Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  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       4       end
  

Archive 2022 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?

  
 
jeffbuzz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


pulper11 wrote:
I'm not sure what the LED issues are for indoor sports for the A9. I shoot electronic shutter all the time on the A9. The first first link I provided in my original post is for indoor hockey and at least I don't see any problems with lighting. Am I missing something?


a9M2 firmware v2.0 added “Hi Frequency flicker” variable shutter speed which I don't believe is available for the original a9. Sony's website has a very detailed explanation of high-frequency flicker. As others noted, this may not impact you if you don't ever encounter that type of LED lighting.



May 16, 2022 at 11:01 AM
GMPhotography
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


jeffbuzz wrote:
a9M2 firmware v2.0 added “Hi Frequency flicker” variable shutter speed which I don't believe is available for the original a9. Sony's website has a very detailed explanation of high-frequency flicker. As others noted, this may not impact you if you don't ever encounter that type of LED lighting.


Its not on the A9 just the A9II why I moved up to it than I jumped full boat to the A1



May 16, 2022 at 01:08 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


What kind of sports are you shooting? 70-200 apparently a bit short for football 100-400 a bit slow.

I've used 2 ssystems and enjoyed it. Used to use m4/3 + alts. Nice change of pace.



May 16, 2022 at 01:45 PM
pulper11
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


jeffbuzz wrote:
a9M2 firmware v2.0 added “Hi Frequency flicker” variable shutter speed which I don't believe is available for the original a9. Sony's website has a very detailed explanation of high-frequency flicker. As others noted, this may not impact you if you don't ever encounter that type of LED lighting.


Thanks for the info. Don't think this will encourage me to go with the A9ii over the A9. Not for the price difference.



May 16, 2022 at 02:14 PM
pulper11
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


AmbientMike wrote:
What kind of sports are you shooting? 70-200 apparently a bit short for football 100-400 a bit slow.

I've used 2 ssystems and enjoyed it. Used to use m4/3 + alts. Nice change of pace.


If you take a look in my first post, you'll see my website that I'm working on. The links are to pages of my photos, which hopefully will give you an idea.

With football, I have to move from end to end to get closer to the action. Still there are times of course when the 70-180 isn't as close as I'd like and I hope for the best as far as action coming toward me. The 100-400 would be nice for the long end. However as you said it is slow. The main issue I have with it (what I had with the 200-600 when I rented it) is the lack of subject separation from the background. I imagine that if the shot is close enough that the 400 would separate the background from the player well, then I would probably be shooting with the 70-180. Not quite sure about that.

That's why I do wish I could get a prime telephoto (used) cheap. But then perhaps I'd just setup shop in one area and shoot - may not be as much fun. I like getting images from different vantage points.





May 16, 2022 at 02:20 PM
Newenglandrocks
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


After reading through this thread, I noticed no mention of using a TC. I've been shooting a lot of collegiate ultimate frisbee recently, and the A9 with the 70-200GM ii and 1.4TC gives meaningfully more reach and in crop mode you get to 420mm equivalent. Then if someone wanted a big print of a cropped image, you could upres with Topaz Gigapixel AI for more detail.

I've got a few sets up on Flickr - some photos were shot with crop mode. It is a great combination and the AF is superb most of the time. I have occasional issues with high contrast buildings in the background, but you won't get thar when shooting football.

https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720298974832

https://flickr.com/photos/53775612@N00/sets/72177720298971322

pulper11 wrote:
If you take a look in my first post, you'll see my website that I'm working on. The links are to pages of my photos, which hopefully will give you an idea.

With football, I have to move from end to end to get closer to the action. Still there are times of course when the 70-180 isn't as close as I'd like and I hope for the best as far as action coming toward me. The 100-400 would be nice for the long end. However as you said it is slow. The main issue I have with it (what I
...Show more




May 18, 2022 at 05:17 AM
doc4x5
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


The two systems question is very personal. In the film era, I owned a number of systems and took one, only one, for each shoot. Once, only once, I went into the field with a Nikon D200, a Hasselblad (film), and a 4x5 (obviously film), and all the stuff that went with them, lenses, film, filters. I just about lost my mind and wasted huge amounts of time deciding which camera to use. The photos that day were not memorable, just the stress.

Having more than one quite different digital system, eg Sony and Canon would also make me nuts, even more than I am ordinarily. I had overlapping systems occasionally in my progress from Nikon to Sony, with a stop at Fuji on the way. I am sooo happy now with one system, one set of menus, one set of lenses. These days, if the exception of tilt-shift (which I'd love for Sony), if you can't find gear, especially lenses to meet your needs, you have very special needs.

Good luck in your quest.







May 21, 2022 at 01:23 PM
AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


pulper11 wrote:
If you take a look in my first post, you'll see my website that I'm working on. The links are to pages of my photos, which hopefully will give you an idea.

With football, I have to move from end to end to get closer to the action. Still there are times of course when the 70-180 isn't as close as I'd like and I hope for the best as far as action coming toward me. The 100-400 would be nice for the long end. However as you said it is slow. The main issue I have with it (what I
...Show more

I think people like 300 or 400 for football. An older 300/2.8 is under $2k if you use canon. 400/2.8 are supposedly all good, older ones heavy though. IS not really necessary for sports imo.

Metabones or sigma EF adapters could be used, not sure how good they are. Sometimes people say they are excellent sometimes not so much. EF to R adapter is supposed to be seamless. Of course if it needs parts an older one can be difficult to repair. Not necessarily that difficult to lose that amount on long teles though in general, depending on. Although sometimes you might be able to get an older used one of a newer version and hang onto it for 2-3 years then resell for minimal loss.



May 21, 2022 at 06:05 PM
httivals
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


I use the Canon R5 for telephotos and telephoto zooms and Sony A7RIV for wide angle to 70mm. Very happy with this. It’s based on my preferences for the lenses available for each. I tried the Sigma EF adapter and while it was ok, it’s a very serious compromise. The EF to Canon R adapters are perfect, seamless. . . . It took me awhile to do it, but I’ve now configured the buttons and settings between the two cameras so that the interfaces are quite similar, albeit not at all identical. It’s relatively seamless for me to switch from one camera to the other, and I typically carry one of each when doing serious photography (which for me is primarily travel or landscape).


May 21, 2022 at 06:11 PM
osv2
Offline
• • • •
[X]
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


canon does not have sony real-time tracking, and the 1st-gen 500/4 you mentioned has limitations on the r5.

the r5 itself does not have a stacked sensor, so the r5 electronic shutter has issues with rolling shutter(see the ball distortion photos below)... r5 does not have a blackout-free evf; in other words there are big advantages you get with an a9/a9ii that can't be duplicated on the r5.






May 21, 2022 at 10:19 PM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


So much depends on your budget. It would be nice to get a 400 f/2.8 lens, but if you stick with Sony your only option is the 400 f/2.8 GM that costs $12,000 and isn't available used for really any less money. If you can afford that, then I would stick with Sony.

If you can't but can afford $8,00 to $9,000, then I would look at the Canon R3 and a used Canon 400 f/2.8. The R3 will not show the negative distortion affects that osv2 describes above and is a super capable camera and will shoot very fast even with the older EF lens in electronic shutter mode. This system would work very well but be heavy.

If you can't afford $8,000 or $9,000, then you are going to have to live with limitations of your lenses. With your A9 your camera isn't really limited, but in one way or another you will have limits with the lens your choose. You can go with reach and the Sony 200-600 f/5.6-6.3 G and you will be limited by the aperture of the lens. You could go with the new 70-200 f/2.8 II and add the 1.4X TC for some more reach and the 2X TC when you need even more reach and you will have the wider aperture when you can get closer but when you want reach you will still be limited by aperture. Even though you have the 70-180, I think if you don't have the budget I would go one of these routes. For $2,000 you can go with the lens with reach and for $3,000 you can get the 70-200 f/2.8 II and both TC and this would be a nice upgrade from your Tamron 70-180 because you can't use the TC with that.

Let me say I think your shots are excellent and you should upgrade to what you can afford. It is a shame Sony doesn't have a moderately priced 300 f/2.8 for example as that would be an even better upgrade at a lower price, but I can't see switching to Canon unless you can afford the R3.



May 22, 2022 at 08:05 AM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


Steve Spencer wrote:
So much depends on your budget. It would be nice to get a 400 f/2.8 lens, but if you stick with Sony your only option is the 400 f/2.8 GM that costs $12,000 and isn't available used for really any less money. If you can afford that, then I would stick with Sony.

If you can't but can afford $8,00 to $9,000, then I would look at the Canon R3 and a used Canon 400 f/2.8. The R3 will not show the negative distortion affects that osv2 describes above and is a super capable camera and will shoot very fast
...Show more

Hi Steve,

Going the Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II alone will cost about $2800 plus tax and with both TCs will run about $3800 or $3900 plus tax. I am not sure what you would pay used for these.

I do not know how the later Canon 300mm f2.8 EF lenses perform with one of Sigma or Metabones adapters on a Sony body like an A9, but that might be an option at a lower price than many of your suggestions.

Rich




May 22, 2022 at 08:32 AM
GHarris
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


httivals wrote:
I use the Canon R5 for telephotos and telephoto zooms and Sony A7RIV for wide angle to 70mm. Very happy with this. It’s based on my preferences for the lenses available for each. I tried the Sigma EF adapter and while it was ok, it’s a very serious compromise. The EF to Canon R adapters are perfect, seamless. . . . It took me awhile to do it, but I’ve now configured the buttons and settings between the two cameras so that the interfaces are quite similar, albeit not at all identical. It’s relatively seamless for me to switch from
...Show more

For what it's worth, while the Sigma MC-11 is indeed a compromise, it's much less of one on the a9 than on the A7Riv you mention. The maximum burst rate rises to 10fps rather than 3, and the autofocus in combination with the a9 is really pretty good, with a high-end, fast-focussing lens (even my ancient 200mm f/1.8 autofocuses pretty well on the a9). Ah, but... how good? That's the unquantifiable "how long is a piece of string?" question that can only be answered by direct experience tested in the situation/use-case demanded.

Here's a weird idea. Find a Canon 400mm f/2.8 L IS II lens (specifically the IS II, note!) for sale at the best price you can obtain second-hand. Doesn't matter if the paint is chipped, as long as it isn't decentred or optically damaged, right? Try it. Keep it, or don't. Resell it immediately, or some years down the line, for similar to the price you paid to buy it. A free trial, aside from the faff and unpredictable timeframes involved in finding one and then reselling it.

I saw a mint-condition used Sony 400 f/2.8 GM for sale here recently in Germany. They don't come up all that often, since it's not an old, hugely widespread lens yet. It sold for around 8300 Euros - the price to buy new is 11,999. If you obtain one, given availability it's mostly by buying new, and you lose a lot of its value right away. Perhaps that particular used price was not representative, I don't know, but it happened. And that price drop is despite the fact that the GM doesn't even have a successor yet, it's still the latest model. The Canon IS II can be found more easily and for quite a lot less than that GM's used price, and then resold again for the same, because its merits are not depreciating any further from now.

The GM is definitely a faster-focusing lens for being native, and with better AF coverage into the far reaches of the frame. And it's much lighter and better-balanced, insofar as that matters depending on usage (handheld or monopod?). But is there any chance that its AF would be fast enough for you on an MC-11 with the a9?

The Canon has as-good image quality. Maybe slightly better. That gen II lens had nothing at all to criticise optically, it was close to perfect, and the gen III/RF model Canon (and its comparable competitor, the Sony GM) did not improve on it optically. With only one exception: The 2x TC may produce better image quality on mirrorless than the old Canon EF 2x TCs can... but that may be to do with the design of the newer, mirrorless-oriented/spaced TCs rather than anything else.

Just a dumb idea / thought experiment. I dwell on the idea occasionally myself, without having yet pulled the trigger, hence the waffling. If you need a fast 400 mm lens and the autofocus doesn't have to be the very best then there's little wrong with the IS II. If you need quite good autofocus, maybe() it's still enough with an a9/a1? Happy for anyone to tear the idea to shreds, it's just a thought.



May 22, 2022 at 09:18 AM
Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


naturephoto1 wrote:
Hi Steve,

Going the Sony 70-200mm f2.8 II alone will cost about $2800 plus tax and with both TCs will run about $3800 or $3900 plus tax. I am not sure what you would pay used for these.

I do not know how the later Canon 300mm f2.8 EF lenses perform with one of Sigma or Metabones adapters on a Sony body like an A9, but that might be an option at a lower price than many of your suggestions.

Rich



Hi Rich,

I probably underestimated the Sony price a bit. I have seen the 70-200 f/2.8 GM II sell on here for $2,500 used and I have seen the TCs sell as low as $400 used (I got the 1.4X TC myself for $400). So, it is probably more like $3,300 to $3,500 if you go this route used. Personally, I would go for an adapted Canon lens for shooting sports. I a huge fan of adapting lenses, but this is the one scenario when you want top level AF without AF misses or racking, so personally I would not recommend adapted Canon, but if you went this route you could get a Canon EF 400 f/2.8L IS (first edition) for less than $3,000 or the second version as GHarris recommends if you can afford it.

I also made the assumption that since the OP was considering a Canon R5 he could spend at least that much money so the 70-200 f/2.8 GM II plus the TC would be within his budget.



May 22, 2022 at 10:40 AM
pulper11
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


Thanks everyone for the wonderful thoughts and advice! I really appreciate it.

First point I want to make is that I've tried the MC-11 with the A9. While it does work reasonably well, the AF is simply not fast enough for what I need. It's a good suggestion but just not for what I do.

Second point is regarding the stacked sensors that are lacking in the R5 and R6. That certainly does concern me. I see those distorted pictures but have also read that this is pretty rare. I don't know what to believe but realize that mechanical is one way to deal with this, albeit being more limited. The limitations mentioned regarding the first version of the Canon 500 lens with the R5 is, I believe, that the FPS with mechanical will not reach 12 fps and would be more like 7 or 8 fps. More recent lenses (such as the version ii of the 400 2.8) apparently hit 12fps which is still really good for sports (amazing how what is good and what isn't anymore has changed so quickly - used to shoot with 5 fps and thought that was fast back in the film days).

Third point is that I just upgraded to the 70-200 2.8 version ii. Bought here and waiting to get it. Well, i really can't wait to get it. Looking forward to giving that a try, but using a tele extender is not what I want to do. Image quality suffers too much based on my previous uses (maybe better now, but I'm not really considering this).

I've also tried the 200-600 (rented). Now I didn't have a very good monopod and only one camera which I shared between this lens and the Tamron 70-180 (not fun during a game), so take this with a grain of salt. However, for the size of the lens (mostly the weight), I didn't feel that the photos were worth it. I also didn't spend much time getting used to the lens and it requires a different shooting style than a smaller lens where you have to move to get closer to the action. After trying for 1 quarter of the game, I packed it back up and didn't use it. Perhaps more experience with the lens would have given better results. However, as an alternative to this in the "more" budget category than big lenses, I started thinking more about the 100-400 GM lens. Still might consider this. Handholdable and sticks with Sony, and also could use it instead of my Canon 100 macro for what I shoot (more savings there).

Two of my pictures in this webpage were shot with the 200-600. Picture #3 and #4.
https://photobybarnick.com/football-photos-by-barnick-wvu/. They certainly captures a great scene that I wouldn't have had otherwise, but the background isn't great. IMO they are still worth showcasing however.

The R3 and the A1 are just too expensive for me at this point. If I'm not mistaken, I could get the R5 and a used 400 2.8 ii lens for about the same price as the R3. Heavy lens, but the pictures would be worth the weight.

Finally, I'm also considering (if going with Canon for the 2nd body) the Canon 400 F4 DO IS version ii. That I think would be my first choice given the weight savings on this and pretty fast aperture. They come up for sale every now and then and that might be where I'm leaning if going with Canon. If you have any experience with this lens and sports, let me know. Including how it handles if shooting without a monopod.

Again, thanks for all the input here. Really helpful.








May 22, 2022 at 11:50 AM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


pulper11 wrote:
Thanks everyone for the wonderful thoughts and advice! I really appreciate it.

First point I want to make is that I've tried the MC-11 with the A9. While it does work reasonably well, the AF is simply not fast enough for what I need. It's a good suggestion but just not for what I do.

Second point is regarding the stacked sensors that are lacking in the R5 and R6. That certainly does concern me. I see those distorted pictures but have also read that this is pretty rare. I don't know what to believe but realize that mechanical is one
...Show more

Hi,

If you think that the Sony 200-600mm G is heavy, the Canon 400 f2.8II approaches twice its weight. The Canon 400mm f2.8 II weighs 8.49 pounds, the Sony 200-600mm G weighs 4.675 pounds, and the Canon DO f4 IS Version II weighs 4.61 25 pounds. These weights are very much something to consider plus the weight of the camera body for hand holding certainly for some period of time. Alternatives to hand holding of course are tripod, monopod, or some sort of a shoulder stock to distribute the weight.

Rich




May 22, 2022 at 01:51 PM
pulper11
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


I think that the 200-600 is heavy considering the images I could get from it. I know that's hard to quantify but I just wouldn't feel like going to a game and having to deal with the weight and a monopod knowing what I'd get, if the images I did get was indicative of the lens (given my inexperience). Sorry if this doesn't make sense, but in comparison, for the 2.8, I'd invest in a much better monopod and do some weight lifting (kidding!) - but would definitely be willing to put up with much more discomfort to be able to use this throughout a football game given the images I could get with it.

Hope this clarifies. However, it's nice that you pointed out the weight of the F4 in comparison. That might change things.

One more other way to look at it - if I'm going to go through having to use a monopod and being more stationary, image quality would trump weight (up to a point, of course - don't want the 1200 lens' weight).



May 22, 2022 at 02:36 PM
naturephoto1
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


pulper11 wrote:
I think that the 200-600 is heavy considering the images I could get from it. I know that's hard to quantify but I just wouldn't feel like going to a game and having to deal with the weight and a monopod knowing what I'd get, if the images I did get was indicative of the lens (given my inexperience). Sorry if this doesn't make sense, but in comparison, for the 2.8, I'd invest in a much better monopod and do some weight lifting (kidding!) - but would definitely be willing to put up with much more discomfort to be able
...Show more

Hi,

You may wish to consider investing in a Leitz/Leica Universal Handgrip with Shoulder Stock #14239. They are extremely adjustable, rigid and strong. The rear shoulder brace can be removed and reassembled to create a small tripod. Here are 2 available right now in Excellent condition for what I consider an excellent price considering they sold new for about $400. I have one that I have I believe I purchased new and is tricked out.

https://tinyurl.com/4t7zy6nz

https://tinyurl.com/2p97rtzp

Below are some photos of my Leitz 14239. I had my machine shop manufacture a part so that I could also mount it attached to a monopod. But it is not necessary and adds weight if you are going to use the unit with the lens and camera alone. In my unit I have added an Arca Swiss type Clamp with a reducing bushing to 1/4 20 (which I have now swapped out) (there is a little felt placed below the clamp and the alignment pin has been depressed).

Since those photos were taken some years ago the lens has a cover, but I have also added to the modified unit using some velcro-

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00006IC2L/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&th=1

to the front of the stock where the electronic shutter release would install and to the back of this Sony Electronic release that allows electronic release of the camera body. Now I can attach and remove the electronic release with the velcro with the electronic release attached sideways to the left side of the unit so the cable can be installed into the camera body.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00MULZSNQ/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71uVl0urK4L._AC_SX679_.jpg

Rich









© naturephoto1 2022


Modified Leitz 14239 with Arca Swiss QR Clamp and parts to mount on Monopod





© naturephoto1 2022


Modified Leitz 14239 with White/Bare Sony 200-600mm G before Kirk Replacement Foot available





© naturephoto1 2022


Modified Leitz 14239 with White/Bare Sony 200-600mm G before Kirk Replacement Foot available and RRS Monopod and Kirk Head





© naturephoto1 2022


White/Bare Sony 200-600mm G before Kirk Replacement Foot available and RRS Monopod, RRS Leveling Base, and Kirk Head



Edited on May 23, 2022 at 08:20 AM · View previous versions



May 22, 2022 at 04:55 PM
schlotz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


The elongated ball issue with electronic shutter is not rare. My fellow shooter uses it with his Canon bodies and since I do all the editing on the field I see it regularly. It bothers the crap out of me but he ignores it. When I started to switch to Sony, my 2 rig setup that used to be identical Canon bodies became Sony & Canon. That quickly convinced me, I needed two similar (if not the same) bodies. So after 20+ years with Canon, I quickly sold the remaining equip and went entirely Sony. Haven't looked back and could not be more satisfied.

Edited on May 23, 2022 at 09:25 AM · View previous versions



May 23, 2022 at 07:38 AM
GMPhotography
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Stick with Sony or add a Canon 2nd body?


Its a serious problem for any sports shooter of just about any venue. The bigger issue is if you stay on mechanical shutter especially when shooting sports your putting a lot of mileage on your shutter not to mention you are no longer silent. I have 2 gigs in a year that I shoot close to 40k on my body, I certainly don't want to put 40k actuations on my body not mention all the other jobs. So I want electronic shutter and many of us need to stop the action and not have these shutter issues. Next get a monopod its the most underrated tool we have. Worse its not even expensive so absolutely no excuse not to use one. I actually have 2. Heavy means absolutely nothing when on a monopod YOU are NOT holding that weight.


May 23, 2022 at 07:55 AM
1      
2
       3       4       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.