Thank you!
400mm F/2.8 Vs. 600mm F/4 - Which Is BEST For Wildlife And Bird Photography?
- Thread starter Steve
- 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).
I will be also happy to see all your gear not only the one you take in your trip. And why you decide to get one lens over another similar one. What changes you are planning to make for your equipment in 2025. I know I am curious, but I like to know about my favorite photographers their way of thinking about gear. But if this for you is too personnel, then I apologize for asking.
No more personal than talking about what's in a toolbox
One of the tricks is that I often don't take the gear I want to take, but instead the gear I need for a given project (book, video, etc). For instance, although I think the Z6iii is a great camera, it wouldn't be my first choice as a primary if I have my Z8/9 along on a trip. However, last summer I spent two months with just the Z6iii as my main camera since I was writing a book about it. Still, this is something to kick around a bit and see if I can come up with a video that people would watch.
Thank you so much for you quick response and thank you for everything! We appreciate all what you are doing in this forum and all the materials you are making to help us.No more personal than talking about what's in a toolbox
One of the tricks is that I often don't take the gear I want to take, but instead the gear I need for a given project (book, video, etc). For instance, although I think the Z6iii is a great camera, it wouldn't be my first choice as a primary if I have my Z8/9 along on a trip. However, last summer I spent two months with just the Z6iii as my main camera since I was writing a book about it. Still, this is something to kick around a bit and see if I can come up with a video that people would watch.
Lecycliste
New member
Neither. Most of my early work in the 2000s and 20 teens was with EF 400 f/4 DO IS and EF 500/4L IS V1. I usually had the EF 1.4X II on the 500/4L. I bought the 400/4 first, but even with the 1.4X, it wasn’t enough for solo bird closeups. The 500/4 with 1.4X filled the frame much better when all I had were the 8MP cameras like the EOS 1D II and EOS 20D that were the norm in digital photography’s early years. I couldn’t crop much so I had to get close for good bird detail back then. The 400/4 worked fine for a grizzly across a two lane highway in Jasper, but that and 500/4 bison closeups on Utah’s Antelope Island are somewhat rare situations.
Lately I’ve been using the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS and Lumix S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ASPH. Zooms are a game changer for instant composition changes, and I‘m happy to not have to schlep the heavy 500/4 around. But in low light, f/4 or even f/5.6 make a difference.
The secret with any shy subject is to get close and shoot when they’re focused on an activity like feeding young or grazing. It also helps to visit the same location repeatedly and get to know where your target species hang out.
Lately I’ve been using the RF 200-800mm f/6.3-9 IS and Lumix S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ASPH. Zooms are a game changer for instant composition changes, and I‘m happy to not have to schlep the heavy 500/4 around. But in low light, f/4 or even f/5.6 make a difference.
The secret with any shy subject is to get close and shoot when they’re focused on an activity like feeding young or grazing. It also helps to visit the same location repeatedly and get to know where your target species hang out.
maxxus46
Well-known member
I shot the 300GM for a few weeks with an A1. Great lens, but i had the 2x TC glued to it for wildlife, and no question the IQ did degrade. If one shoots at 300mm and 420mm @F4 often then this is a great lens. With the 2x TC though, IQ starts to take a hit as does the AF response. In the end I prefer my current 600pf over that combo because I didn't like having the 2x TC on 90% of the time. The 600pf is sharper than the 300GM with 2xTC attached, and less expensive. Furthermore, the difference been f5.6 vs f6.3 is negligible, a non issue. That's been my experience...YMMV
One day in a reasonable timeframe, I hope!
O
Well-known member
Excellent video Steve and fully understand it, However........
If i was a full on outright committed off the planet 24/7 deadly wild life photographer, i would just buy Both lens in a heart beat. That said while i do wild life i am not a full on hard shooter.
For my use, especially for what i do, the tool best suited is the 400 Tc F2.8,
often i am walking through a heavy canopy in the Forrest's, i usually sit and wait for subjects, often i don't need the distance covered with a 600mm and beyond, but that's me.
On the 400 if needed i can flick to 560mm F3.92, again i rarely need much more than 600mm anyway.
I can always add reach to the 400 but at times cant move back.
With the benefit of crop-ability on 45mp and the optional Tcs the reach options is more than long enough for me.
But the real reason for the 400 is i can also have the dual purpose to do sports action, utilizing the tool far more, i cant with the 600.
With any F2.8 Lenses in the exotic area i shoot at F2.8 90% of the time, in the case of the 600 F4 its the same F4.
The 400 F2.8 F2.8 and versatility seems to fit my needs well, that absolutely doesn't take away anything from the 600 F4.
I rent either tool as needed, or for longer periods on rare occasions i borrow from a good colleague on the basis of (loose it or hurt it, i own it) which is perfectly fine.
Infrequent use for myself doesn't justify the cost for either Z400 or the Z600.
Most of my enthusiast mates and pro mates use the Z9 with the 600 FL, more than happy enough, the cost of the exotics here ROI in Oz is hard to achieve for many photographers, see prices below.
That said at a shorter end i currently fill the many gaps often with the DSLR 300 2.8 VR II i have had for years, resale prices hardly makes it worth selling.
I am keen to see if the 300 F2.8TC comes out soon.
If i bought any of these exotics it would be the 400 F2.8 TC again (for my applications), 200mm is not a lot of sacrifice, F2.8 is not a lot of difference to F4 in terms of shallow depth of field compared to the 600 F4, the 600 with its extra length compresses the image more therefor F2.8 F4 appear very similar, but gee if in extremely lower light conditions...........be it psychosomatic or not F2.8 is so very handy.
The 400 Tc 600Tc are both stunning tools, both have a purpose - benefit unique to them, fitting that purpose to what you need is what really counts.
Steve's video on these Nikon 400 F2.8TC 600 F4 TC is simply excellent.
FWIW
The Ozi $ is $0.61 to 1 $ USD, pros don't have the work level compared to the USA, most rent as and if needed. Most are very happy with the DSLR 600 F4 generation on their Z9 Z8.
Only an opinion