For anyone curious, there is a problem with the A7rIV + G 200-600. Full Stop as of June 19, 2020.
I along with others have reported the same direct to Sony with image samples/full EXIF some months ago. You should know however Sony does not read your complaint on any forum and then take action. As a customer with issues, you must send your image samples and full EXIF data to Sony if you want to be heard. Otherwise you are just another comment on some forum.
The A7rIV + G 200-600 issue is NOT so severe that you can't use this combo for great fast action results even handheld, as I have posted many evidence. It is however, one of those insidious issues that experienced will miss too many shots in High Burst modes that would otherwise nailed with other Sony lenses and the A7rIV in High Burst mode.
Very glad to hear Lensrentals has reported the issue too--they are a very large Rental House/Important Customer to Sony and other camera companies. The more the merrier but the fact that Sony has not yet come with a fix means to me it might be more complicated which is not surprising since Sony might be the first to fling UNBELIEVABLY 61MPs Full Frame at fast moving subjects
I am not giving up on the otherwise fantastic G 200-600. Way...way, way too much bang for the buck on this spectacular even relatively compact super telephoto up to 600mm zoom lens. Now if you want G 200-600 and 61Mps perfection high burst aka ( Unicorn Magic) you might have to wait a bit and even IF ...Or just buy the Sony GM 600 and off you go. Likewise 24MPs Sony A9 or A9II are FIRE with the Sony G 200-600.
Agree - I have also experienced similar problems with the A7rIV + G 200-600 for birding in general but particularly for BIF. This is my second copy - my first copy was exchanged due to really bad focus issues using any lens I tried.
I also reported the R4/200-600 focus issue to Sony, and sent them numerous files with full EXIF data. While I have to give Sony USA kudos for being super responsive, the reply from engineers in Japan was that the high MPs in A7rIV makes the AF less responsive for fast action and the A9 should be considered the better choice for BIF.
Dan1313 wrote:
Agree - I have also experienced similar problems with the A7rIV + G 200-600 for birding in general but particularly for BIF. This is my second copy - my first copy was exchanged due to really bad focus issues using any lens I tried.
I also reported the R4/200-600 focus issue to Sony, and sent them numerous files with full EXIF data. While I have to give Sony USA kudos for being super responsive, the reply from engineers in Japan was that the high MPs in A7rIV makes the AF less responsive for fast action and the A9 should be considered the better choice for BIF. ...Show more →
That response from Japan would make sense to me except for the fact that my 600GM and 100-400GM have very little issue with AF on the 61MP sensor. Surely the A9 is better with any lens compared to the RIV but the RIV can focus on BIF with 600GM/2xTC without too much issue and much better consistency than the 200-600.
Sony were of course responding to my use case scenario which is specifically to the 7RIV/200-600 combo. I do have the 100-400 and generally agree that the results are better, but once I add the 1.4TC to get the better reach it doesn't seem to fair all that well. The 200-600 and 100-400 lenses perform very well on my A9, so this issue seems to be specific to the RIV and 200-600 lens combo.
I don't have the 600, so can't comment, but it does seem that many A7RIV users have much better success using the Sony prime.
When the RIV (+200-600) images are in focus they are crazy sharp and detailed, so I know that when everything comes together the results are outstanding, but in my experience it is the exception not the norm.
The A7R4 + 200-600 lens combo have major problems with getting (and keeping) perched birds in focus...as well as slowly moving subject matter as well (ducks on the water moving across the frame). It is much more than just a BiF issue...
After being very disappointed with this combo on my recent outing, I'm planning on selling/trading A7rIV and getting A9II instead. I don't do enough BIF or action to justify the added cost but it is just too frustrating to get out of focus images even on still subject.
Also the results seem to be totally random. Some will come our in focus while others with exact settings will not.
I spoke with Sony chat support yesterday who setup a warranty claim with Precision Camera in my state.
Has anyone had success sending their lens in? I vaguely recall seeing someone getting their lens replaced or calibrated and getting better results but I also recall someone who said it made no difference.
I guess the upside is if they can't fix the issue and a replacement lens has the same issue they would need to refund me? My warranty runs through the end of July.
Still unsure if I should just get a used A9 + 1.4x ($2500-3000) to be able to use the 200-600 for the summer or proceed with the warranty claim losing the lens for a few weeks and hope something positive comes from it or sell/swap the 200-600 for a 100-400 + 1.4x (~$1000 cost to switch).
I'd rather not spend much with the Canon R5 on the horizon which could make me reconsider my whole kit.
AlphaPhotography wrote:
I spoke with Sony chat support yesterday who setup a warranty claim with Precision Camera in my state.
Has anyone had success sending their lens in? I vaguely recall seeing someone getting their lens replaced or calibrated and getting better results but I also recall someone who said it made no difference.
I guess the upside is if they can't fix the issue and a replacement lens has the same issue they would need to refund me? My warranty runs through the end of July.
Still unsure if I should just get a used A9 + 1.4x ($2500-3000) to be able to use the 200-600 for the summer or proceed with the warranty claim losing the lens for a few weeks and hope something positive comes from it or sell/swap the 200-600 for a 100-400 + 1.4x (~$1000 cost to switch).
I'd rather not spend much with the Canon R5 on the horizon which could make me reconsider my whole kit....Show more →
Something that owners of the A7r IV should realize, even if the combo A7r IV and G 200-600mm lens works as specified, the AF performance will not be as good as the same lens on the A9 or A9 II. It simply won’t happen since the A7r IV is not geared to be a high performance, fast or action-packed camera. It is more designed to be a landscape, studio or architectural camera that lives happily on a tripod, for example. It is a 61MP camera...
AGeoJO wrote:
Something that owners of the A7r IV should realize, even if the combo A7r IV and G 200-600mm lens works as specified, the AF performance will not be as good as the same lens on the A9 or A9 II. It simply won’t happen since the A7r IV is not geared to be a high performance, fast or action-packed camera. It is more designed to be a landscape, studio or architectural camera that lives happily on a tripod, for example. It is a 61MP camera...
Most of the owners do realize that and that's not the issue. Issue is when this combo miss focus on static subjects where the AF is not even being challenged. I don't expect A7rIV to be a BIF/action camera like A9/A9II but do want it to take in focus images with 200-600 for perch birds or people when they are posing. It randomly becomes unreliable in those scenarios as well and that's where the frustration is coming from.
ajamils wrote:
Most of the owners do realize that and that's not the issue. Issue is when this combo miss focus on static subjects where the AF is not even being challenged. I don't expect A7rIV to be a BIF/action camera like A9/A9II but do want it to take in focus images with 200-600 for perch birds or people when they are posing. It randomly becomes unreliable in those scenarios as well and that's where the frustration is coming from.
You misunderstood me. The point I am trying to get across is, even if Sony fixes the issue down the road and it works as it should be and as specified by then, the AF performance of that combo will still not be as good as the A9 or A9 II with the same lens.
Yes I understand that and don't expect it to be on par with the A9/A9II. I just want some reasonable consistency, especially for still subjects. Even a 70% hit rate for slow subjects would be more than enough for my needs.
AGeoJO wrote:
You misunderstood me. The point I am trying to get across is, even if Sony fixes the issue down the road and it works as it should be and as specified by then, the AF performance of that combo will still not be as good as the A9 or A9 II with the same lens.
Agreed. I just want a reasonable level of consistency.
ajamils wrote:
Most of the owners do realize that and that's not the issue. Issue is when this combo miss focus on static subjects where the AF is not even being challenged. I don't expect A7rIV to be a BIF/action camera like A9/A9II but do want it to take in focus images with 200-600 for perch birds or people when they are posing. It randomly becomes unreliable in those scenarios as well and that's where the frustration is coming from.
AGeoJO wrote:
Something that owners of the A7r IV should realize, even if the combo A7r IV and G 200-600mm lens works as specified, the AF performance will not be as good as the same lens on the A9 or A9 II. It simply won’t happen since the A7r IV is not geared to be a high performance, fast or action-packed camera. It is more designed to be a landscape, studio or architectural camera that lives happily on a tripod, for example. It is a 61MP camera...
For sure...but the issue is it can't even reliably take a photo of a still bird on a stick or a duck floating by without back focusing most of the time. I don't need it to do challenging BIF (although today the RIV and 600GM was nailing Kestrel's IF so the body ain't terrible) but I do need it to reliably take a perched bird photo
arbitrage wrote:
For sure...but the issue is it can't even reliably take a photo of a still bird on a stick or a duck floating by without back focusing most of the time. I don't need it to do challenging BIF (although today the RIV and 600GM was nailing Kestrel's IF so the body ain't terrible) but I do need it to reliably take a perched bird photo
Arbitrage ... I believe you and you have been very helpful in sorting things out. I am not that good at BIF but like to try anyway. I have both the A9II and the A7R4 and for BIF its the A9II all the way. But I would like the A7R4 to work for still images with the 200-600 for some more sedentary. So I gave it a try yesterday with quite a few shots and most came out like these photos, which are cropped quite a bit. They were shot in RAW and just converted to JPG. No sharpening was applied. To my eyes they look pretty good. Maybe I got lucky.
Nice shots but these still don't look anywhere near as sharp as I would expect with the A7RIV and a good copy of the 200-600. Not sure if it's the focus issue or the lack of sharpening but I've seen far better results when the A7RIV nails focus and even from 24mp sensors.
Laslo Varadi wrote:
Arbitrage ... I believe you and you have been very helpful in sorting things out. I am not that good at BIF but like to try anyway. I have both the A9II and the A7R4 and for BIF its the A9II all the way. But I would like the A7R4 to work for still images with the 200-600 for some more sedentary. So I gave it a try yesterday with quite a few shots and most came out like these photos, which are cropped quite a bit. They were sho in RAW and just converted to JPG. No sharpening was applied. To my eyes they look pretty good. Maybe I got lucky.
AlphaPhotography wrote:
Nice shots but these still don't look anywhere near as sharp as I would expect with the A7RIV and a good copy of the 200-600. Not sure if it's the focus issue or the lack of sharpening but I've seen far better results when the A7RIV nails focus and even from 24mp sensors.
Were the examples you provided processed in any way? Mine where straight out of the camera with just conversion from RAW to JPG? I just want to make sure we compare apples to apples. Here is the first one with noise reduction using Denoise and slight sharpening in Photoshop.
I'm not sure. As I said it could just be sharpening applied making the difference but it is substantial to my eyes, especially considering 24mp vs 61mp. I'd expect the A7RIV to at least look much closer in perceived sharpness if it nailed focus.
What did you use to process from RAW TO JPEG?
Laslo Varadi wrote:
Were the examples you provided processed in any way? Mine where straight out of the camera with just conversion from RAW to JPG? I just want to make sure we compare apples to apples.
AlphaPhotography wrote:
I'm not sure. As I said it could just be sharpening applied making the difference but it is substantial to my eyes, especially considering 24mp vs 61mp. I'd expect the A7RIV to at least look much closer in perceived sharpness if it nailed focus.
What did you use to process from RAW TO JPEG?
Sorry about that. Our messages crossed. My conversion was using Photoshop. The one I just posted I ran through Denoise and then applied sharpening in Photoshop. Photos were take hand held and I'm not the steadiest.
Did you be sure to manually reduce sharpening to 0 in photoshop when processing? I only ask because my understanding is that Photoshop (and Lightroom) applies a default "40" sharpening to imported files unless manually reduced which I've seen many users are unaware of.
Laslo Varadi wrote:
Sorry about that. Our messages crossed. My conversion was using Photoshop. The one I just posted I ran through Denoise and then applied sharpening in Photoshop. Photos were take hand held and I'm not the steadiest.
and even IF ...Or just buy the Sony GM 600 and off you go. Likewise 24MPs Sony A9 or A9II are FIRE with the Sony G 200-600. 
