Sony 200-600 - is my sharpness normal?

View the Latest Sony Lens Deals At: B&H Photo

krisljungberg

Active Member
Followers
2
Following
0
Joined
Apr 2, 2022
Posts
69
Likes Received
69
Name
Kristoffer Ljungberg
Country
Sweden
City/State
Norrköping
The eternal question. Is the lens sharp? Is it normal?

Today I tried my new Sony 200-600 paired with the Sony A7 III for the first time. Here's some photos I took today and I think they look soft. What do you guys think? Everything OK? They are converted from RAW to JPEG in Lightroom with standard sharpness applied by default (amount: 40).

Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_1.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 320


Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_1_100.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 320


Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_2.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 500


Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_2_100.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 500


Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_3.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 500


Sony_200_600_at_600_Soft_3_100.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 500
 
Last edited:
I'd say that there are 2 things at play to stop the sharpness, shutter speed maybe, but more likely atmospheric conditions at the range you are shooting combined with the high resolution sensor will show it more. It's the one thing I notice most since buying the A7R4.
 
Have you got a UV/protection filter on the lens? That can soften the image.
i assume that the last one of the Oystercatcher is a heavy crop of the one before - that could be the problem for that one.
i don’t use Lightroom so don’t know the sharpening effectiveness. Maybe try Topaz Sharpen AI as an alternative.
 
Have you got a UV/protection filter on the lens? That can soften the image.
i assume that the last one of the Oystercatcher is a heavy crop of the one before - that could be the problem for that one.
i don’t use Lightroom so don’t know the sharpening effectiveness. Maybe try Topaz Sharpen AI as an alternative.
The first photo is the original, the smaller photos are 100% crop on the face of the birds just to show the softness. Obviously, no one will ever see the photo in 100% crop but still...
 
I had to go out and try again. This is not an accurate representation of real worl birding, since these piegons are pretty chill. Very close up but at least it's sharp (to my eye anyway) and what I expect.

Original photo:
KL100476.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 800


100% crop:
KL100476__100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 800
 
This guy was 12-13 meters away. Acceptable sharpness or bad? I feel so insecure all of a sudden. Jesus. :p

Original photo:
KL100551.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 500


100% crop:
KL100551__100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 500
 
The first photo is the original, the smaller photos are 100% crop on the face of the birds just to show the softness. Obviously, no one will ever see the photo in 100% crop but still...
The more you crop, the softer it's going to get. Most of the detail is gone from the first set. Look at the eye and the feathers around it on the goose and gull. See how it looks smooth? Now notice how the individual feathers are visible on the pigeon? It's because you were closer to begin with.

There may be a little handshake going on in the first set too, hard to say. The rabbit and pigeon both look better and you had a higher shutter speed. Might be a little technique.
 
I have found the 200-600 to have acceptable sharpness with targets up to 8 meters away, if I expect to be shooting beyond this distance or with a teleconverter I use the 600 f4 GM. The 200-600 is very good value but it has limits which I'm happy to accept at this price.
 
Hi I used the a7iii for a couple of years with the 200-600 and it took a little getting dialed in I would try to push shutter speeds up and iso if handheld, I can assure you you can make this work well, I will attempt to add some similar bird shots if I can find some but I will add a couple of shots that are big edited crops just to reassure you this kit will work first shot is 4.3 mb file second 1.3 mb from 24 meg
tiger open wide 16.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/320 sec
  • ISO 500
tiger gob shot17.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/320 sec
  • ISO 500
 
you really do not have to take wildlife images to check sharpness ,you could photograph anything your pet would be good or a checker chart in a controlled condition base iso and no atmospherics with electronic shutter with tripod / fixed lens and camera ,this would eliminate your fears ,or prove your judgement correct.
 
you really do not have to take wildlife images to check sharpness ,you could photograph anything your pet would be good or a checker chart in a controlled condition base iso and no atmospherics with electronic shutter with tripod / fixed lens and camera ,this would eliminate your fears ,or prove your judgement correct.
Hi I did not post the shots for that reason I simply wanted to reassure him his setup would work when he gets it dialed in, its just I shoot wildlife if I had shots of birds I would have posted them the above are 2020 shots , the electronic shutter is not great on the a7iii its well noted that it suffers from shutter roll, and I still have and use the a7iii as its worth more to me than trade in, the guy is trying to make the 200-600 work on the a7iii in the real world, so testing a fixed lens just proves the camera is sharp not the combo, just my thoughts having used the above combo for 3 years plus and I am no expert so please disregard if irrelevant and I do not wish to offend anyone
 
Based on the pigeon shot, the lens is fine as far as anything I've ever seen at 600mm in those conditions. I have an amazing shot of a Blue Heron landing, but at 600mm, the atmospheric haze makes it look somewhat bright or over exposed. Atmospheric haze has been a major PITA at these focal lengths for me.

With the gull, I think I would have gone a bit less on the exposure. I feel like your whites are overexposed, giving the illusion of softness. If you look at the gray feathers you can see a lot of detail in the 100% crop, but the white feathers are just one big white blob. Coming from a Nikon, which had similar issues with exposure, I have started shooting everything 1 click down on the exposure. This never causes me to not be able to bring it back up if needed, but it does keep me from losing detail in whites.

Just my opinion, and I'm no sought after expert.
 
Thanks for your input guys! Will try to get some more testing in today if the weather allows it. Supposed to be raining though so we'll see. :D
 
Thanks for your input guys! Will try to get some more testing in today if the weather allows it. Supposed to be raining though so we'll see. :D
The Hare shot shows the atmospherics I mentioned well, with some nervous bokeh due to the background foliage. You also need to have better light to really show the sharpness.
Interesting comment from Peter about the lens being good up to 8m. I find it better at distance overall.
 
Here's some taken this morning. Bumped up the shutter speed to 1/2000s and auto iso up to 3200. Normal shooting conditions generally. I have no idea what to think.

Original photo:
KL100665.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2000


100% crop:
KL100665_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2000


Original photo:
KL100676.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 3200


100% crop:
KL100676_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 3200


Original photo:
KL100702.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2500


100% crop:
KL100702_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2500


Original photo:
KL100708.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 3200


100% crop:
KL100708_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 3200


Original photo:
KL100722.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250


100% crop:
KL100722_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250
 
And a few more. :p

Original photo:
KL100638.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2500


100% crop:
KL100638_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 2500


Original photo:
KL100655.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1000


100% crop:
KL100655_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1000


Original photo:
KL100724.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250


100% crop:
KL100724_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250


Original photo:
KL100742.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1600


100% crop:
KL100742_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1600


Original photo:
KL100755.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 800


100% crop:
KL100755_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 800


Original photo:
KL100762.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250


100% crop:
KL100762_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1250


Original photo:
KL100777.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 500


100% crop:
KL100777_100_crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 500
 
Your results seem to be all over the place, and pretty much the only thing changing is ISO. Atmosphere and technique.

Interesting comment from Peter about the lens being good up to 8m. I find it better at distance overall.
Agreed. The day I need a $12k lens to shoot beyond 26 feet is the day I quit. Moreover, there are plenty of examples on this forum and elsewhere on the web that prove differently. On the other hand the $12k lens sure as heck should be better. If it weren't I suspect the people who laid out the purchase price would be rather pissed.
 
Went out again just to try 1/1000s but F/8 instead. I mean, I guess they are sharp? I seriously can't tell. I think I expected some insane standards but when it comes down to it, it's probably just as sharp as my previous Nikon 200-500. Here's Original + 100% crop versions.

KL100808.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100808_100_Crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800


KL100813.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100813_100_Crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800


KL100835.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 320

KL100835_100_Crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 320


KL100883.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100883_100_Crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800


KL100886.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 160

KL100886_100_Crop.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 160
 
Looks ok to me.

A question: Maybe I missed this above, but are these SOOC jpegs, processed jpegs, or RAW?
 
Your results seem to be all over the place, and pretty much the only thing changing is ISO. Atmosphere and technique.


Agreed. The day I need a $12k lens to shoot beyond 26 feet is the day I quit. Moreover, there are plenty of examples on this forum and elsewhere on the web that prove differently. On the other hand the $12k lens sure as heck should be better. If it weren't I suspect the people who laid out the purchase price would be rather pissed.
you are so right the shots I added were for help purposes and from 2020 with the same rig and I was having issues then my self but the tiger his 100
plus feet away and yes birds are smaller etc and more difficult, but you are right lots of people make this kit work and work well
 
Tell us about the camera is it brand new? what software version is it running, if not current version up date if you can I had issues with the 200-600 when it came out on the a7iii and sony brought updates out that seemed to transform the combo
 
Looks ok to me.

A question: Maybe I missed this above, but are these SOOC jpegs, processed jpegs, or RAW?

Everything I've posted so far are RAW, converted to jpeg with Lightroom default settings applied (40 sharpening), but nothing else is done. I almost never add extra sharpening or do noise reduction or anything to my photos. If it isn't sharp from the beginning, there's just no point. :p And I try to keep the ISO levels pretty low because I just feel like the noise reduction process makes all the photos look more like paintings than photos. ;P
 
Tell us about the camera is it brand new? what software version is it running, if not current version up date if you can I had issues with the 200-600 when it came out on the a7iii and sony brought updates out that seemed to transform the combo

The camera is brand new and so is the lens! I updated the camera to the latest firmware a few days ago.
 
Here's some photos I like that I've edited the way I usually edit my photos and post online. All taken yesterday and today with Sony A7 III + Sony 200-600. I guess they look nice enough? Maybe not the most exotic birds but that's a different story. ;)

KL100152_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 125

KL100307_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 500

KL100348_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/7.1
  • 1/640 sec
  • ISO 320

KL100483_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 640

KL100490_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/800 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100739_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1000

KL100778_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100808_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800

KL100856_Small.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/8
  • 1/1000 sec
  • ISO 800
 
I reiterate my previous comment, if you think you could get your blow ups a bit sharper, try Topaz Sharpen AI - you can download a trial version for free. It may seem like a cheat but it’s the result that counts.
 
The camera is brand new and so is the lens! I updated the camera to the latest firmware a few days ago.
I took these late this afternoon with the a7iii and 200-600 look at the iso its really high on some due to low light
sparrow 2022 8.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1000
sparrow 2022 7.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 1000
robin 2022 31.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 8000
robin 2022 32.jpg
  • ILCE-7M3
  • Sony FE 200–600mm F5.6–6.3 G OSS (SEL200600G)
  • 600.0 mm
  • ƒ/6.3
  • 1/2000 sec
  • ISO 8000
I feel the whole setup is wrong because the a7iii handle noise quite well see images yes I have edited and denoised Gary
 
I reiterate my previous comment, if you think you could get your blow ups a bit sharper, try Topaz Sharpen AI - you can download a trial version for free. It may seem like a cheat but it’s the result that counts.

But I don't want to spend 2000 USD on a lens if it's not as sharp as it should be, and then have to spend more money on software to make it look better? :D If my results are not normal, I rather try to get a replacement.
 
Looks like you had good light too! I can't wait for a nice, sunny day. Been pretty so-so at best since I got the camera unfortunately. :D
not really I have other shots and stayed out till twilight on purpose, the a7iii is really a great camera it takes some learning and you can manipulate poor light. The robin shot was shot at 8000 iso so not good light at all. It all about setting up the camera from start to finish. the internet has loads of info to help why not share your set up and we can help point you in the right direction
 

View the Latest Sony Lens Deals At: B&H Photo

Back
Top