I only got my a7iii a month ago - too cheap and wanted the 200-600 Not a bad lens for sport but you notice a difference vs a 400 2.8
Im actually mostly shooting with my Sony RX100 V now days. It's like a little pocket rocket - Mirrorless camera in the body of a P&S! So good! I do miss having interchangable lenses on me at events, however the ease of use and the 4k video quality is just unreal.. EDIT: Just finished doing a video (First actual video that wasn't just a video program for kids because we can't have them in person!)
A couple of nightclub gigs over NYE means I have fallen back to using my EOS 6D DSLR over my EOS R Mirrorless. EOS R Was painfully slow to lock focus even shooting wide open at f/2.8 and with AF assist via the Speedlites. 6D Was magnitudes faster and more importantly, accurate. Still prefer the EOS R for non-nightclub work, but now I'm looking at getting a 6D MKII to upgrade from the 6D.
Mate has an R6 (mostly for video), but I could ask him to borrow it for a session and see how I go with it. I could totally justify it, if it works well and can replace both of my bodies.
From what I've seen, the IR AF-assist makes DSLR's easily outclass mirrorless for focusing in situations where there is seriously no light (like nightclubs). Not sure the R6 would be much different.
Has been a worry for any transition that i've considered - R6's focus down to a silly -EV number, not sure if Dual-Pixel would be better with the AF assist beams than the other manufacturers PDAF implementations
But they're sitting behind an IR filter aren't they? I think they'd have to come up with filter to only the parts of the sensor being used for AF, no idea how they'd achieve that. I mean they could always put the AF sensor in the bottom of the body, put a mirror in there to direct light to it and then flip it out of the way when taking a photo
Yeah i just did a refresher of the tech and you're right Guess you'd have to stick with an LED visible light on the flash..... that said you wouldnt need that much illumination
Pretty sure most cameras still see a heap more near-IR than humans do even with the filter, so it's probably the case that it's still possible to use an almost IR red that would appear dim but still bright to the optics.
