fredmiranda.com

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

3 4 end

Archive 2024 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Douglas L wrote:
Great samples from the 200-600, Joshua! I have the 300GM+2XTC that will replace the 200-600 as my main hummingbird lens but the 200-600 will still be my main airshow lens because of its versatility. It's not going anywhere, unless Sony makes a lighter Mark II.

Fabulous aircraft photos, Douglas. Very powerful and strikingly composed, which I can only imagine must be extremely difficult to capture. Can you say more about your technique for getting these?

Also, I especially love the colors and lighting in the 2nd and then the 2nd and 3rd from the end. Each of them has a deeper tone and somewhat subdued colors and lighting that I love. I have been trying to work toward getting that look in some of my landscapes, and I would love to know how you got that look in those images.

Mar 25, 2024 at 07:39 AM

Knut.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

It has been mentioned above, but it is worth pointing out:

With extreme telefoto lenses it is often difficult to find the subject, especially when the subject is moving.
A zoom lets one stand back (by zooming out), detect the subject, and then zoom in, to get a higher magnification.

I find this feature more important than the ability to shoot an image at 200mm (which I rarely do with this lens).

Mar 25, 2024 at 07:56 AM

yodog54
Offline
•
[X]

p.2 #3 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Post edit...I see someone inquired about your technique earlier, but I will still ask for myself...

I love your aviation photos Douglas and you do such an amazing job. May I ask how you approach shooting the jets? I know that for prop planes you need to dial down the shutter speed to around 1/125s to get the prop blur and then it's perfecting panning technique. On the jets, are you shooting shutter priority with auto-ISO and mostly -0.3 exposure compensation. Seems like most of the shots are around 1/4000s...do you still pan even at those high shutter speeds? I love shooting airshows and go every year to the local airshow, but my keeper rate is dismally low. I've been shooting with either the Sony 100-400 or 200-600 on my a7rIVa body. I also struggle with what AF mode to use. As I recall, I was using continuous AF but experimented with wide, center, and tracking AF but unable to conclude what works best there. For jets, I turn off image stabilization. I would appreciate any advice you might have to share. Thank you!

Mike

Mar 25, 2024 at 09:40 AM

MARKFER
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

It's a wonderful lens. As the original poster mentioned, has the luster wore off? My thoughts are that in terms of size maybe so. I rarely zoomed when I had it. I had it pegged on 600mm with a 1.4 tc for birds and small stuff. To me a Sony 500 5.6 that takes TC's and half the weight. If possible sounds like a dream come true.

Mar 25, 2024 at 10:15 AM

ICee
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

I�ve used this lens since I changed to Sony, it has proved to be an excellent lens and probably the best in that range. Yes it�s heavy but you can�t have everything.

Mar 25, 2024 at 10:26 AM

Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

AGeoJO wrote:
Thank you for your input and superb images, Doug! I am looking forward to the next iteration of this lens whenever Sony introduces it.

---------------------------------------------

Peire wrote:
Excellent,dynamic and colourfull shots of deadly birds made of steel Douglas!

---------------------------------------------

InFocus2014 wrote:
Joshua, from all the great photo�s you (and Douglas) have posted over time, and with all your photographic talent, I think you could make a pinhole lens look good.

Your post came at a good time, for me, as I was considering going to the GM 300mm with converters or, more likely, the Sigma 500mm. It probably makes more sense to put up with the weight and size of the 200-600 for all that flexibility. Fortunately, the Sigma�s apparent May back-order fulfillment date didn�t facilitate any of my hasty (and notoriously poor

) decisions. I will probably end-up with...Show more →

Thank you all very much!

Mar 25, 2024 at 01:44 PM

DWOfPaul
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

This lens totally changed how I felt about using zooms for wildlife photos.

Before I got 200-600 I used to use primes for almost all my wildlife needs. Personally I don't feel the Sony 300mm f2.8 or Sigma 500mm f5.6 are direct replacements.

First the Sony 300mm. For years I used the Nikon 300mm f2.8 + a TC, mostly the TC 2x. A 300mm f2.8 lens can be an amazing lens to have in your kit if you are in low light and can fill the frame at 300mm. Add a TC 1.4 and you have a 420mm f4 if you can fill the frame. But add on the TC 2x and now you are at 600mm f5.6. I don't think I have ever taken a photo that 1/3 of a stop more light would have saved. I have taken many photos though with the 200-600mm that the ability to zoom out did save me. I would not recommend a 300mm f2.8 to someone planing to always use it with a TC 2x.

As for the Sigma 500mm. The main issue I see is Sony's lack of third party teleconverters, and 15 FPS limitation. This lens has so much potential but in my opinion Sony has really handicapped it. I would really miss having that extra 100mm. I often use my 200-600mm with the TC 1.4x so really I would be dropping from 840mm to 500mm.

When I got my Z8 my original plan was to get the Nikon 800mm PF for my long reach needs, but now I am thinking of getting the Z 180-600mm first, since I have gotten so used to benefits a telephoto zoom like the Sony 200-600mm brings to the table.

Personally I would like to see a manufacture make something like a 200-600 with a faster aperture like an f5 or a longer zoom lens like a 400-800mm f6.3. I think either lens could fit nicely between our current supper zooms around the 2k price range, and our exotic telephotos in the 10k + price range.

Mar 25, 2024 at 01:50 PM

aboutthelight
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #8 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Count me in the I don't love the 200-600 camp. I understand that it is versatile and affordable but I just never loved the results that I got from it. Especially when you compared them directly to what you get out of the 600. Yes it is not a fair fight. Different tools but I would rather sacrifice versatility for better fine feather detail rendering and nicer backgrounds. And I tried a few copies of the zoom all with the same results. Nice but not worth it to me. To be fair I also don't like shooting with zooms in general so it was convenient to not love the results. Of course it is always a compromise when we pick any lens to shoot with.

Mar 25, 2024 at 02:57 PM

DWOfPaul
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

I feel comparing a 600mm f4 to a 200-600mm is much diffrent, then comparing a 300mm f2.8 to a 200-600mm. There are many good reasons why a 600mm f4 is 6x more expensive then a 200-600mm. My gut is a 300mm f2.8 + TC 2x is not going to compare to a 600mm f4 either, but it would definitely be an interesting comparison for someone to make.

Mar 25, 2024 at 03:30 PM

Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

chiron wrote:
Fabulous aircraft photos, Douglas. Very powerful and strikingly composed, which I can only imagine must be extremely difficult to capture. Can you say more about your technique for getting these?

Also, I especially love the colors and lighting in the 2nd and then the 2nd and 3rd from the end. Each of them has a deeper tone and somewhat subdued colors and lighting that I love. I have been trying to work toward getting that look in some of my landscapes, and I would love to know how you got that look in those images.

Thank you very much! In terms of composing, If the planes are not flying in an angle I like to see, I may tilt the camera, or change the angle in post. If you were referring to the timing of some of the shots of the opposing passes, it's mostly luck and high frame rate of the A1. I think the 120 FPS of the A9III will almost guarantee you will get the perfect opposing passes

.

As for editing, it varies. In typical summer time airshows, distance/heat shimmering can be a big problem, doesn't matter what lenses you use. Dehazing helps a lot sometimes.

The 2nd picture you referred to was taken last Aug at an airshow in West Virginia. I just looked at my Lightroom editing for this particular picture, this is exactly what I did in Lightroom.

Global adjustments:

1. exposure: -0.20
2. dehaze: 26
3. highlights color grading: H:40S:54:L:0, basically I made the highlight a bit more yellow/orange to mimic sunlight.

Masking adjustments:

1. subject: color temp: +10, saturation: +5, shadow: +24
2. background: exposure:-0.43

These are all the adjustments made in Lightroom, then I sent to Topaz denoise AI, where in "Clear" tap, I usually choose "Low" or "Med" for in "Remove Noise", and "Low" in "Enhance Sharpness".

That's it for this particular shot.

For the 3rd from the last ( the 3 Migs):

Global adjustments:

1. exposure: +0.26
2. dehaze: +89! Usually I don't go anywhere near that but for this shot I wanted to bring out the clouds,
3. blue saturation: -41

Masking adjustments made to subject (the 3 Migs)
1. dehaze:-31, to bring back down the effect from dehazing in global adjustment
2. shadow: +74,
3. exposure: +0.31
4: temp: +11

That was all I did in Lightroom before I sent it to Topaz Denoise AI.

For the 2nd to last shot (Lt Amanda Lee, first Blue Angel jet pilot). I did something similar to what I did to the 3 Migs, global dehaze:+71, to bring out the clouds, subject (the pilot and the jet) dehaze: -22, again, to bring back down the effect from global dehaze.

I know very little about Photoshop, too complicated for me to learn.

Sorry, Peter, I messed up the #, the 2nd from the last is not Lt Amanda Lee, it's the A-10 (from Latrobe, Pa show). Here what I did with the A-10 shot:

Globel adjustments:

1. exposure: +0.20
2. dehaze: +59
3. black: -5
4. vibrance: +11
5. Tone curve panel: Dark: -13
6. calbration: Blue:+61

Masking adjustments:

1. subject: color temp: +7, saturation: +11, exposure:+0.62, shadow: +14, highlight: -14, dehaze: -26, to bring back down the effect from dehazing in global adjustment.
2. sky: exposure: -0.62, dehaze: +12

That's it before I sent it to Topaz Denoise.

Edited on Mar 25, 2024 at 04:33 PM · View previous versions

Mar 25, 2024 at 03:40 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Douglas -- Thank you for checking all that and writing it up so clearly. I am going to go through this slowly and try some similar adjustments and see what I get to. I think the masking/darkening may be a lot the effect that I am looking for, and also the color grading, which I haven't really tried to do.

I am finally taking a more systematic approach to learning Lightroom Classic. So your information will help.

Very excellent and interesting shots. You clearly have gotten very good at capturing screaming jets! Well done!

And thanks again!

Peter

Mar 25, 2024 at 03:49 PM

aboutthelight
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

I agree it is not a fair comparison in terms of cost only. Same really for the 300 which is 3X more expensive. But cost is just one of the things that we need to consider when choosing a lens. Same goes for weight, rendering, focal length needed, versatility and so on. I simply never loved the results that I got with the 200-600. It is not a bad lens in any way, just not remarkable either. When shooting large in frame subjects very close it does really well. Just not as well as the primes do. For what I shoot I just never found the zoom to be worth it for me. Losing shots here and there because a bird comes too close is not worth the rest of the shots having potentially busier backgrounds and lower image quality. Point is I would rather have less photos but higher quality ones than more with inferior quality. As stated I just don't like zooms. Now the choice between the Sigma with lower max fps and the zoom is a tougher choice. Same goes for the 300 with extenders. I have stated in other threads that I would buy a 500pf type sony lens in an instant if they came out with it. The zoom sat on my shelf after I shot with it twice and until I sold it here on the boards.

Mar 25, 2024 at 04:05 PM

Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #13 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

yodog54 wrote:
Post edit...I see someone inquired about your technique earlier, but I will still ask for myself...

I love your aviation photos Douglas and you do such an amazing job. May I ask how you approach shooting the jets? I know that for prop planes you need to dial down the shutter speed to around 1/125s to get the prop blur and then it's perfecting panning technique. On the jets, are you shooting shutter priority with auto-ISO and mostly -0.3 exposure compensation. Seems like most of the shots are around 1/4000s...do you still pan even at those high shutter speeds? I love...Show more →

Thank you very much Mike! Practice makes improvement. In the last 13 years since I started serious in shooting airshows, I have been to probably 50 or 60 airshows, this year I may go to 10.

For me, jets are MUCH easier to shoot than prop planes. For shooting props in slow shutter speed to get the prop blur, "spray and pray" is really the answer for me. My panning skill sucks. I get maybe 1 out of 25 that's decently sharp enough that I can work on, the rest are just trash. In the last 2 years, for props I used a variable ND filter to bring down the shutter speed without shooting at f16+, I set the ISO at 100. For jets I use manual shutter speed, aperture, and auto ISO. I use exposure compensation depending on the subject. If the subjects are the predominantly light color, such as the Thunderbirds, I would use -0.3 or even -0.7 exposure compensation. I really like the easy access to exposure compensation on Sony bodies. The problem is sometimes I forget to change it back when the subject changes. As for shutter speed, for fast jets I usually use 1/3200 or 1/4000, for slow cargo jets or bombers, 1/2000 is plenty fast. I may use higher shutter speed if the light is really bright.

IMHO, airshows are not that demanding on AF, because the planes are pretty big and their flying path is predictable, nothing like tracking erratic small birds. I got some very good shots with my A7RIII, I think I used subject tracking in the A7RIII, don't really remember. Sometimes if you let the camera to pick the focus point, it may pick the bright white smoke trails. I will try the A7RV's plane subject detection next month to see how it goes. I think if you are really after getting nice opposing passes shots, a high frame rate camera would really help. For airshows, the only time I ever use 30 FPS in my A1 is for the opposing passes. BTW, I leave the lens stabilization on �2� all the time, even when shooting at high shutter speed, I know I will forget to switch it back on if I switch it off.

Feel free to pm me with any questions. I think I am getting way off topic in this thread. Also in the "City, Street & Architecture" forum, there is the famous "Mustang Air to Air" sub-forum, some of the folks there are really masters in this craft. I am just a newbie compared to them.

Edited on Mar 26, 2024 at 03:25 AM · View previous versions

Mar 25, 2024 at 04:08 PM

k-h.a.w
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

AGeoJO wrote:
With introduction of the GM 300mm and even more so, the Sigma 500mm f/5.6, this lens appears to have lost its appeal and has been pushed to the background by the birding community, in particular and the long lens aficionados, in general on FM. Actually at f/6.3 at the long end, this lens is only barely slower than the Sigma f/5.6. But it is a zoom lens and as such, you have the flexibility of zooming out to 200mm and any FL in between. Plus, a TC can be used to extend the FL further if there is a need...Show more →

Thank you Joshua from another mid-70-tier.

Great lens and stunning images.
Except for brief periods I use my FE 200-600 mainly on a tripod with a fluid head.
That seems to work well for me.

https://photos.smugmug.com/KHW/Pics-by-Date/2022-12-06-A1200-60056-63-FE-G-OSS-IMBY-Birds/i-qQh2Hb6/0/C9DFkrgS6NwvZzP43DfM6pbHtqcs9p62BPbHhT6Z9/O/F80%25__DSC2032-2096-Juniper-Titmouse-align-trim-crop-print.gif
A1 + FE 200-600.

K-H.

Mar 25, 2024 at 04:39 PM

Knut.
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Wow!

What frame rate did you use on the A1?
� and how did you assemble the Gif?

Mar 25, 2024 at 05:39 PM

dazzerfong
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

The 200-600 was my gateway drug to the birding world. I initially got the 70-300 G hoping it was enough, but I -very- quickly determined that I needed a much longer focal length for birds!

Without the 200-600's existence, I don't think I'd have ever gotten into birding. The 200-600 was great when I started as the zooming meant that I could zoom out to locate, then zoom in to nail the shot.

Over time however as my technique improved, I used the zoom less and less, actually becoming a hindrance at times when I wanted a shot locked off at 600mm but accidentally bumping the zoom to something less. And that's the time when I decided to commit to the 600mm f/4, but the 200-600 will always have a soft spot in my heart.

Downside of the 200-600's existence, is that amount of money I've thrown at birding photography. Might've afforded a new car if not for this lens' existence.

Mar 25, 2024 at 07:11 PM

yodog54
Offline
•
[X]

p.2 #17 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Thank you Douglas...just the kind of response I was hoping for. I am fairly new here and really appreciate you taking the time to share your experience with shooting airshows. I love my 200-600 and 100-400 as well...would love to upgrade to either the a9iii or a7rv.. Thanks again for sharing your awesome aviation photos. Mike

Mar 25, 2024 at 09:06 PM

Douglas L
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

DWOfPaul wrote:
This lens totally changed how I felt about using zooms for wildlife photos.

Before I got 200-600 I used to use primes for almost all my wildlife needs. Personally I don't feel the Sony 300mm f2.8 or Sigma 500mm f5.6 are direct replacements.

First the Sony 300mm. For years I used the Nikon 300mm f2.8 + a TC, mostly the TC 2x. A 300mm f2.8 lens can be an amazing lens to have in your kit if you are in low light and can fill the frame at 300mm. Add a TC 1.4 and you have a 420mm f4 if...Show more →

For me, a 400-800 f6.3 would be perfect for airshows. If they ever make such a lens that has excellent optics and is not too heavy, I think it will be $7000-8000, Nikon�s 800 f6.3 PF is already $6500, and Nikon shooters were expecting a much higher price when they made the announcement.

In the last two years, for most airshows I have had the the 200-600 on one A1, the 600 GM+1.4TC on another A1, but the 200-600 setup was used most due to its versatility. This year for airshows I will have the 200-600 on my remaining A1 and the Nikon Z8+800 PF. The 800 PF feels quite a bit lighter than the Sony 600 GM and several inches shorter too. I want to give it a try.

Mar 26, 2024 at 03:55 AM

CPWarner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

It is interesting how the 200-600 seems polarize people. I have been pretty happy with it on my A1. Scott Kloskowski's review is pretty interesting. My conclusion mirrors his. I need reach and versatility. While the primes would outperform the zoom in focusing speed, bokeh and sharpness, the ability to zoom is still more important for my needs. And, as some have shown here, the 200-600 is plenty sharp in the right conditions. Weighing in the cost of the primes, they are tough for me to justify for my needs. They would likely out perform the 200-600 in a wider range of conditions, but ouch.

Scott Kloskowski 300mm F/2.8 review

Mar 26, 2024 at 09:47 AM

DWOfPaul
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · Another look at the G 200-600mm lens

Douglas L wrote:
For me, a 400-800 f6.3 would be perfect for airshows. If they ever make such a lens that has excellent optics and is not too heavy, I think it will be $7000-8000, Nikon�s 800 f6.3 PF is already $6500, and Nikon shooters were expecting a much higher price when they made the announcement.

In the last two years, for most airshows I have had the the 200-600 on one A1, the 600 GM+1.4TC on another A1, but the 200-600 setup was used most due to its versatility. This year for airshows I will have the 200-600 on my remaining A1...Show more →

Even at 7-8k I could see it selling as well, if not more then a 200-400mm f4 for wildlife photographers.

But part of me thinks we could even be looking at more the 3-6k range, which will probably make it a much better seller. Take the Nikon 180-600mm f6.3 vs the Nikon 600mm f6.3 pf. The 180-600 is $1,700 the 600mm pf is $4,800 that's a price difference of almost 2.8x. The 800mm f6.3 pf goes for $6,500 so even a 50% price reduction (2x) would put you around 3.25k for a zoom. Also Canon has a 200-800mm f6.3-9 for $1,900. A 6.3 would double the size, but where also talking about saving 200mm on the wide side, so that would put us around the 4k range.

-----------

Last year for my local air show I used my 200-600mm (sometimes with 1.4TC) on my a7rIV and a Tamron 70-300mm on my a7rII. Probably going to be using my Z8 and a7rIV this year, but have yet to decide what lenses are going on what body. If I don't get the Nikon 180-600 first I may put the Sony 200-600mm on my Z8, I have had pretty good success with it for birds and usually planes are easier.

--------------------------------------------

As for how much does a zoom matter for finding subjects it really depends. I used my 300mm f2.8 + TC 2x on my D500 for years which gave me an effective FL of 900mm. You end up getting used to it, and I have found it interesting that some photographers say a downside of the 800mm PF is it's hard to locate subjects, but I have also meet quite a few photographers that use a 600mm + TC 1.4 most of the time with no issues. There has definitely been times the ability to zoom out with the 200-600mm locate the subject and zoom back in has saved me a few seconds, and possible saved me a photo I would not have gotten. The main benefit I have found with the 200-600mm ability to zoom though is when you taking photos of a far off subject and suddenly it comes right towards you or lands right by you. By the time you take a TC off your lens or switch to a body with a wider lens the photo can be gone.

Mar 26, 2024 at 11:41 AM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end