50-200 F2.8 IQ

MEDISN said:

Owlsfan said:

Seems most people are using it for wildlife. Sometimes using the 1.4tc.

It's nice you can use it for that but I think flowers, buildings ,people, dogs using the 50-200 range would be nice to see.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I understand correctly, this is already with lens correction applied?

With my 40-150/2.8 at 40mm it was about the same, but with the correction turned off

--
Alex

IagoZ said:

As your picture shows (and thousands before it), no one complained about the IQ from the 40-150 F2.8.

Click to expand...

I did. Sold mine cuz of IQ. Wasn't happy with its performance wide open at 150mm. It was good at F3.5 and up.

You have to give the purchasers time to do that. Most have only had the lens for 4-5 days and if you live in the northeastern USA, it has rained with wind for four to those days. I assume most users are checking the lens to see if everything works and checking for sharpness/decentering instead of trying to show what the lens is capable of doing.

The only thing I can show as my typical use of the lens is large wildlife in not ideal lighting. So, I went out in the rain and photographed my local deer family in the field next to my house. I chose to post this image, not because of sharpness or demonstration of the lens capability, but because the buck fawn's tongue was out.







--
drj3

drj3 said:

You have to give the purchasers time to do that. Most have only had the lens for 4-5 days and if you live in the northeastern USA, it has rained with wind for four to those days. I assume most users are checking the lens to see if everything works and checking for sharpness/decentering instead of trying to show what the lens is capable of doing.

Click to expand...

That's what I actually want to see. Controlled indoor tests that show sharpness/decentering. Too many are trying to show what the lens is capable of doing, and that's why there's so many blurry, out of focus, AI processed to hell shots. I have no interest at all in those "tests". Too many variables - it's not a good test. I want to see the optical performance of the gear, not the user's skill (or lack of), or inability to post-process photos.

Your monitor test was great.

SonyX said:

MEDISN said:

Owlsfan said:

Seems most people are using it for wildlife. Sometimes using the 1.4tc.

It's nice you can use it for that but I think flowers, buildings ,people, dogs using the 50-200 range would be nice to see.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

If I understand correctly, this is already with lens correction applied?

With my 40-150/2.8 at 40mm it was about the same, but with the correction turned off

Click to expand...

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.




Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner




40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

James Stirling said:

That is a great diverse set thanks. For folk not into the super long bird chasing stuff. I feel the combination of focal range and the F/2.8 makes the 50-200mm a more attractive proposition. The close focus and magnification also expand it's use case

Click to expand...

Many more to share later but swamped with work this week. Still on the memory card.

I have some bird chasing stuff but I was using the TC to gauge AF speed/responsiveness. Most of my use will be sports and events with wildlife as secondary.







So far a positive experience. Rendering is very nice. Feels like a true successor to the old 50-200 SWD in that regard.

MEDISN said:

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.

Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner

40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

Click to expand...

Isaac do you have Rx10 iv.

If anyone has both 50-200/2.8 and Rx10 iv 24-600mm be intriguing to see how Rx10 iv at f/4.0 it's sweet spot measures up to 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

With a stacked 1inch bsi sensor + pdaf + 24fps whilst autofocusing + excellent zeiss 24-600 lens Rx10 iv when at f/4.0 £900 £1000 used with warranty could be an enticing proposition.

--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

MEDISN said:

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.

Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner

40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

Click to expand...

Isaac do you have Rx10 iv.

If anyone has both 50-200/2.8 and Rx10 iv be intriguing to see how Rx10 iv at f/4.0 it's sweet spot measures up to 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

With a stacked 1inch sensor + pdaf + 24fps whilst autofocusing + excellent zeiss lens Rx10 iv when at f/4.0 £900 £1000 used with warranty is an enticing option.

Click to expand...

It would need to be a pretty poor condition RX10 IV to sell at £900. Like new or excellent they fetch over £1500 even just good condition from MPB is still nearly £1300

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-cyber-shot-rx10-mark-iv?page=5

My wife has one which we got for £1200 new in sale . It has a fantastic feature set and very good optics. But could do with an update with some of the latest Sony bells and whistles though that seems very unlikely

--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

James Stirling said:

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

MEDISN said:

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.

Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner

40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

Click to expand...

Isaac do you have Rx10 iv.

If anyone has both 50-200/2.8 and Rx10 iv be intriguing to see how Rx10 iv at f/4.0 it's sweet spot measures up to 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

With a stacked 1inch sensor + pdaf + 24fps whilst autofocusing + excellent zeiss lens Rx10 iv when at f/4.0 £900 £1000 used with warranty is an enticing option.

Click to expand...

It would need to be a pretty poor condition RX10 IV to sell at £900. Like new or excellent they fetch over £1500 even just good condition from MPB is still nearly £1300

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-cyber-shot-rx10-mark-iv?page=5

My wife has one which we got for £1200 new in sale . It has a fantastic feature set and very good optics. But could do with an update with some of the latest Sony bells and whistles though that seems very unlikely

Click to expand...

Yikes £1500. Seen a couple sold on ebay just around £750. Cex if in stock none in stock though, £900 grade B.

I'd be intrigued to see Rx10 iv at f/4.0 vs 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot indoors testing similar Dpreview does studio test scene.

--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

James Stirling said:

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

MEDISN said:

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.

Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner

40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

Click to expand...

Isaac do you have Rx10 iv.

If anyone has both 50-200/2.8 and Rx10 iv be intriguing to see how Rx10 iv at f/4.0 it's sweet spot measures up to 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

With a stacked 1inch sensor + pdaf + 24fps whilst autofocusing + excellent zeiss lens Rx10 iv when at f/4.0 £900 £1000 used with warranty is an enticing option.

Click to expand...

It would need to be a pretty poor condition RX10 IV to sell at £900. Like new or excellent they fetch over £1500 even just good condition from MPB is still nearly £1300

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-cyber-shot-rx10-mark-iv?page=5

My wife has one which we got for £1200 new in sale . It has a fantastic feature set and very good optics. But could do with an update with some of the latest Sony bells and whistles though that seems very unlikely

Click to expand...

Yikes £1500. Seen a couple sold on ebay just around £750.

Click to expand...

Have you perhaps seen other models in the RX10 series looking at the recently sold prices for the RX10 IV on ebay the only one under £1000 had a damaged tripod mount

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

Cex if in stock none in stock though, £900 grade B.

Click to expand...

I think it may be safer to pay for sex than buy from Cex

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

I'd be intrigued to see Rx10 iv at f/4.0 vs 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

Click to expand...

Dpreview has a large sample gallery from the RX10 IV most with raws available to give you an idea how it looks


--
Jim Stirling:
"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason, is like administering medicine to the dead." - Thomas Paine
Feel free to tinker with any photos I post

James Stirling said:

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

James Stirling said:

SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany said:

MEDISN said:

Both copies of my 40-150/2.8 are softer at 40mm than at 150mm, both in the center and in the corners. The 50-200/2.8 is sharper in the corners than both copies of my 40-150/2.8 at 50mm. At the long end, with the same framing (moving the 40-150 closer to the target), the corners are sharper on the 50-200.

Camera profiles are applied by default in ACR. Test target is A1 size at 10m.

Both lenses at F2.8, upper right corner

40-150 stopped down to F5.6. 50-200 wide open.

The 40-150/2.8 reaches peak corner sharpness at F5.6. To my eyes, the 50-200 at F2.8 edges out the 40-150 at F5.6. If corner sharpness is important to you, the 50-200 is the better choice. Personally I don't need corner sharpness at this focal length. Both are equally sharp in the center.

Click to expand...

Isaac do you have Rx10 iv.

If anyone has both 50-200/2.8 and Rx10 iv be intriguing to see how Rx10 iv at f/4.0 it's sweet spot measures up to 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

With a stacked 1inch sensor + pdaf + 24fps whilst autofocusing + excellent zeiss lens Rx10 iv when at f/4.0 £900 £1000 used with warranty is an enticing option.

Click to expand...

It would need to be a pretty poor condition RX10 IV to sell at £900. Like new or excellent they fetch over £1500 even just good condition from MPB is still nearly £1300

https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sony-cyber-shot-rx10-mark-iv?page=5

My wife has one which we got for £1200 new in sale . It has a fantastic feature set and very good optics. But could do with an update with some of the latest Sony bells and whistles though that seems very unlikely

Click to expand...

Yikes £1500. Seen a couple sold on ebay just around £750.

Click to expand...

Have you perhaps seen other models in the RX10 series looking at the recently sold prices for the RX10 IV on ebay the only one under £1000 had a damaged tripod mount

https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=rx10+iv&LH_Complete=1

James Stirling said:

Cex if in stock none in stock though, £900 grade B.

Click to expand...

I think it may be safer to pay for sex than buy from Cex

Click to expand...

I asked a cex staff in their first ever store totty crt rd, it was supposed to be sex pronounced sex but they couldn't get away with it.

James Stirling said:

James Stirling said:

I'd be intrigued to see Rx10 iv at f/4.0 vs 50-200/2.8 at its sweet spot.

Click to expand...

Dpreview has a large sample gallery from the RX10 IV most with raws available to give you an idea how it looks

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-gal...y-cyber-shot-dsc-rx10-mark-iv-samples-gallery

Click to expand...

Pretty neat write up with nature wildlife photos.


--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.

MEDISN said:

Owlsfan said:

Seems most people are using it for wildlife. Sometimes using the 1.4tc.

It's nice you can use it for that but I think flowers, buildings ,people, dogs using the 50-200 range would be nice to see.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Bird photos and cliff house are both too dark. Is this the type of output this lens is producing or could you have used different settings to brighten them. Dog and bee are both very good.

--
Thanks, Tom
my Instagram gallery...