Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 25 posts | 
by RichardMittleman/Gon2Foto on Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:00 pm
User avatar
RichardMittleman/Gon2Foto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6503
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
I love my Canon 500/4II, but I want to buy the Sony a9II. What are the downsides to using the adapter so that the 500/4 will function with the Sony s9II?
http://www.gon2foto.net (current site)   
The grandeur of nature is God's glory.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:02 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Hi Richard, that was pretty much answered by me and others in your previous thread on this topic:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=286562

Bottom line is that the a9/a9 II are absolutely amazing cameras for tracking fast action but not with adapted telephoto lenses that were not made for mirrorless cameras.  They simply do not use the right kind of AF motors for that type of performance.
 

by RichardMittleman/Gon2Foto on Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:29 pm
User avatar
RichardMittleman/Gon2Foto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 6503
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: pasadena, ca.
E.J. Peiker wrote:Hi Richard, that was pretty much answered by me and others in your previous thread on this topic:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=286562

Bottom line is that the a9/a9 II are absolutely amazing cameras for tracking fast action but not with adapted telephoto lenses that were not made for mirrorless cameras.  They simply do not use the right kind of AF motors for that type of performance.
I have been using a Canon MKIV so I'm not accustomed to the focusing ability of the newer Canon bodies. Can you possiblly ?compare the Sony with the adapter to the MkIV?
http://www.gon2foto.net (current site)   
The grandeur of nature is God's glory.
 

by Phil Shaw on Thu Jan 16, 2020 2:53 am
Phil Shaw
Forum Contributor
Posts: 99
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Member #:00106
I only used my Canon 600/4II once with my Sony A9. It was a very frustrating experience. Afterwards, when I needed the 600, I only used it with a Canon 5D4. People are expecting Sony to announce a 500/4 this year - probably in February. In the meantime, my advice is either to get a Sony 100-400 + 1.4x to use with an A9ii, or hang on to your current Canon gear until the Sony 500/4 is announced. One other thing to bear in mind tho' is Canon's recent announcement about the EF mount, and the impact that will have on used equipment values.
Phil Shaw
Essex, UK
[color=#008000][url]http://www.naturephotopro.com[/url][/color]
 

by mikeojohnson on Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:27 am
mikeojohnson
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1219
Joined: 21 Dec 2003
Location: Estero , Florida
Member #:00374
I agree with all of the comments about adapted lenses.  They work but not as well as you want.

Another suggestion to help with your transition is the very nice Sony 200-600.  It is a slow zoom but focus is accurate and fast.  And, higher iso performance is good on the A9's

Finally, in the world of high end lenses, it is a bargain.
Mike
"Photography intensifies the experience of life"
http://www.mojphoto.com
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Jan 16, 2020 7:31 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
RichardMittleman/Gon2Foto wrote:
E.J. Peiker wrote:Hi Richard, that was pretty much answered by me and others in your previous thread on this topic:
viewtopic.php?f=57&t=286562

Bottom line is that the a9/a9 II are absolutely amazing cameras for tracking fast action but not with adapted telephoto lenses that were not made for mirrorless cameras.  They simply do not use the right kind of AF motors for that type of performance.
I have been using a Canon MKIV so I'm not accustomed to the focusing ability of the newer Canon bodies. Can you possiblly ?compare the Sony with the adapter to the MkIV?
As I and others have said several times now, it does not work well.  Again, a DSLR telephoto lens does not use linear stepper motor focusing, it uses what Canon calls a USM motor designed to work with an off sensor phase detect AF array, not an on sensor split pixel phase detect system.  It won't be anywhere near as good.  The only way you are going to get AF as good, or in this case MUCH better than a 1D4 and your 500/4 is to use either the Sony 400/2.8+1.4x, Sony 200-600, or Sony 600 f/4.  There are no other lenses on the market from any manufacturer, either native Sony FE, or adapted, that will focus as well as these three, or approach what you currently have.  All three of those on an a9, a9 II, or a7R 4, will substantially outperform what you currently have but nothing adapted will perform as well as what you are used to.
 

by DChan on Thu Jan 16, 2020 10:45 am
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
Resist the peer pressure, go buy the 1Dx Mk III and be done with it.

Either stay with Canon, or go all the way to Sony. You go half way and you get half of the good stuff. Sooner or later you'll get tired of the bad that comes with using an adapter.

Anyone who goes fire sale of it dslr gears today I'm not buying them :lol:
 

by Biff on Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:13 pm
Biff
Forum Contributor
Posts: 10
Joined: 9 Jan 2020
Well, I know there are many discussions like this and it's always recommended to use native lenses on Sony Cameras... my experiences over the last few month are different:
1. A7RIV + Sigma MC-11 + Canon EF600 f/4 III worked very good on flying cranes. I was so impressed, really. The AF tracking... superb. Probably it might have been better with a FE 600 f/4... but I could not compare.
2. like above, but with Canon 1.4x Extender: still worked... but had problems in low light conditions.
3. A9 + FE200-600 Tests with moving cyclists and cars... very good!
4 A7RIV + FE200-600 shooting vultures in flight (with about 50 mph?). Lots of images out of focus... AF did not capture the flying bird. Really nice shots every now and the, but too much waste. That was disappointing... I still hope it was my fault with some settings and not the camera, but I'm experienced enough with different AF modes...
Biff
 

by E.J. Peiker on Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:24 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Biff wrote:Well, I know there are many discussions like this and it's always recommended to use native lenses on Sony Cameras... my experiences over the last few month are different:
1. A7RIV + Sigma MC-11 + Canon EF600 f/4 III worked very good on flying cranes. I was so impressed, really. The AF tracking... superb. Probably it might have been better with a FE 600 f/4... but I could not compare.
2. like above, but with Canon 1.4x Extender: still worked... but had problems in low light conditions.
3. A9 + FE200-600 Tests with moving cyclists and cars... very good!
4 A7RIV + FE200-600 shooting vultures in flight (with about 50 mph?). Lots of images out of focus... AF did not capture the flying bird. Really nice shots every now and the, but too much waste. That was disappointing... I still hope it was my fault with some settings and not the camera, but I'm experienced enough with different AF modes...
Biff
Interesting results, Biff.  Some comentary on your points below:
1.  Cranes are very predictable flyers and do not tax an AF system like many other birds do.
2. Not surprising :)
3. Not surprising
4.  I am surprised by this as I have had no trouble even with fast flyers coming at the camera with exactly that combo.  I use Tracking: Expand Flexible Spot.  You can not have Subject Detection set to Animal to select this mode, you have to set it to Human.
 

by KK Hui on Thu Jan 16, 2020 6:44 pm
User avatar
KK Hui
Moderator
Posts: 42662
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong, China
Member #:00536
People report struggling with the a7R IV + 200-600 combo for birds ...
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1630739
KK Hui  FRPS
Fellow of The Royal Photographic Society
Personal Website | Portfolio @ Flickr

Lifetime Member NSN 0536
 

by hcarl on Fri Jan 17, 2020 1:56 am
hcarl
Forum Contributor
Posts: 185
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver Island
KK Hui wrote:People report struggling with the a7R IV + 200-600 combo for birds ...
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1630739

Images taken with dslr have been so good dating back many years that all the talk about these new cameras make my head spin.  All this discussion is driven by the manufactures to drive sales and I can see no improvements in images now as from back as  10 or more years ago.  I look back at images from people using cameras such as the D200 and can see no improvement that really matters. hcarl
 

by Phil Shaw on Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:09 am
Phil Shaw
Forum Contributor
Posts: 99
Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Member #:00106
KK Hui wrote:People report struggling with the a7R IV + 200-600 combo for birds ...
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1630739
I don't think the A7r4 and the Sony 200-600 zoom are a particularly good match.  I used this combo on occasion in Zimbabwe and have many unexplained out-of-focus images - I'm not used to getting any out-of-focus images since I largely switched to Sony 2 years ago.  I think in my case, the problem may be due to the way in which I was using the new "tracking" focus set up, but I haven't really had an opportunity to test my thoughts about this since my return.  With the single focusing motor, the 200-600 is not as responsive as the 100-400 (twin focusing motors) and this may be part of the problem as well.  That's why I recommended the 100-400 in the post above.  
Phil Shaw
Essex, UK
[color=#008000][url]http://www.naturephotopro.com[/url][/color]
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:13 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
KK Hui wrote:People report struggling with the a7R IV + 200-600 combo for birds ...
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1630739
They likely don't know how to set-up the AF system. It isn't intuitive and the settings that work best are unlikely to be chosen based on their description by most users.  I have had absolutely no problems with that combo including flight shots.  I will be using the 600 f/4 with an a7r4 in late Feb and March though and get a good feel for how the two compare.  Of course the 600 f/4 with it's extra 1.3 stops of light and dual linear focusing motors compared to a 600 f/6.3 with a single linear focusing motor should outperform it substantially, especially in low light.  The question though is if the 200-600 is good enough on the a7R4 and my experience so far for the last couple of months shooting it a lot is that it is plenty good enough.  Note that the 200-600 also costs 1/4 of what the 600 f/4 costs and is much easier to travel with.

It kind of reminds me of the Nikon 500 f/4E vs 500 f/5.6PF debate.  Yes the 500 f/4 performs substantially better, especially with a 1.4x but that doesn't mean that the 500 f/5.6PF isn't good for birds, it is plenty good enough in most situations and is MUCH smaller and lighter.

There's no free lunch ;)
 

by SantaFeJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 8:20 am
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 8622
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere Out In The Wilds
hcarl wrote: Images taken with dslr have been so good dating back many years that all the talk about these new cameras make my head spin.  All this discussion is driven by the manufactures to drive sales and I can see no improvements in images now as from back as  10 or more years ago.  I look back at images from people using cameras such as the D200 and can see no improvement that really matters. hcarl
The ability to capture quality images on a consistent basis has come so far in recent years that your statement is just not true. Low light/low noise images were never possible with older cameras. I know because I tried shooting at 1250 ISO with a D200 and failed miserably. Auto focus has improved to an amazing degree, including eye AF. Burst speeds to capture precise moments of action have been increased. Lens technology and AF speed have been improved. Sensors have been improved and detail can be captured that was not possible before. HDR is amazing nowadays. There is really no comparison. People have always said that it is the photographer and not the equipment that makes an image, but that is not exactly the truth. The same photographer can make far better images with a current setup than he/she can with a ten year old camera. That’s just a fact. To me, what you say is comparable to saying that an author can write a story just as well on a typewriter as on a computer. While it may be true, the efficiency of doing so is much improved with modern technology. The list goes on and on. Film vs. digital, AF vs. manual focus, auto wind vs. manual wind, auto exposure metering vs. manual settings, tripod vs. handheld, image stabilization vs. non stabilized.........there is simply no comparison.

Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by DChan on Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:28 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
SantaFeJoe wrote:
hcarl wrote: Images taken with dslr have been so good dating back many years that all the talk about these new cameras make my head spin.  All this discussion is driven by the manufactures to drive sales and I can see no improvements in images now as from back as  10 or more years ago.  I look back at images from people using cameras such as the D200 and can see no improvement that really matters. hcarl
The ability to capture quality images on a consistent basis has come so far in recent years that your statement is just not true. Low light/low noise images were never possible with older cameras. I know because I tried shooting at 1250 ISO with a D200 and failed miserably. Auto focus has improved to an amazing degree, including eye AF. Burst speeds to capture precise moments of action have been increased. Lens technology and AF speed have been improved. Sensors have been improved and detail can be captured that was not possible before. HDR is amazing nowadays. There is really no comparison. People have always said that it is the photographer and not the equipment that makes an image, but that is not exactly the truth. The same photographer can make far better images with a current setup than he/she can with a ten year old camera. That’s just a fact. To me, what you say is comparable to saying that an author can write a story just as well on a typewriter as on a computer. While it may be true, the efficiency of doing so is much improved with modern technology. The list goes on and on. Film vs. digital, AF vs. manual focus, auto wind vs. manual wind, auto exposure metering vs. manual settings, tripod vs. handheld, image stabilization vs. non stabilized.........there is simply no comparison.

Joe
What is a good photograph? That's the question.

Image quality is over-rated.
 

by SantaFeJoe on Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:54 pm
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 8622
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere Out In The Wilds
DChan wrote:What is a good photograph? That's the question.

Image quality is over-rated.
If one doesn’t care about image quality or producing a “good photograph”, what are their reasons for shooting to begin with? A pro cannot make a living, nor an impression, by not producing both a good photograph and one that is of good quality, with a possible exception of paparazzi and self-promoting fast talkers. An amateur should have enough pride of workmanship to try and do the same. If not, mediocrity will prevail. There’s enough of that everywhere phone images are posted. No composition, no good BG, no interesting subject matter, no sharpness, improper DOF for the subject, poor lighting and I say “What’s the point?”.
Modern equipment has made it possible to achieve quality images(even with a cell phone) in a way never before possible. Why settle for mediocrity?
Apologies to the OP for sidetracking the original topic.
Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by KK Hui on Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:17 pm
User avatar
KK Hui
Moderator
Posts: 42662
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Hong Kong, China
Member #:00536
E.J. Peiker wrote:
KK Hui wrote:People report struggling with the a7R IV + 200-600 combo for birds ...
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1630739
They likely don't know how to set-up the AF system. It isn't intuitive and the settings that work best are unlikely to be chosen based on their description by most users.  I have had absolutely no problems with that combo including flight shots.  I will be using the 600 f/4 with an a7r4 in late Feb and March though and get a good feel for how the two compare.  Of course the 600 f/4 with it's extra 1.3 stops of light and dual linear focusing motors compared to a 600 f/6.3 with a single linear focusing motor should outperform it substantially, especially in low light.  The question though is if the 200-600 is good enough on the a7R4 and my experience so far for the last couple of months shooting it a lot is that it is plenty good enough.  Note that the 200-600 also costs 1/4 of what the 600 f/4 costs and is much easier to travel with.

It kind of reminds me of the Nikon 500 f/4E vs 500 f/5.6PF debate.  Yes the 500 f/4 performs substantially better, especially with a 1.4x but that doesn't mean that the 500 f/5.6PF isn't good for birds, it is plenty good enough in most situations and is MUCH smaller and lighter.

There's no free lunch ;)
I also suspect that it has a lot to do with correct settings in a7R IV for BIF.
Since I don't own any Sony ML and lens as of now I've no way knowing ...
KK Hui  FRPS
Fellow of The Royal Photographic Society
Personal Website | Portfolio @ Flickr

Lifetime Member NSN 0536
 

by Primus on Fri Jan 17, 2020 6:29 pm
Primus
Lifetime Member
Posts: 905
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New York
Member #:02003
When the Sony a9 first came out I took it with me on a trip to Namibia. At the time I also had my Canon gear with me. I used the a9 with the Canon 100-400 with a Metabones adapter and it was slow as molasses in AF. Lost a lot of good shots. The longest Sony lens available was the 70-200 2.8GM and I also had that with me. The contrast between these two was incredible. We were on a boat in Walvis Bay, shooting gulls and pelicans that were following us as fish was being thrown out. The frantic action with the gulls fighting over the fish in the wake of the boat would have been impossible for me to capture with the adapted Canon lens and yet I got a lot of amazing images with the native Sony lens. What was very gratifying for me was that I had never been able to get these kind of shots even with an all-Canon system in the past.

Prior to this experience, I had also tested all my Canon lenses with the a9 and the a7r2. Found that it was the lens and not the camera body, although the a9 was somewhat better. Many of the lenses would just not work at all. 

It was a long wait for Sony to come out with their long lenses but it has been well worth it, IMHO.

Pradeep
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Jan 17, 2020 7:49 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Primus wrote:When the Sony a9 first came out I took it with me on a trip to Namibia. At the time I also had my Canon gear with me. I used the a9 with the Canon 100-400 with a Metabones adapter and it was slow as molasses in AF. Lost a lot of good shots. The longest Sony lens available was the 70-200 2.8GM and I also had that with me. The contrast between these two was incredible. We were on a boat in Walvis Bay, shooting gulls and pelicans that were following us as fish was being thrown out. The frantic action with the gulls fighting over the fish in the wake of the boat would have been impossible for me to capture with the adapted Canon lens and yet I got a lot of amazing images with the native Sony lens. What was very gratifying for me was that I had never been able to get these kind of shots even with an all-Canon system in the past.

Prior to this experience, I had also tested all my Canon lenses with the a9 and the a7r2. Found that it was the lens and not the camera body, although the a9 was somewhat better. Many of the lenses would just not work at all. 

It was a long wait for Sony to come out with their long lenses but it has been well worth it, IMHO.

Pradeep
The a7r2 AF system is from the dark ages compared to the current cameras ;)
 

by Primus on Mon Jan 20, 2020 10:31 am
Primus
Lifetime Member
Posts: 905
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New York
Member #:02003
E.J. Peiker wrote:
Primus wrote:..........

Prior to this experience, I had also tested all my Canon lenses with the a9 and the a7r2. Found that it was the lens and not the camera body, although the a9 was somewhat better. Many of the lenses would just not work at all. 

Pradeep
The a7r2 AF system is from the dark ages compared to the current cameras ;)
Heh heh, agree completely. Who would've thought a 35mm camera would have 60 MPx one day. I remember attending the Sony booth at the Jacob Javitz Center here all those years ago when they first launched the a7r, claiming it would do away with Medium format. It hasn't done that of course, but Sony has indeed made tremendous strides in sensor tech especially.

Pradeep
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
25 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group