A Pro’s take on the venerable 180-600mm Nikkor Z lens

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).

Member's gallery
macwalter said:
I always found the 200-500 to be an ungainly piece with terrible balance but it was sharp enough and I did get some nice shots with it. But the weight and front heavy balance put me off as a purchase. The 186 is vastly superior in this regard. Also I really don’t like how the FTZ adapter pushes the lenses out further that only make balance issues worse. This is why I decided to sell all my dslr gear and go full mirrorless. I don’t regret the decision although the cost up front was significant
Click to expand...
You nake some very good points.

I do like the 180-600 and think its an absolutely excellent lens, as you say with the internal zoom i guess it would also make it better for video as well.

Nikon have put a lot of thought into the 180-600 especially fixing the throw which was a big issue for many people especially with birders in the camera club.

Reflecting on this post i guess its not so much about the 180-600 over the 200-500, or price, if your happy with what you have that's all that counts, there is always different or better.

Many people shoot DSLRS only or DSLRs and Mirror less. If you go full mirror less then there it’s the perfect case to go with the 180-600.

I feel the 180-600 and what it offers as a very versatile alternative tool compared to some of the more expensive lenses makes the 180-600 at times a serious consideration to use.

Like most zooms regardless of size range and brand i feel the better the light the better they will work.

Nikon Tamron Sigma long zooms lenses all offer versatility with more than usable optical quality.

That said a good point made in this post, sometimes you just want to go out the door with one versatile does it all lens rather than a lot of extra heavy gear, somthing i consider often even if there is a little compremise.

Did a 3.5 hour trek in the woods Koala bear hunting, schlepping like an ax over my shoulder the 200-500 on a gimbal on mono pod on a Z8 with FTZ adapter, 500mm was just enough, 400-800 is the preferred range and would have been better, the previous time 300-500 was perfect, was it worth it, well only a few bears in the very tops of massive trees where spotted, then suddenly one at 200mm only if I walked back about 20 feet, all very concealed, better luck next time. The take way is versatility combined with feet. When you know the subject and parameters things are easier. A feeind uses canon with a tiny 800mm lens on one body and a 400mm lens on another.

I guess I am more of a rare kind as i dance enjoyably with DSLRS and Mirror less tools happily, the operative being enjoyably :ROFLMAO:

Only an opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top