Exploring 600mm 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
Member's gallery
mjais said:
I don't have any experience with Sony but I recently got the 600TC, 600PF and 800PF.

I use two Z8s, I've never used a Z9, but from an AF point of view, that should not matter.

Overall the 600TC focuses super fast. If there are problems, it's probably the camera, not the lens. The Z8 has a very good AF system but nothing is perfect. It sometimes looks onto the body and not the eye (especially with herons, I've found) and sometimes it stays stuck on the background or foreground. This can normally be fixed using the manual focus ring, using a focus preset or jumping to single-point AF (which I have currently on the Fn1 button but I will try a small custom wide-area as Steve suggested in a video and his book).

Optically the lens is basically perfect at 600 and very, very good at 840. Honestly, I can't really tell the difference from shots taken in the field, only when shooting test-charts as some reviewers do, can you tell.
It is also the most flexible long lens I've ever used.

Disadvantage is the weight: It is very light for what it is but when hand-holding it for longer, I wear out faster than with the 800PF and that is why I will keep the 800PF. I got the 800PF earlier and originally had no plans to buy the 600TC but for different reasons I ended up buying it and I love it. The 800PF will remain with me and I also use it regularly when I want the weight to be as low as possible, e.g. for longer hand-holding or when hiking. Recently I was shooting out of my window and I had to lean out and be in a rather uncomfortable position. The 600PF was to short and the 600TC was getting heavy fast. The 800PF allowed me to shoot for longer and get some nice shots.

When it comes to weight, the 600PF is in a different league and overall the most fun lens I've ever used. Not as flexible as the 600TC but so much lighter.
Maybe the combo 600PF + 800PF is interesting. Together, both with a Z8 attached, they are much heavier than a 600TC + Z8 but individually they are more fun to use.
That being said, the 600TC is also a lot of fun and if I could own only one long Nikon lens right now, it would for sure be the 600TC.

This is all very specific to my situation but maybe there are some useful thoughts and experiences here.

I hope the Z8 will get a firmware update in the future to further improve the AF and maybe give use pre-capture with RAW.
Click to expand...
Thank you, @mjais! I appreciate you sharing your experience! You have great options for sure!
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
Between the two lenses, the Nikon TC is a hands-down winner for me. But ONLY because of the TC. Both lenses seems to focus equally fast, both are equally sharp, and the Sony is slightly less bulky (since it's doesn't have the TC). Take the built-in TC out of the equation and it's a tie on all counts.

The built-in TC though, mmm, I love that thing. It's literally game-changing to be able to flip in and out from 600 to 840 IMO. I shoot more of a 60/40 (60% @ 600mm and 40% at 840) mix and the built-in TC saves so much time. I can't tell you the number of shots I've missed over the years while messing with a TC - or shots where I had one on and didn't need it or needed one and didn't have it on - and couldn't risk changing so I had to compromise the shot. To flip it on and off like that has been fantastic.

FWIW, I like the Sony ergonomics and controls better and that at least partially makes up for the 600 without the TC, but even so, I find myself using my Nikon gear more simply because of that TC in the lens. Before I had the 600TC, I would use the Sony most of the time. It makes that much of a difference. If Sony ever comes out with a 600TC lens, I'l probably end up shooting more Sony than Nikon again.

Also, I'd echo what the others said about rain - AF will struggle. Keep in mind that AF systems, no matter how sophisticated, are still going to focus on the first area of useable contrast. With something like Zone, you're begging for it to struggle. A small Spot AF point usually works better but still isn't immune to grabbing something between you and the target (rain, in this case).
Click to expand...
Thank you so much, @Steve! Great to know the built-in tele is a game changer! I could see that being the case. I'd love to "know" that Sony is working on something like this, but I'm guessing that it would be a long way off if ever.

Can I ask if you think the VR is as good on both lenses? I know I'm new to hand-holding a 600mm and it is doable, but there is a small part of me that wishes the VR was a bit "stronger". I'm not trying to be unreasonable, but I've heard so many great things about the VR on the new Z lenses and quite honestly, that just may sway me one way or the other.

I'm struggling with making sure that I spend this kind of money well! Also, please know that I am a birder at heart so it's not about "getting the shot". Rather in my case, I witness some of the most wonderful things and deeply want to do justice when documenting! The A1 with 200-600 has served me well, but I'd like to step it up. Yes, I know what happens behind the camera has to be solid and I do believe I'm doing well (knowledge, patience, talent, etc.), and there's always room for growth, but I'd like to be able to capture some of this that is beyond cropable 600mm in more detail. I hope some of you understand where I'm coming from and know I am very serious about photography. Your time, expertise, experience, and recommendations are very much appreciated!
 
Member's gallery
Mommacat said:
Thank you so much, @Steve! Great to know the built-in tele is a game changer! I could see that being the case. I'd love to "know" that Sony is working on something like this, but I'm guessing that it would be a long way off if ever.

Can I ask if you think the VR is as good on both lenses? I know I'm new to hand-holding a 600mm and it is doable, but there is a small part of me that wishes the VR was a bit "stronger". I'm not trying to be unreasonable, but I've heard so many great things about the VR on the new Z lenses and quite honestly, that just may sway me one way or the other.

I'm struggling with making sure that I spend this kind of money well! Also, please know that I am a birder at heart so it's not about "getting the shot". Rather in my case, I witness some of the most wonderful things and deeply want to do justice when documenting! The A1 with 200-600 has served me well, but I'd like to step it up. Yes, I know what happens behind the camera has to be solid and I do believe I'm doing well (knowledge, patience, talent, etc.), and there's always room for growth, but I'd like to be able to capture some of this that is beyond cropable 600mm in more detail. I hope some of you understand where I'm coming from and know I am very serious about photography. Your time, expertise, experience, and recommendations are very much appreciated!
Click to expand...
It's close - I think Nikon may have an edge, but I can't say for sure. Just seems like it. However, I also think it's close enough that it wouldn't sway me one way or the other.

What it comes down to I think is just this: Do you want more versatility with the lens or with the body? Nikon has it for the lens, Sony has it for the body. The truth is, I can use either kit and come away with photos, but I do give Nikon the edge due to the TC. Still, I'm confident that I'll get the shots I want with either setup on any trip. No bad choices here.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
It's close - I think Nikon may have an edge, but I can't say for sure. Just seems like it. However, I also think it's close enough that it wouldn't sway me one way or the other.

What it comes down to I think is just this: Do you want more versatility with the lens or with the body? Nikon has it for the lens, Sony has it for the body. The truth is, I can use either kit and come away with photos, but I do give Nikon the edge due to the TC. Still, I'm confident that I'll get the shots I want with either setup on any trip. No bad choices here.
Click to expand...
Thank you so much, @Steve!

This may sound crazy but I'm really enjoying the 600 GM! For someone who was used to the 300PF and 500PF lenses, I wasn't sure that I could handle the 200-600, but it worked out great. This is more work than the 200-600 (likely just me getting used to such a long lens), but it's doable and that's amazing for me! I will enjoy this lens a few more days until I have to return it. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top