"Future proofing" thoughts

Now don't get me wrong, I'm loving my A99ii and if A-mount had a a long future I'd stick with it but as it sits right now if my most used lens (Sigma 150-500) were to bite the dust I'd be stuck with having to hunt for a second hand replacement of some sort.

So the thought goes to some kind of transition towards E-mount with the G 200-600 and possibly also a TC-1.4 in the mix. Budget would be rather generous, as the only way I could do this kind of transition is a likely coming redundancy from work. After 19 years of service the severance pay would come out to be a decent chunk of change.
That's not to say it's unlimited, if it was the A9ii and 600GM would be in the cards

So my thoughts are somewhere along the lines of this.
Kit 1: A7RIV, G 200-600, TC-1.4, LA-EA5 and grip...making use of my old Minolta's.
Kit 2: A7III, G 200-600, TC-1.4, Grip plus a few native lenses to make up the difference.
Possibly also Kit 2 with an LA-EA4 for a "budget" setup.

Main bit I'm up in the air about is how the 7RIV or 7III handles the G 200-600 plus TC-1.4. And also how the old Minolta's (mainly the Beercan era lenses) hold up for focus and IQ on the E-mount bodies.
Anyone have any thoughts on the matter?

Is it wrong walking around nowadays hoping to get fired?

AF and IQ will not change when moving to FE mount, perhaps some of the modern AF features will work when using the LA-EA5 on A7Riv, but it remains screw driven AF with inherent limitations. In any case it will not get worse. If you're satisfied with these lenses now, you will remain so.

W.r.t. 200-600+1.4TC on A7iii all I can say is that AF has proven to be accurate, fast and reliable in AF-A mode, even in our abysmal Dutch December weather.

Bob J wrote: Later on I found out that they were intending to move my 'policy and projects' group to be up near the Secretary of State's outer office (Michael Gove at that time, Note that other politicians from other political parties may also be insufferable...) With my talent for holding my tongue, I don't think I would have lasted a month...

Well worth it though and would have been a month well spent

Bob J wrote: Later on I found out that they were intending to move my 'policy and projects' group to be up near the Secretary of State's outer office (Michael Gove at that time, Note that other politicians from other political parties may also be insufferable...) With my talent for holding my tongue, I don't think I would have lasted a month...

Michael Gove - the absolute definition of the term "Acquired Taste" I suspect. I think you made a good move there, Bob!

Best regards, Neil.

Ah ok that's nice, the A7RIII was limited to f8 for PDAF, so I wrongly assumed A7III was the same.

I don't find the 200-600mm slow, in fact I find it to be the fastest one in it's class. The 100-400mm was slightly faster to lockon or acquire focus but once you have your subject in focus the both do equally well at tracking the subject.

He is thinking about the A7RIV which will give more reach than any APS-C body sony produces atm.

nandbytes wrote: He is thinking about the A7RIV which will give more reach than any APS-C body sony produces atm.

That shows how ignorant I'm about the E-mount bodies. I'm still stuck in the A-mount. Would like to get into birding but the 200-600 seems to be the best "budget" lens and hence that's what I'll most likely get next year or so.
Need to educate myself a bit.

Anyway, back to the OP's discussion...