A6000+MC-11+Sigma 150-600 Contemporary test: surfing, planes, beach portraits

[Brownie1010]

Hi, I have recently added the Sigma MC-11 adapter and 150-600mm Contemporary so that I can retire (sell) my Panasonic FZ-1000. Have been using my A6000 for general use, and in an underwater housing (Meike) for taking shots in the surf, but have wanted for some time to replace the FZ-1000 for beach shooting. I have never trusted the FZ-1000, despite its specs, after a mammoth battle to get the lens replaced due to focussing issues soon after I bought it (refer gallery and posts in the Panasonic forum). Now, I just love the A6000 and am determined not go back to a big DSLR, even for sports photography!

So, these shots are selected from about 450 shots taken one afternoon at a local beach, on its second outing, so still getting used to it. I was shooting my son and his mates in the surf, using a monopod, when suddenly some acrobatic planes appeared, so did some impromptu handheld ones. The later shots of the boys, and a group of people taking photos of their daughter were also handheld.

Posting these to show that even without the better AF system of the A6300/6500 (which I will upgrade to in due course) the results are pretty good. All the surfing and plane shots were taken as part of mid-speed bursts, with high "keeper" rates, probably 9 out of 10 (or better). I find that using the lower burst rate allows me to keep shooting (some rides can go for 15 seconds, and buffer overrun is one reason is why I need to upgrade, better PDAF-based AF being the other).

All shots have been exported as sRGB JPEGs (1400 on the long side, as per the ZackieDawg standard) with no sharpening, no cropping, no exposure adjustment ... no nothing.

Settings were Shutter-priority at 1/2000, Auto ISO, focus AFC-C (but not sure what the camera actually does through the adapter interface, probably AF-S, but the camera EVF displays Lock-on AF and a green indicator - need to research more).

Focal length in these images varies, but generally 300 to 550mm on the Sigma (so apply 1.5 crop factor for 35mm equivalent). Tried to avoid shooting at 600mm as testing shows the lens softens at the end of its range. And at that FL, its too hard keeping the surfers in frame through a burst, especially if they launch into an aerial (cropping off your son's head in his most soaring moment is viewed with some disdain at post-mortem ...).


Image 1a : 1/2000 f5.6 ISO 250 and 302mm (so 453mm 35mm equivalent). All good, in nice sequence.


Image 1b: Next frame in sequence, shows change in subject at the Mid frame rate ... risks missing peak action.


Image 2: 1/2000 freezes the spray, can go to 1/1600 but no lower ... Aussie beach - lack of light not an issue!


Image 3: Problem - focus has shifted to the broken wave in front despite using the 10m+ focus switch on the Sigma (because the wave is actually 50m or so away). Stopping focus shifts to foreground is a big problem when the shooting angle can't be elevated, which would also reduces the impact of the shot). Maybe this is something I can adjust if I get the the USB dock, by limiting the refocussing "slew rate". Future research.


Image 4: not that interesting, except that even with white foam, white shirt, white board ... the focus system works ... but maybe that's why .


Image 5: I use a small Flexible centre spot for focus area - it can get busy out there ... with the spot adjusted upwards above the horizontal centreline (to bias it away from broken wave focussing, the problem seen in Image 3.


Image 6: not that interesting, just wish my son would adopt better hand positions - he'll never win a title without attention to these details!


Image 7: the acrobatic planes appear, I lift the monopod and shoot handheld. Not easy getting PIF even coming at you. Is planes-in-flight even a sensible acronym? Maybe ZackieDawg can advise .


Image 8: they get closer, maybe even start to get interesting ...


Image 9: but it's not all good, start of a burst, and focus not achieved.


Image 10: but two frames later it's OK. Keeper rate swinging the lens around at the sky is high, but lower than monopod.


Image 11: 1/2000, f6.3, ISO 250, 388mm, monopod. Light is starting to fade.


Image 12: 1/2000 f5.6, ISO 160, 252mm, handheld. I like the subject isolation, no bokeh though ... damn.


Image 13: 1/2000, f5.0, ISO 320, 157mm, handheld. Spotted a photographer taking family shots. Very cute.


Image 14: 1/2000, f5.0, ISO 800, 157mm, handheld. Time to go home.

That's it. Longest post in my history, hope it uploads. [Edit: It did, and now see that the camera settings are overlaid by the site itself ... sigh.] All taken with the shutter-priority and auto ISO settings adopted at the outset, and nothing changed throughout. Hard enough keeping things in frame for me without going all "manual" ...

Absolutely looking for C&C here. I am pretty happy with the Sigma lens+adapter combination, look forward to learning how to use it better, with an eventual upgrade to a A6300/6500/6700 on the cards. Have now pretty well decided the fall-back option of buying a Canon body just for action photography is unwarranted.

Cheers, Brownie.

 

[davelok]

Hi Brownie1010, I am happy to hear that you got good results with the combo. I have been wondering if I should upgrade my NEX-6 eventually to one of the newer versions (a6000 included) to make better use of my Canon-mount lenses.

I bought a Canon 70D after failing to get passable results focusing the Sigma 150-500mm and Tamron SP 70-300mm VC USD manually on the NEX-6. They don't have AF with the Viltrox ii adapter on this camera. Later on, I bought a Canon 400mm f/5.6 L for BIF (being unsatisfied with the other two lenses), but it suffers from the lack of image stabilisation for stationary birds although it focuses very well on the 70D.

I was wondering if I should be using a two camera set up, or if I should just sell the gear that I don't use much. The a6500 world be a great match for the 400mm with its IBIS, but it's too costly, and when one adds the cost of a new adapter, prohibitively expensive for me. So I got to thinking that perhaps using the two stabilised lenses on the a6300 would be a better deal. Still unaffordable if an adapter is included, but probably a target after some time.

However, this post by you gives me hope that an updated a6000 with an MC-11 (or perhaps Viltrox III) would be a more affordable, and practically alternative. I would still miss stabilisation on the 400mm, but the other two lenses, on which I have sunk nearly $1000 wouldn't just lie unused.

I might just need to get rid of the NEX-6 and the Viltrox II.

 

[Brownie1010]

Dave, I am absolutely with you on many of your ideas and observations.

Hi Brownie1010, I am happy to hear that you got good results with the combo. I have been wondering if I should upgrade my NEX-6 eventually to one of the newer versions (a6000 included) to make better use of my Canon-mount lenses.

I think the answer is yes. But which one in what is now a range? Will the next release be an A6700, and the A6000 gets dropped? Or no new models, just linear refinements of each?

I am leaning to the A6300 as being the sweet spot for an upgrade. I don't need IBIS or a touch screen, though it would be nice. I may go A6300, and wait to see if an A6700 eventuates, an upgrade on every 2nd strategy.

I bought a Canon 70D after failing to get passable results focusing the Sigma 150-500mm and Tamron SP 70-300mm VC USD manually on the NEX-6. They don't have AF with the Viltrox ii adapter on this camera. Later on, I bought a Canon 400mm f/5.6 L for BIF (being unsatisfied with the other two lenses), but it suffers from the lack of image stabilisation for stationary birds although it focuses very well on the 70D.

I think an MC-11 might work here, ditch the Viltrox, but I have no experience of other adapters. IS for stationery birds? Might be missing something? Maybe use faster shutter, and let Auto ISO range? I always prefer sharpness over a bit of noise.

Getting a A6500 to get IBIS for the 400 seems expensive ... as you know.

I was wondering if I should be using a two camera set up, or if I should just sell the gear that I don't use much. The a6500 world be a great match for the 400mm with its IBIS, but it's too costly, and when one adds the cost of a new adapter, prohibitively expensive for me. So I got to thinking that perhaps using the two stabilised lenses on the a6300 would be a better deal. Still unaffordable if an adapter is included, but probably a target after some time.

I have made my choice: I have tried to learn two menuing systems, across Panasonic and Sony, and I accept that Sony can and should do a better job. But technical power and flexibility, like in the Sony cameras, comes at a complexity cost. I just want to get very familiar with one system. I will be selling my Panasonic FZ-1000.

However, this post by you gives me hope that an updated a6000 with an MC-11 (or perhaps Viltrox III) would be a more affordable, and practically alternative. I would still miss stabilisation on the 400mm, but the other two lenses, on which I have sunk nearly $1000 wouldn't just lie unused.

I wouldn't expect anything other than maintenance firmware updates to the A6000 now. Maybe it will get A6500 style menuing, maybe it won't.

Maybe though with an MC-11 you can start to get a return on your lenses again. Can you try one somehow?

I might just need to get rid of the NEX-6 and the Viltrox II.

Maybe even try a second-hand A6300 and a MC-11?

Good luck, and thanks for commenting!

 

[zackiedawg]

First off - congrats! Looks like the combo works half-decently. I wasn't sure how the MC11 would do on the A6000 vs the A6300 - definitely it's a better option for the A6000 than the LA-EA3 adapted lenses are...those work fine on A6300, but not well at all on A6000.

I would guess you're right that the jump to the A6300 will likely improve your results a bit with regards to tracking via the PDAF algorithms which I think will function better with the adapter. I'm not sure if the MC11 adapted lenses have the same limitations as the LA-EA3 adapted lenses do - which is that AF-C will only work continuously at 3fps burst...so if you switch to a faster burst, you're only going to get focus on the first frame. Might need to test that out.

As for suggestions or C&C - the shots of the surfers look pretty good - good action captures and moments. I do think you could probably stand to lower the shutter speed a bit in order to give you the leeway to decrease the aperture - if you were shooting that lens at the longer end at F7.1 to F8 or so, the results would probably be much sharper, and you could still keep shutter speeds up at 1/1000 or 1/1600...which should be plenty to freeze surfers and even the board spray droplets. I've shot surfers and wakeboarders at 1/800 and still freeze the action well...that lens might do a little better at the long end stopped down just a touch.

All in all, good shots, good action, and fun to look through, so job accomplished.