RETURN to AlphaUniverse.com
Jump to content
Welcome To Our Community!

Discuss, share & explore photography, video, vlogging and making the most of your gear.

Do I really want the 600 f4?


CarolineJensen

Recommended Posts

Ok, I know. It is a BEAST. I have the 400 with the 2x already, but I am wondering if I should invest in the 600. This year I sold some older gear to get a floating blind for waterfowl photography. We live in a place that is coveted for duck hunters, but I don't hunt. I do have access to prime duck habitat though, only a mile from my house. Getting in the water with the birds this spring is a priority for me. 

My question is if the 600 is really a good choice. I HAVE to have super fast shutter speed since the camera and lens are literally bobbing in the water. 

Talk me into it or out of it! 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Caroline, I'm going to be bad and talk you into it!😂 It's such an amazing lens!!! Extreme speed, heavenly image quality, beautiful bokeh, not too bad weight wise. Combined with an a1, you got the best combo on earth! 😄

P.S. click on the pick for clearer resolution

1217iD222C328E3681430.thumb.jpg.b6cf73dcc651bbd2b0d3aa109955135c.jpg

1221iBCDE764E107AFCC7.thumb.jpg.0460b6aedf265fe51d98fba74fced3ed.jpg1222i8D47DE16CA2DBEA5.thumb.jpg.02dc93035d4885a1928aba969569f41c.jpg

1170i5D56FCE54EFF2CC5.thumb.jpg.ad4b5b16d2f7e136068c813de57f0258.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caroline, I'm going to be bad and talk you into it!😂 It's such an amazing lens!!! Extreme speed, heavenly image quality, beautiful bokeh, not too bad weight wise. Combined with an a1, you got the best combo on earth! 😄

P.S. click on the pick for clearer resolution

1217iD222C328E3681430.thumb.jpg.1e9c5b94330c49edc8e0ecc7ab49d850.jpg

1221iBCDE764E107AFCC7.thumb.jpg.14065fd6c81b5cc2c54496e0f695f524.jpg1222i8D47DE16CA2DBEA5.thumb.jpg.4b44c3f11e4221aec5413b3533f604fc.jpg

1170i5D56FCE54EFF2CC5.thumb.jpg.3bccf237432472cecdf47fe66aaaee27.jpg

 

Yeah, I was afraid of that! Amazing images! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Caroline! That’s a tough one. I have it, but I much prefer the 200-600mm for bird photography. It’s easier to carry around, hold and versatile. I don’t care for putting a TC on it so 600mm is as far as that one is going to go and it does the trick for most of what I shoot. Plenty fast shutter speeds and with noise reduction software so good these days I don’t worry much about high ISO. That said, there are times where I want more reach. That’s when I put the 600mm with the 1.4 TC on. If I think I need the 840mm and/or I’m going to be in lower light, then I’ll use it. But the 200-600mm is just amazing and the AF is really fast, ISO on the A1 is great so I don’t have a noise issue, and people often see the blurry backgrounds and think I shot with the 600 f/4 when I shot with the 200-600. If you could sell the 400 and get the 600 then I’d go for it. But not sure I would invest in it. Hope that helps! Feel free to call or text if you have any questions about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How close are you typically to the ducks? 200-600 gives you better range but is worse at lower light. You do have a 400 prime to help with lower light situations though. I don't know about primes, but a 100-400 with 1.4x is softer and lower reach then the 200-600 at 600. As long as you are farther away, the 600 is good. Closer up, the 600 is worthless. the 600 is what most birders I shot with use. I've used A7III, 7R4, and now 7R5. I was thinking of getting the 600 until I saw the minimum focal distance which I believe is twice that of the 200-600. My 200-600 is being repaired, and I am shooting with a 100-400 now which is pretty good at macro. First picture below with hummingbird and ant is 200-600 and bottom is 100-400. The 1.4x on the 600 gives reach but makes things softer, e.g., the hummingbird isn't that sharp. Last hummingbird pic is cropped full frame with 100-400. Macro shots I can go fullframe on a hummingbird's head and see my reflection in its eyes. I haven't tried the 1.4 with a prime, but on non-primes I notice differences with hummingbirds and other birds. It becomes more noticeable when further away. My friend took his 1.4 off his 600 prime and got better results. Only time 1.4x and 2x look good is with my a7III, otherwise it looks bad on 7R5. Let me know if I can answer any questions for you and I'll do my best. Since you like ducks, I included a mandarin. Happy New Year to you and everyone :-).

1227iA7A3D92195AFE9AC.thumb.jpg.a6c1e62db521301f254daef466807014.jpg

1226iCF13FE84DEDBFF3B.thumb.jpg.4acd4e06753b9ff35778d05b2e3b0b5c.jpg1225iBED63C58C3EB4C7B.thumb.jpg.b9af8f06697363ddc1516dcad5259c69.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How close are you typically to the ducks? 200-600 gives you better range but is worse at lower light. You do have a 400 prime to help with lower light situations though. I don't know about primes, but a 100-400 with 1.4x is softer and lower reach then the 200-600 at 600. As long as you are farther away, the 600 is good. Closer up, the 600 is worthless. the 600 is what most birders I shot with use. I've used A7III, 7R4, and now 7R5. I was thinking of getting the 600 until I saw the minimum focal distance which I believe is twice that of the 200-600. My 200-600 is being repaired, and I am shooting with a 100-400 now which is pretty good at macro. First picture below with hummingbird and ant is 200-600 and bottom is 100-400. The 1.4x on the 600 gives reach but makes things softer, e.g., the hummingbird isn't that sharp. Last hummingbird pic is cropped full frame with 100-400. Macro shots I can go fullframe on a hummingbird's head and see my reflection in its eyes. I haven't tried the 1.4 with a prime, but on non-primes I notice differences with hummingbirds and other birds. It becomes more noticeable when further away. My friend took his 1.4 off his 600 prime and got better results. Only time 1.4x and 2x look good is with my a7III, otherwise it looks bad on 7R5. Let me know if I can answer any questions for you and I'll do my best. Since you like ducks, I included a mandarin. Happy New Year to you and everyone :-).

1227iA7A3D92195AFE9AC.thumb.jpg.091870248fc9cef360c1ff1474abe389.jpg

1226iCF13FE84DEDBFF3B.thumb.jpg.f00fe8ddf26dabd99b6d31f13c5ed48e.jpg1225iBED63C58C3EB4C7B.thumb.jpg.8863e6bd3fe0dd7b43181a9b183ec0e6.jpg

This is so helpful! Thank you!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Caroline! That’s a tough one. I have it, but I much prefer the 200-600mm for bird photography. It’s easier to carry around, hold and versatile. I don’t care for putting a TC on it so 600mm is as far as that one is going to go and it does the trick for most of what I shoot. Plenty fast shutter speeds and with noise reduction software so good these days I don’t worry much about high ISO. That said, there are times where I want more reach. That’s when I put the 600mm with the 1.4 TC on. If I think I need the 840mm and/or I’m going to be in lower light, then I’ll use it. But the 200-600mm is just amazing and the AF is really fast, ISO on the A1 is great so I don’t have a noise issue, and people often see the blurry backgrounds and think I shot with the 600 f/4 when I shot with the 200-600. If you could sell the 400 and get the 600 then I’d go for it. But not sure I would invest in it. Hope that helps! Feel free to call or text if you have any questions about it. 

Thank you so much, Matt! I really appreciate your insight here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow Caroline - can't tell you how many times this question has gone through my mind 🙂 Didn't realize that the area I moved to was such a birding haven. I'm in Iceland leading some tours with Gary Hart and this weekend back home is a very large birding event with lots of shooters from all over coming in. I am starting to see the joy in it but not sure if I would say I go out specifically to photograph birds. If I did - the 600mm f/4 would be awesome to own. Like you, I own the 400mm f/2.8. Back in my sports photography days I owned the 600mm f/4. It is a razor sharp piece of glass designed to be shot at wide open aperture of f/4, you will not be disappointed. Back in the day, I made a living off shooting 600mm glass wide open. That aperture allows for faster shutter speeds at lower ISO. Let me know what you decide and good luck with your decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow Caroline - can't tell you how many times this question has gone through my mind 🙂 Didn't realize that the area I moved to was such a birding haven. I'm in Iceland leading some tours with Gary Hart and this weekend back home is a very large birding event with lots of shooters from all over coming in. I am starting to see the joy in it but not sure if I would say I go out specifically to photograph birds. If I did - the 600mm f/4 would be awesome to own. Like you, I own the 400mm f/2.8. Back in my sports photography days I owned the 600mm f/4. It is a razor sharp piece of glass designed to be shot at wide open aperture of f/4, you will not be disappointed. Back in the day, I made a living off shooting 600mm glass wide open. That aperture allows for faster shutter speeds at lower ISO. Let me know what you decide and good luck with your decision.

It really is a lens to set yourself apart! I think birders are a unique breed of photographer. It is a quest for sure! I'll let you know! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

  • Trending Content

  • Featured Products

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...