Image Made with Garbage Lens

[Arthur Morris]

Image Made with Garbage Lens and processed on (greatly inferior) MacBook Pro.

This young Bald Eagle was photographed near Homer, AK with the handheld SONY 200-600 with the a9 ii. ISO 1250. 1/2500 sec. at f/6.3.
Like all of my Wildlife Photographer of the Year- and Natures Best-honored images, not to mention the many hundreds if not thousands of digital images that I have sold over the past two decades (though not many in recent years ), it was processed on my laptop.

I find the SONY 200-600 to be a great lens -- great for flight and action, great for tight work, and hand-holdable for me. Yes, the 2-6 and a MacBook Pro are not at all up to Arash's high standards, but I have sort of been doing okay with each of those. And I am not the only one.

In addition, I am at a complete loss regarding folks who opine about the poor Bokeh of the SONY 2-6.

All comments are welcome.

with love, artie

[arash_hazeghi]

I like the high key, great HA. the white feather look hot/blown without detail on my screen and the colors a bit odd on my screen, a bit muted for lack of a better word. I'd warm it a up a touch more. Details are good but I would sharpen them more. For a point blank head shot I'd expect to see more fine details from the feathers around the eye but they are missing here, not sure if RAW is better.

I stand by what I said about 200-600. I think you need to clarify great for what. These kinds of shots, i.e. close range head shot of a static subject, can be taken with any camera and any lens made in the past 15 years and at small posting size they will look indistinguishable. If in doubt look at the various images posted in this forum. You have made exactly the same images and statements in the past 10-15 years from the original old 7D mated to the old canon 100-400 push-pull , all the way to the Sony through the years if I remember

As I have said many times before I evaluate a lens by shooting dynamic subjects (not a head shot) with it and view the RAW files at 100% to assess sharpness. Of course each of these tests are valid for a given audience. it's a matter of perspective. Glad the sony zoom works great for you. I love 500PF and keep it until sony come out with something similar to that lens.

Also this shot doesn't have a bokeh. Bokeh refers to the rendering of a varied OOF BG




best

[Arthur Morris]

I know what Bokeh is :). I clearly was referring to the lens in general not to this image in particular. Are you not liking the Bokeh on the 200-600 because it is f/6.3 wide open or because it is a lousy lens?

a

[arash_hazeghi]

I know what Bokeh is :). I clearly was referring to the lens in general not to this image in particular. Are you not liking the Bokeh on the 200-600 because it is f/6.3 wide open or because it is a lousy lens?

a

I think f/6.3 is not the problem, I get nice creamy bokeh with my 600 GM and the 2X (e.g. skimmer image) which is f/8. the busy or "noisy" bokeh of the 200-600 has to do with its optical design and shortcomings. Sony GM lenses have excellent bokeh, I love the bokeh of my 135mm f/1.8 or 85mm f/1.4 or the 600 f/4 but the zoom isn't one of them

one more secret about the 200-600: it has significant focus breathing effect. At close focus distance its focal length is closer to 500mm than 600m! you can do this test : shoot something about 8-10 yards away with your 600 GM and then with 200-600 at 600mm you will find that the zoom has a wider field and significantly less magnification. it also has a known and pretty bad focus problem with cameras other than A9 series. just google sony 200-600 focus problem with A7R to see many documented problems when shooting BIF or even static subjects. Honestly with the light 600GM I am not sure why you even bother with the zoom

[arash_hazeghi]

here is one of my own 200-600 files, it's not bad for this subject as you can see, details are good. nothing wrong with it except for the BG bokeh that looks busy or nervous for the lack of a better world. the BG was noisy too which I then applied NR to clean it up. but an OK file.


A9ii 200-600 f/6.3 1/1600sec ISO 3200

[arash_hazeghi]

but here is one with a fast flying subject in low light / low contrast condition. I have done my best in terms of processing but you can probably tell the IQ isn't quite there, initially I thought it was noise but after I got my 600GM I made some higher ISO images that were much better. when I looked closely the 200-600 file just isn't as sharp, it doesn't have the low contrast micro-detail that the 600GM has. so for this subject it didn't work well. for BIF you always have to crop some so it puts much higher burden on the lens, it really has to be tack sharp at 100%



mallard A9 II 200-600 ISO-2500

[Jay Ing]

I'll try putting you to love birds to rest :)... lol.

I don't have AH's nice 600 (yet!) - but have been using the 2-6 (for a little while). IMO and experience (which FAR outstrips both of you guys combined... whawhawha)... I do find the Bokeh of the lens more "edgy" than I'd like... not much cream to be found. If the bkg is nicely lit (blacking dark areas/twigs which I find it struggles with, if the bkg contrasts the subject and is sufficiently distant -- a not to shabby bokeh can be achieved. Not as good as a 400 2.8, 500 or 600 4... but acceptable.

What I like most about the 2-6 (and it's the only option in the Sony line) is the versatility of the lens. It CAN look sharp and pleasing with closer subjects and medium range subjects and not toooo bad with distant ones. But some shots I'd just never get with a 600 because there's inadequate space and not way to back up . SO, it's a very good lens for it's adaptability... and not bad at all most of the time given it's price. I'd not expect it to be as sharp as the 500 PF either as that's a prime - even if a fresnel prime.

I hope to keep my 2-6 and get the 600 just as soon as the two stocks I bought at their bottom climb out of this darn recession. Hard to wait... but... I've got 400 good mm to bide my time :)... cheers.

[arash_hazeghi]

I have no doubt that in my hands at least, a d500 + 500PF will make more keepers and better overall images than the combination of A9II and the 200-600 lens despite the A9's AF supremacy. I was about to give up and let the Sony go until I tried the 600GM and that changed EVERYTHING. I wasn't judging the system fairly because of the zoom lens. On the other hand the nikon 200-500 is even worse. I was just expecting more from the 200-600 after reading raving reviews of it which turned out to be hype other than anything else. :)

[Brian Sump]

Hey Artie, a fine Eagle indeed.

I am curious if this was from a time ago? If so, would you process it any different with today's technology/software?

[Paul Burdett]

Arah & Artie: If I was confused before...I'm more so now. I do want to upgrade my 7Dii, 100-400ii combo. I was thinking seriously about the A9/200-600 combo, but despite having a quick go at a store recently (not the best situation out in the street photographing cars etc) I wasn't sold...would need to try it out in the field so to speak. At least the store has a 30 day return policy if you want to change it for something else.
Anyhow...I'm now thinking that one of the following combos may be best for me. Note that I shoot static birds/BIF in the approx ratio of 60/40. AF tracking is important to me and so any recommendation you give needs to take that into account. In addition I shoot 100% hand held.
So...in order of preference what do you feel would be the best overall combo for me from these that I'm now considering.

Sony A9/200-600
Canon 5Div/500mm f4ii
Canon 1DXii/500mm f4ii
Nikon D500/500mm PF
Nikon D850/500mm PF

Feel free to suggest a different combo. A 600mm Canon/Sony?Nikon lens is out of my price range at this point in time. Thanks in advance.

[Arthur Morris]

here is one of my own 200-600 files, it's not bad for this subject as you can see, details are good. nothing wrong with it except for the BG bokeh that looks busy or nervous for the lack of a better world. the BG was noisy too which I then applied NR to clean it up. but an OK file.


A9ii 200-600 f/6.3 1/1600sec ISO 3200

The Bokeh in the image looks perfectly fine to me. Actually, it looks quite beautiful.

a

[Arthur Morris]

Hey Artie, a fine Eagle indeed.

I am curious if this was from a time ago? If so, would you process it any different with today's technology/software?

WW,

Last FEB or early MARCH. There was not 200-600 "a time ago." So would not do anything different today :)

a

[Arthur Morris]

Arah & Artie: If I was confused before...I'm more so now. I do want to upgrade my 7Dii, 100-400ii combo. I was thinking seriously about the A9/200-600 combo, but despite having a quick go at a store recently (not the best situation out in the street photographing cars etc) I wasn't sold...would need to try it out in the field so to speak. At least the store has a 30 day return policy if you want to change it for something else.
Anyhow...I'm now thinking that one of the following combos may be best for me. Note that I shoot static birds/BIF in the approx ratio of 60/40. AF tracking is important to me and so any recommendation you give needs to take that into account. In addition I shoot 100% hand held.
So...in order of preference what do you feel would be the best overall combo for me from these that I'm now considering.


Sony A9/200-600
Canon 5Div/500mm f4ii
Canon 1DXii/500mm f4ii
Nikon D500/500mm PF
Nikon D850/500mm PF

Feel free to suggest a different combo. A 600mm Canon/Sony? Nikon lens is out of my price range at this point in time. Thanks in advance.

Hi Paul,

First, remember that I abandoned Canon for Nikon and then left Nikon for SONY.

Used a9 or new a9 ii and 200-600. At one point, Arash asked something to the effect of "what's so good about the SONY 200-600?"

The short answer is lots. I will be doing a direct comparison of the 200-600 with the 500 PF. Soon. Keep reminding me :)

with love, a

[arash_hazeghi]

Arah & Artie: If I was confused before...I'm more so now. I do want to upgrade my 7Dii, 100-400ii combo. I was thinking seriously about the A9/200-600 combo, but despite having a quick go at a store recently (not the best situation out in the street photographing cars etc) I wasn't sold...would need to try it out in the field so to speak. At least the store has a 30 day return policy if you want to change it for something else.
Anyhow...I'm now thinking that one of the following combos may be best for me. Note that I shoot static birds/BIF in the approx ratio of 60/40. AF tracking is important to me and so any recommendation you give needs to take that into account. In addition I shoot 100% hand held.
So...in order of preference what do you feel would be the best overall combo for me from these that I'm now considering.

Sony A9/200-600
Canon 5Div/500mm f4ii
Canon 1DXii/500mm f4ii
Nikon D500/500mm PF
Nikon D850/500mm PF

Feel free to suggest a different combo. A 600mm Canon/Sony?Nikon lens is out of my price range at this point in time. Thanks in advance.

my pick would be
nikon d500 500 PF

the Sony is a FF camera and to get the same reach with the d500 +PF you will need to use it with the TC this means a super slow f/9 lens. You will be disappointed if you are me ;)

I will also have detailed review of Sony gear on my blog stay tuned

[Dorian Anderson]

Lovely view of this regal bird. Irrespective of gear, I'm a huge sucker for headshots so this sits well with me. The whites might be a tad hot but no so much to be an issue.

[Brian Sump]

WW,

Last FEB or early MARCH. There was not 200-600 "a time ago." So would not do anything different today :)

a

Got ya. There are a few spots on the left neck/shoulder that I would maybe deem "hot" by current standards.

One of the more beautiful Baldie head shots I've seen none-the-less

[John Mack]

Great frame. Love the pose and high key treatment. If your going to throw that lens and laptop in the garbage i will take them.

[Arthur Morris]

Great frame. Love the pose and high key treatment. If you're going to throw that lens and laptop in the garbage i will take them.

Thanks, Jon. Your comment made me laugh.

with love, a

[Arthur Morris]

Lovely view of this regal bird. Irrespective of gear, I'm a huge sucker for headshots so this sits well with me. The whites might be a tad hot but no so much to be an issue.

Thanks, Dorian. The snow is all in the mid-240s. On a cloudy day, I would not expect or be striving for any detail in the snow.
with love, artie

[Arthur Morris]

Got ya. There are a few spots on the left neck/shoulder that I would maybe deem "hot" by current standards. One of the more beautiful Baldie head shots I've seen none-the-less

WW,

Not sure of those standards, but they are not mine:) The brightest WHITEs on the bird are on the lower neck, strangely on our right; none of those have RGB values greater than the low- to mid-240s.

with love, a

[Brian Sump]

WW,

Not sure of those standards, but they are not mine:) The brightest WHITEs on the bird are on the lower neck, strangely on our right; none of those have RGB values greater than the low- to mid-240s.

with love, a

You nailed it then. Well done as usual ;)

[Andrew McLachlan]

Simply stunning! Someone once said something to the effect of most lenses being sharper than most photographers....LOL :)

My highly honored award in the 2019 Nature's Best Competition was photographed with the Nikkor 28-300mm VR lens....trying to find anybody having something positive to say about that lens on the internet is like finding a needle in a haystack!

[Paul Burdett]

Thank you Artie and Arash.
Arash: 500PF is f5.6...so with a 1.4TC, wouldn't that make the lens an f/8? (Not f/9)
Artie: look forward to your comparison. Cheers.

[arash_hazeghi]

Thank you Artie and Arash.
Arash: 500PF is f5.6...so with a 1.4TC, wouldn't that make the lens an f/8? (Not f/9)
Artie: look forward to your comparison. Cheers.

it does but why would it matter in this context? BTW, I think it's better to follow the lens compare here in this thread : http://www.birdphotographers.net/for...67#post1239567 i added more info for folks who are interested....

[Paul Burdett]

Hi Arash...thanks again...good info.