Nikon 200-500 F5.6 to 600mm F4 or…?

[BC_Grizzly]

Hello, I have been getting some solid shots with my D850 200-500mm f5.6. I am having all these incredible encounters and getting photos that look great on Instagram and even on my monitor, but I have this lingering feeling I won’t be able to appreciate these photos one day once I’ve upgraded to a professional lens.

What I’m debating is picking up a second hand version of the latest 600mm f mount f4. These are going for around $8000–$12,000 CAD from what I can see.

Before doing this, I was hoping to hear from people here who’ve made this upgrade. How big is the difference?

Next, people who’ve upgraded to the z mount 400mm f2.8 TC, or the z mount 600mm f4 TC. I’m guessing most of you have gone from equivalent f mount lenses. How significant is the difference?

Lastly, is there any issue using f mount 600mm f4 on a mirrorless body? Eventually I’ll switch to the Z9 or whichever version is out down the line, and I don’t want a 600mm f4 to be made redundant if I should go that route.

If your me, how do you play this out and why? Thanks for your time.

 

[DRwyoming]

Hello, I have been getting some solid shots with my D850 200-500mm f5.6. I am having all these incredible encounters and getting photos that look great on Instagram and even on my monitor, but I have this lingering feeling I won’t be able to appreciate these photos one day once I’ve upgraded to a professional lens.

What I’m debating is picking up a second hand version of the latest 600mm f mount f4. These are going for around $8000–$12,000 CAD from what I can see.

Before doing this, I was hoping to hear from people here who’ve made this upgrade. How big is the difference?

Next, people who’ve upgraded to the z mount 400mm f2.8 TC, or the z mount 600mm f4 TC. I’m guessing most of you have gone from equivalent f mount lenses. How significant is the difference?

Lastly, is there any issue using f mount 600mm f4 on a mirrorless body? Eventually I’ll switch to the Z9 or whichever version is out down the line, and I don’t want a 600mm f4 to be made redundant if I should go that route.

If your me, how do you play this out and why? Thanks for your time.

Welcome to the forums.

Moving from a 200-500mm f/5/.6 lens to a super telephoto like a: 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4, 600mm f/4 or 800mm f/5.6 is a big step up in terms of optics, light gathering and subject isolation through selective focus and background blur. It's hard to go back to a pro-sumer zoom after shooting with the big pro lenses. That said, that move has some downsides as well starting with the obvious price differences but also what it means to work with the big prime lenses in the field.

For instance though it is sometimes possible to handhold something like a 600mm f/4 for short periods it's best to plan on using a lens like that with a very sturdy tripod and good tripod head (e.g. full gimbal head or something like a Flexshooter Pro). That adds substantial weight, cost and lends itself to slower more methodical field work and not run and gun opportunistic wildlife photography.

Personally I love shooting with big glass but for more casual walk around photography I'll still carry lighter lenses that I can hand hold most of the time. My favorite in that class of lens is the 500mm f/5.6 PF lens which doesn't buy you any light gathering or better background separation than your current lens but is much lighter, sharper, focuses faster and is a great light and fast wildlife lens. Of course a move like that costs you the ability to zoom compared to your 200-500mm lens which may or may not be an issue depending on how you work and your favorite subjects.

And yes, something like a 600mm f/4 G or 600mm f/4 E-FL lens will work fine with modern mirrorless cameras via the FTZ adapter as will many other lenses like the 300mm or 500mm PF lenses.

Personally my long glass is still F mount and I'm not in any rush to invest in the latest Z specific long lenses even for use with mirrorless cameras but if you have the money to spare the new lenses are certainly impressive.

Only you can decide if it's worth the financial investment to upgrade to something like a 600mm f/4 or even the 500mm PF but personally I sold my 200-500mm f/5.6 years ago and reach for either my 500mm PF (for a light weight walk around and hiking long lens) or the 600mm f/4 when I'm doing more serious work which usually involves a tripod and less mobile photography.

 

[Butlerkid]

Two very different lenses - for different purposes.

The 200-500 is primarily a "walk around" lens. Portability due to lighter weight. But they are "slower", meaning the higher f stops reduce light gathering aspect of the lens and necessitate slower shutter speeds.....often the penalty of which is higher ISOs. Prices are lower than "fast glass".

The 500/600 f4's are primarily tripod lenses. Stellar IQ (yes, better than the 200-500) and ability to shoot wide open to REALLY separate the subject from an OOF background and allows lower ISOs with reasonable shutter speeds. But the long lenses also require attention details of handling the long lenses. And they are heavier than slower glass. And they are more expensive than slower glass.

No free lunch. Pick the tool for how YOU will use the lens.

 

[SonoranDesert]

Last year I sold my 200-500mm and bought the 500mm PF (from someone on this forum) and I haven’t looked back. It’s the lens that basically stays on my D850. I predominately handhold.

 

[NorthernFocus]

I say ignorance is bliss. If you're happy with what you have for the use that you have for the images, why change? There is certainly a difference in IQ. The question is will you use it? You won't likely notice the difference unless you start printing or if you're prone to pixel peeping. But there are two things for sure. A big prime lens is a lot more trouble and expense to use, maintain, etc. And secondly if you do in fact fall in love with the look of the results it's awfully hard to go back. Unless there is a tangible reason/need to upgrade I'd think carefully before stepping off.

 

[BC_Grizzly]

I say ignorance is bliss. If you're happy with what you have for the use that you have for the images, why change? There is certainly a difference in IQ. The question is will you use it? You won't likely notice the difference unless you start printing or if you're prone to pixel peeping. But there are two things for sure. A big prime lens is a lot more trouble and expense to use, maintain, etc. And secondly if you do in fact fall in love with the look of the results it's awfully hard to go back. Unless there is a tangible reason/need to upgrade I'd think carefully before stepping off.

Thanks Dan. It’s been a real passion for > 5 years. But I’m 32 and just starting a family. My first child is due this week actually. 10 grand is a lot right now. 20 grand would be irresponsible.

I am a pixel peeper. Haha. That will never change!

I’m just thinking I’m at the point where the passion has proven to not be fleeting and I think if I can get pro glass I might be able to build something here. What that is I don’t know yet. Maybe just a big passion and sharing with a wider audience.

 

[Steve W]

when I analysed my photos with the 200-500 I found most were shot at 500mm. Since I got the 500 of the zoom doesn’t get much use. As I get older weight becomes important

 

[thelordofthelight]

Hello, I have been getting some solid shots with my D850 200-500mm f5.6. I am having all these incredible encounters and getting photos that look great on Instagram and even on my monitor, but I have this lingering feeling I won’t be able to appreciate these photos one day once I’ve upgraded to a professional lens.

What I’m debating is picking up a second hand version of the latest 600mm f mount f4. These are going for around $8000–$12,000 CAD from what I can see.

Before doing this, I was hoping to hear from people here who’ve made this upgrade. How big is the difference?

Next, people who’ve upgraded to the z mount 400mm f2.8 TC, or the z mount 600mm f4 TC. I’m guessing most of you have gone from equivalent f mount lenses. How significant is the difference?

Lastly, is there any issue using f mount 600mm f4 on a mirrorless body? Eventually I’ll switch to the Z9 or whichever version is out down the line, and I don’t want a 600mm f4 to be made redundant if I should go that route.

If your me, how do you play this out and why? Thanks for your time.

That’s a big step up I’d say and one that’s worth it however If you are used to using your 200-500 by just walking around shooting hand held, big teles will be a limitation, particularly the 4002.8/600f4 F mount glass is so heavy it’s impractical to hand hold. 500 F4 FL is another fantastic choice and hits the right balance between price, portability and performance. It’s still heavy but very much manageable compared to 400/600 F mount.

Z teles are excellent but most of the positives are more a matter of convenience rather than significant optical advantages I’d say. Lighter, in built TCs, more button customization, slightly better corner performance etc. that may not be a big deal considering the price difference. Even the D/G versions of the tele lenses are exceptional optically but are too heavy. The 500 F4 E FL in my opinion offers the best balance between price, weight, performance.

Oh btw, all the F mount glass perform exceptionally well on the Z9. Actually better than they do on the DSLRs and when you start using TCs, the differences both in terms of the AF performance as well as AF precision is much better on a Z9 vs using the same combinations on a DSLR.

 

[Len Shepherd]

I have this lingering feeling I won’t be able to appreciate these photos one day once I’ve upgraded to a professional lens.

I use both pro grade lenses having the 180-400 and have recently sold the 300 f2.8 VR - and have the 200-500.

I and many others find the 200-500 optically very good - independent of its modest price point.
Are your images from the 200-500 very good viewed at 100% on a good monitor?

If you use less than a 45 MP body your 200-500 image resolution will increase instantly if you get a 45 MP D850 - though the same is also true if you get a 600mm f4.
This could be a relatively affordable short term option.

At first inspection some of my 25 year old wildlife images do not match the best that is possible today.
They can be dramatically improved by AI noise reduction software (ideally doing this first) and file enlargement to double the MP dimension with the AI element of the software IME around 80% of the time successfully creating plenty of detail not recorded in the original image.

Those who have been in photography a long time once using 10 MP bodies and film along with lenses with pre-nano coating find the best of our older images can be upgraded to near what is possible with the latest gear.

I prefer the 180-400 with a good tripod and head/Gimbal when I can park nearby, yet find the 400 f4.5 with separately attached 1.4 x distinctly more portable and much more hand holdable - with very close to equal optical quality.

It might be that within a month (or several months at "Nikon speed") that Nikon launch a more affordable than a Z9 pro body.

If your current images are good at 100% as subject location/technique often count more than the best equipment - I suggest you wait and gradually move over to the Z system part for its higher resolving optics.

Edit - hiring a 600mm f4 for maybe 2 weeks for side by side comparison with your 200-500 should give you more useful informationthe the way you shoot than anybody else's opinion.
If you can also run to the cost of hiring a Z9 (which I have) and the 600 f4 S (which I cannot afford) with good technique the over £20,000 ML combination should be a clear winner.

 

[Craig Yuill]

One thing that has already been brought up, and I think should be mentioned again, is the need for extra support for a big lens. I have seen YouTube videos put out by influencers where they show off how “He Man”-like they are by hand holding big glass for a few seconds while taking a shot. If you get a big lens like a 600mm f/4, you are going to need a sturdy tripod and ball head or gimbal head to support such a lens. That will add another $1000-$3000 CDN, to your overall cost, depending on brand, buying new or second hand, etc.

The idea of renting glass before buying is a great idea. But BC_Grizzly and I are both from British Columbia, Canada, which is not well served by rentals companies as far as big glass is concerned. Unless things have changed recently, companies like Lens Rentals do not operate in Canada, and do not rent outside of the US for a variety of logistical reasons. If anyone from our area can suggest a good lens-rental company that rents big glass for Nikon cameras please feel free to make a suggestion.

I wonder if a 500mm PF lens might be better for your needs. If you bring along your “little one” while on a photo session you might not want to get bogged down by too much gear.

Good luck with making a decision. Let us know what happens.

 

[Abinoone]

Hello, I have been getting some solid shots with my D850 200-500mm f5.6. I am having all these incredible encounters and getting photos that look great on Instagram and even on my monitor, but I have this lingering feeling I won’t be able to appreciate these photos one day once I’ve upgraded to a professional lens.

What I’m debating is picking up a second hand version of the latest 600mm f mount f4. These are going for around $8000–$12,000 CAD from what I can see.

Before doing this, I was hoping to hear from people here who’ve made this upgrade. How big is the difference?

Next, people who’ve upgraded to the z mount 400mm f2.8 TC, or the z mount 600mm f4 TC. I’m guessing most of you have gone from equivalent f mount lenses. How significant is the difference?

Lastly, is there any issue using f mount 600mm f4 on a mirrorless body? Eventually I’ll switch to the Z9 or whichever version is out down the line, and I don’t want a 600mm f4 to be made redundant if I should go that route.

If your me, how do you play this out and why? Thanks for your time.

I can’t add anything more than what others already have written about big prime lenses. However, if I were in your youthful shoes with a baby on the way, I’d save my money for the many new expenses you’ll have with a growing family. Hell, I’d be more concerned about having a good, shorter lens for all those baby shots you’ll be taking in the near future! In the meanwhile, enjoy your 200-500 while you can and count your blessings.

 

[coachjohn57]

I was in a similar situation to you not that long ago. I shot with the D850 and the D500, and for a long time used the Sigma 60-600 Sport for my wildlife lens. Great lens in many regards; built like a tank, sharp throughout most of its range (weaker at the short end), and I could handhold it, albeit with frequent breaks. I sold it and bought the 500PF...probably the best decision I could have made. It's sharp, focuses fast and you can hand hold it all day. I have since purchased the Z9, with the D850 as my current backup...I will eventually go all mirrorless (the AF system on the top-of-the-line mirrorless bodies is SO good), but for now it's a nice balance and the F mount lens perform as well, if not better, with the FTZ adapter. Good luck with your decision.

 

[MatthewK]

Thanks Dan. It’s been a real passion for > 5 years. But I’m 32 and just starting a family. My first child is due this week actually. 10 grand is a lot right now. 20 grand would be irresponsible.

I am a pixel peeper. Haha. That will never change!

I’m just thinking I’m at the point where the passion has proven to not be fleeting and I think if I can get pro glass I might be able to build something here. What that is I don’t know yet. Maybe just a big passion and sharing with a wider audience.

You're where I was at 5 years ago: making the choice to get deeper into birding and big f/4 lenses as we were expecting our first child. It eventually became evident that my free wheeling, 'spend all day in the field' loner days were over, and I just couldn't justify the costs of a lens setup I couldn't use to it's fullest whenever I wanted. Thus, I chose to go small and nimble w/ the 500PF so that I could take it anywhere I could take a baby/toddler, and it served me extremely well.

If you're happy with the photos you've taken w/ the 200-500, I'd say stick with it for now, see how your new life pans out and whether or not you feel that you can afford/justify the time and money to a big glass setup.

 

[pnbarne]

Your new baby is going to take a lot more of your time than you realize. I have seen many new parents disappear from all sorts of venues. Some of them reappeared ten years later, some did not. Be prepared for a massive change in your lifestyle. I would wait until the new normal is well established in your family and then decide on a lens. You may find your main camera becomes an iPhone and your main photo outlet is Instagram.

 

[BC_Grizzly]

Your new baby is going to take a lot more of your time than you realize. I have seen many new parents disappear from all sorts of venues. Some of them reappeared ten years later, some did not. Be prepared for a massive change in your lifestyle. I would wait until the new normal is well established in your family and then decide on a lens. You may find your main camera becomes an iPhone and your main photo outlet is Instagram.

I hear you. I’ve abandoned all other hobbies in preparation for the new addition. This is one I feel I can still enjoy and dive deeply into during golden hours as I have quick access and the occasional weekend getaways to parks and hikes.

It is a funny time to look to spend any money though. I appreciate that.

 

[BC_Grizzly]

One thing that has already been brought up, and I think should be mentioned again, is the need for extra support for a big lens. I have seen YouTube videos put out by influencers where they show off how “He Man”-like they are by hand holding big glass for a few seconds while taking a shot. If you get a big lens like a 600mm f/4, you are going to need a sturdy tripod and ball head or gimbal head to support such a lens. That will add another $1000-$3000 CDN, to your overall cost, depending on brand, buying new or second hand, etc.

The idea of renting glass before buying is a great idea. But BC_Grizzly and I are both from British Columbia, Canada, which is not well served by rentals companies as far as big glass is concerned. Unless things have changed recently, companies like Lens Rentals do not operate in Canada, and do not rent outside of the US for a variety of logistical reasons. If anyone from our area can suggest a good lens-rental company that rents big glass for Nikon cameras please feel free to make a suggestion.

I wonder if a 500mm PF lens might be better for your needs. If you bring along your “little one” while on a photo session you might not want to get bogged down by too much gear.

Good luck with making a decision. Let us know what happens.

Makes sense! I would love to rent if given the chance. I am pretty fit and so far weight of lens hasn’t been a top concern of mine. I usually scramble at a safe distance around subjects looking for a good background and that often leads me to use a branch, or the ground as a tripod. I rarely hand hold with the 200-500 f5.6 but I rarely use a tripod either! Funnily enough.

 

[MatthewK]

Oh man, you so remind me of myself

One thing you're going to see is all of these free people on here getting to spend as much time as they want on this hobby, whereas people on our position just don't have that luxury. You can try to time your outings when the newborn/toddler naps, but I can almost guarantee it'll be at high noon when the light is the worst

Things get easier as the kid grows, so hang in there, you got this!

 

[BC_Grizzly]

Oh man, you so remind me of myself

One thing you're going to see is all of these free people on here getting to spend as much time as they want on this hobby, whereas people on our position just don't have that luxury. You can try to time your outings when the newborn/toddler naps, but I can almost guarantee it'll be at high noon when the light is the worst

Things get easier as the kid grows, so hang in there, you got this!

Haha. Sounds good! Well, I’m hopeful my wife and I can work things out to still enjoy our hobbies. I’ve let other hobbies fall to make alittle space for this one! It’s therapeutic to get out in nature. I’ve got to find a way to be creative, plan and keep having those encounters. Is there somewhere you share your work? I’d love to see!

 

[MatthewK]

Mostly just on Flickr, though it doesn't get updated as often anymore (either because I don't like any of my work, or I just haven't been able to shoot too much): https://www.flickr.com/photos/100190564@N08/with/51873735753/

 

[Turberticus]

Thanks Dan. It’s been a real passion for > 5 years. But I’m 32 and just starting a family. My first child is due this week actually. 10 grand is a lot right now. 20 grand would be irresponsible.

I am a pixel peeper. Haha. That will never change!

I’m just thinking I’m at the point where the passion has proven to not be fleeting and I think if I can get pro glass I might be able to build something here. What that is I don’t know yet. Maybe just a big passion and sharing with a wider audience.

Congrats! I'm 40 and have a 1 year old. He's our first. You're in for quite the adventure! Enjoy every moment, even the mundane. You'll miss them as he/she grows. I don't get out much, though I do have some time on weekends when my mother in law babysits, or I will sometimes shoot from the car when I'm out running errands with my son. You'll find a way to make it work. Like you I have been considering an upgrade to my 200-500, but that won't happen anytime soon lol.

 

[BC_Grizzly]

Mostly just on Flickr, though it doesn't get updated as often anymore (either because I don't like any of my work, or I just haven't been able to shoot too much): https://www.flickr.com/photos/100190564@N08/with/51873735753/

Nice work! Thanks for sharing

 

[Doug Herr]

I suspect my passion for wildlife photography is as strong any anyone on this forum, but when arranging my photos chronologically from the 1970s through the present there's a distinct gap when my little one was little. Enjoy those years, they'll slip away before you know it.

 

[Calson]

The 200-500mm lens is a good lens considering its price but it is the worst performing full frame zoom lens sold by Nikon in terms of autofocus, VR, and image quality. Anything will be an improvement, except perhaps the 80-400mm zoom. When I used the lens I often found myself wanting a shorter focal length and wider view angle than that provided at 200mm. In places like Yellowstone I would usually grab the 80-400mm (with or without a teleconverter) instead.

The 500mm PF weighs far less and is an excellent lens. It is like having a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens mounted on the camera and easy to use hand held on land or on a small boat. The 600mm f/4 lens cost needs to include the price for a solid tripod and a good gimbal head and tripod carry case (if buying RRS or Gitzo where all they provide is a cardboard box).

There are clear advantages to being about to photograph subjects at eye level and to being able to select the background. This is where a hand held lens is far superior to any lens that needs to be supported by a tripod for extended use. For me the weight limit of lens and camera is 8 lbs in total for hand held shooting. More weight than that and I need a tripod.

On my last trips to Costa Rica and to Brazil I used the 500mm PF and 80-400mm lenses far more than the 600mm f/4 lens and often left the 600mm in my rooms at the lodges.

 

[Jeff Lane MD]

I would not buy another F mount lens. My 800mm 6.3 only weights 5.25 lens and is great hand held. It also works fine with the 1.4
TC. For the 12k you are considering spending, you could nearly get a Z9 and the 800 6.3. Much cheaper and almost 2lb lighter would be the 500PF that I still use on my Z9 with or without a 1.4 TC for a 700 mm equivalent.

 

[Karl Gillard]

BC, I’d be hard pressed to try and give more info or advice than what’s been on here so far. I can speak from real world experience about your situation, since I had a 200-500mm, 500mmPF, 600mm f/4, and an 800mm f/5.6. My cameras are the D5 and Z7 that I have used all lenses on with fantastic results.
I loved my 200-500mm and shot with it at 500mm at least 90% of the time. Super sharp , locked on fast, and the versatility of a zoom. Only bad thing is they aren’t weather resistant. A 500mmPF came around at a good price and I bought it. Sold the 209-500mm to a friend and it’s his “go to” lens. While I, at times, misc the zoom versatility, I’m extremely happy with my 500PF.
About 1-1/2 years ago, I bought a 600mm f/4 and I have never minded lugging it thru the woods on my shoulder because the results were worth the effort. Most of the time I had my TC-14eIII attached, giving me 840mm at f/5.6.
I recently purchased an 800mm f/5.6 and now it accompanies me everywhere. I sold the 600mm yesterday, but I should add that had I not purchased the 800mm, I would not have sold the 600mm.
So, just my two cents worth, but I don’t have a little one either…LOl! Just remember that you won’t be able to resell it for what you buy it for. Every time a new Z lens come out, the F lenses go down in value. My results are sharper than my eyes can differentiate anyway, so I’ll just stick with the lenses that work for me. Good luck!