NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Jan Anne on December 04, 2015, 20:59:12
-
Mes amis, the plan is to buy a "something long" solution again somewhere next year but can't find a set that checks all the boxes so I'm hoping you can offer some help :)
The general idea is to buy a dedicated camera and tele lens combo for travel purposes, using it in the homeland for wildlife or zoolife is a secondary priority as this is a dwindling activity. When not in use it will be slung around a shoulder when fooling around with the Sony a7S and 35/1.4 FE which will be my main camera setup with some other short lenses in the bag for the something wide, something fast and something special lens options.
Though I'm mainly a prime lens user a tele zoom might be more practical for a secondary system which needs to be ready to shoot anything from medium to far away distances without fumbling around with TC's and such to reach the intended 400mm. On multiple occasions I had snakes swimming by with only a wide-angle mounted, by the time I had my 125mm mounted it swam too far away to make anything memorable. Same happened with wildlife, birds, planes, etc where I was too late or had too little reach to capture it properly.
I'm open for any suggestions as long as they fit the bill, bonus points when the camera can be used with my other lenses but being capable for its designated tele job is more important.
As a reference to my type of use, the 200-400/4VR was used a lot at 400mm, f/4 and ISO4000 so a f/5.6 solution should be capable of delivering clean images at ISO6400. Also a big fan of the close focus properties of the 200-400 and it's 1:3.7 maximum magnification (MM) ratio, so minimal focus distance (MFD) of 2 meters or preferably less is preferred as wel as a magnification ratio well below 1:4.
I've looked at lenses like the Minolta 400/4.5 AF and Canon 400/4DO I and II which are very compact, weight around 2 kilos and at f/4 reasonable fast for 400mm lenses but their minimal focus ranges are around 3 meters, the Minolta uses a very slow screw driver AF (like AFD), Canon MKI wasn't very good while the MKII model is a little expensive which would be OK if the specs were all spot on. No such lenses in the Nikon camp that I am aware off but a 400/4 PF would be very cool.
In the tele zoom arena a 200-400/4VR is too big, the 80-400 AFS VR misses too many checkboxes (MM 1:5.7) but the new 200-500/5.6 looks very cool though spec wise a little short on things like a MFD of 2.2m, MM ratio of 1:4.5 and weight is a little on the heavy side for secondary use but the option to go to a cool 500m without TC's makes up for those minor issues.
Sony has an updated 70-400 in A mount with an MFD of 1.5m and MM ratio of 1:3.7 and works pretty good on the A7II and A7RII after the 2.0 firmware updates. But the clear winner is the new Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS USM II which is apparently razor sharp at 400mm, focuses down to an amazing 0.9 meter, has a MM ratio of 1:3.2, is weather sealed, made of metal, uses 77mm threads and weighs a very nice 1.5 kilograms. I read mixed performance reports on the latest Sony mirrorless cameras and I'm not really a big fan of the Canon cameras either, for instance the 7DII looks good on paper with its 10 fps and 1.6 crop factor but I doubt it will be usable at ISO6400 plus it misses basic stuff like spot metering on the selected AF point (just wow....) which I use a lot on wildlife.
In the Nikon camp I can't find a proper action camera for the 200-500 either, doing 8 fps is apparently a thing of the past for all the models besides the D4s and on the FX cameras the AF points are still cluttered in the middle which annoyed me greatly when using the D700, D3s and D800E cameras. The latter also applies to the Sony a7II btw but the a7RII has 399 PDAF focus points nicely spread out over 60% of the frame which is how it should be IMHO but at 5 fps and 42MP its no action camera.
So.....there you have it, I'm going in circles again and again so maybe you guys can shed some light on the matter ;D What am I missing in the Nikon camp camera wise? Are there completely different solutions from other vendors, etc?
In the meantime I'm keeping my hopes up that 2016 will bring me a true action (mirrorless) camera with the speed and ISO performance of a D4s and the AF spread of the a7RII instead of the increasing focus on slow high megapixel offerings.
-
Can't find better than a D4s+200-500 in the Nikon camp
But could be also Canon 7D MKII +100-400
-
One of the main contenders is a used D4 or D4s, I'll wait though until the D5 is released so the market gets flooded lowering the prices for all of them to a bit to more manageable price levels I'm willing to pay for a secondary camera.
A used D3 or D3s were also on the list but I don't like buying stuff I already had, part of the ride is discovering new gear :) That said the D3s is a very good camera for what I intend to use it for and can be bought for a very doable €2000 outdoing all the cameras now sold new in that price range.
-
So ignoring the body, can you expand on what the target or constraints of your shooting are.
Obviously something like the 200-500 sounds attractive.
Does it have to be a zoom, or would the 300mm PF work (lighter, maybe higher quality etc)?
Are you after maximum flexibility (so prepared to accept some compromises) or would you be prepared to lose a few chances in exchange for using a more restricted set of kit that gave you fewer but higher quality images?
-
Can't find better than a D4s+200-500 in the Nikon camp
But could be also Canon 7D MKII +100-400
The new Canon 100-400/4.5-5.6 focuses very close, and is an excellent lens by all accounts.
-
I've heard good impressions about both Canon MkII's 7D and 100-400. Another candidate for the lens may be EF70-300mm/f4.0-5.6 "L" IS USM if the weight is concern, althogh it is optically a bit inferior to 100-400.
Olympus E-M5 MkII offers superb image stabilization which is a significant help for low light shooting so long as the subject stands still. But I would doubt if you are satisfied with its high-ISO performance and image quality of the dedicated long zooms currently available.
-
The 300 PF on a DX sensor would take you pretty far even without a TC, and is a very travel-able package. And it does not need a large heavy body to balance well. A 200-500 on a D4 is closer to 3.5 kg... One should not underestimate the value of something as light as the 300PF - during my last solo hiking/skiing+camping trips, I ended up leaving my AF 300/4 because it was just too much on top of a 60 lbs pack with food and gear for 8 days (I usually carry my shoulder tripod with it). The reasoning was that it would have to be carried in the backpack, and thus would not be ready when a spontaneous wildlife occasion shoved up; wildlife would be long gone before I got it out. This showed to be true.
Another thought would be a CX 70-300VR on a Nikon 1 body if quality and low-light capability is good enough for you.
-
What Øivind says.
The 300PF on a D7200 is a very nice lightweight package.
The 70-300CX on a Nikon 1 Vx is even less. The Nikon 1 needs light though, but DxO Optics Pro can do miracles with Nikon 1 files at higher ISO (up to ISO3200).
I don't have a D7200 anymore, but the other 3 you can always take from me and try them out.
-
I'd use a long macro (likely the Sigma 180mm 2.8 macro for the OS) on a 24mp DX body for a 280mm 2.8 that focuses to 1:1, which would provide plenty of resolution to crop for more reach. Would be more versatile than a non-macro telephoto lens and faster in a much smaller package.
-
I am not sure how important extreme separation is for ýou but my decision for this range fell quite a while ago, although I did not buy yet:
EM1 + 2.8/40-150 Pro
in a bundle with the 12-40 Pro @3000€: http://www.amazon.de/Olympus-Systemkamera-Megapixel-LCD-Display-Bildstabilisator/dp/B00U34K9VI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1449321477&sr=8-3&keywords=olympus+em1
or without the 12-40 Pro @2400€
Why? Because I handled this combination at Photokina and I was blown away by AF precision and speed
The TC is available for 300 Euros, but I guess you might find a deal somewhere where the 40-150 and the TC are sold together as an attractive bundle.
Weight & Optical performace of the Oly system are very attractive as a tele solution. The larger DOF due to the smaller format plus the very well designed IBIS can offset all trouble you might have comparing it to a FF solution.
Rent it for a weekend in the wild!
-
I just got a 300mm PF and a TC 1.4 III, using them on a D7100 and I am very impressed/satisfied.
A very small package with a lot of reach.
But, as always, I am once again reminded that I am talent limited and not equipment limited.
-
The always rumored D400 + 200-500mm :P
-
I was pretty happy about the performce of the D750 with 300mm PF and Tc14-iii.
In fact, if I decide to buy the sony rx1 or leica Q, I will bring that combo on trips where I want to travel as light as possible.
During my last vacation, I used the 35mm for 80%, 300mm for 15% and rest for 5%. More or less.
You can try the combo, if you want. We only live 40-50kms away from each ether
-
Canon is apparently working on another tele option, a 200-600mm F4.5-5.6 L:
http://www.cameraegg.org/new-canon-lens-patent-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6l-usm/ (http://www.cameraegg.org/new-canon-lens-patent-ef-200-600mm-f4-5-5-6l-usm/)
-
How long of a reach do you need/desire? If you can get by with 300mm, I suggest you look at the Fuji 55-200. It is relatively small and light with IS and has super performance across the entire zoom range. Pair it with a Fuji XT1 and you'll have a very small footprint, good high ISO capability, with a slightly different than Bayer IQ. Being mirrorless, there will be adapters for your other lenses. But, mirrorless is different than a dSLR ... not necessarily different good or different bad, just different. Most notably with the focus, which has a steep learning curve for continuous action if you're coming from a dSLR.
-
So ignoring the body, can you expand on what the target or constraints of your shooting are.
Obviously something like the 200-500 sounds attractive.
Does it have to be a zoom, or would the 300mm PF work (lighter, maybe higher quality etc)?
Are you after maximum flexibility (so prepared to accept some compromises) or would you be prepared to lose a few chances in exchange for using a more restricted set of kit that gave you fewer but higher quality images?
Everything from landscapes, whales or bears from a little dingy to animal portraits in the zoo :)
I had the 200/2VR with the 1.7TC, a versatile and fast setup but not as versatile as a tele zoom. The 70-200 on DX was too short, the Sigma 120-300/2.8 worked better but the 200-400/4VR had a very usable range for my type of use combined with a D700 for low light (@ ISO4000 max) and a D300 for the range (@ ISO1600 max).
With smaller primes I rarely miss a moment, usually a step back or forth makes it work. With longer lenses you don't have that luxury, being able to quickly zoom out and shoot close by action is worth the loss in aperture speed IMHO.
Two simple examples where the 200-400 was set at 200mm to capture two images I would have hated to miss as they mark two memorable events (the reason why I started doing photography).
This male wanted to impress Chris Dees and me by getting within the 6 meter mark of my focus limiter
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2444/4019866274_ab6e7d60a6_o.jpg)
D700 & 200-400/4VR, Holland 2009
This young elefant chased us around the block, I havent seen any images of the other participants in car with half a dozen photographers
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3486/3823395178_4b3587be55_o.jpg)
D300 & 200-400/4VR, South Africa 2009
-
The always rumored D400 + 200-500mm :P
That would be sweet indeed, a true follow up of my old 8fps D300 speedmonster ;D
-
Another vote for the 300mm f4 on D7200 or D750.
Yes, I know it is less versatile, but I feel the AF speed, light weight and close focus make up for that?
I carried the older AF-S version on a walking trail in the iMfolozi nature reserve (Natal, South Africa), and was the only guy to get a photo of the charging lioness. All the mirrorless cameras were still switching on when the charge was over.
-
and was the only guy to get a photo of the charging lioness. All the mirrorless cameras were still switching on when the charge was over.
A lot has to with mindset and skills, some people freeze up, some enjoy the moment and might regret not having an image to tell the story to others and some instinctually take images but might miss some of the excitement of the action.
With my deer shot I had no idea he was so close because I was busy with capturing the action, composition, exposure while slowly zooming out. Only until the focus limiter prevented the 200-400 from focussing closer than 6 meters I raised my head to see what was going on and relealized he was pretty big up close when sitting on my knees ;D
That said the Nikon DLSR camera are faster to start up than my Sony but by timing it properly its usually operational by the time the camera reaches my eye.
And yes the 300/4 looks like an interesting lens, very impressed with the new PF model which shortly played with in Slovenia.
-
How long of a reach do you need/desire? If you can get by with 300mm, I suggest you look at the Fuji 55-200.
Something 400mm would be nice, that said the Fuji route looks very interesting as its a nice excuse to get me one of those cool Fuji cameras ;D
Thank you for letting me look at yet another option :)
-
For sure skill and knowledge make a difference. But one of the other photographers who didn't get a photo is a professional guide specializing in photo-safaris in Africa, and is much more experienced and skilful than I am.
The charge came pretty much out of the blue, with no warning. It was at short range, and the whole incident lasted less than 2 seconds.
Like you, I only realized the danger later.
-
Jan: consider renting the Olympus combo I talked about. I know some real life professional from Suisse
who sold his Nikon Gear for Oly EM1 the set of Pro lenses from 7 to 150mm and some of the primes.
He claims he compared large prints in his real life photo club and noone could tell a D800 with best Nikon glass
from his.
-
And I also know professionals whom know bupkis about the gear they use so prefer first hand experiences from the NG community :)
I do like small sensor cameras however for tele work as they provide a better coverage of the autofocus points and the added field of view range, the penalty is high ISO performance however and I usually shoot when the light levels are more pleasant to the eye.
-
I like high iso too. I love my D600 and hope for the next generation.
Just in the tele I really see the advantage of 43ds.
Do we have Olympus shooters here? Yet.
-
Just in the tele I really saw the advantage of 43ds.
Do we have Olympus shooters here? Yet.
As I posted in another thread, I moved completely to Olympus. E-M5 Mk II made me decide. I use Nikkor-Q C 200/4.0 with it and IBIS and high magnification function for precise MF work marvelously. Because of the inferior high-ISO performance, however, the combo is not suitable for shooting actions, which is why I have refrained from posting here.
-
I moved from FF to MFT. I was quite happy with Oly's, the EM5 and EM1. I evolved from MFT to APS-C and the Fuji's. For me the Fuji is a a great compromise between the IQ of FF and the small package of MFT.
-
#1
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/Brea-Jazz-Festival-2014-Derek/i-Cs3CMXN/0/O/_GA17739.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1
ISO: 3200
Focal Length: 200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/4.8
Exposure Time: 1/320
#2
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/MFT-Meetup-5-31-14/i-TPxQPN9/0/O/_GA12681.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1
ISO: 1250
Focal Length 200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/4.8
Exposure Time: 1/3000
#3
(http://www.garyayala.com/Sports/Rockets-2014/i-gjQzsQW/0/O/_GA14735.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1
ISO: 1000
Focal Length: 200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/4.8
Exposure Time: 1/1000
#4
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/WHS-Talent-Show-2014/i-RD2q8gT/0/X2/_GA11077-X2.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1
ISO: 3200
Focal Length: 200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/9
Exposure Time: 1/250
-
When using D3 batteries in the D700 and D300 they could do 8fps with a buffer of 16/17 12bits RAW files, very impressive figures back in 2008 which only a few cameras can match 7 whopping years later in 2015. The focus nowadays is mostly on slow high resolution cameras instead high speed cameras.
The XT1 seems to be one of them though as it can shoot RAW images at 8fps and a very respectable 23 frame buffer
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/9 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/9)
According to Fujirumors.com a 100-400/4.5-5.6 lens will be announced in early 2016 making things a whole lot more interesting for me :)
http://www.fujirumors.com/xf100-400-to-be-announced-on-january-15-for-about-e1800-anonmyous-source/ (http://www.fujirumors.com/xf100-400-to-be-announced-on-january-15-for-about-e1800-anonmyous-source/)
-
When using D3 batteries in the D700 and D300 they could do 8fps with a buffer of 16/17 12bits RAW files, very impressive figures back in 2008 which only a few cameras can match 7 whopping years later in 2015. The focus nowadays is mostly on slow high resolution cameras instead high speed cameras.
The XT1 seems to be one of them though as it can shoot RAW images at 8fps and a very respectable 23 frame buffer
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/9 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-t1/9)
According to Fujirumors.com a 100-400/4.5-5.6 lens will be announced in early 2016 making things a whole lot more interesting for me :)
http://www.fujirumors.com/xf100-400-to-be-announced-on-january-15-for-about-e1800-anonmyous-source/ (http://www.fujirumors.com/xf100-400-to-be-announced-on-january-15-for-about-e1800-anonmyous-source/)
That is one of the shortfalls for a newer system/mount, like Fuji, is that it takes a while to fill out the lens line-up. Fuji's FX lens are very good. If you were here I'd toss an XT1 and a bag full of lenses into the trunk of your car so you could play.
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/Brea-Jazz-Festival-2013/i-8zfvSCP/0/O/_DSF0860c.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-Pro1
ISO: 1600
Focal Length: 200mm (300mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/4.8
Exposure Time: 1/250
-
The problem with mirrorless for action photography is viewfinder blackout during high speed frame bursts.
-
Good point Sten, I only shoot at single frame speed with the a7S so had to test it to see the black out phenomena.
At 5 fps it was very manageable but it will probably become an issue at higher frame rates, curious how Sony will deal with this issue if they do come out with the rumored pro a9 camera.
-
That is one of the shortfalls for a newer system/mount, like Fuji, is that it takes a while to fill out the lens line-up. Fuji's FX lens are very good. If you were here I'd toss an XT1 and a bag full of lenses into the trunk of your car so you could play.
Gary: How happy are you with the AF-speed and AF-precision of the Fuji. You have the comparsion to the Olympus system.
With my D600 as well as with my D3 and my X100T I loose a lot of frames to bad focussing. With a friends Oly EM1 all frames are dead sharp, only sometimes the focus is on some object that came into the way or the background.
-
The 300/4E PF is a lot of fun and very effective for travel tele use. I'm generally happy with its outcome although the contrast on skin tends to be a bit low. The image quality shines when photographing subjects with colour and contrasty detail. The sharpness is high and I find the sport mode VR to be very useful for stabilizing the lightweight lens when photographing moving subjects. However, although it is good it's not comparable with e.g. the 200/2 II. I sometimes combine the 300/4 PF with the 70-200/4 if I need those focal lengths with high image quality in a compact package. The two weight together about the same as the 70-200/2.8 by itself. f/4 is usually fast enough for me to be able to photograph outdoor subjects with movement-freezing shutter speeds. I have the 200-500/5.6 also, but prefer to use it on a tripod or at very least a monopod, and mostly for static subjects at least during the winter months; a lot of the time in the winter it just can't stop the movement effectively and the light level is often dim so that it affects AF tracking. On sunny days, I expect to be able to use it for aircraft, summer outdoor concerts, and some sports. If I were to have just one long lens, I would not choose a lens with a smaller maximum aperture than f/4. If you need more pixels on the subject, the D7200 would seem to be an excellent choice with AF performance and image quality beyond its price point.
-
The problem with mirrorless for action photography is viewfinder blackout during high speed frame bursts.
That used to be a severe problem. But with the faster refresh rates/updated software of the newer generation cameras, the blackout is barely noticeable on the lower FPS. I rarely shoot at 8FPS, but I'll do a quick test this afternoon.
-
Gary: How happy are you with the AF-speed and AF-precision of the Fuji. You have the comparsion to the Olympus system.
With my D600 as well as with my D3 and my X100T I loose a lot of frames to bad focussing. With a friends Oly EM1 all frames are dead sharp, only sometimes the focus is on some object that came into the way or the background.
I think the Oly AF is slightly better than the Fuji, but not really significantly better.
Mostly, I shoot people doing stuff in an uncontrolled environment. Lots of movement and changing light. With the exception of sports, extreme action, I don't see a difference in my keeper-rate between my old Canon 1D's, Oly EM1's/EM5's and Fuji XT1's. The first generation Fuji's were AF dogs and in low light they just howled and the viewfinder smeared when focusing on even slow moving subjects. I think the Contrast AF for stationary subjects is spot on ... no in-camera micro adjustments required. 2nd generation mirrorless focus is extremely fast, on a stationary subject you won't see a difference between a EM1, XT1 or a D1/D4. But, (the big but), DSLR's are much better for shooting fast action especially fast action in low light. If I was working, say shooting a nighttime football game, with my XT1's and to the right was a photographer with a D4 and to my left a photog with a 1DX ... they'd outshoot me ... I'd get scooped ... after a couple games of getting outshot by the competition, I'd get fired. But if I was covering something slower moving ... like a fire or a concert ... no problem ... the Fuji would keep up with the 3x more expensive cameras. And, not that it really matters, but at the end of the day my poor-old-sore back would be less sore shooting mirrorless. I am much higher on the mirrorless action AF learning curve ... and I can successfully shoot sports with my mirrorless cameras. Shooting sports with a mirrorless is harder than a dSLR. You will have less keepers shooting mirrorless as opposed to shooting a dSLR. But I do fine as a hobbyist ...
(http://www.garyayala.com/Sports/Rockets-2014/i-Vfx5Nr6/0/O/DSCF6587.jpg)
The Fuji viewfinder is significantly better than the EM1. In very bright California sunshine, the dark shadows lose detail with the Oly viewfinder ... the Fuji shadows do not black out. Another plus to EVF is that they can be set to ramp up in dark conditions and they can be set to reflect your exposure ... often, especially when in a rush, I'll just adjust my settings to a good looking picture in the viewfinder and shoot away. I'll use the spot meter to fine tune the settings. The EVF in the XT1 is huge.
Sometime back, a friend's brother was killed when his doughnut shop was robbed. The local community pulled together and had a nighttime "Peace March" to protest the violence and to honor Andy. There was a news photog covering the event that eyed my hardware. We chatted, he worked for the LA Times, my former paper. He said he remember my name, (I doubt it as I left in the '80's). He was using 1D's but in parting he said that mirrorless is the future.
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/The-Peace-March/i-7pDCz2D/0/XL/aperture%2093-XL.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1 w/ Fujinon 50-140
ISO: 6400
Focal Length: 140mm (210mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 1/60
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/The-Peace-March/i-tgCctJR/0/X2/aperture%20124-X2.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1 w/ Fujinon 10-24
ISO: 6400
Focal Length: 10mm (15mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/4
Exposure Time: 1/60
(http://www.garyayala.com/Events/The-Peace-March/i-7595TcC/0/XL/aperture%2094-XL.jpg)
FUJIFILM X-T1 w/ Fujinon 50-140
ISO: 6400
Focal Length: 50mm (75mm in 35mm)
Aperture: f/2.8
Exposure Time: 1/60
-
On many mirrorless cameras the EVF delay increases by several hundred ms when high fps continuous mode is used. Thus the user must anticipate the effects of the delay on framing if the subject is moving laterally. Since this delay is not present (or is much shorter) in single shot mode, the user needs to frame such situations differently to get the intended composition. I think this makes such cameras impossible to use for most action. If there is an EVF camera which shows a real time image instead of a slide show in high fps mode I would be happy to know about it.
-
With my D600 as well as with my D3 and my X100T I loose a lot of frames to bad focussing.
The spec & capability of the lens has a lot to do with the accuracy of focussing, in addition to mage quality. Hence the difference in keeper rates between (say) a Nikon 300mm f4 and the equivalent f2.8.
So whilst the lenses for Mirrorless cameras may be high quality, do they get close to this level of performance? (I know Olympus make a premium tele range, but not if a sports photographer would rely on it to shoot a night time game).
If not, then at this extreme end of the performance envelope, there will still be a difference. And for the vast majority of users (and situations) this wouldn't be enough to stop them using Mirrorless.
With a friends Oly EM1 all frames are dead sharp, only sometimes the focus is on some object that came into the way or the background.
Actually sharp focus of something else apart from the desired subject seems almost as bad - esp if you mean a telephoto shot where DOF isn't going to save you. I have *lots* of pictures of not-quite-sharp hawks; they all get binned!
-
Gary: Great coverage. You got it man. People in situations is your great stregth. Thank you for your answer too. I am really happpy with what I can do with the Fuji RAF files now after a few month of getting used to them, esp the colors ion the dark and at high ISO. I can push an pull them, wow! Af is another thing. Thank you.
-
In the last three months a lot of interesting things happened regarding this topic, Nikon actually announced a proper successor of the D300 with some amazing specs that pretty much check all my boxes. Together with a 200-500VR or 200-400VR the D500 would be my ideal wildlife solution and a very good reason to finally add a Nikon to my camera bag again.
In the mean time Sony also introduced the A6300 however, a $1000 APS-C mirrorless camera which can do 8fps with little viewfinder blackout, 425 PDAF points covering the entire frame and improved compatibility with third party autofocus lenses. Though I have no interest (yet) in the A6300 itself it kind of predicts what the minimum specs will be for the MKIII iterations of the a7 cameras or even something a little more sporty (a9 is rumoured to challenge the D5 / 1Dx).
With that in mind I've chosen for the latest version of the Canon 100-400mm because thats the lens I wanted to have specs and features wise, also makes for a lot more compact travel lens than the mentioned Nikon lenses. This is my first Canon lens ever btw, and yes if you told me 2 years ago I would buy a Canon lens I would probably call you crazy ;)
So I've chosen glass over camera in the hope that the next generation of the Sony cameras will give me the desired camera performance to complete the "Something Long for Travel" package. Btw this does not rule out the option to get a D500 and some premium long glass if I ever want to get serious again about wildlife, the 100-400 would actually open up the option to get me a nice exotic prime again ;D
Still figuring out the best settings for the best AF performance, the grip (plus custom Arca plate) of the MKII Sony is big and comfortable enough btw for the big Canon.
Enough talk, here's the Canon mounted on an a7RII using a Metabones IV T adapter, note the 0.98m minimal close focus 8)
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1668/25812630021_8399563f7d_o.jpg)
Sony a7S and Voigtlander 125/2.5 EF, Home 2016
-
The initial test reports indicate that the Sony A6300 has done away with the lag that is usually asociated with mirrorless cameras. The sensor has got copper wiring instead of aluminum before, and the processor, CPU, in the camera is upgraded. It can now do 8 fps with only minimal viewfinder blackout.
Another interesting aspect of the copper wired sensor is that it allows for avgreater angle of incidence of light falling onto the sensor. This may be even more significant in future 35mm format mk III generations from Sony, should the also get copper wired sensors. I'm sure such cameras will be tested with RF lenses and Kolari thin sensor cover mods by enthusiasts over at fredmiranda.
Kolari offers a thin sensor cover mod that will be of interest to anyone shooting rangefinder wide angles on Sony A7 series of cameras, since smearing and astigmatism issues are adressed with a thin sensor cover.
-
Congratulations JA! ;)
I think it looks a little large on the Sony,,, Let's see how you like it over time ;)
I recommended always this 'long zoom' lens to Canon shooters/ friends over time, they have all been very happy with it!
Never head about how it takes converters, but 400 is pretty far
-
Fuji 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR Fujinon Lens is on sale in the UK £1399. Weighs 1.375 kg, and with a compatable 1.4 teleconverter £1499.
I have no idea what it handles like though, as I won't be getting one!
-
Never head about how it takes converters, but 400 is pretty far
Especially on a 42MP full frame sensor, an APS-C crop is still 18MP :o :o
And thanks :)
-
Fuji 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR Fujinon Lens is on sale in the UK £1399. Weighs 1.375 kg
For roughly the same price and weight the Canon version is full frame, does work on my Sony a7RII but also on the upcoming Canon FF mirrorless and should in theory also work on the rumored Nikon FX mirrorless camera.
Again, this is the lens I wanted, the grip holding the sensor will change over time ;D
-
Congratulations JA, will be interested in the first results !
Like many others in this thread I am happy with the 300/4E PF with TC-14E III, but the Canon is more flexible being a zoom lens and optically also very good !
-
The 300/4PF becomes a very interesting option when the autofocus Nikon adapter becomes available, as its an E lens like the Canon lenses it should be lot easier to adapt to other mounts.
Here's two test shots with the 100-400 on the a7RII from today.
Even though this is shot at ISO6400 on a 42MP camera the detail is amazing with very clean ISO performance
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1530/25883596516_20a3450785_o.jpg)
A Rook shot through my kitchen window in dull overcast light and heavily cropped
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1520/25615562210_d6b6ec3cec_o.jpg)
These birds are getting rare I've been told but they fly in a few times a day "grazing" the fields for worms, first decent shot in months due to the 400mm setting and the insane MP's of the a7RII. The Rooks are very easily spooked however so the next challenge will be to get one without a window in between.
There's some unexpected double nervousness in the OOF grass btw, not sure if this is caused by the double window I shot through or that it is caused by IS artefacts. Might have to do some test, with and without IS, with and without the built in Steadyshot.
-
Indeed - you need to shoot glass-less ;) Sure hope it's just the window!
-
As far as I understand register distance Nikkors will work on Canons but Cannons will only work on Nikons
with very significant limitations.
-
Frank, true in the DSLR world but not in mirrorless world :)
In time Nikon, Canon and Fuji will come out with a full frame mirrorless camera, most of my lenses can then easily be re-used by buying a new adapter.
-
Let's hope these adapters offer the maximum of compatibility with regard to lens features. Automatic aperture functionality and EXIF support are indispensable. Reliable AF operation is desirable as well.
The current fascination with adapting odd lenses to mirrorless systems and thereby losing all automation features is essentially a throwback to the 1950's. Its attraction fades over time. Surely it should be possible to offer something better.
-
JA, your a7RII looks a major step up from my a7II in terms of High ISO. I've been disappointed with the High ISO of the a7II compared to most of my Nikon FFs. The 80-400 afs works quite well on the Commlite AF adapter. If I pre-focus to the general distance it is very fast to lock on. Still not up to action shooting.
Bjørn, I would expect adapters to keep improving particularly if the major lens manufacturers get into the game (ala Sigma's new adapter) . Using adapters is enjoyable due to the lens selection available. The Df brought me back into manual focusing and I use MF vs AF about 50% of the time now with the Df. It is a pain having to set the FL and not having EXIF but the images work. Scouting for old lenses is also enjoyable and cheaper ( I did not say 'cheap' ;) ) .
We are off to the Thar Desert (Rajasthan) next week. My wife and son have it easy. Both shooting EM1's and 6 lenses between them. I'm taking the Sony and Df with a selection of Sony, Zeiss, Nikon, Voigtlander and Leica lenses. Fortunately the carry on weight is cumulative for the family :) . The Nikon and 3 lenses weighs close to the same as the Sony and 7 lenses. The only long lens will be the Olympus 40-150 2.8 (and TC1.4) .
It is all about enjoying taking photographs :)
I did think about taking just the Sony but I am still not that confident in the Sony and the Df is just so good with that 16MP sensor and I can still use CNX2 .
Tom
-
JA, your a7RII looks a major step up from my a7II in terms of High ISO. I've been disappointed with the High ISO of the a7II compared to most of my Nikon FFs. The 80-400 afs works quite well on the Commlite AF adapter. If I pre-focus to the general distance it is very fast to lock on. Still not up to action shooting.
I am amazed about the ISO performance as well, at 42MP I feared the worst but here's a 100% crop of the OOC JPG of the dog portrait posted earlier.
EXIF: ISO6400, 263mm, f/5.6, 1/250, autofocus, Image Stabilisation on, Steadyshot off, handheld on a moving dog.
-
JA, pretty darn impressive :) . I cannot afford to keep chasing High ISO and since I'm not shooting action with the Sony I'll just have to learn to shoot differently. If I were a Professional Sports shooter I would probably sell a bunch of gear and get the D5 or a D5S (if one appears) and a 400 f2.8 but, for my market ( ;) ) , the D3S and D750 will have to suffice. A D500, maybe :) .
Cheers,
Tom