According to Alex phan, A1 is still superior regarding AF acquisition and lock on, especially so with cluttered backgrounds. This is in comparison to both Z9 and Z8 with latest firmware. Now if Sony could just give us a 600 and 800pf!
This was my finding too when I had the Z9 with the latest FW and the Nikon 600 TC for a few weeks in December last year. The A1 seemed to pick out the bald eagles with busy background quite a bit quicker. I sold the Nikon setup because I wasn't a fan of the Z9's size and weight, I kept my 600 GM. Since I shoot the 600 GM hand held and with a 1.4X TC on 95% of the time, I figured I may as well get the Z8 and the Nikon 800 PF to save some weight and $$$. I will have the Nikon Z8 and 800 PF in about a week. If I find the Z8+800 PF suits me better, I will sell the 600 GM.
With regard to the 300 GM, I may get one to use with the 2X TC (most of the time). I enjoy shooting hummingbirds at very close distance from my study, I have been using the Sony 200-600 for that for a few years due to its better MFD. Sounds like the 300 GM+2X TC will give me slightly sharper images with better bokeh, at a slight shorter MFD. I hope the 300 GM+2XTC will give me bigger hummingbirds than the 200-600 at 600mm. It's pretty well documented that at MDF the 200-600 is more like 550mm something. The new Sigma 500 or the Nikon 600 PF won't do it for me because of their MFD.
At MFD the 200-600 is just over 300mm, about 0.2x magnification. Not a whole lot more than the primes.
I was looking for a source for this, and found this post:
Marco wrote:
The formula to calculate effective focal length at minimum focal distance is:
Sony 200-600 G @ 600mm:
mfd = 2.4 meters = 2400 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,20
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 333 mm
Sony 600 GM
mfd = 4,5 m = 4500 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,14
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 485 mm
Nikon Z 600/6.3 S
mfd = 4 m = 4000 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,15
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 454 mm
So actually the Sony 200-600 w//1.4x tc (= 466 mm) has slightly more focal lenght than the Nikon 600 PF and slightly less than the Sony 600 GM.
However that formula doesn’t tell how the focal lenght changes at different focus distances which should be of more value for normal non-macro subjects.
If the breathing occurs more at very close distances imho it is more important to have a short mfd than highest focal lenght at mfd.
For instance I’d prefer a 600mm that focusses down to 1 meter at 100mm effective focal lenght than a 600mm that is 599mm at a mfd of 50 meters… 😉
According to Alex phan, A1 is still superior regarding AF acquisition and lock on, especially so with cluttered backgrounds. This is in comparison to both Z9 and Z8 with latest firmware. Now if Sony could just give us a 600 and 800pf!
This was my finding too when I had the Z9 with the latest FW and the Nikon 600 TC for a few weeks in December last year. The A1 seemed to pick out the bald eagles with busy background quite a bit quicker. I sold the Nikon setup because I wasn't a fan of the Z9's size and weight, I kept my 600 GM. Since I shoot the 600 GM hand held and with a 1.4X TC on 95% of the time, I figured I may as well get the Z8 and the Nikon 800 PF to save some weight and $$$. I will have the Nikon Z8 and 800 PF in about a week. If I find the Z8+800 PF suits me better, I will sell the 600 GM.
With regard to the 300 GM, I may get one to use with the 2X TC (most of the time). I enjoy shooting hummingbirds at very close distance from my study, I have been using the Sony 200-600 for that for a few years due to its better MFD. Sounds like the 300 GM+2X TC will give me slightly sharper images with better bokeh, at a slight shorter MFD. I hope the 300 GM+2XTC will give me bigger hummingbirds than the 200-600 at 600mm. It's pretty well documented that at MDF the 200-600 is more like 550mm something. The new Sigma 500 or the Nikon 600 PF won't do it for me because of their MFD.
At MFD the 200-600 is just over 300mm, about 0.2x magnification. Not a whole lot more than the primes.
I was looking for a source for this, and found this post:
Marco wrote:
The formula to calculate effective focal length at minimum focal distance is:
Sony 200-600 G @ 600mm:
mfd = 2.4 meters = 2400 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,20
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 333 mm
Sony 600 GM
mfd = 4,5 m = 4500 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,14
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 485 mm
Nikon Z 600/6.3 S
mfd = 4 m = 4000 mm
Max Reproduction Ratio (x) = 0,15
Effective focal lenght at mfd = 454 mm
So actually the Sony 200-600 w//1.4x tc (= 466 mm) has slightly more focal lenght than the Nikon 600 PF and slightly less than the Sony 600 GM.
However that formula doesn’t tell how the focal lenght changes at different focus distances which should be of more value for normal non-macro subjects.
If the breathing occurs more at very close distances imho it is more important to have a short mfd than highest focal lenght at mfd.
For instance I’d prefer a 600mm that focusses down to 1 meter at 100mm effective focal lenght than a 600mm that is 599mm at a mfd of 50 meters… 😉
