens.
It could be everything that’s written and also that when you’re looking at 61 MP that what might have been acceptably sharp at 24 or 42 MP is not so much as 61 MP.
p.2 #17 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
2xbass wrote:
It could be everything that’s written and also that when you’re looking at 61 MP that what might have been acceptably sharp at 24 or 42 MP is not so much as 61 MP.
Nah, I do get great shots with it, just very few, and the smaller the subject the less are usable. A distant eagle flying might yield nothing usable.
p.2 #18 · Brief Comments on the 200-600 with A7R4 (Harlequin Duck)
Arbitrage Posted:
"It could come down to the focusing motors in the lens combined with the A7RIV only sampling AF data 20x per sec where as the A9 may make up for the slower motor by sampling at 60x per second. 100-400GM has a better linear motor than 200-600 and the 400/600GM lenses have an even better dual-linear motor. But I'm hoping that isn't the full reason as that may not be fixable with FW."
From DPR description:
"The Sony FE 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 OSS 'G Master' lens is a compact telephoto zoom that uses a double linear motor and 'Direct Drive SSM' drive system for fast and quiet AF."
Not sure if the AF drive system has anything to do with anything but the 100-400 GM looks to have some type of dual drive system while the 200-600 is single drive
