Long Lens strategy

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

I think a lot depends on where and what you shoot. My kit is usually Z9 & Z7ii with two lenses. My lens kit is pretty much set but what I take with me varies a lot. In the Pacific Northwest, wider apertures have more value than they might if I lived in a sunnier location. AGe is starting to impact the weight I can bring. I carry:

24-120 mm f/4 and 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 for travel and hiking. Allows wider environmental shots, some close-up capability and enough reach for most mammals. Too short for most birds. I bring along the TC14 but rarely have enough light to use it. Limited early morning and late evening shooting.

70-200 mm f/2.8 and 400 TC 2.8 with TC14 & TC20 allows up to 200 mm f/2.8, up to 280 mm f/4, 400 f2/8, 560 f/4, 800 f/5.6 and 1120 f/8. This kit is preferred when light levels will be low and I can handle the weight and size traveling. Most versatile for mammals and birds, large and small. Limited to 70 mm environmetal shots unless I bring 20 mm prime. Limited close-up capability unless I bring MC105mm 2.8. (The 280 - 400 range could be covered using the TC20 but the 70-200 is pretty soft with this TC).

I might have gone another way if Nikon had a 600 mm prime that I could hand hold for a reasonable amount of time. The 600 TC is just too much weight for me.

 

[12markus12]

shooting birds and small mammals and some sports (soccer) and I'm running your option 2 since about 1 week as I finally got delivery of the 600TC.
I pack the 400/4.5 + the 1.4TC if I'm at the soccer field, out with my bicycle or just explore new spots. It's easy to just put in a backpack.
The 400/4.5 is damn good lens at 1/4 of the cost of the 400TC. If you know you won't need f2.8 too often its a great alternative for sure.

The 600TC which I just have since a couple of days is used for "planned" shootings. It also fits with the Z9 attached into my 36l Mindshift and is far lighter and better balanced than the 600FL I had before but still it gets's heavy when lifted around couple of hours. It is far better handholdable though and the VR is magic.
While I *sometimes* do wish for the f2.8 of the 400TC I appreciate in probably 80% of my personal use-cases native 600mm/f4 and getting to brilliant 840mm with a simple switch of a lever.

 

[jim0379]

I am considering two different options for my long lens "kit"

Option 1:
- 800 Z (already have this)
- 400 TC (need to order, not sure of the lead time)
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z

This gets me 400, 560, 800, 1120

Option 2:
- 600 TC (ordered, still waiting)
- 400 F/4.5 (already have this) or just use 100-400Z.
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z
- would sell 800 Z

This gets me 400, 600, 840

No, I am not going to consider both the 400 and 600 TCs. I see advantages to both. Option 1 is lighter and covers the range very well but involves 2 superteles with all the space that requires traveling. Option 2 is easier to travel with, only 1 supertele. Big trade off using the 800 Z and 100-400 w/ 1.4 TC versus 400 TC.

Option 3. Wait and see what Nikon does to replace the 180-400 TC.

I am leaning to option 3 for the moment

I thought Brad Hill's argument that 100-400, 400 TC, and 2x Teleconverter gets you a very wide range of very useable/good IQ focal lengths. So I have been trying to do that. The only thing I can comment on for sure in your post is that the non-NPS wait time for the 400 TC currently stands at 14 months and 10 days.

 

[RichF]

I thought Brad Hill's argument that 100-400, 400 TC, and 2x Teleconverter gets you a very wide range of very useable/good IQ focal lengths. So I have been trying to do that. The only thing I can comment on for sure in your post is that the non-NPS wait time for the 400 TC currently stands at 14 months and 10 days.

14 months and 10 days - from today or from launch day? Interested in the wait from today since I can not back date an order

 

[RichF]

As for the topic at hand, many options

Rich, if I remember correctly you mainly shoot birds, right? With the 800pf and 400 4.5, you have a lot covered already. Unless you really need the faster glass, I would just keep using that. If in the future something interesting at the lower end of things comes along (200-600, 180-400,...); that could indeed be a valuable addition.

I may have to keep using them, delivery time for either TC is measured in months or years .. if if NPS and you did not get your order immediately

 

[RichF]

I am kind of reluctant to pay the hefty sum for new Z long primes. I understand that they are perfect if money is no issue. But the Z 600 F4 TC price is prohibitive for non-professional use IMO.

What I want to advocate is using of F primes as an alternative. I have F mount Sigma Sport 500/F4 and the results on Z9 are excellent. Focusing speed is reasonable, sharpness on par or better then Z 100-400, better reach than 400 mm and a bonus of F4 aperture. (MPB offers one in 'like new' condition for 25% of Z 600 TC)

Hence my current setup is:
Z 100-400 - for shorter ranges
F 500/F4 +- TC 1.4 as a main prime lens
Z 800 PF as long reach and astronomy lens

I am trying to avoid using FTZ and older TCs.

 

[Butlerkid]

FWIW......I'm satisfied with the 100-400, 400 f4.5 and 600mm TC. Actually the only reason I got the 400 f4.5 was for times when I want to hand hold, probably using the 1.4 tele.

 

[jim0379]

14 months and 10 days - from today or from launch day? Interested in the wait from today since I can not back date an order

from March 11, 2022. Order placed directly with NikonUSA.

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

I am considering two different options for my long lens "kit"

Option 1:
- 800 Z (already have this)
- 400 TC (need to order, not sure of the lead time)
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z

This gets me 400, 560, 800, 1120

Option 2:
- 600 TC (ordered, still waiting)
- 400 F/4.5 (already have this) or just use 100-400Z.
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z
- would sell 800 Z

This gets me 400, 600, 840

No, I am not going to consider both the 400 and 600 TCs. I see advantages to both. Option 1 is lighter and covers the range very well but involves 2 superteles with all the space that requires traveling. Option 2 is easier to travel with, only 1 supertele. Big trade off using the 800 Z and 100-400 w/ 1.4 TC versus 400 TC.

Option 3. Wait and see what Nikon does to replace the 180-400 TC.

I am leaning to option 3 for the moment

Any advice I might give would be coloured by what I shoot and where-- so can you share with the community your shooting intentions.

I own all the lenses on your list - but sold the 800 when my 600/4TC arrived.

 

[RichF]

Any advice I might give would be coloured by what I shoot and where-- so can you share with the community your shooting intentions.

I own all the lenses on your list - but sold the 800 when my 600/4TC arrived.

I shoot both birds (large and small) as well large mammals. And of course the occasional flower and landscape (but I have the adequately covered with other lens).

There have been a lot of great comments here, wondering if I should not have 2 kits: 600TC w/ 400 F/4.5 (or 100-400) and the other kits w/ 800 PF and 400 F/4.5

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

The 400/2.8TC is the lens for most field sports and big wildlife where you need the 2.8 -- it simply cannot be beat -- particularly when you can convert it to a 560/4.0 with the flip of that lever -- it was my most used lens on my 3 week trip to the Masai Mara and will be my most use lens here in the UK for sailing and motor racing etc....

BUT -- should I be an active bird shooter (as opposed to I will shoot BIF/Birds in africa when no Cat is around) == then the 600/4.0TC simply is the one. One is not, forgive me, stuck at just 800 - and this is why I sold mine - even though it is marginally lighter than the 600 -- flexibility and that f/4 at 600 cannot be beaten.
With the flip of that lever the 600/4.0 becomes an incredible 840/5.6 -- so if you were willing and able to make one investment (or whim purchase) then the 600/4.0TC is it hands down no doubt - except the price and weight/size disadvantages.

Then to shorter focal length and here is the rub. I REALLY LUV my 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 s-line lenses -- but then I find the 24-120/4 S perfect for general family travel - I rarely want to shoot beyond 120 when with family and friends - if I were to take a 2nd lens then it would be for portraits and be the 85/1.8 (the 1.2s are just too big for basic tourism). You can use the 70-200/2.8 with a ZTC14 and/or ZTC20 -- it is marginal to me if the Z70-200/2.8+ZTC20 is as good as the Z100-400 -- but obviously you cannot take a 70-200 beyond 400mm whereas you can extend the 100-400 with a ZTC14 and it is great out to 560mm all beit at f/8. AND if you need to go that long well that is what the 600/4 is for.

I also took the 24-120 mm f/4 and 100-400 mm f/4.5-5.6 to Kenya and since these were stuck on my trust but old Z7, while the Z400/2.8TC lived on one Z9 and the Z600/4.0TC on my other Z9 -- they were barely used. On friday I will receive my first Z8 and had I had this body in Kenya then I probably would have shot the 100-400 more often. I use it a lot when shooting Falcons and other very fast movers -- which while I have had some success with both the 400 and 600 -- the 100-400 is so much easier and flexible to use.

Adding a 400/4.5PF to the mix would be a nice to have in the line up -- it is nice to have a very light but only fairly bright 400mm that works well with the ZTC14 -- however the vastly more expensive Z400/2.8TC and Z600/4.0Tc just sweep the floor in every way.

If you have the chance to try before you buy then with is ideal - if not the 24-120/4S; Z100-400/4.5-5.6; Z600/4 TC; and the ZTC14 is one heck of a line-up.

As to replacement feet with Arca-Swiss for the Z600/4.TC - same fitting as the Z600/4.0TC and the Z800/6.3PF -- a new design so you will have to source this -- there are NOW choices. I worked with Zenelli in Italy to design their very expensive but ultra light foot - there are at least 3 US based manufacturers and I am sure there are other too.

Please do not trust a heavy and very expensive rig like the Z9, Z600/4.0TC to a sling with a QR socket.

For walking about I clamp the lens foot to the Acratech Swift Clamp attached by a Swivel Locking Carabiner (I will not use the screw in fitting) to my very trusty leather sunsnipper sling (the one with the metal safety cable inside). OR fit it to a monopod for over shoulder carries -- some times I have both attached. All my supports use the same Acratech locking lever clamps these days (or similar) -- I simply no longer trust screw fittings or clamps with screws. The AcraTech heads and clamps are solid.

Hope this helps and let me know if you need anything else.

 

[mdirvin]

I would go with option 2, for me it would be much more versatile. It allows "switching" lens with flick of the finger in a range I find most useful. Of course that depends on what your subjects. With the 800Z you have to make a decision on if it's worth changing lens (and most likely back again) or pass on the shot. To me that is to great value of the two TC lens. I have both on order maybe some day.....It is probably just. me but I would ditch the 100-400, and go with a 70-200 f2.8 /TC 1.4..

 

[Strodav]

I am not a professional and working on picking good subjects at the right time, good composition and technical details are much more important to me than the tiny improvement in IQ that expensive glass gives you. For birding, it's a Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 with MegaDap 2 adapter, legacy 600mm f/4G with 1.4x tele if needed, and I will pick up an 800mm f/6.3 when they become readily available and again a 1.4x tele if needed. I really don't get the 400mm focal length. For me I go from the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S, perhaps with a 1.4x tele, to 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3.

 

[12markus12]

I am not a professional and working on picking good subjects at the right time, good composition and technical details are much more important to me than the tiny improvement in IQ that expensive glass gives you. For birding, it's a Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 with MegaDap 2 adapter, legacy 600mm f/4G with 1.4x tele if needed, and I will pick up an 800mm f/6.3 when they become readily available and again a 1.4x tele if needed. I really don't get the 400mm focal length. For me I go from the Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S, perhaps with a 1.4x tele, to 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3.

i think no one buys a z400 or z600 because of the improved IQ over the FL versions- much less weight,better balanced and the integrated TC are the key selling points. Getting rid of the FTZ is a nice side effect as well.

 

[CoyoteCreationsNW]

i think no one buys a z400 or z600 because of the improved IQ over the FL versions- much less weight,better balanced and the integrated TC are the key selling points. Getting rid of the FTZ is a nice side effect as well.

I partially agree. I never purchased an exotic prime for my D850/D5 cameras mostly because I did not think I could handle the weight. I ended up with a 500 PF. I replaced the DSLRs with a Z9 for frame rate and auto focus capability. The 500 + FTZ was hand holdable and OK. I sold it and replaced it with tthe 400 TC. The twothings that led to the Z exotic were flexibility with the internal TC and the wider, f/2.8 aperture. Weight was a lesser consideration but I did think about handling.

 

[ssheipel]

As I wait (and wait) for the 600 tc (and have twice now said no to an available 800 pf) I find myself wondering if I might be better off with the 2.8 400.... Or neither and get back on the 800 list.... Clearly, I'm of no help whatsoever

 

[arbitrage]

I'd say 600TC and 100-400.
I own 600/4, 400/2.8 and 100-400 in Sony.
I use the 600/4 75% of the time, the 400 the rest with the 100-400 very sparingly in my backyard or out with family when a big lens isn't ideal.

I love having both the 400 and 600 but if I had to choose just one I'd go 600. If I was shooting Nikon I'd probably try to get both 400TC and 600TC and 100-400.

 

[maikm]

If you ever want to take this entire kit into the field so you actually have the full flexibility, option 2. Because you'll never lug both a 800 and a 400/2.8 around at the same time.

So, the 100-400 (which is quite usable with a TC1.4) and either the 600 or the 800, depending on how regularly you need: 1. reach beyond 800/840, 2. f/4. Also, the weight difference between the 800PF (2385 g) and the 600TC (3260 g) is considerable.

 

[ccirelli]

So 9 years from now lol. I sure wouldn’t wait on a long term rumor.

I'd bet $ we'll see this before the end of 2025.

 

[Calson]

Personnaly I would go with option #1. I use my 800mm PF for small critters where the narrow view angle is a pro rather than a con and where the subject's environment is less of a concern. When I replaced a 500mm f/4 with a 600mm f/4 lens I had some regrets later as the 500mm/700mm was a more usable combination thatn 600/840mm in general use.
The 500mm PF was a welcome addition and I used it more than the 600mm f/4 that needed a tripod 100% of the time.

The 400mm TC being able to provide 400mm, 560mm, 800mm focal lengths in one lens would be my first choice for trips to Costa Rica or the Pantenal or Ecuador despite my needing to use a tripod to handle its weight. If I lived in an area with wildlife that is habituated to humans like Florida for example, this lens would be a must have for me.

Preferring to avoid the need for a tripod and gimbal head, my tele current kit consists of the 800mm PF, 400mm f/4.5, 100-400mm, and the 1.4x and 2x teleconverters.

The 500mm PF gave me a taste of the increase in mobility with a lens I could use all day and shooting hand held. It was very liberating and I get nearly as much from the 800mm PF lens on the Z9.

I would consider whether the 200-600mm lens, which may be available next year to buy, would be a good fit for your ideal kit and how that would impact your lens purchases now.

 

[O]

I am considering two different options for my long lens "kit"

Option 1:
- 800 Z (already have this)
- 400 TC (need to order, not sure of the lead time)
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z

This gets me 400, 560, 800, 1120

Option 2:
- 600 TC (ordered, still waiting)
- 400 F/4.5 (already have this) or just use 100-400Z.
- everything below 400 would be covered by 100-400Z
- would sell 800 Z

This gets me 400, 600, 840

No, I am not going to consider both the 400 and 600 TCs. I see advantages to both. Option 1 is lighter and covers the range very well but involves 2 superteles with all the space that requires traveling. Option 2 is easier to travel with, only 1 supertele. Big trade off using the 800 Z and 100-400 w/ 1.4 TC versus 400 TC.

Option 3. Wait and see what Nikon does to replace the 180-400 TC.

I am leaning to option 3 for the moment

Fortunately, i don't have the problem of making the choice LOL.

My personal overall choice is always fast glass where possible, I feel Light is the greatest tool of all............F2.8, F4, 300-400 F2.8, 600mm f4, filling the frame is nice, but, in the case of 45mp sensors / Sony 60 mp using good light tolerates cropping so well these days, after all what is the medium/platform the footage or photos will be viewed on, or printed with.

If weight and size is a factor then that needs to be considered as possibly a little compromise, assumed.

I see images from people of different clubs doing their trips to Africa, some happy snaps, others with world class shots, surprisingly so many people get great to absolutely perfect results even from 200-500, 200-600, 150-600 Sigma, Tamron, even, 500 pf, and yes so many on DSLRS even. Mostly variations reflect skill sets more than gear.

As i don't do this type of shooting every day, i find hiring what i need, when i need it is the best option, again that's for myself, a trip is expensive, add a little more for gear rental ! who cares, drink a little less LOL, this way you experience using everything first hand, what suits you the best..............that may help guide you into buying exactly what it is you need or like.

If light gear is super critical i lean towards the 500 PF, 400 F4.5, 70-200 FL, 200-500, the 800 is similar weight to the 200-500 ?


Only an opinion