Steve or anyone with this Sony gear: how do you like the a9ii + 600mm f/4 combination? That's my first lens over 400mm, and I'm very pleased with it on my a7Riii (42MP). However, when I think about a camera upgrade, I can't decide between a9ii with lower resolution, or a7Riv, which is 62MP but does 26MP in APS-C mode (maintaining 10fps). Any thoughts on suitability for birds/wildlife (or other action settings) welcome.
Sony a9ii + 600mm f/4 experience
- Thread starter Susan Scharenberg
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
We have both the a9ii and the A7R4 and use it with the 600 F/4G. Great either way - the 600 F/4 G is the sharpest 600mm I've ever used (the Nikon is close, the Sony is just a bit better and takes TCs better too). So, I guess I wouldn't decide based on how the lens will perform on either body - you'll be smiling either way. On our last trip, Rose was using it with the A7R4 since I was reviewing the D6 and I had serious doubts that I'd ever get to use the Sony 600 again LOL!
Between the two bodies, it's tough. The a9ii is faster (20FPS, but only 10FPS if you want 14 bit) has no blackout (wonderful), has a huge buffer, and is better in lower light. Overall, it's my go-to in Sony. However, I also sometimes envy Rose's A7R4 for it's ability to crop like crazy - although it gets fairly noisy after ISO 1600 and she frequently hits the buffer shooting full frame.
I think it comes down to how much you think you'll crop. If you crop a lot, than the A7R4 needs serious consideration - especially if you're not always shooting in the dim light of Costa Rica
However, if you don't need the extra pixels, the a9ii would get the nod from me. Also, since the 1.4 TC takes almost nothing away from that 600, it acts as another way to gain some reach. I've also heard the 2X is fantastic, but we don't have one just yet.
Between the two bodies, it's tough. The a9ii is faster (20FPS, but only 10FPS if you want 14 bit) has no blackout (wonderful), has a huge buffer, and is better in lower light. Overall, it's my go-to in Sony. However, I also sometimes envy Rose's A7R4 for it's ability to crop like crazy - although it gets fairly noisy after ISO 1600 and she frequently hits the buffer shooting full frame.
I think it comes down to how much you think you'll crop. If you crop a lot, than the A7R4 needs serious consideration - especially if you're not always shooting in the dim light of Costa Rica
However, if you don't need the extra pixels, the a9ii would get the nod from me. Also, since the 1.4 TC takes almost nothing away from that 600, it acts as another way to gain some reach. I've also heard the 2X is fantastic, but we don't have one just yet.Very helpful, thanks Steve! The A7R4's high-ISO performance is a key concern for me, as it would be my primary camera, and some of my other shooting is often in low light. Thanks too for including your experience with the 1.4 TC!
BTW, I really like the forum! It has the best user interface of any forum I'm in.
BTW, I really like the forum! It has the best user interface of any forum I'm in.
So I thought I would post one of my cropped photos from Yellowstone so you can see what the A7R4 looks like at ISO 6400. It was taken with the Sony 600mm with the 1.4 TC 1/5000 sec @ F5.6. I will say I am always fighting with the noise on the A7R4, but I do like what I get from it.
This is the original.
Here is the crop with no Topaz noise reduction done to it.
Here is the final with some Topaz applied to it.
This is the original.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Here is the crop with no Topaz noise reduction done to it.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Here is the final with some Topaz applied to it.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Attachments
arbitrage
Well-known member
I own the A9II, A7RIV and the 600/4GM. I've never owned the A7RIII.
The 600 works very well on both of those bodies but there are always trade offs. If you are after more challenging action and flight shots then the A9II is just at another level with AF compared to the RIV. The RIV is still really good but the A9II is certainly the best AF I've owned over the years. Previous cameras I've had include 1DX, 1DXII, 5DIV, D500, D850. I haven't owned the D5/D6 which may be the closest competition for AF and I haven't owned the new R5. But the A9II is certainly top of AF for what I've owned over the years.
The A9II's main advantages come from its fast readout of the sensor. This gives a few unique benefits. One is that it does 60 AF calculations per second vs 20 on the A7RIV. The other big advantage is having a blackout free live feed in the EVF while actively shooting and this helps with following a subject. For fast and erratic flying subjects it makes a big difference over other cameras.
On the other hand the A7RIV shines in pure MP performance and if you need those pixels then you may be better off with it. I find that with the 600GM and the use of TCs, that I usually have enough reach to fill my subject onto the A9's 24MPs and for me 24MPs when I don't have to crop a lot is all I need. I like A9II files better than higher pixel files just as in the past I've prefered files from cameras in the 20-30MP range over the 40-60MP range.
The 600 works very well on both of those bodies but there are always trade offs. If you are after more challenging action and flight shots then the A9II is just at another level with AF compared to the RIV. The RIV is still really good but the A9II is certainly the best AF I've owned over the years. Previous cameras I've had include 1DX, 1DXII, 5DIV, D500, D850. I haven't owned the D5/D6 which may be the closest competition for AF and I haven't owned the new R5. But the A9II is certainly top of AF for what I've owned over the years.
The A9II's main advantages come from its fast readout of the sensor. This gives a few unique benefits. One is that it does 60 AF calculations per second vs 20 on the A7RIV. The other big advantage is having a blackout free live feed in the EVF while actively shooting and this helps with following a subject. For fast and erratic flying subjects it makes a big difference over other cameras.
On the other hand the A7RIV shines in pure MP performance and if you need those pixels then you may be better off with it. I find that with the 600GM and the use of TCs, that I usually have enough reach to fill my subject onto the A9's 24MPs and for me 24MPs when I don't have to crop a lot is all I need. I like A9II files better than higher pixel files just as in the past I've prefered files from cameras in the 20-30MP range over the 40-60MP range.
Rose, thank you for the comments from your experience, and the images. Very helpful to see examples of the noise, before and after!
Glad I could help.
Thanks for sharing your experience with this gear!
I have the X2 and X1.4 TC. I use these on a Sony A7R iii with the 100-400 Sony G master. In my experience the 1.4 is sharper by far. It has become my go TC and I hardly use the X2 now. Given the High F numbers with the X2 and 100-400 I may use it on stationary subjects in very good light but in all honesty I think the gain from the X2 is just not worth it I think you would get the same or even better results with a slight crop
arbitrage
Well-known member
I agree that the 2xTC on the 100-400 and 200-600 is not worth it and cropping a 1.4TC shot is the better way to go. You can pull off a sharp image with the 2x on the zoom lenses but most times it ends in some level of frustration for me.
That said, on the 600GM (and I assume on the 400GM) the 2xTC is totally worth it. The IQ and AF stays top notch and I feel that using the 2x when needed is better than cropping the 1.4 or bare lens.
200-600/2xTC....sometimes it works....
August 31, 2019.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
600GM/2xTC is even good for action on the A9(II)...
May 04, 2020.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
That said, on the 600GM (and I assume on the 400GM) the 2xTC is totally worth it. The IQ and AF stays top notch and I feel that using the 2x when needed is better than cropping the 1.4 or bare lens.
200-600/2xTC....sometimes it works....
August 31, 2019.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr600GM/2xTC is even good for action on the A9(II)...
May 04, 2020.jpg by Bird/Wildlife Photos, on Flickr
Great to know, I've been thinking out a 2X for the 600 and that's one great looking duck