600mm lens manufacturing quality and technical differences

[Dzikie_Kadry]

I have been a passive spctator of this forum for quite some time now, but it is the time for a big Hello .
I am an amateur wildlife photographer who takes her passion seriously. The thing is, after quite some time, i have almost collected enough money to get my dreamy, glassy, 600mm long Stradivarius.
Currently i shoot with sony a7 iv and 200-600 and can only say i love this combo. There are of course some things i like more than the others, but as it is my first serious camera i dont really have a reference point.
I have probably read and watched everything internet has to offer including some really geeky stuff from lensrentals which strangely enough i have quite enjoyed. I cannot make a choice between nikon and sony. The fact that i already shoot sony does not matter, as first and foremost i do care about the lens quality.
Do you know how does the two (600gm and tc vr s) compare regarding manufacturing quality? And also what about the impact of 3 vs 2 fluorite elements or 9 vs 11 diaphragm blades. Is there any difference in autofocus speed, precision and sound? And what about focus breathing? I know it is a lot of questions, but i want to get the best lens possible while being aware of its strengths and weaknesses.

 

[StefanSC]

I think you are overthinking this.

Both 600mm's are great and your skills in the field will impact the final image much more than 9 or 11 blades of diafragm and other such nitpicking details.

There might be a case to be made about the TC in the Nikon but then again, I think the Sony is easier to obtain theae days and doesn't require a new body and the learning curve of the new system...

 

[pwaring]

I don't own the 600 TC but I do own the 400 TC and a variety of other Nikon wildlife lenses. If I were buying from scratch today I would be going Nikon because I find the built-in TC to be ridiculously useful. Nobody who looks at your photos will ever know which brand you shot, but the built-in TC might get you a photo you otherwise could have missed. I also prefer the ergonomics of the bodies and I think for wildlife photography that the variety of available lenses is ahead of the competition.

If it is possible for you, rent the lenses before you make such a big purchase. The ergonomics of Sony and Nikon bodies are quite different and whilst the glass is more important in terms of the results, you absolutely need to enjoy using the body attached to it and not get frustrated that you can't reach certain buttons. I think most people can learn to use any system of menus and buttons but my wife can't comfortably reach the front buttons on the z8 (she has very small hands) and so I helped her figure out how to work around that. She would certainly prefer a slightly smaller Z8.

The ergonomics of the lens also matter. Can you comfortably hold it whilst accessing any lens buttons that you want to use? I don't love the placement on them on my 400 TC with my size hands but I assign stuff to them that I rarely need to use so it doesn't cause me much concern.

Finally to the lens ecosystem. A 600mm f4 lens isn't a walk-around and you may well in future be shopping for additional lenses to go with it. On Nikon this would often be the 100-400mm for wider stuff and perhaps a 400 4.5 or a 600 6.3 PF. The lightweight primes give us options and they're very much a "nice to have" aspect of using Nikon gear.

One other thing is that it is worth double-checking your most used focal lengths with your 200-600mm. If you're always at 600mm then absolutely grab the 600mm. If you photograph mammals quite a lot and use 400-600mm frequently then something like the 400 TC is a wonderful lens and it packs into a bag with a camera body on it in the same space that a 600mm lens takes up on its own. If you intend to stay local and shoot a lot of small subjects then often a 600mm would be better. If your goals are more travel based like safaris then the 400 TC is worthy of consideration.

 

[Steve]

I use both Nikon and Sony 600 F/4 lenses and can't tell any difference in quality. Both are superb.

I can tell you that I use the Nikon far more because of that built-in TC. I actually like the Sony bodies better (more options, better control layout / types, better customizations, etc), but engaging that TC at the flip of a lever is game-changing for me. When looking at a system, I consider the things that cause missed shots and messing with TCs is right at the top of that list, at least for me. So, although I like Sony bodies a little better, I'm shooting more Nikon at the moment because of that lens.

Also, FWIW, I think Nikon has better stabilization too

Still, can't go wrong either way.

 

[Dzikie_Kadry]

Thank you all for great answers. Steve - that is why i chose sony when getting my first full frame. Its size and features ticked all the boxes for me then. When looking at the camera part of the equation, technology-wise sony still looks like a winner but with all the updates the gap seems to be closing. I had a chance to hold a1 with 600gm and found that suprisingly handholdable. How does the nikon set compare? Also, i have read about quite strong focus breathing. Is it better in sony's? Same question about autofocus sound - how does that compare?
Have you guys (especially those from eu, maybe even pl? ) ever had any experience with nikon warranty service or service in general? I have heard some not really pleasant stories about canon and also had quite unsatisfying experience with sony.

 

[Steve]

Thank you all for great answers. Steve - that is why i chose sony when getting my first full frame. Its size and features ticked all the boxes for me then. When looking at the camera part of the equation, technology-wise sony still looks like a winner but with all the updates the gap seems to be closing. I had a chance to hold a1 with 600gm and found that suprisingly handholdable. How does the nikon set compare? Also, i have read about quite strong focus breathing. Is it better in sony's? Same question about autofocus sound - how does that compare?
Have you guys (especially those from eu, maybe even pl? ) ever had any experience with nikon warranty service or service in general? I have heard some not really pleasant stories about canon and also had quite unsatisfying experience with sony.

I've compared the Sony and Nikon and haven't noticed any significant focus breathing issues. From up close, I can shoot and fill the frame the same way with either lens. If it's present, it's minor.

I think the a1 is easier to handle - Nikon's grips are larger and my dainty hands sometimes have to stretch a bit to reach things like the Fn2 button. Not bad, but if my hands were any smaller it would be an issue. I like that on Sony all the major controls are on the camera and you aren't really reliant on lenses for additional controls the way you are with Nikon (it leads to aggravating ergonomic inconsistency when one lens had features and another doesn't). From an AF standpoint, I think the two systems are very close. I like the way Sony implements tracking better, but both are equally reliable IMO. However, when it comes to customization, Sony still has the edge. I like the rear control wheel where I can keep ISO - and spin all the way down to jump to Auto ISO. I like the AF area toggle (the Z8 finally has it), I like the user modes better on the Sony (they're sticky), I like that I can have more than a single recall shooting option, etc. So, while Nikon is catching up, when it comes to the bodies, I still prefer Sony.

However, all of that is still easier to work without than the TC lenses IMO.

The biggest challenge is that Nikon has the best, most innovative lenses, Sony has the best bodies. They say date the bodies and marry the glass and I think that's true. For me, the lenses are usually my deciding factor when I'm going out - I can shoot any body from any brand and make it work.

 

[RikWriter]

I don't have a Nikon 600, but I can tell you that the Sony 600 f4 I've had for the last 2.5 years has been a tank, no problems at all. As Steve said, I'd really like to have the built-in TC, but I don't know if I'm willing to go through the hassle of trying to sell my Sony gear to do it.

 

[DavidT]

I think Steve hit the nail on the head and a built-in TC is pretty awesome but rather expensive!

If you are buying a lens like that a body upgrade would bring that lens to life. In Nikon, you have two choices Z8 or Z9. In Sony, you have one which is the a1. The a9III and a7R5 have some strengths but the a1 is overall as a single body the best choice in the Sony line.

So look at it this way:
Nikon 600 with Z8 $19,294 plus tax
Nikon 600 with Z9 $20,993 plus tax
Sony 600 with a1 $19,496 plus tax. Add in a 1.4TC $548. Total package $20,044 plus tax
Sony 600 with a7R5 $16,896 plus tax. Add in a 1.4TC $548. Total package $17,444 plus tax

The total cost is essentially the same. The Sony a1 and a7r5 will be lighter, and smaller, the 600 is the lighter version but doesn't have the TC built in. The a1 is the fastest camera in RAW of all the above. It is also the oldest of all the cameras. The a1 will likely have a new model in the spring of 2025.

If I was starting from scratch today it would be a tough choice. If I did not really understand the power of a Sony camera and what its customization allows you to do I would likely go with Nikon. Knowing what I know now about how much customization is important to me and how it has allowed me to capture images that I couldn't have in the past I would still buy the Sony again.

However, if I wasn't spending the level of funds required for a big prime then I would likely go with Nikon and the 600 or 800PF lens as a more affordable choice but still have a quality prime lens. With that being said depending on my budget there are some Sony big primes for thousands less for sale from time to time which I haven't seen with the Z mount 600 which is to be expected.

I would love to have a built-in TC in my 600 but when reflecting on my use it isn't that often that I am taking it on and off in the field. Often I plan on either using it or not using it and subjects tend to warrant the use or not use of it. It isn't often that I need to go back and forth on a given outing. If I do one of my zooms such as the 200-600 is likely a better choice at that moment. For me, the built-in TC alone wouldn't pick the system. It could be the single item that tips the scales but it wouldn't be the reason I ignore the other benefits of the Sony system.
Just my 10 cents.

 

[abc123brian]

I cannot give you a comparison of any of those lenses as I don‘t own them, but wanted to add you should consider the system as a whole. Which one is going to give you what you need/want as it is today. From everything I’ve seen comparing the Sony and Nikon 600mm F/4 the biggest factor is the built in TC. I can see how that is a game changer for quickly changing focal lengths so between those two lenses I find the Nikon more appealing. The 180-600 and 200-600 seem very close and neither of them would make me decide on one system or another. Nikon also has amazing small prime super telephoto lenses like the 400 4.5, 600 6.3, and they have the 800mm PF which is unique. Sony has the new 300mm 2.8. If you need other lenses, consider those as well. Then you also have to consider the bodies. Currently Nikon has Z8 and Z9 which are great but if you’re looking for a budget friendly body, you have the retro Zf until the Z6iii is announced. Sony has you covered with bodies but most at a slightly higher price. Only you can decide which will best fit your needs.

 

[DavidT]

I've compared the Sony and Nikon and haven't noticed any significant focus breathing issues. From up close, I can shoot and fill the frame the same way with either lens. If it's present, it's minor.

I think the a1 is easier to handle - Nikon's grips are larger and my dainty hands sometimes have to stretch a bit to reach things like the Fn2 button. Not bad, but if my hands were any smaller it would be an issue. I like that on Sony all the major controls are on the camera and you aren't really reliant on lenses for additional controls the way you are with Nikon (it leads to aggravating ergonomic inconsistency when one lens had features and another doesn't). From an AF standpoint, I think the two systems are very close. I like the way Sony implements tracking better, but both are equally reliable IMO. However, when it comes to customization, Sony still has the edge. I like the rear control wheel where I can keep ISO - and spin all the way down to jump to Auto ISO. I like the AF area toggle (the Z8 finally has it), I like the user modes better on the Sony (they're sticky), I like that I can have more than a single recall shooting option, etc. So, while Nikon is catching up, when it comes to the bodies, I still prefer Sony.

However, all of that is still easier to work without than the TC lenses IMO.

The biggest challenge is that Nikon has the best, most innovative lenses, Sony has the best bodies. They say date the bodies and marry the glass and I think that's true. For me, the lenses are usually my deciding factor when I'm going out - I can shoot any body from any brand and make it work.

I would say you are correct. I would say that most people aren't going to own the 600TC along with a 600PF and a 800PF and so on. You are in a fortunate position of having multiple systems and the best they have to offer. For the rest of us poor and non-pro folks who aren't profiting from our gear we tend to have to invest differently, yes I am jealous lol.

So when considering someone who is willing to buy the new 600TC I wonder how many are also buying say the 600PF or 800PF. I suspect most aren't. Maybe the 180-600 or the 100-400 to pair with the 600TC. So if you look at it this way you are likely either in the lower-cost PF prime camp which then Nikon handly wins the glass war. If you are all in on the big glass I think the glass starts to matter less and the body begins to push me into a specific brand.

So if I wanted to and could afford all the options then yup Nikon is winning in the optics for wildlife photographers. Sadly it tends to not be that clear cut for dropping $20K plus for a hobby.

Going back and looking for that money tree again lol.

 

[EricBowles]

I would say you are correct. I would say that most people aren't going to own the 600TC along with a 600PF and a 800PF and so on. You are in a fortunate position of having multiple systems and the best they have to offer. For the rest of us poor and non-pro folks who aren't profiting from our gear we tend to have to invest differently, yes I am jealous lol.

So when considering someone who is willing to buy the new 600TC I wonder how many are also buying say the 600PF or 800PF. I suspect most aren't. Maybe the 180-600 or the 100-400 to pair with the 600TC. So if you look at it this way you are likely either in the lower-cost PF prime camp which then Nikon handly wins the glass war. If you are all in on the big glass I think the glass starts to matter less and the body begins to push me into a specific brand.

So if I wanted to and could afford all the options then yup Nikon is winning in the optics for wildlife photographers. Sadly it tends to not be that clear cut for dropping $20K plus for a hobby.

Going back and looking for that money tree again lol.

David makes a really good point. You need to think about this from the perspective of a set of long lenses for what you personally photograph. All of these lenses are excellent, so it boils down to your kit. And it may be some other lens or a camera body that drives your decision.

In my case, my original big purchase was a 600mm f/4, and in spite of the cost, my thought process was that it was simply the best lens available and the longest lens available. Buying that lens is something I never second guessed. The same was true when I got the 800mm PF - it was the best lens available for what and how I photographed small birds - my main subject matter for long lenses. I had a number of options for wading birds and mammals - all of which were very good to excellent. But there was only one choice at 800mm - and I had a lot of experience shooting a 500mm PF with a 1.4 TC and a 600mm f/4 with a 1.4 TC. Another person might make different choices or have different preferences, but you can't go wrong choosing the best lens available for what you frequently photograph.

 

[Butlerkid]

I can only second Steve's comments about the built-in TC. With the built in TC you can go from 600mm to 840 in a second! And Nikon has a wide assortment of top line glass including lighter weight options for hand carrying. One can customize settings and buttons in either system......Both systems can deliver stunning images. The variable is you. And only you can determine which one suits you better.

 

[Anjin San]

I have been a passive spctator of this forum for quite some time now, but it is the time for a big Hello .
I am an amateur wildlife photographer who takes her passion seriously. The thing is, after quite some time, i have almost collected enough money to get my dreamy, glassy, 600mm long Stradivarius.
Currently i shoot with sony a7 iv and 200-600 and can only say i love this combo. There are of course some things i like more than the others, but as it is my first serious camera i dont really have a reference point.
I have probably read and watched everything internet has to offer including some really geeky stuff from lensrentals which strangely enough i have quite enjoyed. I cannot make a choice between nikon and sony. The fact that i already shoot sony does not matter, as first and foremost i do care about the lens quality.
Do you know how does the two (600gm and tc vr s) compare regarding manufacturing quality? And also what about the impact of 3 vs 2 fluorite elements or 9 vs 11 diaphragm blades. Is there any difference in autofocus speed, precision and sound? And what about focus breathing? I know it is a lot of questions, but i want to get the best lens possible while being aware of its strengths and weaknesses.

As others said…you’re overthinking it. However…since this is your first serious camera…going to the exotic and therefore expensive lenses (at least I think but I shoot Nikon so don’t know Sony)…might be premature. I’m not going to say yay or nay to that question…just something to consider…along with weight, hiking distance, output destination and the myriad other factors going into the choice. While Steve is on the money…the built in TC is a game changer but it comes along with that price problem and more importantly for me the size/weight/hand holdability problem…so I’m passing on the exotics as the wrong decision for me…and because the 600PF with or without the TC, 100-400, and 180-600 when it gets here fit my overall needs and situation better. Cost isn’t a big driver for me…it’s the other things that make the decision for me.

 

[Ltgk20]

I agree with what's been written above. To me, it largely comes down to a couple of differences.

First, the bodies. Sony focuses on smaller, more compact bodies, whereas Nikon prefers somewhat larger formats. From an all-out AF performance standard with the latest firmwares, most of what I read is that the A1 and Z8/Z9 are similar enough (I have an A1). Each has strengths and weaknesses, but at the end of the day, gets the job done. I do tend to read that the Sony AF can be a bit easier to make perform. Though it's impossible to predict the future, it's pretty safe to assume the a7rv and a9iii AI chip will make it in the A1 with at least equal, and possibly improved performance. With respect to the Z8 and Z9, it's a bit harder to predict what Nikon will do with them or what the next models will include (though it needs to be said that they've extracted serious improvements from the firmware updates to date).

With respect to the 600mm lenses. Again, the performance is quite similar, but the built in TC on the Nikon is significant, both in cost and in the benefit of flexibility.

 

[Calson]

A built-in teleconverter is a nice to have feature. When I owned several generations of 600mm f/4 lenses I used a 1.4x teleconverter at times but I seldom changed the setup once I was out in the field. For distant subjects like bears in Yellowstone I started and ended with the teleconverter attached. For small birds I started and ended with the 1.4x TC in place. I always had a zoom lens like the 80-400mm and now the 100-400mm one with me in addition to the large prime lens.

Nikon has some great telephoto lenses and this includes the ultra light weight 600mm PF and 800mm PF and can be used without a tripod and gimbal head. For macro Nikon is the best option but Canon is also excellent with what it provides. In terms of third party lenses from Sigma it is the ones they provide with a mount for Sony mirrorless cameras that would be of interest.

I stayed with Nikon partly in the hope they would provide a mirrorless 500mm PF lens which did not happen. The 800mm PF made up for that as well as the 100-400mm which is a great improvement over the DSLR 80-400mm lens. Unless one has used the very compact and light Nikon PF lenses the freedom they provide in the field cannot be appreciated.

What has impressed me the most has been Nikon's investing in new firmware for the Z9 and Z8 cameras to not just fix bugs but to add new features and capabilities. In the past I needed to buy the latest version of their DSLR cameras at considerable expense. To be able now to simply download and install new firmware is a sea change.

 

[Biggest Fan]

I have the 600tc Nikon. I do hand hold it a bit but not for long periods of time. With the TC you really get 2 lenses, 600 and 840. And I often add an external tc for 1176mm! And oh how good the shots at all those focal lengths! Being able to switch focal length with just a flip of the switch is priceless! Getting better photos! You’ll have to pay closer attention to hear shimmer with this combination!

 

[Dzikie_Kadry]

Hello again , just want to share with you that i have finally pulled the trigger and welcomed the most anticipated familly member. Eventally i went with sony. I have tried both 600gm and 600tc and although having integrated tc felt great, the weight distribution and ergonomics finally won mine not very bulky 165cm over . Once again, i am very greatful for all your advice. See u in the field

 

[soundwatts]

I have your exact combo Sony A74 and 200-600. My daughter is a Nikon shooter and had a z8 with 180-600. She recently upgraded to the z9 and z600 f4 tc s. So I got the hand me down. I really enjoy shooting the Nikon a lot more I get better results with the 1806 as the Sony zoom had focus breathing issues on the zoom. I did like the the Sony customization more but now that I’m used to it I find the Nikon equal except for the custom modes that I never used anyway. I almost pulled the trigger on an a1 when it was on sale. Glad I didn’t as it’s long in the tooth and Nikon is doing a much better job of firmware feature updares that Sony is so far behind on Also like having the high res stacked sensor over the a74 makes a big difference in speed crop ability and fun. Now to your question. My daughters 600 with built in tc is a game changer as Steve said. She is getting the shots that are spectacular where my lens would be my limitation. I think it’s in a league that can’t be matched today. But I’m sure Sony will catch up sooner or later. The other advantage I see of Nikon is the lens mount is 55mm vs the 46 of the Sony. so I am able to mount all my Sony glass using a megadap on my z8 and it works well.
good luck with the journey either way you cant go wrong