Good point. My cameras would be very easy to carryOr we could just change the definition of a pound... Either way, not only would you weigh less, but so would you camera gear!!
Is the Nikon 600 f6.3 a full 600mm?
- Thread starter Matt N
- 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).
Yeah-No (not a real word -
) but here is the thing. It would not make sense for Nikon to look at the cost of the 600 F4 TC which is a highly desirable and very important lens for the brand, then decide to launch a 600 F5.6 PF. A 600 F6.3 is exactly the right lens in terms of the line up.
One of the problems that face any company is making a judgement about how much it costs to meet the break even price for a niche product like a lens. How many will they sell? How much are the fixed costs and variable costs, distribution and advertising costs? The balance of the line up of lenses is a vital part of the planning. There are always customers who want ‘more’ for even less. Like it or not the financial viability of the company has to come first.
Nikon offers a great range of telephoto lenses.
Most lenses focus breath at least a little, but the 600PF does less of it than the 600TC (I tested it and was surprised).
Thanks Steve! That’s what I wanted to know. I’m looking forward to seeing a comparison between that and other lenses. I’m interested to see how it compares to the Sony 200-600 optically. I’m looking at going either Z8 + 600 PF vs A1 + 200-600. So many tradeoffs to consider.
I have some videos coming out this week that will look at those things, but I can tell you now, based on my tests, the 600PF is better. It turns out my initial feelings about it being a "baby 600TC without the TC" were more spot-on than I imagined
Last edited:
Interesting. Perhaps I should sell my 600 TC ... and live with the babyI have some videos coming out this week that will look at those things, but I can tell you now, based on my tests, the 600PF is better. It turns out my initial feelings about it being a "baby 600TC without the TC" were more spot-on than I imagined
For some tasks you need a big boy…
Which is why I'll keep my 600 f/4 G until I can purchase the Z 600 w/TC without thinking twice about spending that money.LOL - what Joel said
After seeing Steve’s new video comparing the 600TC vs. 600pf out of focus, I’m convinced that I want it.
The problem is, I know for a fact it will sit as dead weight at home. I need the freedom of handholding a lens, and the 600TC is dependent on support.
I'm usually able to support a heavier camera & lens combination with either a monopod or tripod. Even when doing so causes inconvenience, like when I shoot sports events, the increase in the number of acceptable images makes the inconvenience worth it.
Sports and events is more tripod friendly vs. birds flying, handheld in every possible position where a tripod is a clumsy object to shlep along. My 2 cents.
Vincent_VdB
Well-known member
So you really think that the length of a lens reflects the number of mm it states?Fact is the 400/4.5 isn’t a 400mm long barrel, and it’s lighter and sharper then expected without a PF element inside.
My point is, Nikon knows some tricks to overcome challenges. Therefore I’m not convinced for 100% that they couldn’t pull off f/5.6 while still being lightweight and compact.
Regarding 5.6 vs. 6.3, it IS a difference when the sun goes down when all the action happens, and the ISO climbs up. 6400 vs. 8000. I don’t agree that its negligible in real world.
I’m still loving the lens! I just like to put things in perspective.
The front element is the simple formula of focal length / max aperture opening. In case of the mentioned 400 f/4.5 is that 89mm and is the front lens 95mm.
Back to the 600mm f/6.3 is that slightly over 95mm but is the front element usually the one acting "only" as a protection, coated by the way.
Hope this can help why it was stated you can't change the laws of physics
front element usually the one acting "only" as a protection,
Very interesting information.
Basically a built in protection filter, and it’s not part of the optical formula?
Very interesting information.
Basically a built in protection filter, and it’s not part of the optical formula?
Is it possible to handhold a 600TC like I’m doing with the 800pf?
I pic taken by a friend walking by.
I pic taken by a friend walking by.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
I found this.
600/5.6 is actually possible?
I’m not so good in trading diagrams.
Post in thread 'After the 600 TC arrived, if you had an 800 PF, did you sell it?'
https://bcgforums.com/threads/after...d-an-800-pf-did-you-sell-it.25135/post-282985
Vincent_VdB
Well-known member
If 600mm f/4 is possible so is a f/5.6
The front element will therefore increase in size and as explained will weight go up. The front element will need to be 108mm and is thus bigger than any standard protection filter out there.
The f/4 teles out there work with drop-in filters but obviously contributing to an increase is length and is that not good for a PF lens.
I do it all the time.
Vincent_VdB
Well-known member
I hardly use a tripod or monopod, no problem is handholding this lens. Of course, in hide photography is the lens on a gimbal .
.
Joel, if light passes through the glass, it is part of the optical formula. It's effects may be miniscule, or not, but its effects must be accounted for by the optical designers.
If you own a lens with an internal filter mount, you'll likely find a notice in the lens manual/brochure that says there must be some filter in the mount for optimal optical performance.
Even though a "burden" to carry along, I nearly always take a tripod with me. I've had far more experiences where I didn't have one and wished I did than instances where I had one and wished I didn't. To make it easier to "carry", I use a converted baby jogger to move my heavy and/or cumbersome gear out on trails.
Last edited:
I thought you’re always using a tripod or monopod
arbitrage
Well-known member
No one can really say whether someone else can handle or not handle a physical task.
I can only say that I handhold and do just as in your photo my 600 f/4 GM 98% of the time I'm shooting.
I only use a tripod or monopod when I'm planting myself in the middle of a field for 5hrs straight to shoot short-eared owls and have no plans to move.
I often do - but not quite as much in the past. Between better VR, lighter lenses, and even faster frame rates, I can often hand-hold in situations where I would want a tripod in the past. I still prefer them if I can though. Sometimes it's not even about slow shutter speeds - sometimes I'm shooting an active area and will be setup for hours and I don't' want to hand-hold the entire the time
Yup well said !
I used to have a D500, D850 and D6 and I had 200-500 f/5.6, 500 pf f/5.6, 600 f/4. Now I have 2 Z9's. To me the Z9 is all 3 of my DSLR's in one.
Z800 f/6.3 on one and Z180-600 f/6.3 on the other. As I and others have said repeatedly f5.6 to f6.3 in the real world is no material difference. F/4 of the 600 f/4E was a real world difference over 150-600 f/6.3 but logistically a pain and no flexibility but I did really like that lens. But for this bird ID guy when Z9 and Z800 f/6.3 came along the D6 and 600 f/4 E went away. And now the Z180-600 gives me the flexible variable focal length lens I have always found useful (Tamron 150-600 G2, Sigma 150 and 60 - 600 sports).
My biggest low light need is indoors photographing people with no supplemental light allowed and I just got the new Z mount Tamron 35-150 f/2.-f/2.8 and it really takes advantage of the Z9 capabilities
I hand held a 600 f/4E all the time. A heavy weight forward lens has more stability than a whippy light lens say a 400 f4.5 one reason target rifles have bull barrels.
I found the length and overall size of the 600 f/4E to be as equal a losistics challenge as the weight. The Z800 PF = never missing the 600 f/4E even with that f/4 real world light advantage ... F/4 is far less of an advantage for me now with my Z9 than it was with the D850 or even the D6.