1bwana1 wrote:
Maybe we need a new "Go Fund Me" thread.....
Haha, I would suggest a "Go Fix Me" for this combo. There are too many cases/reports that they can be just swept under the rug. Come'n, Sony! Get your act together, please! It is mind boggling that the 200-600mm lens works impeccably with the A9/A9 II while the A7r IV works the same with other similar lenses, like the 100-400mm with TC.
Wow. Interesting. While anticipating the R5 I'm not particularly thrilled with the new RF lenses Canon is releasing. I was having a serious look at this combo as I'm very interested in the 200-600. I'm glad someone linked me to this site. While the A9 and II work better anyone try the A7III with this lens?
I can't vouch for it personally but I believe I've read that the A7III works great with this lens. In fact, I've read that basically every other camera body except for the R4 does.
Zenon Char wrote:
Wow. Interesting. While anticipating the R5 I'm not particularly thrilled with the new RF lenses Canon is releasing. I was having a serious look at this combo as I'm very interested in the 200-600. I'm glad someone linked me to this site. While the A9 and II work better anyone try the A7III with this lens?
AlphaPhotography wrote:
I can't vouch for it personally but I believe I've read that the A7III works great with this lens. In fact, I've read that basically every other camera body except for the R4 does.
Like many others have posted I have experienced exactly the same issues and disappointing results with the A7R4 & 200-600 OSS lens combo that many here have had. And as other have stated I'm not happy about it with the investment I've made in Sony gear.
I have the A7R2, A7R4, and A92 bodies. My results with the 200-600 affixed to these bodies:
A7R2 = the combo works great, focus is nailed almost always
A7R4 = the combo works sometimes and when it does it nails the focus, but mostly it's off with the focus point showing somewhere completely away from the original focus point.
A92 = the combo works great, focus is nailed always
I've tried other lenses on the A7R4 and every single one of them in combo with the bodies above nail focus always.
So my unscientific conclusion is that the A7R4 has an issue when used with the 200-600 only and hopefully we get a F/W update sooner than later.
Each shot still not ultimately critically sharp I realize and accept.
And on each shot I was at 840mm and even then big crops.
I just don't think, well I know because I tried, the a9 with its limited (compared to the Riv) cropabilty would have given me anything close to what I got with the Riv.
I guess I don't fret over it, this focus issue, because either
1. My eyes suck and maybe I just don't see it
2. I use the 70-300G or the 100400GM on the Riv and keep the 200600+1.4TC glued eternally on the a9.
3. It could be worse.
4. I really didn't buy the Riv for BIF, where I think this issue is found mostly because people naturally are using
the long reaching 200600 in this genre. For what I use the Riv mostly (macro,landscape,astro) it's just not a problem.
I do wonder at this point whether a fix is possible. Surely Sony has at least looked into it.
I know very little about Sony but starting to get the idea off the different models. What are the fundamental differences between the A9 and II vs the A7 line. 1DX vs 5D?
Also I see the AR7 III and IV which are 42 megapixels. The A7 III which was released in 2017 is 24 megapixels and does not have the R designation.
Zenon Char wrote:
I know very little about Sony but starting to get the idea off the different models. What are the fundamental differences between the A9 and II vs the A7 line. 1DX vs 5D?
Also I see the AR7 III and IV which are 42 megapixels. The A7 III which was released in 2017 is 24 megapixels and does not have the R designation.
A9 family would be the 1DX family equivalent
A7R family would be the 5DSR
A7S family would be for astrophotography or anything requiring clean low light, high ISO
A7 family would be 5D family
webmstrk9 wrote:
A9 family would be the 1DX family equivalent
A7R family would be the 5DSR
A7S family would be for astrophotography or anything requiring clean low light, high ISO
A7 family would be 5D family
I was doing some calculating. If the R under $4000 like stated which may be $3999 after converting to CND that will be $600 shy of the Sony A9 II. I thought the A9's where far more expensive. I can see why Canon is under the microscope on this one.
Zenon Char wrote:
I was doing some calculating. If the R under $4000 like stated which may be $3999 after converting to CND that will be $600 shy of the Sony A9 II. I thought the A9's where far more expensive. I can see why Canon is under the microscope on this one.
Well, it’s not only cost but the offerings. The 5dmkiv is dated and while it still offers great functionality the Sony products far eclipse it. Apart from the 1dxiii which it’s too large and expensive what has Canon done which is competitive lately?
armd wrote:
Well, it’s not only cost but the offerings. The 5dmkiv is dated and while it still offers great functionality the Sony products far eclipse it. Apart from the 1dxiii which it’s too large and expensive what has Canon done which is competitive lately?
I have had the R4 only a few weeks and haven't had a chance to fully test it. I did however run into a problem with 2xTC. In AF-C mode the R4 would find focus and then backfocus when taking the picture. 1.4xTC worked and the 2xTC/200-600 combo works flawlessly on a9. When I switched to AF-S all was fine.
Zenon Char wrote:
I was doing some calculating. If the R under $4000 like stated which may be $3999 after converting to CND that will be $600 shy of the Sony A9 II. I thought the A9's where far more expensive. I can see why Canon is under the microscope on this one.
The big seller for the A9 series over the A7 series is the speed(fps) and 0 black out. Every A7 body has a blackout so shooting sports and wildlife, it's annoying if you're tracking and shooting.
Nikon/Canon with their DSLR don't have this blackout issue, but they are also limited at 12-14 fps
The R5 is yet to be seen, will it have zero blackout, huge buffer, and full sensor read vs crop for 4k video, it can be a real beast of a camera body. I'm sure a lot of Canon shooters are drooling over the specs. I know I am and I always dislike Canon, mainly for their ergonomics.
webmstrk9 wrote:
The big seller for the A9 series over the A7 series is the speed(fps) and 0 black out. Every A7 body has a blackout so shooting sports and wildlife, it's annoying if you're tracking and shooting.
Nikon/Canon with their DSLR don't have this blackout issue, but they are also limited at 12-14 fps
The R5 is yet to be seen, will it have zero blackout, huge buffer, and full sensor read vs crop for 4k video, it can be a real beast of a camera body. I'm sure a lot of Canon shooters are drooling over the specs. I know I am and I always dislike Canon, mainly for their ergonomics....Show more →
I already get to experience the joys of blackout with my R. That is very helpful. My 2 key areas are AF, tracking and blackout when it comes to the R5 which includes using it with an EF lens. My goal is to EF lenses but that may not happen right away. The R is not that bad at AF. It handled my 400DO II and 2X better than my 7D2 and 5D4 did.
What do we loose without those extra 3 pins which apparently are for high speed transmission using an EF lens? It may be very little but no one knows yet.
webmstrk9 wrote:
The big seller for the A9 series over the A7 series is the speed(fps) and 0 black out. Every A7 body has a blackout so shooting sports and wildlife, it's annoying if you're tracking and shooting.
Nikon/Canon with their DSLR don't have this blackout issue, but they are also limited at 12-14 fps
The R5 is yet to be seen, will it have zero blackout, huge buffer, and full sensor read vs crop for 4k video, it can be a real beast of a camera body. I'm sure a lot of Canon shooters are drooling over the specs. I know I am and I always dislike Canon, mainly for their ergonomics....Show more →
The A7 blackout doesn't bother me as much as the results. With the 200-600 and to a lesser extent with other lenses the actual AF points are different than what appears in the EVF. For example panning with a flying bird, the EVF will light up all of the little green squares over the bird and then later reviewing the actual AF point either in camera or in post, the actual point will likely be somewhere different, not even on the subject. So, the EVF blackout seems to parallel an AF blackout.
The 1dxIII hits 16fps in viewfinder and supposedly 20 in liveview. It's plenty fast, much faster than a a7riv which the fps drops to 7 for uncompressed RAW. That's not the problem rather the size and $$$.
Yes, the R5 is yet to be seen. If, it can shoot at 12+ FPS, with A9 like AF, and be 40+ MP, my Sony gear is up for auction.
