billsnature wrote:
Focusing on the background is a problem, but it is a different problem. What we are discussing is the focusing on nothing problem. It is focusing not on target or background and is just slightly OOF.
As to the problem you have mentioned, I suspect the shot occurred during the delay between having acquired the background and locked in on it and reacquiring the bird which is now under the AF point. Was the next frame in focus?
Bill
I think the two problems may be one in the same. I find the stationary problem like Kim describes usually shows under close inspection just a slight shift to the background....often just onto the lower back or tail of the bird despite a small flex spot right on the head. Now in flight shots the background is usually further away so I'm not seeing it focus way back on the background but my guess is the focus is also just slightly behind the bird so that nothing looks in focus. The focus plane is just in the empty air slightly behind the bird.
But regardless, it is an ever perplexing issue that I've only ever experienced similar with Canon bodies. Why some days I can go out and shoot the combo for a few hours and come home thinking I've solved it and other days it is a total mess is beyond me. I gave up shooting BIF with the combo awhile ago so not even sure how that performs anymore. Maybe I'll give BIF a try in overcast conditions and see what happens. Only problem is the only reliable BIF situation I have this time of year is swallows and that is probably pushing things too far. Of course I am shooting swallows with success with the R4 and 600GM so the R4 is not a total loss.
It may be that the Sony 200-600mm is sensitive to atmospherics, temperature shifts or plain lightfall. My first lens to perform superlative in certain circumstances and downright messy in other circumstances, was the Canon 400DOII. It was literally a two faced lens with extenders on. Shoot over water in bright Spring and images looked like they were from a €300,- mirror lens, although the very limited DR of the 7DII added to the total IQ loss. Shoot in covet autumn light, and I got razor sharp detailed images even with the 2×TC on. Coming from a Pentax DA560 that did not care one hoot what kind of light I threw at it, that was a major surprise.
What I have learned is that with super telelenses, not all is what it seems. They seem to be véry temperamental, and modern types of glass and design and coatings may add to this, improving IQ in areas, but not in all circumstances, as well as very high resolution sensors making visible what should probably stay hidden....
My quest is now to find a super telelens that just performs, no matter what light you throw at it. With that as a start, you are less likely to walk into frustration.
arbitrage wrote:
I think the two problems may be one in the same. I find the stationary problem like Kim describes usually shows under close inspection just a slight shift to the background....often just onto the lower back or tail of the bird despite a small flex spot right on the head. Now in flight shots the background is usually further away so I'm not seeing it focus way back on the background but my guess is the focus is also just slightly behind the bird so that nothing looks in focus. The focus plane is just in the empty air slightly behind the bird.
But regardless, it is an ever perplexing issue that I've only ever experienced similar with Canon bodies. Why some days I can go out and shoot the combo for a few hours and come home thinking I've solved it and other days it is a total mess is beyond me. I gave up shooting BIF with the combo awhile ago so not even sure how that performs anymore. Maybe I'll give BIF a try in overcast conditions and see what happens. Only problem is the only reliable BIF situation I have this time of year is swallows and that is probably pushing things too far. Of course I am shooting swallows with success with the R4 and 600GM so the R4 is not a total loss....Show more →
ChrisMak wrote:
It may be that the Sony 200-600mm is sensitive to atmospherics, temperature shifts or plain lightfall. My first lens to perform superlative in certain circumstances and downright messy in other circumstances, was the Canon 400DOII. It was literally a two faced lens with extenders on. Shoot over water in bright Spring and images looked like they were from a €300,- mirror lens, although the very limited DR of the 7DII added to the total IQ loss. Shoot in covet autumn light, and I got razor sharp detailed images even with the 2×TC on. Coming from a Pentax DA560 that did not care one hoot what kind of light I threw at it, that was a major surprise.
What I have learned is that with super telelenses, not all is what it seems. They seem to be véry temperamental, and modern types of glass and design and coatings may add to this, improving IQ in areas, but not in all circumstances, as well as very high resolution sensors making visible what should probably stay hidden....
My quest is now to find a super telelens that just performs, no matter what light you throw at it. With that as a start, you are less likely to walk into frustration.
The strangest thing though is that it has none of these issues on my A9 or A9II. I can shoot in bright light, backlight, cloudy light with the 200-600 on the A9 and it just performs like it should. I can shoot over distance with the A9/2-6 and it performs as can be expected considering only 24MPs. I can shoot it with the 1.4TC on the A9(II) and it performs for swallows in flight.
That is the perplexing thing with this whole thing. The lens is amazing on a different body and the R4 body is pretty amazing on other lenses. So it could just be some odd programming thing or the combination of slower AF calculations combined with slower focus motor.
arbitrage wrote:
The strangest thing though is that it has none of these issues on my A9 or A9II. I can shoot in bright light, backlight, cloudy light with the 200-600 on the A9 and it just performs like it should. I can shoot over distance with the A9/2-6 and it performs as can be expected considering only 24MPs. I can shoot it with the 1.4TC on the A9(II) and it performs for swallows in flight.
That is the perplexing thing with this whole thing. The lens is amazing on a different body and the R4 body is pretty amazing on other lenses. So it could just be some odd programming thing or the combination of slower AF calculations combined with slower focus motor....Show more →
I am curious if doubling your shutter speed would help, obviously not with mis-focus but those 61 mpix are not forgiving.
arbitrage wrote:
The strangest thing though is that it has none of these issues on my A9 or A9II. I can shoot in bright light, backlight, cloudy light with the 200-600 on the A9 and it just performs like it should. I can shoot over distance with the A9/2-6 and it performs as can be expected considering only 24MPs. I can shoot it with the 1.4TC on the A9(II) and it performs for swallows in flight.
That is the perplexing thing with this whole thing. The lens is amazing on a different body and the R4 body is pretty amazing on other lenses. So it could just be some odd programming thing or the combination of slower AF calculations combined with slower focus motor....Show more →
That’s right on the money, I would say. I took out both the G 200-600mm and the GM 600mm and used them on the A9 II and A7r IV, respectively over the weekend. Each combo performed well. Since I did it under real life shooting conditions and not for testing/evaluation, I didn’t want to change the combo for the possibility of messing up opportunities .
mogul wrote:
I am curious if doubling your shutter speed would help, obviously not with mis-focus but those 61 mpix are not forgiving.
No, I don't believe the 61MPs is part of the issue, I shoot handheld 1200mm with the 600GM/2xTC (heavier, more arm fatigue etc) without issue at my normal SSs from 1/200 up to 1/4000 depending on what I'm shooting and conditions.
arbitrage wrote:
The strangest thing though is that it has none of these issues on my A9 or A9II. I can shoot in bright light, backlight, cloudy light with the 200-600 on the A9 and it just performs like it should. I can shoot over distance with the A9/2-6 and it performs as can be expected considering only 24MPs. I can shoot it with the 1.4TC on the A9(II) and it performs for swallows in flight.
That is the perplexing thing with this whole thing. The lens is amazing on a different body and the R4 body is pretty amazing on other lenses. So it could just be some odd programming thing or the combination of slower AF calculations combined with slower focus motor....Show more →
Then the question would remain why the A7RIV+200-600 combo generally performs well in cloudy circumstances, but fails in bright light conditions.
Although I have now settled on Nikon, I am still following this thread with interest, as I almost opted for the A7RIV+200-600 combo, because it looks so damn good on paper, and because it would have offered the upgrade route to the apparently spectacular 600GM. But I read too much concern on the performance of this combo and settled on the Z7+500PF, with the somewhat less spectacular upgrade route to the 500mmF4E+1.4TC.
ChrisMak wrote:
Then the question would remain why the A7RIV+200-600 combo generally performs well in cloudy circumstances, but fails in bright light conditions.
Although I have now settled on Nikon, I am still following this thread with interest, as I almost opted for the A7RIV+200-600 combo, because it looks so damn good on paper, and because it would have offered the upgrade route to the apparently spectacular 600GM. But I read too much concern on the performance of this combo and settled on the Z7+500PF, with the somewhat less spectacular upgrade route to the 500mmF4E+1.4TC.
With cloudy conditions it is better but still not acceptable to me. 500PF is such a good lens and Z7 a great sensor that nothing wrong with that combo. Only thing I struggled with that combo when I owned it was flight shots. 500E is a sweet lens also if you need the f/4 or want to shoot more at 700mm. Otherwise I never felt it gave me a huge sharpness advantage over the 500PF which is why I eventually sold it as I kept grabbing the PF over it.
I've had my 7RM4 and 200-600 since Oct. 2019. At first I chalked up soft images to user error since I was switching over from shooting Canon for almost 10 years. As I started to shoot more wildlife - and even stationary wildlife - the fact that there was something wrong was undeniable. I wasn't having any issues with my Sony 70-200, but the 200-600 had a very low hit rate.
I finally sent the lens to Precision Camera for warranty service toward the end of April. Got it back May 1 "cleaned and restored to factory specs." Still NG. I reached out to Sony Pro Support in Los Angeles. They had me send in the body and lens to be evaluated. They still have both. But I got this note today that I thought some people would be interested in:
"We do currently believe it is a compatibility issue with the 7RM4 and 200600G, largely due to the 7RM4 having a large amount of pixels that is not communicating properly with the lens, or a similar issue. As we investigate more we will inform you of the issues.
One of the reasons we are not immediately replacing the unit is because we do not yet have definite reasoning that the production date is what is causing the issue and do not want to sent a unit that may result in the same issue you were having."
Finally, confirmation in writing from Sony on what my Sony Rep told me a number of months ago. Back then he already claimed that Sony was aware of the issue, and was working on a fix. It must not be a simple fix because they have been working on it for some time now. Lets, hope that they are able to solve it soon.
1bwana1 wrote:
Finally, confirmation in writing from Sony on what my Sony Rep told me a number of months ago. Back then he already claimed that Sony was aware of the issue, and was working on a fix. It must not be a simple fix because they have been working on it for some time now. Lets, hope that they are able to solve it soon.
Yes, I remembered when you posted that info back then. It seems like it is not an easy fix and I am afraid that it may involve some kind of hardware and not only a FW update.The logistics of that fix would be tough to implement due to global pandemic, lockdown and maybe even shortage or unavailability of certain parts. I hope I am wrong though.... We will see.
One would think (or have hoped) that Sony would have thoroughly gone through the paces with their newest flagship body and newest long lens! It looks like the Sony body team people were not communicating very well with the Sony lens people
S29H wrote:
I've had my 7RM4 and 200-600 since Oct. 2019. At first I chalked up soft images to user error since I was switching over from shooting Canon for almost 10 years. As I started to shoot more wildlife - and even stationary wildlife - the fact that there was something wrong was undeniable. I wasn't having any issues with my Sony 70-200, but the 200-600 had a very low hit rate.
I finally sent the lens to Precision Camera for warranty service toward the end of April. Got it back May 1 "cleaned and restored to factory specs." Still NG. I reached out to Sony Pro Support in Los Angeles. They had me send in the body and lens to be evaluated. They still have both. But I got this note today that I thought some people would be interested in:
"We do currently believe it is a compatibility issue with the 7RM4 and 200600G, largely due to the 7RM4 having a large amount of pixels that is not communicating properly with the lens, or a similar issue. As we investigate more we will inform you of the issues.
One of the reasons we are not immediately replacing the unit is because we do not yet have definite reasoning that the production date is what is causing the issue and do not want to sent a unit that may result in the same issue you were having."
Please keep us updated as it is the first written acknowledgement that a problem exists. It points to communication issues which is probably the case. I’m hard pressed to believe that the G lens can’t keep up (it works on the a9) and it isn’t simply the camera doesn’t read fast enough as it af fine with an adapted prime +tc. It is the combination.
That's great news! Now i just hope Sony acknowledges this problem globally so that each one of us need not explain the issue to the service technicians. After sales support is generally terrible in India no matter what brand one uses (canon seems to be ok and i am yet to try out Sony). I have had painful experience with Nikon couple of times, once with my Nikon D750 shutter issue and then with my D850+500 F4 G AFFT....With the 750, the service centre was in complete denial until Nikon officially announced this in all their local websites and with the AFFT i just gave up...
S29H wrote:
I've had my 7RM4 and 200-600 since Oct. 2019. At first I chalked up soft images to user error since I was switching over from shooting Canon for almost 10 years. As I started to shoot more wildlife - and even stationary wildlife - the fact that there was something wrong was undeniable. I wasn't having any issues with my Sony 70-200, but the 200-600 had a very low hit rate.
I finally sent the lens to Precision Camera for warranty service toward the end of April. Got it back May 1 "cleaned and restored to factory specs." Still NG. I reached out to Sony Pro Support in Los Angeles. They had me send in the body and lens to be evaluated. They still have both. But I got this note today that I thought some people would be interested in:
"We do currently believe it is a compatibility issue with the 7RM4 and 200600G, largely due to the 7RM4 having a large amount of pixels that is not communicating properly with the lens, or a similar issue. As we investigate more we will inform you of the issues.
One of the reasons we are not immediately replacing the unit is because we do not yet have definite reasoning that the production date is what is causing the issue and do not want to sent a unit that may result in the same issue you were having."
armd wrote:
Please keep us updated as it is the first written acknowledgement that a problem exists. It points to communication issues which is probably the case. I’m hard pressed to believe that the G lens can’t keep up (it works on the a9) and it isn’t simply the camera doesn’t read fast enough as it af fine with an adapted prime +tc. It is the combination.
Despite my theorizing about the combination of slow motor, slow camera, I am much more inclined to believe as you do that it is some sort of communication or programming issue. That does make more sense based on how the lens and camera perform when matched with other lenses and cameras.
I tried to join that community....trying to create an account just takes you to login...useless....so I thought maybe I already have an account. Entered my email to reset password, email received which usually means I am on record, try to reset password and asked my birthdate (says incorrect), simple security question "where were you born" (incorrect)...no other options. So I gave up.
arbitrage wrote:
Despite my theorizing about the combination of slow motor, slow camera, I am much more inclined to believe as you do that it is some sort of communication or programming issue. That does make more sense based on how the lens and camera perform when matched with other lenses and cameras.
I tried to join that community....trying to create an account just takes you to login...useless....so I thought maybe I already have an account. Entered my email to reset password, email received which usually means I am on record, try to reset password and asked my birthdate (says incorrect), simple security question "where were you born" (incorrect)...no other options. So I gave up....Show more →
Does Canada have its own Sony site?
Yes. But I was just trying to link into that particular discussion on the US site to add my complaints/thoughts. Its not like the site asked where I was...wouldn't even let me get to a proper registration page to create an account. Buggy...
arbitrage wrote:
Yes. But I was just trying to link into that particular discussion on the US site to add my complaints/thoughts. Its not like the site asked where I was...wouldn't even let me get to a proper registration page to create an account. Buggy...
It know where are from without registering.
I just created a new account on the sony community and posted my comments. I have also pasted the link to this thread, just in case someone from sony really wants to know what users are reporting. Let's try our collective luck! 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.
.