Reading mode: Light Dark

Seeking opinions about the A7 iii for bird photography

Go to last post
B

BirdShooter7

Forum Pro
Messages
11,554
Solutions
3
Reaction score
7,396
Location
Texas
I posted this on the nature forum but didn’t get much interest so thought it might be worth a try asking here.



For the past 20 years I’ve been using mostly Canon gear and I pretty much exclusively do bird/nature photography. Most of my lenses are getting pretty old and while they generally are top quality L lenses, their age means that I can’t get the full performance from the newest mirrorless bodies from Canon (limited to 6FPS and reduced AF area, some compatibility issues with IBIS...) so though I have been fairly invested in EF glass, even if I stick with Canon I’m looking at an expensive lens upgrade. It seems that now is a good time to explore the various options. One of the things that made me more interested in the A7 iii was my recent experience with the R5 and R6 that not only convinced me that I’m ready to transition to mirrorless but I also REALLY value the silent electronic shutter. Unfortunately, due to COVID I have pretty much lost a year of work so I have to be a little careful with my budget, otherwise I’d be really looking at the A9. However, considering the cost I think I can probably be happy with the A7 iii and if I like it add the A9 later. I had considered adapting my EF lenses but it sounds like that might not be giving the A7 a fair test so I’m pretty sure I want to go with the Sony 200-600. Also, one thing that I found when I rented the R5 and R6 was that I actually was able to get great results from the 20 MP sensor so I think I don’t need the MP’s of the A7 R series.



So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
 
If you're used to the Canon ergonomics/interface, enjoyed renting the R6, and find that 20MP is enough, why not buy an R6? If you want to save $800 that makes sense, of course.
 
I've had the opportunity to shoot an A7iii paired to a 200-600 (don't own this bad boy), but holy cow - you won't be disappointed one bit. When you crop in, you're at 900mm and that's before clear image zoom if needed...
 
BirdShooter7 said:
So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I rented the Sony 200-600mm to use on my A7riii, and I was happy with the lens performance and the results I got. Below are a couple of shots I took handheld; the first one at 600mm and the other at 293mm.

I didn't buy the lens because it was heavy (4.65 lbs) to carry around. If the weight doesn't bother you, it's definitely a great lens for bird photography.



53df67b6d5bd466db41fa56e773cc6a8.jpg



94f2e00d8bc54b4ab99fd1f06321fca4.jpg
 
I own the A9 and the A7Riv, plus the 200-600G.

My opinion is that it's worth it to get the A7Riv with that lens due to the ability to crop like mad.

6ccc5356160546409795ce5bacdc3212.jpg

8f94119b9a2c48299389b6a38c4a8415.jpg

ff12cc5af69d4377a96d513b02d2bdb5.jpg

22d82a71daae414595adbedb6f67ec02.jpg

The image below is a very extreme crop of an image taken at 600mm in APS-C mode, for an effective 900mm at 26 MP.

b065dbddafa149a7a965bee8b52baa6c.jpg



--
Gary
 
BrentSchumer said:
If you're used to the Canon ergonomics/interface, enjoyed renting the R6, and find that 20MP is enough, why not buy an R6? If you want to save $800 that makes sense, of course.
Click to expand...
Yes it has a lot to do with the cost and in the end I may just go the R6 route but I think it’s a good idea to at least see what else is available. My current cameras have a ton on clicks on them and are starting to have issues so whatever way I go I think it’s going to cost some $$$
 
MikeTakesPix said:
I've had the opportunity to shoot an A7iii paired to a 200-600 (don't own this bad boy), but holy cow - you won't be disappointed one bit. When you crop in, you're at 900mm and that's before clear image zoom if needed...
Click to expand...
I’ve gotten to hold the 200-600 and it feels great. The output I’ve seen from it also looks great. It’s definitely a big selling point for me with the Sony system.
 
TonyCh said:
BirdShooter7 said:
So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I rented the Sony 200-600mm to use on my A7riii, and I was happy with the lens performance and the results I got. Below are a couple of shots I took handheld; the first one at 600mm and the other at 293mm.

I didn't buy the lens because it was heavy (4.65 lbs) to carry around. If the weight doesn't bother you, it's definitely a great lens for bird photography.

53df67b6d5bd466db41fa56e773cc6a8.jpg

94f2e00d8bc54b4ab99fd1f06321fca4.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing, great shots!! I don’t think the weight will be much of an issue for me, my current main lens weighs 8.5lbs.

--
Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/
 
Thanks very much Gary, great shots and I agree the crop ability of the A7r4. If my budget was less modest I’d definitely be considering it. It seems to be a very impressive machine.
 
BirdShooter7 said:
TonyCh said:
BirdShooter7 said:
So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I rented the Sony 200-600mm to use on my A7riii, and I was happy with the lens performance and the results I got. Below are a couple of shots I took handheld; the first one at 600mm and the other at 293mm.

I didn't buy the lens because it was heavy (4.65 lbs) to carry around. If the weight doesn't bother you, it's definitely a great lens for bird photography.

53df67b6d5bd466db41fa56e773cc6a8.jpg

94f2e00d8bc54b4ab99fd1f06321fca4.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing, great shots!! I don’t think the weight will be much of an issue for me, my current main lens weighs 8.5lbs.
Click to expand...
Sheesh! Don't need to work out if you're used to 8.5 pounds! 4 pounds will feel like a weightless treat.

Personally I'm considering the Sigma E 100-400 and cropping in when need be, it's reasonably affordable and only 2.5 pounds. Pretty darn manageable. I also tend to do more zoo photos than proper birding. My subjects are large and close enough (elephants, great apes, giraffes, tigers/lions) that 400mm cropped in a bit (or shot on an APSC cam) will be more than sufficient.
 
For bird shooting on a sort of budget I’d look for a used A9 and add the 200-600 since you like the idea of ES. The lens really suits the body and other than the A9II I don’t think there is a better ES.
 
Last edited:
BirdShooter7 said:
Thanks very much Gary, great shots and I agree the crop ability of the A7r4. If my budget was less modest I’d definitely be considering it. It seems to be a very impressive machine.
Click to expand...
You can buy a nice used A7Riv for about $2600 on Ebay.
 
MikeTakesPix said:
BirdShooter7 said:
TonyCh said:
BirdShooter7 said:
So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I rented the Sony 200-600mm to use on my A7riii, and I was happy with the lens performance and the results I got. Below are a couple of shots I took handheld; the first one at 600mm and the other at 293mm.

I didn't buy the lens because it was heavy (4.65 lbs) to carry around. If the weight doesn't bother you, it's definitely a great lens for bird photography.

53df67b6d5bd466db41fa56e773cc6a8.jpg

94f2e00d8bc54b4ab99fd1f06321fca4.jpg
Click to expand...
Thanks for sharing, great shots!! I don’t think the weight will be much of an issue for me, my current main lens weighs 8.5lbs.
Click to expand...
Sheesh! Don't need to work out if you're used to 8.5 pounds! 4 pounds will feel like a weightless treat.

Personally I'm considering the Sigma E 100-400 and cropping in when need be, it's reasonably affordable and only 2.5 pounds. Pretty darn manageable. I also tend to do more zoo photos than proper birding. My subjects are large and close enough (elephants, great apes, giraffes, tigers/lions) that 400mm cropped in a bit (or shot on an APSC cam) will be more than sufficient.
Click to expand...
I have the EF mount version of the Sigma 100-400 C and really like it. I think the E mount version is supposed to be even better.

--
Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/
 
BirdShooter7 said:
I posted this on the nature forum but didn’t get much interest so thought it might be worth a try asking here.

For the past 20 years I’ve been using mostly Canon gear and I pretty much exclusively do bird/nature photography. Most of my lenses are getting pretty old and while they generally are top quality L lenses, their age means that I can’t get the full performance from the newest mirrorless bodies from Canon (limited to 6FPS and reduced AF area, some compatibility issues with IBIS...) so though I have been fairly invested in EF glass, even if I stick with Canon I’m looking at an expensive lens upgrade. It seems that now is a good time to explore the various options. One of the things that made me more interested in the A7 iii was my recent experience with the R5 and R6 that not only convinced me that I’m ready to transition to mirrorless but I also REALLY value the silent electronic shutter. Unfortunately, due to COVID I have pretty much lost a year of work so I have to be a little careful with my budget, otherwise I’d be really looking at the A9. However, considering the cost I think I can probably be happy with the A7 iii and if I like it add the A9 later. I had considered adapting my EF lenses but it sounds like that might not be giving the A7 a fair test so I’m pretty sure I want to go with the Sony 200-600. Also, one thing that I found when I rented the R5 and R6 was that I actually was able to get great results from the 20 MP sensor so I think I don’t need the MP’s of the A7 R series.

So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I check the Nature and Wildlife forum every day and don’t remember seeing your previous post. Although I’m old and forgetful 😁 I may have even posted a reply to your previous thread....lol

Anyhow, I had been using a Canon 7Dii and 1DIV with the Sigma 150-600 C or the old Canon 400mm f5.6. I also used a Sony a6400 with the Sigma adapter. I was very happy with these bodies but I shoot a lot and the Canon bodies were getting a bit long of tooth. Over a quarter million releases. So I rented the A7iii right after it first came out. It was my first experience with a full frame camera. Even though I only used it for a short period of time, it compared well to my 7Dii. But there wasn’t any reason for me to switch at that time.

Having said that, I’ve lusted after the A9 since it’s release. As many of my shooting cronies had switched from Nikon and Canon to the A9 and they’d tell me how great the AF was pretty much on a daily basis. Not to mention the 20fps. But it was just too expensive. Then early last year, before the A9ii was announced, the price was reduced to $3500. I was hooked. I used it with a rental 100-400 (great lens!) and the Sigma. I found the 100-400 to be a bit too short. So once the 200-600 was released I had to have it.

For just about a year I’ve used the A9 with the 200-600 and I am/was delighted with the performance, weight and balance and image quality. Once I started shooting this combo the rest of my gear sat unused.

I can’t say enough about this combo. Which I almost always shot with a 1.4x TC. I’m sure you’ve read tons of great reviews (and viewed many great shots) regarding both. The only improvement I could have made was to move up to the 600mm f4. Which I did a few months ago. I didn’t think any Sony combo could beat the A9 and 200-600 (for wildlife and birding). But while out of reach for many, the 600 is on another level. So much so that I haven’t used the 200-600 much since picking up the prime. So start saving today, or tap into the kid’s college fund.....lol J/K

While I really didn’t spend enough time with the A7iii to properly evaluate or recommend it. Maybe you can find a lightly used A9? My A9 version 1has 0 mechanical shutter releases for example (and over 100k electronic releases). You may be able to pick one up in the $2000 range?

I wholeheartedly recommend the 200-600. For the money it’s a steal. You’re also correct in your belief that Sony glass will work better with most Sony cameras. The only issue I’ve ever heard of related to this lens is when used with the A7Riv. And I’m not sure if this is related to the lens? As my cronies report similar issues when using the A7Riv with the 600mm prime. So even though I could use more megapixels. This issue has kept me from picking up an R4. So I’m happily awaiting the A9iii.

If you’re able to rent the bodies and the lens first, I’d highly recommend this. As it would suck to spend the amount of money you’re talking about only to wind up not totally satisfied.

Good luck with your decisions 😷

Cavig

--
https://mya6000.smugmug.com/Misc/
 
Last edited:
liggy said:
For bird shooting on a sort of budget I’d look for a used A9 and add the 200-600 since you like the idea of ES. The lens really suits the body and other than the A9II I don’t think there is a better ES.
Click to expand...
Thanks, if I find a good deal on the A9 I’m planning on going for it.
 
Cavig1 said:
BirdShooter7 said:
I posted this on the nature forum but didn’t get much interest so thought it might be worth a try asking here.

For the past 20 years I’ve been using mostly Canon gear and I pretty much exclusively do bird/nature photography. Most of my lenses are getting pretty old and while they generally are top quality L lenses, their age means that I can’t get the full performance from the newest mirrorless bodies from Canon (limited to 6FPS and reduced AF area, some compatibility issues with IBIS...) so though I have been fairly invested in EF glass, even if I stick with Canon I’m looking at an expensive lens upgrade. It seems that now is a good time to explore the various options. One of the things that made me more interested in the A7 iii was my recent experience with the R5 and R6 that not only convinced me that I’m ready to transition to mirrorless but I also REALLY value the silent electronic shutter. Unfortunately, due to COVID I have pretty much lost a year of work so I have to be a little careful with my budget, otherwise I’d be really looking at the A9. However, considering the cost I think I can probably be happy with the A7 iii and if I like it add the A9 later. I had considered adapting my EF lenses but it sounds like that might not be giving the A7 a fair test so I’m pretty sure I want to go with the Sony 200-600. Also, one thing that I found when I rented the R5 and R6 was that I actually was able to get great results from the 20 MP sensor so I think I don’t need the MP’s of the A7 R series.

So, I’m interested in opinions about the A7 iii and 200-600 for bird photography.
Click to expand...
I check the Nature and Wildlife forum every day and don’t remember seeing your previous post. Although I’m old and forgetful 😁 I may have even posted a reply to your previous thread....lol

Anyhow, I had been using a Canon 7Dii and 1DIV with the Sigma 150-600 C or the old Canon 400mm f5.6. I also used a Sony a6400 with the Sigma adapter. I was very happy with these bodies but I shoot a lot and the Canon bodies were getting a bit long of tooth. Over a quarter million releases. So I rented the A7iii right after it first came out. It was my first experience with a full frame camera. Even though I only used it for a short period of time, it compared well to my 7Dii. But there wasn’t any reason for me to switch at that time.

Having said that, I’ve lusted after the A9 since it’s release. As many of my shooting cronies had switched from Nikon and Canon to the A9 and they’d tell me how great the AF was pretty much on a daily basis. Not to mention the 20fps. But it was just too expensive. Then early last year, before the A9ii was announced, the price was reduced to $3500. I was hooked. I used it with a rental 100-400 (great lens!) and the Sigma. I found the 100-400 to be a bit too short. So once the 200-600 was released I had to have it.

For just about a year I’ve used the A9 with the 200-600 and I am/was delighted with the performance, weight and balance and image quality. Once I started shooting this combo the rest of my gear sat unused.

I can’t say enough about this combo. Which I almost always shot with a 1.4x TC. I’m sure you’ve read tons of great reviews (and viewed many great shots) regarding both. The only improvement I could have made was to move up to the 600mm f4. Which I did a few months ago. I didn’t think any Sony combo could beat the A9 and 200-600 (for wildlife and birding). But while out of reach for many, the 600 is on another level. So much so that I haven’t used the 200-600 much since picking up the prime. So start saving today, or tap into the kid’s college fund.....lol J/K

While I really didn’t spend enough time with the A7iii to properly evaluate or recommend it. Maybe you can find a lightly used A9? My A9 version 1has 0 mechanical shutter releases for example (and over 100k electronic releases). You may be able to pick one up in the $2000 range?

I wholeheartedly recommend the 200-600. For the money it’s a steal. You’re also correct in your belief that Sony glass will work better with most Sony cameras. The only issue I’ve ever heard of related to this lens is when used with the A7Riv. And I’m not sure if this is related to the lens? As my cronies report similar issues when using the A7Riv with the 600mm prime. So even though I could use more megapixels. This issue has kept me from picking up an R4. So I’m happily awaiting the A9iii.

If you’re able to rent the bodies and the lens first, I’d highly recommend this. As it would suck to spend the amount of money you’re talking about only to wind up not totally satisfied.

Good luck with your decisions 😷

Cavig
Click to expand...
 
BrentSchumer said:
BirdShooter7 said:
spacc said:
Low budget. A7iii+sigma 100-400
Click to expand...
Definitely the Sigma is a great lens but I really want more FL.
Click to expand...
Sigma 150-600mm C + MC-11 gets you 600mm for about $1,000, with the caveat that it's not going to perform as snappily as the 200-600mm native lens.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1353685-REG/sigma_150_600mm_f_5_6_3_dg_os.html
Click to expand...
I already own the Sigma. The only reason I’m not looking more seriously at adapting it and my 500mm f/4 is that I have read many comments suggesting AF tracking isn’t as good as native E lenses. Since I do a good bit of action shooting I want to go with the best case scenario.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top