Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 51 posts | 
by E.J. Peiker on Fri Feb 21, 2020 7:24 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Smaller is better in my book because the vast majority of my photography involves travel. I don't care if it "looks" out of proportion. I just got the Sony 600 f/4 (rental) for my trip to the Himalayas and it is half the weight of the last 600 f/4 I owned at about 6.5 lb. It is also constructed so that the majority of the optics are close to the lens mount and as such it balances very well with an a7R4 or a9 even without vertical grip. The combo weighs about 1/3 of what my old 600 f/4 with full size pro DSLR weighed and is balanced MUCH better than that rig ever was even with the large body camera.
 

by DChan on Fri Feb 21, 2020 7:51 pm
DChan
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2206
Joined: 9 Jan 2009
Lighter? Yes. Smaller?

Sony FE 600 f4 GM OSS is 6.54 x 17.01"

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR is 6.54 x 17.01"

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens is 6.61 x 17.64"

Sony and Canon weigh pretty much the same. Size-wise, mirrorless or not as long as it's full-frame the bulkiness is still there.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:23 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
I was responding to Karl's comment about the camera body not being sized to look right on a 600 f/4. A 600 f/4 is a 600 f/4, unless you do some optical things like diffractive optics (DO or PF), it's going to be about the same size.
 

by Primus on Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:10 am
Primus
Lifetime Member
Posts: 905
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: New York
Member #:02003
I used the 600 f4 with my a7r4 these past two weeks and I was amazed that I could hand-hold it and focus on a small bird. No way I could do this with my old Canon rig. I am small, with small hands, so for me this is very good. The 200-600 is much smaller of course and probably the perfect long lens for Sony cameras unless your need is for maximum sharpness, ability to add on 2X TCs and of course low-light capability. However, the 200-600 is much bigger than the 70-200 or the 100-400 and yet even for me it is easy to hand hold for long periods.

In the end it is not just the weight of the lens but the total weight and the 'heft' of the camera and lens combo. How it balances with the weight being mostly closer to the camera is also very important. In the field these are the important things, of course carrying all that weight on airplanes is a different matter and even there, mirrorless is a better option especially if you are taking multiple bodies with you on a trip.

Pradeep
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:11 pm
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
Canon 1Dx Mark 3= 6.22 x 6.6 x 3.25" And 1,440 grams with battery
Nikon D6 = 6.3 x 6.42 x 3.62" and 1,270 grams no battery
Sony A9 Mark 2 = 5.07 x 3.8 x 3.05" and 678 grams with battery

I’d say that’s quite a difference.
 

by Vivek on Mon Apr 20, 2020 2:26 pm
Vivek
Lifetime Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 5 Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Member #:01186
Dan Kearl wrote:
Porsche917 wrote:Isn't the reality that the major camera manufacturers are moving toward mirrorless 35mm systems now, just as they moved from 35mm SLR film systems  to DSLR 35mm systems in the early 2000s?   That movement raises value retention, obsolescence and maintenance/service issues.

Best Regards,

Roman :-)
I completely agree and my next camera will probably be a mirrorless in
a couple years. I just think at the present time and in the near future,
for birds and wildlife, Nikon has the best system.
I was just wondering why Karl, who shoots the best Nikon has, would like to change.

That assertion that Nikon has the best system right now is debatable and has been debated ad-infinitum on the boards. For *my* use, Sony has the best system at the moment. I can rattle off the advantages, but these are for my needs. YMMV. BTW, I did switch from Canon to Nikon (D850+500PF) to Sony (A7R4, A9 + 600/4 + 100-400) and I love the Sony system. Same performance much lighter weight compared to Nikon DSLR rig. Light years ahead AF compared to Nikon Mirrorless, Canon DSLR rigs. No idea about Canon mirrorless. I got tired of their slowness to respond to the market and they lost a good loyal customer of over two decades.
-- Vivek Khanzode
http://www.birdpixel.com
 

by Vivek on Mon Apr 20, 2020 2:30 pm
Vivek
Lifetime Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 5 Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Member #:01186
E.J. Peiker wrote:Smaller is better in my book because the vast majority of my photography involves travel.  I don't care if it "looks" out of proportion.  I just got the Sony 600 f/4 (rental) for my trip to the Himalayas and it is half the weight of the last 600 f/4 I owned at about 6.5 lb.  It is also constructed so that the majority of the optics are close to the lens mount and as such it balances very well with an a7R4 or a9 even without vertical grip. The combo weighs about 1/3 of what my old 600 f/4 with full size pro DSLR weighed and is balanced MUCH better than that rig ever was even with the large body camera.

Precisely! And the AF is absolutely fabulous... I love this new rig.
-- Vivek Khanzode
http://www.birdpixel.com
 

by Vivek on Mon Apr 20, 2020 2:32 pm
Vivek
Lifetime Member
Posts: 786
Joined: 5 Aug 2008
Location: Santa Clara, CA
Member #:01186
DChan wrote:Lighter? Yes. Smaller?  

Sony FE 600 f4 GM OSS is 6.54 x 17.01"

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR is 6.54 x 17.01"

Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM Lens is 6.61 x 17.64"

Sony and Canon weigh pretty much the same. Size-wise, mirrorless or not as long as it's full-frame the bulkiness is still there.

Lighter and weight balance matter immensely. Canon 600 IS-III and Sony 600 GM are almost the same weight, but the Canon mirrorless does not work with their IS-III without an adapter and even 5D4, their dated latest SLR is heavier than the Sony SOTA cameras (A7R4, A9). The size of the lens is not going to change much if the focal length and aperture are the same :-)
-- Vivek Khanzode
http://www.birdpixel.com
 

by Bill Chambers on Thu Apr 23, 2020 11:09 pm
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Karl Egressy wrote:I ventured into Fujifilm mirrorless. I want to sell it.
Karl, can I ask why you want to sell the Fuji?  What are the areas of dissatisfaction?
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

by Karl Egressy on Sun Apr 26, 2020 2:37 pm
User avatar
Karl Egressy
Forum Contributor
Posts: 39506
Joined: 11 Dec 2004
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Canada
Member #:00988
Bill Chambers wrote:
Karl Egressy wrote:I ventured into Fujifilm mirrorless. I want to sell it.
Karl, can I ask why you want to sell the Fuji?  What are the areas of dissatisfaction?

Hi Bill,
The short answer is, yes.
I have the Fujifilm X-T30. It basically has the same sensor as the X-T3.
My problem is that I no longer do any other photography than Birds and occasionally mammals.
I have a Nikon system, D500, D800 and Z50. Have the lenses I need but due to the luck of "smart" adapter I cannot put them on the Fujifilm camera.
The camera is better than the Z50 but is has no value for me with the 18-55 f 2.8-f 4.0 lens.
 

by Bill Chambers on Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:15 am
User avatar
Bill Chambers
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4015
Joined: 8 Feb 2006
Location: Milton, Florida
Thanks Karl. Appreciate you getting back with me.
Please visit my web site, simply nature - Photographic Art by Bill Chambers
Bill Chambers
Milton, Florida
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
51 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group