Those dang spots on the sensor are killing me. sorry, couldn’t resist. But that sharpness though 😳💯 and those shots from behind the plate are phenomenal!!!
@@SouthAfricanWanderer it only happens on my Sony mirrorless. My Olympus, Fuji, Leica M and Canon mirrorless gear don't have the problem, in fact I have never had to clean the sensors on any camera until I got the Sony A7iii
Sony bodies are known to have sensor dust. When I made the switch, I find myself cleaning my sensor at least once during every wedding I used it for. I don't remember the last time I had to clean my sensor on my Canon or Leica cameras. Tony Northrup explains this issue and is one of the reasons my Sony gear that planned on using to replace my Canon and Leica wedding gear will just be my personal camera for travel instead.
A smudge on a lens like this would never show up, in fact you could put half your hand in front of the front element and it would barely affect it. It's on the sensor for sure, which is a problem with mirrorless camera's. I'll keep my DSLR for another 5 years or so, I don't want to clean my sensor every couple of days, which is expensive and over time peels away at the low pass filter/sensor.
@@patricksmith2553 I have a Sony a7II and have only had to clean my sensor twice in the past year. The two times that I have needed to clean it, I just turn on the cleaning mode in the settings. I take my lens off anytime I'm not using it, and put the cap on my camera. Maybe I just got a good model, but its definitely not as bad as it's made out to be, at least in my use. I've used a Sony a7, Sony a7II, and a Sony a6400. I cant speak to other brands, but sony rarely has senor dust in my opinion.
I think the fact that you were able to shoot at 1/200th shows that some of the principles that we follow in photography are meant to be broken from time to time. Knowing when and how to break the rules is what really makes you a pro. Thanks for sharing that part!
@@ar00042 nope. It was a mistake on Amazons part but a bunch of cameras and lenses accidentally got listed for $94, some people really lucked out! Unfortunately I was not one of them
That is a light weight. For deep sky astrophotography I use an astrograph optical tube that's 684mm focal length @ f/1.9 with 355mm aperture. It weighs 60 lbs.
The little gorilla chillin out @17:59 looks incredible. The grass just frames it perfectly in the foreground and the bokeh does the same in the back. If you clone out that bright spot or just change its hue to green that would be a perfect photo.
I shoot motocross regularly. I'm definitely in need of a pro setup. I would likely have to spend the same amount of money to switch to any of the mirrorless full-frame cameras by any of the brand leaders. I want the type of performance that you described. I'm seriously thinking of going to Sony.
@@worldrallyblu I'm seriously considering adding a Z6 (film makers kit is looking at me)...I'm gonna wait and see what gets released in the next 6 months or so, no hurry..that's what I keep telling myself.
Great review and look forward to the 200-600. I think the 400GM x 1.4TC could offer better overall flexibility than the 600 assuming Sony’s statement about TC’s only passing data and not impacting AF speed.
Dear Jared, your VLOG's are absolutely phenomenal to say the least. Your giveaways are generous! Most of all, the information that i glean from you, is so constructive to my photographic experience. At 09:50 I was also blown-away at the "softness" of the f4 - I suppose this is to be expected but most of all; I think I really enjoy the fastest means available to do "facial-tracking" to keep the subject in focus. If I had $20k to drop on lens and camera I would rather hang out with you for a day. Please don't stop sharing with us. Thanks so much
Love to see a side-by-side comparison with the F2.8 400mm GM and 1.4 converter. That would make it 580mm and also F4.0 but potentially more versatile. Thoughts?
Guess I'm going to have to get the 200-600mm till I can offload my Canon gear and save up a bit. Just do a bit more background photoshop. Actually I think the 400mm f2.8 is better value gives you more options.
I don't understand why you say you used "compressed for the first time, because I wanted the 20 frames per second over the full quality of the uncompressed files" when they are compressed lossless files. Its the same file, like when you download a software program in a compressed file, all you have to do is unpack it and there you go, the full file is there. Same thing with a RAW file, that in digital terms is an extremely simple file.
Video idea: When I was growing up as a photographer it was conventional wisdom that lens hoods were required. And truth be told, lens flare is still a major issue on a lot of older glass. But with modern lens coatings it seems that the average photographer has to work fairly hard to get lens flair anymore. Could be a great video to test out if we're all wasting place and grams in our kits
I think it's less of a problem nowadays because of the stabilization in camera plus lenses. But I believe that this rule was to mainly help people who , like me, dont have stable hands
Great camera and lens set up. I would love this for air show shots, but being a normal human being, I have no chance of owning anything like this. Really enjoyed the review Jared and the shots were terrific!
Sir please suggest me that which DSLR should I buy Nikon d7500 or Fujifilm x t30. Please tell me that the rumors about replacement of Nikon d7500 is true or not
Jaw dropping price, but jaw dropping photos too. Hard to argue with those results. I don't see myself shelling out a cars worth to buy one, but I'd love to buy one 11th or 12th hand in a few decades.
when you think about it, any type of 600mm telescope that is cheap is around 2-4lbs so not the smallest because when added to a dslr, they are a lens. And for that money, i can get a really good rasa at f/1, sure it's made for astrophotography, but I'd use it only for AP.
Question... I’ve only watched 4 minutes and you mentioned about the 1.4 and 2 times converter. If I remember rightly from my military training, you will lose a stop of light! But you haven’t mentioned that yet! It would be beneficial to mention that because it does.
Great review! However, it does look like Sony has temporarily conceded the amateur wildlife and wildlife cruise or safari market to Nikon and Canon. That isn’t to say this is a bad move by Sony. A company that wants to survive needs to pick its battles carefully. Right now, if I were a serious amateur in this market segment I’d buy either the Nikon 300mm f/4 or the 500mm f/5.6 phase-Fresnel lens plus a Nikon body to go with it. These lenses are crazy sharp but also crazy light. I would then put the substantial amount of money left over away to buy the Z9 or whatever they call it when it comes out. If that money left over is burning a hole in your pocket, buy the Nikon 500mm f/4 with the fluorite lenses for 10 grand. If you look at the many RU-vid channels by wildlife photographers, they all have 600mm f/4s in their arsenal and they use them when required. However they also have smaller lenses and use them instead whenever they can because their 600mm is so heavy and bulky.
9 lakh India rupees for a lens I think profit margin is very high in lens like this Otherwise I don't think it's possible to make a lens that costs 13k$
Why on 🌍 earth have they made it look so similar to the Canon version, everything, including the drop in filters and even the lens case. Ok so they're doing their best to eat Canon, but cm'on Sony you could have at least painted em pink 😂
@James Peebles so what you are saying is that those planes are moving at roughly 1000km/h's and not destroying your eardrums every time the fly by? (Ik, they ain't making a sonic boom, but still)
@James Peebles I guess it has to be fighter planes flying over you at full throttle (cuz you said 90-95% the speed of sound) that in it self is a 120db, that is more than enough to damage your hearing.
That sony a9 is a boss! But, it seems to attract sensor dust. As a nature tog (non-pro as I have a friggin ball-n-chain desk job), I feel I should just go into hock and get this a9/600f4 combo. I got the money in the bank, but it still feels like an irresponsible move to buy it since I make essentially zero money from photography. Thing is, I'm going to be dead in the next 15-20 years (likely) so shouldn't I get what I want to maximize my enjoyment of those years? I feel like if i don't, I will have lived my entire life sucking hind tit.
look forward to seeing a sharpness/detail comparison between this behemoth an the 200-600. Hope its not just the softer bokeh that seperates them. For left/right subject tracking you could lower the shutter and iso reducing noise and increasing the background blur.
Still, there a lot of issues to iron out that you don't get with a mk iv/v version body. GM lenses are super expensive (f2.8 70-200mm GM £2300 - really!!), and battery life awful on many sony bodies. Several bodies have no dual card slots either. Tech is moving, and if money is not an issue, then switch, if not stay as you are for another few years while they iron out problems for the first movers.
@@crowtheri Im not much of a fanboy, but you are missing a few things in your comment. Sony does need to work out the issues in their current generation of cameras, but they have been putting out updates to smooth them out. The GM lenses might be expensive, but you get what you pay for as they are some of the best lenses out there! Battery life was awful on the last generation of Sony's but this newer generation definitely has started to fix that. The same for the dual slots, it was an issue for the last gen but the new gen have that already fixed. Definitely agree that if money isn't an issue then switch, but soon those who do have an issue might want to start looking at these systems, cause they have been out long enough that they are starting to have some nice sales that make them more affordable. This might be the start of great time to switch no matter what. You just gotta keep your eyes open for whats happening around you and whats to come no matter what system you have! Both Nikon and Canon are scrambling to keep up, but eventually they will get there if they don't tire out first and then it will truly be an amazing time to be a gear junkie!
@@dalestokes2789 I hear you, Dale. However, if you/we are paying top dollar with additional top up premiums, I want as little wrong with the camera gear as is humanly possible. I agree the glass is top notch, but it's not another £1000 better better than Canon's L-glass or Nikon, or not that it matters to me when shooting or that I could justify. Its people and ideas coupled with great gear that allow to notch images. One other point, the secondary Sony market is tiny right now, so no real gems to pick out of sales and people looking to cash out - this maybe the case for some time. You're right, improvements have bene made, but as I said, the mark iv and v's will be even better, and then after a few years, I may just buy one! ;-)
Since (almost) nobody bokeh-stalks a finished, published image, not too swayed to swap my 200-600 5.6-6.3 for the 13K version. But appreciate the forensic analysis.
I always find it funny that if you spend thousands on cameras and lenses you are considered rich but no one thinks twice if you are a dumbass that drops $5,000 a year smoking cigarettes. LOL
