Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I currently own the A7rIII but shoot mainly wildlife and birds in flight with Canon gear. I’d like to get the Sony 200-600 lens and shoot birds in flight with the A7rIII instead. Only thing is that I’ve seen and read some less than glowing reviews of this combination. Does anyone here use the 200-600 on the A7rIII? And how does it perform?

Cheers!

Jilldwr

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

What focal lengths do you find yourself using the most?  You might find that a fixed focal length lens will work fine, have a faster maximum aperture, weight a lot less -- and save you a lot of MOO-LA.

And if you are not already familiar with catching birds in flight with a long lens, you might just want to start out with a tele-converter.  It's not particularly easy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your manual focussing skills must be quite exceptional @XKAES but most people rely on quick and accurate autofocus to catch birds in flight. In E-mount land that means your suggestions don't make a lot of sense:

When it comes to autofocussing primes in the 200-600 range, there's only the 400mm f/2.8 (€12000) or the 600mm f/4 (€13500). Not a lot of weight or MOO-LA saved there...

When it comes to teleconverters, trying to get to 400-600mm range, there's really only two options:

70-200 GM + 2× teleconverter (€2500 + €570)

100-400 GM + 1.4x teleconverter (€2700 + €600)

None of these options save weight, cash or give a faster aperture than the Sony 200-600 (€2000). In the end the only viable alternatives - assuming one needs an AF E-mount lens - are the Tamron 150-500 (€1500) or the Sigma 150-600 (€1400).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say exceptional, but I would say affordable -- I never paid more than $150 for any of my long, lightweight CATS -- 500mm Yashica, 650mm Tokina, 800mm Vivitar, and 1250mm Celestron.  In my experience, most birds in flight are at infinity, so focusing is not a problem. 

If I could afford any of the current crop, I could pay someone to take the pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, XKAES said:

 In my experience, most birds in flight are at infinity, so focusing is not a problem.

Sounds like your BiF-photography experience is quite different from mine. I tend to shoot at about 15-20 meters distance with my 70-350mm lens at 350mm f/8 on APS-C (525mm f/11 FF equivalent). Depth of field is only 50 cm in this case. Good luck manually focussing that with any bird flying eratically or towards you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I take my hat off to anyone getting pics of small birds flying erratically. I get the impression that some of these images are got by using high FPS, blasting off in the general direction, then picking out any frames that happen to be caught.

For the larger birds flying high, I understand Xkaes' view point.

I'm no birder, but I've filled my frame with a Red Kite or two using my old A99 and 100-400mm zoom.

I'm getting better results with my recently bought A7Rii and FE 100-400 G lens.

From what I gather, talking to various people, the downside to high res cameras is that the speed of rendering is not fast enough to get a long blast of photos if using the "click and hope" method (NB: There is more skill in this than the nick name suggests.) I've not tried your options, but I reckon it would prove better than the bad reports suggest - just not as good as premium "sports" bodies like the A9 or A1.

I've never shot with Canon so I've got no idea how that gear performs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't even try to photograph a hummingbird or a flycatcher in motion. 

One approach is to focus on a point where the bird frequents -- a nest, a perch, feeder, a fishing spot on the lake.  Focus on that and wait for the bird to "do the work" when they are flying by.

Edited by XKAES
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...