fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6              8              10       11       end
  

Archive 2020 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved

  
 
Maxxus46
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #1 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


Afraid so, im not seeing any measurable improvement. Lets face it, Sony wont be fixing this issue..and if you need faster, reliable AF you will need an A9.. there is no other solution. The R4 was pumped with too many pixels which slows it down in many ways. Problem is Sony will never sell a body that will cripple sales of another body. They expect you to have at least 2 bodies. I suspect next R series body will have resolved these AF issues and be slightly faster overall (but again will not exceed the A9 in terms of AF performance ). R4 is a great landscape, studio camera. Thats about it... after using an A9ii I have an even stronger dislike for the R4...it feels slow

LBJ2 wrote:
The placebo effect is very strong in this thread.

LBJ2 wrote:
I am confident I don't see any evidence v 1.20 improved A7rIV + G 200-600 AF while in high burst mode. I posted settings which seem to work better and frankly with these settings and practice there is a chance to increase the hit rate while in high burst mode with the A7rIV. I’ve been using the G 200-600 since it first came out so I’ve plenty of practice with this lens. It’s a very, very good lens at its price point and FL.

Maxxus responded:

"According to Arbitrage there is a
...Show more



Sep 07, 2020 at 07:58 AM
LBJ2
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #2 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


I’m not so sure about intentional crippling, but I know this is a very popular allegation to write these days. Personally I’m still amazed at what I can pull off with 61MPS to include very fast moving targets. I intentionally forced myself to make A7rIV + fast moving targets work even though I became very spoilt with the A9. Seriously who exactly misses any target with the A9/II !

Glass Half Full:

It’s not natural to expect to easily fling around 61 MPS FF for very small, fast moving targets. BUT, the A7rIV + GM 600/4, GM 400/2.8 or GM 100-400 will make you a believer and when you nail the A7rIV + not GM AF tech level “G”-200-600 consistently your heart will leap.

IMO the a7rIV + G 200-600 will test anybody’s fast moving BIF patience, skills and confidence. If you can make it work and many of us can to a very acceptable degree with some practice and maybe a few settings adjustments, it will only enhance your BIF abilities. Much easier to let supersonic AF tech take over and why not—I get it. I haven’t tried the R5 for BIF, my GAS has not become that out of control...yet 🤓 but I think Canon showed us that a very powerful processor can indeed fling around a lot of FF pixels even for very fast moving BIF and bird eye-AF. Time will tell of course as more and more put the R5 to the test. Personally, I would not spend $4K + lenses for bird eye-af, but I do admit it looks a very cool feature, but not really needed for great BIF and I’m confident Sony will achieve or exceed bird eye-af at some point.

Otherwise A9/II + G 200-600 and don’t look back ✅



Sep 07, 2020 at 09:35 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #3 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


Just spent another morning with the RIV and 200-600. Once again the combo just nailed almost everything that wasn't flying and nailed most of what was flying including some Hail Mary shots of shorebirds in flight. Not seeing any back focus anymore.

I was so confident that I switched all my settings back to how I used to shoot when I first got the camera. OSS 1, TS 5, MS, wide open....well it was still working even doing that.

So again, don't know what happened but it seems to work for me now.



Sep 07, 2020 at 02:04 PM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #4 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


arbitrage wrote:
Just spent another morning with the RIV and 200-600. Once again the combo just nailed almost everything that wasn't flying and nailed most of what was flying including some Hail Mary shots of shorebirds in flight. Not seeing any back focus anymore.

I was so confident that I switched all my settings back to how I used to shoot when I first got the camera. OSS 1, TS 5, MS, wide open....well it was still working even doing that.

So again, don't know what happened but it seems to work for me now.


Got to be the placebo effect, as I mentioned above . I meant on the camera, of course, since we were able to convince it that the FW update would make it perform like the A9 AF-wise.

I will go out later on today in 4 hours or so and I will only take that lens. I will see how it performs on the A7r IV. Just to be on the safe side though, I will take my A9 II on this outing though.



Sep 07, 2020 at 02:15 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #5 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved




AGeoJO wrote:
Got to be the placebo effect, as I mentioned above . I meant on the camera, of course, since we were able to convince it that the FW update would make it perform like the A9 AF-wise.

I will go out later on today in 4 hours or so and I will only take that lens. I will see how it performs on the A7r IV. Just to be on the safe side though, I will take my A9 II on this outing though.


I’m now spending the afternoon in my yard shooting the combo and I will try it for awhile with default settings and see if my good results continue.

I had my A9II along this morning also and switched to it for the last 1/2 hr to shoot some tiny shorebirds IF.



Sep 07, 2020 at 02:56 PM
k-h.a.w
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #6 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


. .


Sep 07, 2020 at 03:31 PM
Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #7 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


I got this yesterday morning, didn't even see the green heron coming until pretty late, took three shots, all in focus, I think.



Green Heron in Morning Fog by Douglas Liu, on Flickr


The GBH was easy, it was taking off about 20' from me.


Great Blue Heron Morning Flight by Douglas Liu, on Flickr



Sep 07, 2020 at 03:57 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #8 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


I'm starting to question the R5 I was planning to order this week....


Sep 07, 2020 at 04:22 PM
Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #9 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


arbitrage wrote:
I'm starting to question the R5 I was planning to order this week....


If the R5's electronic shutter shows no visible rolling shutter effect under most circumstances, I still think it's a better camera for BIF for its AF and FPS than the A7RIV, but than Canon doesn't have the 200-600



Sep 07, 2020 at 04:31 PM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #10 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


kdrk888 wrote:
If the R5's electronic shutter shows no visible rolling shutter effect under most circumstances, I still think it's a better camera for BIF for its AF and FPS than the A7RIV, but than Canon doesn't have the 200-600


Yeah lenses are my biggest issue with the R5.....



Sep 07, 2020 at 05:25 PM
Maxxus46
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #11 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


Precisely...if i owned the 600F4 GM I would keep the A7RIV. I Have other priorities so for me it makes more sense to use the A9ii with 200-600G. Amazing combo.
I will add that the 100400GM although a good lense, just wasnt doing it for me even in R4 crop mode when birding...tracking smaller birds like swallows with that combo still tested my patience where the A9ii+200-600 just does its magic. Take care

LBJ2 wrote:
I’m not so sure about intentional crippling, but I know this is a very popular allegation to write these days. Personally I’m still amazed at what I can pull off with 61MPS to include very fast moving targets. I intentionally forced myself to make A7rIV + fast moving targets work even though I became very spoilt with the A9. Seriously who exactly misses any target with the A9/II !

Glass Half Full:

It’s not natural to expect to easily fling around 61 MPS FF for very small, fast moving targets. BUT, the A7rIV + GM 600/4, GM 400/2.8 or GM 100-400
...Show more



Sep 08, 2020 at 08:24 AM
Maxxus46
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #12 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


from all I've read R5 does have rolling shutter, worse than 1dxmiii

kdrk888 wrote:
If the R5's electronic shutter shows no visible rolling shutter effect under most circumstances, I still think it's a better camera for BIF for its AF and FPS than the A7RIV, but than Canon doesn't have the 200-600




Sep 08, 2020 at 08:25 AM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #13 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


Maxxus46 wrote:
Afraid so, im not seeing any measurable improvement. Lets face it, Sony wont be fixing this issue..and if you need faster, reliable AF you will need an A9.. there is no other solution. The R4 was pumped with too many pixels which slows it down in many ways. Problem is Sony will never sell a body that will cripple sales of another body. They expect you to have at least 2 bodies. I suspect next R series body will have resolved these AF issues and be slightly faster overall (but again will not exceed the A9 in terms of AF
...Show more

Nelson, I spent 2-3 hours at a local wildlife reserve in the PM yesterday and I had only my A7r IV plus the 200-600mm. Although my intention was to shoot some other birds that were reported to be present in large numbers but I ended up capturing several in-flight images of fairly small to fairly large birds. I haven’t had the chance to go through the images but from a cursory look, my keeper rate of in focus images is easily somewhere around 80%, I would say. Of course, from the artistic or composition point of view, the keeper rate is significantly lower than that. I will post a few later on today or tomorrow. To say it in a few words, I am pleased with the AF performance of that combo. I am sorry to hear that your experience doesn’t match mine.



Sep 08, 2020 at 08:37 AM
kimknapp
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #14 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


IMHO
Tips from a non-200-600 user for stationary birds (where you sometimes get back focus or poor focus):

1. Try NOT to use flexible spot. I have found, over and over, with the 600GM and the 100-400GM, that flexible spot can result in OOF shots, even when the spot is completely within a part of the bird that is in the correct plane. I only use it when the bird is buried in branches and then, if there is time, I switch to manual focus to get the focus tack sharp (difficult with the 600GM handheld because MF control is too coarse). I use zone AF almost exclusively and am often surprised how well it picks up birds even when there are branches nearby. Also, I think that since zone tries to get as many points in focus as it can, the focus point ends up in the middle plane of the front of the bird resulting in more of the bird being in focus. If you use zone in a busy environment try getting close to focus with MF first, as others have suggested.
I noticed this readily last weekend while photographing a very patient Great Horned Owl. He was in a tree and I was worried about a branch in front of him, so I started with small flexible spot. Over and over I had the spot right over the bill (very close to the same plane as the eyes) and the shots were too soft. I switched to zone and the shots were all tack sharp for most of the head (and a lot of the body). I have seen this over and over. For example, a while ago I posted a photo of a small bird sitting on a cross member of a wooden fence where I had put the spot on the bird and all of the spot was covered by the bird, but the camera ended up focusing on the fence's wall a couple inches behind the bird.

2. Don't bother trying to do BIF (even stationary birds sometimes) when lighting isn't low and behind you. I know that this is a basic rule, but I found it is much more critical with the 7Riv and the 100-400, so probably the 200-600, too. I am not sure what is going on, but I have found, over and over, that lighting from the side or front really screws up the focus. To prove it to myself, several times I switched to MF (stationary bird) and could get a tack sharp image, but AF was way off, even with zone AF. As just mentioned, even stationary birds can end up poorly focused in overly bright, side or front lighted conditions. I am not talking about mid-day heatwaves. And, I am not talking about extreme front lighting. This is much more evident in the 100-400 than the 600.
Just a SWAG, coming from an electrical engineering background with a lot of experience with radio waves, I suspect that enough of the light bounces off the inside of the hood and changes phase, that it confuses the phase detection algorithm. (any time a radio wave, including light, is reflected, the phase reverses). To be honest, I am not sure if this would affect the way the phase detection focuses, but... Would be nice to be able to turn off phase detect and only use contrast detect, just to see if it makes a difference. I may try an extended hood made from black felt to see what that does.

Just some thoughts. Hope they are helpful.

Kim



Sep 08, 2020 at 12:03 PM
MedicineMan404
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #15 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


kdrk888 wrote:
If the R5's electronic shutter shows no visible rolling shutter effect under most circumstances, I still think it's a better camera for BIF for its AF and FPS than the A7RIV, but than Canon doesn't have the 200-600


That's why you can get the EOS 100500+1.4TC eh



Sep 08, 2020 at 09:43 PM
nobody23
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #16 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved



UV filter anybody?



Sep 09, 2020 at 10:03 AM
AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #17 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


nobody23 wrote:


UV filter anybody?


Very interesting! I never used any UV filter on any of my lenses unless someone puts a gun on my head and tells me to do it . Not for that particular reason but I simply do not want to degrade the optical quality by adding a piece of glass that can cause flare, ghosting, etc. regardless how expensive that filter is.



Sep 09, 2020 at 10:34 AM
arbitrage
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #18 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


nobody23 wrote:


UV filter anybody?


I've never used a UV filter (or any filter on a telephoto lens) and never will. UV filters are for film. If you want to protect a lens for a digital camera buy a clear filter or better yet...DON'T



Sep 09, 2020 at 10:37 AM
weomck
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #19 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


MedicineMan404 wrote:
That's why you can get the EOS 100500+1.4TC eh


or save yourself $2,300 and get the 800mm f/11, gain 100mm and only lose 1/3 stop of light...



Sep 09, 2020 at 12:46 PM
armd
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #20 · A7rIV & 200-600 looks like issues may have been resolved


arbitrage wrote:
I'm starting to question the R5 I was planning to order this week....


Seriously Geoff? It's been a dream, now that I am getting the hang of it and have figured out the PP a bit more. At first, I was missing the resolution of the a7riv files and ability to routinely crop 75% for web work (pushing it for prints) but after a couple of weeks, my results are much better. The AF is superior in every respect compared to the a7riv and the ES is fine under most circumstances.

Apart from the better focus capture, my R5 files require less overall PP, the WB and colors are better, and I am back to a more appropriate Tv for BIF; anything less than 1/2500-1/3200 was a bit iffy on my a7riv for even large, slow moving birds such as geese and GBH. The rolling shutter while demonstratable is much better than the a7riv though not as good as the a9(ii). Though I miss the a7riv's controls and button programability perhaps the most underappreciated aspect of the R5 is that the mount seems more robust with less play; it feels like the camera is much better integrated to the lens.

The only thing I wish I could do is figure out a way to adapt the 200-600 to the R5. That, would be interesting (calling Sigma).



Sep 09, 2020 at 01:31 PM
1       2       3              6              8              10       11       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6              8              10       11       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account