Thank you very much, Jan. Much appreciated!
These have been cropped. The first maybe a linear crop of around 15%, the second around 20%, the third around 25%.
180-600 Disappointment!
- Thread starter MRK
- Start date
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).
These have been cropped. The first maybe a linear crop of around 15%, the second around 20%, the third around 25%.
JanH
Active member
Cropped they are also impressively sharp. In an earlier post I struggled a bit with this lens and heat haze at long distance - I am more pleased with some closer shots of deer I posted the other night. For a some more controlled shots in good light I took the lens out to the local zoo and got these shots on the Z6ii. They are resized full frame followed by crops. I am pleased with the result, though I wish I could see how the lens resolves on a Z7/8 sensor.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
A higher resolving lens producing a higher contrast image should produce images which appear sharper relative to "affordable" wide range zooms - in any lighting conditions.
Landscapes of fields, different parts of the plants like bolls, blooms or open bolls, wildlife, spray planes, tractors etc. below are some examples..
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
arbitrage
Well-known member
Two possibilities:
1) The lens is defective and exchanging it would have a good chance of a better copy as we know from 100s of examples and trusted user reports that the lens can produce perfectly acceptable, sharp images.
2) The lens is a good copy but you were caught unaware in some atmospherics that you didn't realize were happening. In this case I would have whipped out the 500PF and shot the same subjects back to back to see if it really was the 180-600 or it was the atmospherics.
Even if you didn't have the 500PF with you on that outing, I would have gone home and done some back to back testing between the two lenses before returning the 180-600.
Sounds like you already returned the lens so I guess we will never know. If you liked having the 180-600 focal range then I think it would be worth it to buy another copy and do some better testing this time.
1) The lens is defective and exchanging it would have a good chance of a better copy as we know from 100s of examples and trusted user reports that the lens can produce perfectly acceptable, sharp images.
2) The lens is a good copy but you were caught unaware in some atmospherics that you didn't realize were happening. In this case I would have whipped out the 500PF and shot the same subjects back to back to see if it really was the 180-600 or it was the atmospherics.
Even if you didn't have the 500PF with you on that outing, I would have gone home and done some back to back testing between the two lenses before returning the 180-600.
Sounds like you already returned the lens so I guess we will never know. If you liked having the 180-600 focal range then I think it would be worth it to buy another copy and do some better testing this time.
Do they hire you specifically to photograph these things? I'm curious what they want photos like this for, if that's the case. Or, do you do these photographs on your own and then try to sell them to the farm owners?
Kenny88
Active member
For the purpose of my expectations and use of the lens, the 180-600mm works for my use case and budget. It's all subjective I think: if someone wants to ensure that they are possibly getting absolute best image quality that a lens can deliver, then they should resort to a prime lens, and be willing to pay the price for it.
If I was doing this professionally, and if photography pays me, and I have clients/customers, I would likely then be able to justify the costs and use prime lenses more. But again, being out in the field with a 600mm prime lens, one might miss opportunities for better composition at a wider focal length, which is were a zoom lens comes in. Or either that, have multiple camera bodies with different focal length attached to each one. Ie. Z8+70-200mm, Z8+500mm prime, Z8+600mm, Z8+800mm - that's serious cash we're talking here!
If I was doing this professionally, and if photography pays me, and I have clients/customers, I would likely then be able to justify the costs and use prime lenses more. But again, being out in the field with a 600mm prime lens, one might miss opportunities for better composition at a wider focal length, which is were a zoom lens comes in. Or either that, have multiple camera bodies with different focal length attached to each one. Ie. Z8+70-200mm, Z8+500mm prime, Z8+600mm, Z8+800mm - that's serious cash we're talking here!
Kenny88
Active member
Great advice! I would also recommend a controlled environment - shoot indoors, which eliminates many outdoor environmental factors. If a lens is indeed bad, shooting indoors will provide a more accurate representation of the lens on whether there's an issue or not.
I do most of these on my own. When they say you need to know your subject in photography, I really do as I am growing my 35th cotton crop. I sell these pics to the public as well as agribusinesses for both artwork and advertisements. I have also done work for wind turbine construction and documentation and art work.
Some Local banks have commissioned me to do artwork for different communities branch banks artwork.
I like what I'm seeing here
Atmospherics are a sneaky stealer of sharpness and clarity, and numerous times I've been going through images, breaking out in a cold sweat because I thought something was wrong with my lens, only to have a "ahhhhh curse you, atmospherics, got me again!" moment. Most recent was last winter when I was shooting birds right off my back porch, and everything was hazy... come to find out was a byproduct of the temperature variance caused by the lens hood. Soon as I took the hood off, boom! Sharp photos again. Sneaky, innocuous things like that when you least expect it.
I'm keeping the 180-600 for sure. There are times that a zoom saves the day. I have quite a few favorite shots captured with a zoom that would have been lost had I not been able to change focal lengths. Heck, there are plenty of times I have a prime on an WISH I had a zoom LOL! While it won't be my primary lens (600TC wins that one), I'll use it for sure.
Cameron T
Well-known member
I just can't give zooms up because sometimes wildlife moves. If I had a second body, I'd use a prime on it, but since I've got only one, well...
Kenny88
Active member
We're so lucky that Steve is a active on the forums and sharing his breadth of knowledge on threads - thanks Steve!
We all look forward to seeing your full comprehensive review on your production copy (hopefully you have, or will get soon!)Calson
Well-known member
I tried the Sigma 150-600mm C and Sport versions and both were inferior to the Nikon 200-500mm lens at that time. At that time many Sigma owners would avoid using the 500-600mm focal range where softness was quite apparent.
In testing sharpness I would use manual focus and a target where it is easy to determine any issues with a lens. These are mass produced and meant for the hobbyist so not surprising if a few slip through that have alignment issues. I like to buy from B&H where returns are very easy to do.
In testing sharpness I would use manual focus and a target where it is easy to determine any issues with a lens. These are mass produced and meant for the hobbyist so not surprising if a few slip through that have alignment issues. I like to buy from B&H where returns are very easy to do.
Maybe sometimes, but unless I can be there with a person and watch what they do or try their lens myself, I would never suggest this. It's a but of a sore spot of mine due to my own experience and what I've seen since.
When I got my first long lens, a 200-500, I tested it and found I could not get anything at all sharp at 5.6. It was not just soft but just out of focus at f8 it was a lot better. I had never used a long lens before so I wondered if it was my own error and tried to correct it. When that didn't work, I set up various tests to try to check, to no avail. Even manual focus on a tripod wouldn't give a sharp result.
I posted about on a forum asking for help, including all the images taken with testing of carefully set up targets on the tripod, etc., and I got nothing but a lot of people blaming me, saying my handholding technique was poor (the lens was on a tripod), my shutter speed (1/1000 or something) was too slow (when I sped it up and tried again they said now my ISO was too high), etc.
This went on for a long time and I felt pretty beaten up by the end to be honest. Long story short is that I sent the lens back and when the the replacement came it was night and day. The lens definitely *had* been the problem.
Since that time I have seen so many others suffer the same thing where no matter what they report people just jump all over them and blame them for whatever the problem is, refusing to acknowledge the possibility that the equipment does have a problem. It's what happens 99% of the time.
I'm sure some lenses are perfectly fine and the issue really is the user, but unless there's clear reason to think otherwise I'd rather err on the side of assuming the person is capable rather than assuming they're the problem and making them feel frustrated.
NicholasN
Active member
Sent mine back also, I had similar issues with sharpness or maybe not nailing sharpness on my behalf, however after thousands of shots I discovered chromatic aberration (more lateral and to the right half of the image) - More so when using VR and panning right to left it seemed to exaggerate the problem - I sort of worked out that the direction of the pan seemed to have an influence on the CA so panning from left to right added more of an orange fringe towards the front of the pan and cancelled out the already blue fringe to the right so hence the left to right panning seemed to make it a bit better. Either way with VR OFF the lens seemed ok with panning, but I just could not get rid of the outer blue fringing on the right of the frame that extended almost all the way across towards the left, but not the extreme left - weird !!
Nextlife1
Active member
Could not agree more with your post. When one has years of experience getting consistently sharp shots, with multiple Nikon cameras (in my case 8), Nikon lenses (in my case 12 including exotic supertelephotos), and in varied conditions all over the world, it is not technique when I cannot get a sharp shot with a new lens. I used to question myself about this but not anymore. I know when a lens is a bad copy, and in each case it has been instantly confirmed when I received the replacement.
ajrmd
Well-known member
Can you post some examples? I would like to see what you are describing.
Thinking of canceling my order for the 180-600. Weight and size is a concern for me. I have a Z100-400 that I've been very happy with, so thinking if I got the 600 PF, I could have my 100-400 on my Z8 and be pretty much covered. Cost, though. $3,000 more for the PF, but you get what you pay for, don't you? Hopefully.
NicholasN
Active member
these images are from the lcd of the z9 as i dont have time to upload the originals, there are 100’s of photos with different lighting conditions that show the CA on the right side and its worse when panning BIF
Cameron T
Well-known member
Did you mean to upload images? There aren't any in your post.
And back of screen jpgs aren't the best way to prove a point either imo, maybe when you have time, screencap the raw files and upload examples that way?
If you have CA, then it maybe that you have a lens out of alignment as Camera Labs testing said that the lens is practically free from CA:
Nikon Z 180-600mm f5.6-6.3 VR review | Cameralabs
www.cameralabs.com
NicholasN
Active member
I tried to upload them but it says uploading when I select them from my iPhone files folder but then they disappear with an error saying oops we ran into some problems ! Any ideas?
Cameron T
Well-known member
They have to be a certain maximum size, so that might be your problem. I think 2k long edge is the max, and 2mb
