Login to an Existing Community Account
Our community environment has changed, so you need to create a new login to access your existing community account and posts.
Follow the steps listed under Create an Account and make sure you use the same email address as before to create your login.
Note: If you use a different email address, the system will not be able to associate your Community account history with your new login. In this case, you will start over as a new user.
Create a New Account
By creating an account you can submit posts, message other users, upload a custom avatar and more.
Click the Login link to the right of the search bar.
Click the Create New Account button at the Sign In screen.
Click the Start button on the Create Account screen.
Enter a Sign-In ID (email address) and your desired Password.
Click the Next button.
Select your Country/Region.
Enter your Date of Birth.
Click the Next button.
Please read the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy and check the box to confirm on the Finish screen.
Click the Agree and Create Account button.
Complete the CAPTCHA and click the Continue button.
A Verify Email window will appear.
A confirmation email will be sent to verify your email address is valid. Click the Verify link in the email.
A new window will open to confirm you have verified the email. Close this window.
Click the I Verified button in the Verify Email window.
You can now use your Sign-In ID and Password to login to the community.
Click Sign in
arbitrage wrote:
Yes true but the Canada site does the same thing. I'm not going to waste any more time on a broken website.
FWIW, tonight I went outside in the fading contrasty light and shot an egret at high ISO (6400) with the Canon 500 f/4IS II + 1.4x III TC on the a7riv. Of the 30+ shots in several bursts, every shot was in focus. The 200-600 would have struggled under the same circumstance. Sure, the bird was just wading across the pond but the tracking was spot on. Images cleaned up extremely well in Topaz.
The point is, how can an adapted prime with a TC perform better than the company's 200-600 zoom? Clearly, the camera can perform and the lens works fine on the a9, so what gives?
So, I was walking around the pond nearby my house today in windy conditions, partly sunny skies - making exposure challenging as the sun was skirting in and out of the clouds and had the 200-600 + a7riv paired up in OS 2, AF sensitivity 4. A few killdeer were flying by (they tend to coast more than fly) and all of the images were in focus. A couple of barn swallows were darting about and they too were in reasonably good focus. Momma mallard with her 6 chicks were swimming by and the wide AF was fooled by the waves as it usually is though it grabbed on well with the spot M tracking. An egret took off from the pond and I fired off perhaps 18 shots in a couple of bursts all of which were in focus. Go figure. This lens/body are so vexing.
Cropped around 50%, basic tone adjustments, NR in Topaz AI, auto
High degree of crop showing the amazing resolution capturing water drops...
I just spent a half hour in the yard shooting the lens and lens/TC....cloudy conditions....light levels around f/6.3 1/1000 ISO 1600. OSS Mode 3.
Combo was doing perplexingly well. With the 1.4TC I started to see an increase in the minor back focus issue but it was still hitting a fair number on the head. This was all with birds landing and posing on perches for a few seconds.
arbitrage wrote:
I just spent a half hour in the yard shooting the lens and lens/TC....cloudy conditions....light levels around f/6.3 1/1000 ISO 1600. OSS Mode 3.
Combo was doing perplexingly well. With the 1.4TC I started to see an increase in the minor back focus issue but it was still hitting a fair number on the head. This was all with birds landing and posing on perches for a few seconds.
These are amazing Images. I am particularly impressed at how well this lens takes the 1.4TC @f9....Are you happy with the AF performance? I can't see much difference in sharpness though.
arbitrage wrote:
I just spent a half hour in the yard shooting the lens and lens/TC....cloudy conditions....light levels around f/6.3 1/1000 ISO 1600. OSS Mode 3.
Combo was doing perplexingly well. With the 1.4TC I started to see an increase in the minor back focus issue but it was still hitting a fair number on the head. This was all with birds landing and posing on perches for a few seconds.
gannis wrote:
These are amazing Images. I am particularly impressed at how well this lens takes the 1.4TC @f9....Are you happy with the AF performance? I can't see much difference in sharpness though.
As has been discussed throughout this thread and other threads, I'm certainly not happy with the AF performance of the 200-600 on the A7RIV. Sometimes it can do the job like it did in these shots yesterday but I still can't take it out for a morning of birding when looking for perched and flight and trust it. Certainly once you add the 1.4TC the combo gets noticeably less reliable.
My recommendation is still for anyone considering this lens is to go for 200-600 with the 1.4TC on an A9 or A9II instead of shooting the 200-600 on the A7RIV. I am still way more confident to get the shot with the 2-6/1.4TC on A9(II) than I am with the bare lens on the A7RIV. Pixel reach is very close (A7RIV acts like a 1.6TC with its pixels vs the 1.4TC), A9 can make up for the stop of light loss, A9 has all the other benefits like blackout free EVF, ability to shoot silently in all situations, 20FPS etc.
If 840mm on a 24MP FF sensor isn't enough reach for one's subjects then you pretty much need to either get the 400GM to get 800mm on 61MP or 600GM to get 1200mm on 24MP and on 61MPs.
OP here, thanks for the lengthy discussion all, it's been enlightening to read all of your thoughts and experiences....
As an update to my initial post, my a7RIV and 200-600 were switched out for a7RIII and 100-400 (Still waiting on the 1.4x). While I recognize I'm comparing apples to oranges, for me with action shooting the RIII and 100-400 is SO much better. Perhaps it's the lower resolution that's hiding my technical faults or any sharpness issues. Regardless, I went out to test this morning and shot a bunch of burst in the same conditions and settings I was trying w/the IV. My goodness what a striking difference, with easily 8 out of 10 BIF shots considerably sharper, almost all acceptably and several critically, and none of that random muddy IV-soft-focus-all-over mess.
Here are just a few representative shots (nothing fancy just gulls and the like on a jetty), ~50%/heavy crops, RAW processed straight through C1 w/no sharpening or adjustments:
Perhaps the RIV was just too much camera for me and my technique, who knows. It's such a beautiful camera, and if I could I would totally keep it for my portrait and landscape work. Either way, I'm delighted with the results of the III and 100-400 for the BIF so I'll be interested to see how the combo works with the 1.4x.
Thanks again to all for your contributions to this conversation. Best, John
FYI
Over in the german sonyuserforum.de someone also had issues with 7r4 & 200600.
After sending it to the well known repair facility (german speaking CHATDE) they did some magic and they fixed it.
German: sonyuserforum.de
nobody23 wrote:
FYI
Over in the german sonyuserforum.de someone also had issues with 7r4 & 200600.
After sending it to the well known repair facility (german speaking CHATDE) they did some magic and they fixed it.
German: sonyuserforum.de
That’s good news! Did the repair facility fix the lens or the camera or both then?
Google translation (slightly altered):
After a long course of my 200-600 with the A7RIV in the repair center, I clearly sign Dirk's experiences.
The technician tested a lot and in the end my 200-600, with my TK's, was completely readjusted.
Since it was already selected before the purchase, it was optically top and actually no problem.
The very complex adjustment therefore mainly related to the electronics, the weaknesses of which were not so often recognized on the A6400.
Almost 1000 pictures now show a constancy and hit rate that I had previously dreamed of, and the majority of them with the TK1.4x.
In contrast to Dirk I have no comparison to the "small fixed prime lenses", but what came back from the technician is already
I will comment in the A7RIV thread later when the result after my vacation is clear ......Show more →
Just a comment on my side:
Each country (CHATDE) has its repair center, however I'm trusting only one of them and so do others aswell.
It's the one which has done the above. ;-)
Is this the same problem as the one we all have? Going through this link , it sounds like it was more of a TC/Lens calibration that they did, maybe i am missing the point because of translation . But then, if the R4+200-600 with a 1.4TC can perform so well then it is simply superb.
nobody23 wrote:
Google translation (slightly altered):
Just a comment on my side:
Each country (CHATDE) has its repair center, however I'm trusting only one of them and so do others aswell.
It's the one which has done the above. ;-)
I am coming late to this thread with the same issues everyone is having.
I was in Africa earlier this year with my a9, a7r4 and multiple lenses. This was the first time I was using the big 600f4 and the 200-600 in the field. I also had the older 70-200 2.8 which I admit is not the sharpest one in the Sony line-up.
I was dismayed that so many of my images with the r4 and 200-600 combo were not sharp. They looked good on the LCD in the field but back home on a big 4K monitor they are just slightly off, but enough to make it useless. I thought it was a shutter speed issue although there was no discernible sign of motion blur. For example, a lioness walking slowly at an angle and then right past us was sharp in maybe 5% of the shots. I had used tracking with small flexible point, the same method with the a9 and with the other lenses.
Throughout the trip the images taken with this combo were very disappointing especially with animals in motion.
This week I went to the beach on one day with the a9 and 200-600 and today with the r4 and the lens. Today, I could only keep 2-3% of the images of the Oyster catcher chicks and adults that were walking around. Great opportunities - bird in the surf, with a soft crab in its beak, all useless. OTOH the ones with the a9 with exactly the same light and subject were 80-90% keepers.
I suspect, as everyone else has learnt, that it is this particular combo which is the problem perhaps amplified by light with harsh contrast and other factors - the mode of OSS etc.
However, the images that do come out right are so dense with information and the quality is better than with the a9. There is something magical about having so many pixels on the subject, it is like watching a movie on a giant screen vs on a small television, it is really 'immersive'.
I hope Sony does something about this issue because on their own, the lens and camera are both absolutely delightful.
The entire experience is made even more exasperating by the sheer lack of predictability. Was shooting last evening about an hour before sunset in cross or backlit conditions with a bit of atmosphere a series of GBH's, Sandies, and other large, slow moving birds. Nearly every image was in focus. AF sensitivity 4, OSS 2, Wide (non tracking). ISO's from 640 to around 1600. Though I should be grateful for the delightful images, tomorrow who knows what combination will show up?
Primus wrote:
I hope Sony does something about this issue because on their own, the lens and camera are both absolutely delightful.
Pradeep
My prediction is rather 'unlikely', but it can be fixed with intensive calibration/tinkering with the electronics.
I dont know if all service center would even have this knowledge or perseverance...
nobody23 wrote:
My prediction is rather 'unlikely', but it can be fixed with intensive calibration/tinkering with the electronics.
I dont know if all service center would even have this knowledge or perseverance...
Sadly, I suspect that will be the case until the a7r5 although hope springs eternal. I would be very willing to pay good money to somebody to fix this.
This morning I took the a9 with the 200-600 to do the local shoot at the beach. Nearly perfect score, birds running, flying, random movements, tracking with single small AF point was absolutely spot on. Sharp images from this lens, but that too is well known. What a difference between yesterday and today. Only thing I miss is the truly amazing detail with the r4 files when they are well focused. Almost 3 times the pixel density does have its benefits.
BTW, does anybody know of an app that allows the focus point to become visible in LR on a Mac running Catalina? The A7Info does not work with Catalina.
In the last two weeks I've found myself migrating to just using my A9II for everything even with the 600GM. This past weekend I didn't even pack the A7RIV along for my outings which was a first since buying the RIV. I just find I can trust the A9II AF so much more even with the 600, let alone the 200-600. With the RIV I'm always fiddling switching back and forth from crop to FF to try and use smaller files when I have to crop and the buffer is always getting in the way. Also I'm constantly switching from e-shutter for more static subjects back to mechanical for flight. Just a lot of little things that make just using the A9II a much more pleasing experience that I have total confidence in. I find that I'd rather add the 1.4TC to the 200-600 on the A9II vs bare lens on RIV. Also even adding the 2xTC to the 600GM with the A9II over the 1.4 with the RIV just works better for me. Also finding that by the time I'm needing to use crop mode on the A7RIV and 1200mm that I'm usually reaching out over too far of a distance for good shots anyways. Finally, I just don't have much use/preference for 61MP files vs 24MP files for my use case. The 61MP is used for cropping in my case and I'm just finding that I'd rather use an extra TC on the A9II vs crop mode on the RIV despite the ISO penalty. I even found myself considering selling the RIV this weekend...not sure yet.
arbitrage wrote:
In the last two weeks I've found myself migrating to just using my A9II for everything even with the 600GM. This past weekend I didn't even pack the A7RIV along for my outings which was a first since buying the RIV. I just find I can trust the A9II AF so much more even with the 600, let alone the 200-600. With the RIV I'm always fiddling switching back and forth from crop to FF to try and use smaller files when I have to crop and the buffer is always getting in the way. Also I'm constantly switching from e-shutter for more static subjects back to mechanical for flight. Just a lot of little things that make just using the A9II a much more pleasing experience that I have total confidence in. I find that I'd rather add the 1.4TC to the 200-600 on the A9II vs bare lens on RIV. Also even adding the 2xTC to the 600GM with the A9II over the 1.4 with the RIV just works better for me. Also finding that by the time I'm needing to use crop mode on the A7RIV and 1200mm that I'm usually reaching out over too far of a distance for good shots anyways. Finally, I just don't have much use/preference for 61MP files vs 24MP files for my use case. The 61MP is used for cropping in my case and I'm just finding that I'd rather use an extra TC on the A9II vs crop mode on the RIV despite the ISO penalty. I even found myself considering selling the RIV this weekend...not sure yet....Show more →
Yep, the a9 is now my go to for so many things. My poor a7RIII is getting lonely being left home so much.
