Nikon 200-600 Interest?

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

MotoPixel

MotoPixel

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
As a sort of tangent to the desire for a D500 Mirrorless replacement, I'm curious as to whether or not the 200-600 still garners as much interest as it once did, especially if it comes in at $2,000 or above.

Just as the advent of the Z9 and Z8 changed my thinking regarding buying a high-performance DX mirrorless body to replace my D500, my experience with the 100-400mm zoom and the 500pf have caused me to rethink the purchase of a Z version of the 200-500 at whatever the final focal range turns out to be at a likely variable aperture f6.3.

The 200-500 was/is a remarkable value, IQ is astonishing at its price point, but as we all know, it was not compact, relatively heavy, not exactly zippy in focusing and zooming from a comfortable holding position took two grasps of the zoom ring to zoom the full range. Once I picked up a 500pf, my use of the 200-500 plummeted.

Although it was double the price of the 200-500mm lens (at its release), I find the utility and image quality of the 100-400mm lens much better...better by every metric except reach and price...and with a 1.4x TC, the reach can be dealt with...or I switch to the 500pf. And speaking of the 500pf, I'm not selling it until Nikon releases a 600pf, which is really the only remaining long FL that I'd like to pick up.

Perhaps Nikon is struggling with this issue...bringing in the 200-600 at a low price point with high enough performance to compete against the 100-400. Or deciding to go with a new optical design to do as they have done with the 100-400 and the 400 f4.5 prime and make it more compact than the typical budget xxx-600 zooms from Nikon and 3rd parties. If they do that, I don't see it being priced below the Sony 200-600 at $2000. Kinda between a rock and a hard place!

What are other's thoughts on this?
 
Member's gallery
Great question. I'm also very pleased with the Z100-400 w/wo TC, and as a result I'm not shooting my adapted Sony 200-600 as much as I thought I would. But I'm still interested in the Nikon version PROVIDED it doesn't come up short against the Sony version in any substantial way. What I need most (vs. the Sony) is synchro stabilization and the ability to focus while zooming in real time (this is a Megadap ETZ limitation). To be honest, I don't care too much about the price -- it Nikon needs $3k to match the Sony version, so be it. But if Nikon released their 200-600 with the same traits as the 200-500 -- even if it's cheap -- I'll just keep the Sony.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
My interest has decreased as time has worn on and any remaining interest depends on what the lens turns out to be. I know it won’t be better than the 70-200 f/2.8 at 200 or better than the 400 f/4.5 at 400, so I’m interested to see what it is in the 500 mm to 600 mm range. If it’s both heavy and slow, I’ll pass and wait for a lightweight 600 PF or alternative.

To put it another way, I don’t need the flexibility of carrying a lens with a zoom range of 400 mms. I would mostly be getting it for the 500-600 focal length range. If it gives good value there, I might still get it. If not, I’ll pass.

I‘m at the point where I would rather pay more to get more from a lens. I’m fully aware the lens may not be for me.
 
Member's gallery
Yes, I'm interested in the 200-600 or whatever the final FL turns out to be. Count me in the crowd that's happy with the 100-400 and I have 500/4E so I'm probably not a buyer unless it just gobsmacks me. I might very well go with the 200-600 and the 800pf but it's wait and see what is coming before leaving my other glass behind.

EDIT: What I'd really like is a 600/5.6 PF....:cool:
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I think it's a lens Nikon almost has to release both to stay competitive with other brands and because they announced it quite a while ago so there's a fair amount of pent up expectation. But at the moment it's not really on my wish list as I really like some of the prime options like the 400mm f/4.5 as well as the 300mm and 500mm PF lenses in that focal length range. I wouldn't rule it out if it's a well built internal focus zoom but if it ends up more like the F mount 200-500mm I'd probably stick with the prime strategy plus TCs on mirrorless cameras.
 
Member's gallery
Similar situation as Dave above me. I'm currently still shooting 300pf/500pf (on a Z9). So my decision would be based on how the 200-600 compares to those lenses. If it's equal (or better) in terms of AF speed, IQ etc; then count me in. If not, I'll happily continue with what I currently have.
 
Member's gallery
The 100-400 is great and takes a Z TC14 very well - making the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 a 140-560 f/6.3-8.0.

The 200-600 would have to be spectacular and it won't be. Not even if it s a 180-600 -- so I have no interest in a non s-line variable aperture lens.

Now if updates came to the AF-S NIKKOR 120-300MM F/2.8E FL ED SR VR (possibly including an internal TC) -- Well then

AND surely we will see a 600mm f/5.6 PF soon as well.
 
Member's gallery
Andy Miller Photo UK said:
The 200-600 would have to be spectacular and it won't be. Not even if it s a 180-600 -- so I have no interest in a non s-line variable aperture lens.
Click to expand...
the non S part is of some concern to me too. But let's see what the final specs are. I am still interested at this stage. But I also was introduced to the Z800 mm yesterday :rolleyes:
 
Member's gallery
Nikon identifies the Emerging Market as significant in their recent corporate Reports, and the market for Non S Line Z-mount products also includes many Hobbyists. For the latter consider the success of the 24-200 Z Mount.It can be assumed the 180-600 will be priced accordingly. This means it will be relatively affordable - less than the S Line 100-400. So as roadmapped, it will extend the line up of non S Line Z-mount zooms. Consider the 24-200, which is a bargain in pairing it on a Z5. There are also many happy campers using the 24-200 on a Z50 or Zfc.

At a guess, quite a few of those who can afford a 100-400 S and the ZTC14 are unlikely to buy a non S Line 180-600. In particular, an interesting question is how many Z8 owners will buy a 180-600 in preference to one or more of the S Line telephotos? Probably not many, although let's see how this 180-600 performs in the wild. Nonetheless, the 500 PF and 400 f4.5S have so many advantages, which includes image quality with their respective TC14 pairings.

Currently there's nothing that fills the gaps in the budget Zoom Telephoto niche for Nikon mirrorless besides an adapted 200-500 f5.6E on Z6 or Z7, or one of the Bigmas. None of the affordable Z cameras are up to standard (compared to affordable high performance DSLRs) for wildlife nor sports.

The ideal camera for current owners of an Adapted Bigma or 200-500 f5.6E is the rumoured Z90, if it's relatively affordable, or opt for a trade-in of older gear in order to afford the the anticipated cost of a Z90 and 180-600.
EDITED
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
MatthewK said:
This is the lens that’ll bring it all together. Hope we see it someday.
Only way I’d be interested in a Nikkor 200-600 is if it’s basically a Sony clone.
Click to expand...
Surely a Tamron -- if the 200 --> 180 --> 150 [SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2] OR Sigma Contemporary 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM would be the NON - S-line lens WHEREAS the SPORT would be the S-line ???

On maybe still not good enough.

S-line is a high bar for any non-Nikon to jump.
 
Member's gallery
Winston Churchill (Sir) said:
the non S part is of some concern to me too. But let's see what the final specs are. I am still interested at this stage. But I also was introduced to the Z800 mm yesterday :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Not everyone can release the cash for a full s-line -- but this means that many folk will """"have to live"""" with less wonderful glass than they would wish for.
It just means it will need to be used in good light.

I am hopeful that Nikkor will be able to pull something special out of the bag for this lens -- better than the Sigma or Tamron -- we will have to wait to see. A lot of folk are simply adapting these lenses with an FTZ/FTZii. It must have synchronous VR and some special source - given how many folk seem so desperate for it. BUT of course since it is Nikon it will get a pounding by all the naysayers.

The use case for the 800mm is a fine one -- it is perfect for dedicated birders in good light -- but it is an 800mm and this was too much for me. I sold mine when my 600/4.TC came in last year and it is now being put to good use by a dedicated "birder". My use case was primarily 600mm for big cats at a distance; when f/4.0 was also needed, with the ability to punch in with the flick of the TC lever. BUT of course the cost the cost the cost !!!
 
Member's gallery
I know a lot of Sony users who love, and I mean LOVE their Sony 200-600 lenses. If Nikon can match the quality of that lens at the same or slightly lower price point, I think it will be a winner. Something to remember, too, is that a good 200-600 at a good price point can be a great "gateway" lens for new photographers who don't want to spend as much when getting started. This would make adding the lens to the Z lineup a good strategy for Nikon.
 
Member's gallery
I have the Z 100-400 and the two Z TCs. The Z 100-400 becomes a nice 140-560, f8 at the long end, with the Z 1.4x TC. I also have the Z 400 f4.5 and Z 800 mm PF, along with the 500 mm PF. So not sure I will have a need for the Z 180/200-600 mm lens. I am interested to see the weight, size and performance of the 180/200-600 lens. Even if I may not want it, I think it is an important lens for Nikon to get out. It’s very delayed as is.
 
Member's gallery
At first I was very interested in this lens. Once I bought the 24-120 and 100-400mm combination I thought I’d get the 200-600mm and one long prime, that I’d cover the majority of my shooting. Then I bought the 400mm 4.5 and started using it with and without the 1.4x TC and I really have the focal range of the 200-600 covered so lost interest in it. This past week, I’ve renewed my interest in the 200-600 for flexibility. My 100-400mm is nice and has its own use cases, but I think having a 200-600 on a second body actually gives me more flexibility to pair with my 400mm 4.5 or whatever longer lens I decide on. It should also work well for video. Hopefully Nikon gets it right.
 
Member's gallery
I have been using the Sony 200-600 (with a Sony A74) for almost a year and a half because the quality is stellar. All my other gear was Nikon F mount, but I just sold it to KEH and the check is in the mail as I type this. If it arrives tomorrow as I hope then I will go to my local Nikon dealer and order a Z8. (I love Sony lenses but don't love the ergonomics of their bodies). If the upcoming Nikon 200-600 can match the quality of the Sony then I will switch to get back to one system. However, the Sony is so sharp (it's a G series) and the Nikon is a non-S, that I am fearful it may not match. The weight and price would have to be the same as Sony also, though if Nikon can figure out how to make it even lighter that would be a selling point for me.
 
Member's gallery
I had been saying I was going to be a day one buyer of the Nikon 200-600 but after picking up the 100-400 and 1.4TC I'm not so sure any more. I don't shoot as much wild life as most on this forum so I may be a wait and see. I know a lot are upset that that it isn't listed as an S line lens but I'm not as worried about that. Nikon has been doing a really good job with all their lens under the Z line, S and non S. It will be interesting to see the final output for this lens and speculate why it took them so long to release it. Hopefully there is a really good reason for it and that reason is how good it is. We can all hope right?
 
Member's gallery
MrFotoFool said:
I have been using the Sony 200-600 (with a Sony A74) for almost a year and a half because the quality is stellar. All my other gear was Nikon F mount, but I just sold it to KEH and the check is in the mail as I type this. If it arrives tomorrow as I hope then I will go to my local Nikon dealer and order a Z8. (I love Sony lenses but don't love the ergonomics of their bodies). If the upcoming Nikon 200-600 can match the quality of the Sony then I will switch to get back to one system. However, the Sony is so sharp (it's a G series) and the Nikon is a non-S, that I am fearful it may not match. The weight and price would have to be the same as Sony also, though if Nikon can figure out how to make it even lighter that would be a selling point for me.
Click to expand...
But Sony G series is not their top series. That is the GM line. So if we loosely equate Sony GM to Nikon S then Sony G could be similar to Nikon non-S. Although I don’t really know how closely those two lines relate to each other.

But I’m sure Nikon is aiming to match or surpass the Sony version and compete on price. I think it will be good.
 
Member's gallery
Andy Miller Photo UK said:
Not everyone can release the cash for a full s-line -- but this means that many folk will """"have to live"""" with less wonderful glass than they would wish for.
It just means it will need to be used in good light.

I am hopeful that Nikkor will be able to pull something special out of the bag for this lens -- better than the Sigma or Tamron -- we will have to wait to see. A lot of folk are simply adapting these lenses with an FTZ/FTZii. It must have synchronous VR and some special source - given how many folk seem so desperate for it. BUT of course since it is Nikon it will get a pounding by all the naysayers.

The use case for the 800mm is a fine one -- it is perfect for dedicated birders in good light -- but it is an 800mm and this was too much for me. I sold mine when my 600/4.TC came in last year and it is now being put to good use by a dedicated "birder". My use case was primarily 600mm for big cats at a distance; when f/4.0 was also needed, with the ability to punch in with the flick of the TC lever. BUT of course the cost the cost the cost !!!
Click to expand...
TY for reminding the list that not everyone can justify spending $16K or even $6K (again, after the z9 purchase!). The 100-400 with the 1.4 tele does produce fine results and under appropriate circumstances even with the 2.0 tele. The non-S line z glass has greatly exceeded the pundits' expectations. Perhaps the 200-600 (or 180, whatever) with a 1.4 tele will surprise us. Only time will tell.

doclrb
 
Member's gallery
I’m casually interested in how the 200-600 will fare against the 200-500. I’ve got the 200-500 and am very happy with the IQ from that lens. Adding 100mm on the long end is not a big deal for me so I doubt I’ll spend the money on a 200-600 - assuming Nikon ever releases one.
 
Member's gallery
Considering I have the 100-400, 500 PF, and the 800 PF, my initial response would be “not interested”. But Nikon’s done such a good job with ALL their long Z lenses that I will have to take a look at the 200-600. If it’s that good, I can maybe replace up to two lenses with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top