Best Companion Lens for 200-600 for Low Light

[russellsnr]

Hi, sorry people another question on lenses.
I have the 200-600 & 70-200 F4.
My problem just now is low light, ISO up above 10,000 in a wooded area with heavy canopy.
The 200-600 does a fine job with good light but the 70-200 is to short on focal length on many occasions.
I no Sony do the F2.8 of the 70-200 but again the focal length again is the problem.
Any suggestions please?
Does not necessary have to be Sony branded.
Thankyou, Russ.

 

[spudhead]

Hi, sorry people another question on lenses.
I have the 200-600 & 70-200 F4.
My problem just now is low light, ISO up above 10,000 in a wooded area with heavy canopy.
The 200-600 does a fine job with good light but the 70-200 is to short on focal length on many occasions.
I no Sony do the F2.8 of the 70-200 but again the focal length again is the problem.
Any suggestions please?
Does not necessary have to be Sony branded.
Thankyou, Russ.

Russ I think you have the a74r? and the 200-600, this combo should handle noise just a little less well than the a9 I mostly use the a7iii handles noise even better, but to the point and not wanting to burst your bubble its down to setup and and manipulating the available light and denoising if required

 

[russellsnr]

Russ I think you have the a74r? and the 200-600, this combo should handle noise just a little less well than the a9 I mostly use the a7iii handles noise even better, but to the point and not wanting to burst your bubble its down to setup and and manipulating the available light and denoising if required

Hi, Thankyou for the reply. I do have the A7R IV and changed from the A9, I am actually regretting that I did so although relatively new to Sony from Canon, I feel I did not get as much noise in images with the A9. Just need to get the boss to agree for me to maybe get the A9 back or A9 II, I did look into the A7 IV but from what I am seeing (and no expert) the A9 seem to be a better option. As Frank said "Regrets I've had a few". Russ.

 

[spudhead]

Hi, Thankyou for the reply. I do have the A7R IV and changed from the A9, I am actually regretting that I did so although relatively new to Sony from Canon, I feel I did not get as much noise in images with the A9. Just need to get the boss to agree for me to maybe get the A9 back or A9 II, I did look into the A7 IV but from what I am seeing (and no expert) the A9 seem to be a better option. As Frank said "Regrets I've had a few". Russ.

Russ you should be able to make it work with some effort, I one thing you mentioned in an earlier post was file size? why not try apsc crop setting I am not sure of the file size but could be half and you will gain reach.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Russ. See my recent posts about resolution vs atmospherics and the discussion about the issues the high resolution causes. I use the RIV in all sorts of conditions, and shooting 10k ISO is not an issue if you get exposure right, and, of course, use some noise reduction software like Topaz. One trick I have found works well is to deliberately over expose in high ISO situation. Take a look at the attached image, it was shot on a dull, grey day in my garden, and she was under a tree. You wouldn't know the ISO was as high as it is. One other thing to note, high ISO is actually quite good if you aren't looking for fine feather and hair details.

• ILCE-7RM4
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/9
• 1/800 sec
• ISO 10000

 

[spudhead]

Russ. See my recent posts about resolution vs atmospherics and the discussion about the issues the high resolution causes. I use the RIV in all sorts of conditions, and shooting 10k ISO is not an issue if you get exposure right, and, of course, use some noise reduction software like Topaz. One trick I have found works well is to deliberately over expose in high ISO situation. Take a look at the attached image, it was shot on a dull, grey day in my garden, and she was under a tree. You wouldn't know the ISO was as high as it is. One other thing to note, high ISO is actually quite good if you aren't looking for fine feather and hair details.View attachment 23358

Kev some good pointers for Russ and the over exposure at high iso is what I do, its is a shame he is ready to give up he just needs to stick with it and help from you and other a74r users may sort his issues

 

[Paul stuart]

do what i am going to do ,buy a sigma 500mm f4 ef mount and adapt with sigma adaptor ok you will only get 15fps on stacked sensors but it will still af well enough and cover you when the light fades ,hold to on it until sony announces a 500mm f4 or sigma make a mirrorless version ,it is a tack sharp lens although heavy but it will hold up well to competitors ,canon and nikon 500,s sony will announce a 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4 but not tomorrow ,what would be better still is something like the nikon 400mm f4.5 which does not require pfl lenses to remain light .

 

[iain clyne]

I don't tend to worry about the noise as there are so many de-noise software out there that you can still get a good picture. Its costs less to get noise reduction software than a 2.8 lens.

 

[spudhead]

do what i am going to do ,buy a sigma 500mm f4 ef mount and adapt with sigma adaptor ok you will only get 15fps on stacked sensors but it will still af well enough and cover you when the light fades ,hold to on it until sony announces a 500mm f4 or sigma make a mirrorless version ,it is a tack sharp lens although heavy but it will hold up well to competitors ,canon and nikon 500,s sony will announce a 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4 but not tomorrow ,what would be better still is something like the nikon 400mm f4.5 which does not require pfl lenses to remain light .

nice that the newer sigma 500, I have the sigma 500 4.5 ex sony-minolta a-mount , I have the minolta 400 4.5 , sony 300 g 2.8, minolta version 300 2.8 etc list goes on

 

[MrFotoFool]

There is no easy solution to your dilemna, one that many of us share. I also use the FE 200-600 for wildlife, which is stellar. It's the heaviest lens I would want to carry, so getting something like the 600 f4 is out of the question (even if I could afford it, which I cannot). For low light I use a 70-200 f2.8 often paired with 1.4 teleconverter for 280 f4. (In my case these are Nikon F on D850, but you could get the same setup for Sony). It's not long for wildlife, but with cropping it can work and it's better than selling my car and hiring a porter to use a super telephoto.

I am not sure about compatability with adaptors, but other options as suggested are Sigma 500 f4 or (not yet mentioned) Sigma 120-300 f2.8 .

 

[russellsnr]

Hi, OK many thanks for the advice especially the OE option never thought doing that would help with noise.
I have both Topaz products and On1 2022, attached ( i hope) are two images put through as RAW files and saved as Jpegs, each program used without any pre process on my part and both on there auto options ISO was 12,800, now I can see artefacts in front of the birds breast and don't no if this is because of the high MP or not on the A7R IV. Thanks again, Russ.

 

[spudhead]

Hi, OK many thanks for the advice especially the OE option never thought doing that would help with noise.
I have both Topaz products and On1 2022, attached ( i hope) are two images put through as RAW files and saved as Jpegs, each program used without any pre process on my part and both on there auto options ISO was 12,800, now I can see artefacts in front of the birds breast and don't no if this is because of the high MP or not on the A7R IV. Thanks again, Russ.
View attachment 23385View attachment 23384

details will help metadata shooting mode as much possible and approx distance to bird, focus mode metering mode

 

[russellsnr]

Exposure 1/250
F6.3
ISO 12800
600mm
Exposure manual
+/- 0
Metering Multi Segment
W/B Auto
Focus distance 6.31 mtrs

Proton Drive

Securely store, share, and access your important files and photos. Anytime, anywhere.

drive.proton.me

 

[iain clyne]

If you are viewing at 100% magnification you will see things like that. With the high MP cameras I never view higher than 50%. Most people are not printing posters, they my like me and print up too A3 and if a picture is fine at 50% it will print well at A3.

 

[russellsnr]

Most people are looking at them on a 3" cellphone screen.

Nope I could not even see a 3" screen I use a Benq 27" although the way the eyes are going that could be upgraded to a 40" screen

 

[Paul stuart]

no it is a combination of things artifacts are due to the algo of the software ,i guess for iso 12,800 you will need to play around a little with sliders ,and what one you use topaz standard is my favourite ,clear just seems to sharpen the image it is ok for low iso ,low light and heavy noise options do not do anything that can not be achieved in standard ,but lets be honest a 61mp sensor is going to show noise at 12,800 ,like all 50+ mp sensors ,they are comparable to other sensors upto 6400 after this you need to use careful noise reduction.

 

[Deleted Member 5003]

I think you have nailed it Paul, I believe on Topaz, and subject to the active profile and underlying algorithm you select(Raw or otherwise), some profiles may produce artifacts dependant on the colour balance of the image and a whole host of other theoretical light related factors.

I have seen something similar in the past.......and you just need to check out the other profiles during the denoising process and select
the best.

 

[russellsnr]

Works well with lower ISO (2500) on this today

• ILCE-7RM4A
• FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
• 600.0 mm
• ƒ/8
• 1/1250 sec
• ISO 2500

 

[spudhead]

Works well with lower ISO (2500) on this today
View attachment 23423

yes Russ looks good also look at your metadata and compare it to the other shot and shutter speed there was only 1/250 with a 600 mm length I would have shot in raw if you didnt and over exposed somewhat and fix in editing later, nice shot