This is a timely thread as I flying to Florida today. 100-400 and 600 pf..... don't yet own the 180-600. And Steve's update to the Z8/Z9 book just hit! Downloaded to my iPad.
Plane reading.
Plane reading.
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 go to your proposed locations frequently. I have a 500pf which is the lens I use exclusively. I sm most interested in BIF and a light lens is key. There are relatively stationary birds where you can use a tripod. The birds are relatively close to the boardwalk . A 1.4 is such a small item it doesn’t take up space. I would take the 100-400Thanks for your thoughts on this. I'm still going back and forth, but now leaning towards the 100-400 for close/unpredictable birds and the 400/2.5+TCs for far away subjects. The 180-600 is nice, but just seems a bit too large for fast moving birds (at least for me). I actually purchased it with large (slow) far away wildlife in mind. I've been doing some backyard bird low light comparisons in preparation for the trip and the f/4.5 makes a bit difference.
You're just like me then…ordered the 180-600 yesterday and have been using the 100-400 and 600PF on my 2 bodies.This is a timely thread as I flying to Florida today. 100-400 and 600 pf..... don't yet own the 180-600. And Steve's update to the Z8/Z9 book just hit! Downloaded to my iPad.
Plane reading.
I live in Florida and have a 800mm pf and 600mm pf. I try to come up with excuses to use the 600mm pf but keep wishing I had the 800pf when I use the 600mm. I would say the longer the better especially when you are shooting shore birds. The exception would be if you are somewhere like the St. Augustine Alligator farm or Wackodahatchee where there is a lot of close up shooting possibilities. At locations like that a 180-600mm or 100-400mm would work well.I’m trying to decide which lenses to bring on a trip to Florida in April. Here are the Nikon Z lenses that I own:
If I decide to fly, I will need to limit choices. My carry on bag can fit only two of these lenses (especially if one is the 180-600). My initial thought is to bring the 180-600 for flexibility (and max reach without TCs) along with the 70-200 for low light situations (I’ll also bring the TC14 just in case). Before getting the 180-600, my choices would have been the 400/2.5 + the TCs for max reach and the 100-400 for flexibility.
- 180-600
- 400/2.5
- 100-400
- 70-200
- TC1.4x and TC2.0x
The guide for the trip said we’ll mostly be shooting from boardwalks (Green Cay Wetlands, Wakodahatchee Wetlands and Loxahatchee Wildlife Refuge). He recommended a 100-400 + TC14 as the birds can get quite close at times. He also said that a tripod would not be practical due space constraints on the boardwalk. I have a monopod with the Wimberly head (recommended by Steve) for the 180-600.
My camera body is a Z8 (with a Zf or maybe the Zfc as a second body). I’m not a pro and am happy with all of the lenses listed here, just trying to decide on the best combo. Any thoughts are appreciated.
Thanks,
Tom
So what you’re saying is that when I go to Ft. DeSoto in April, sounds like my “kitchen sink” kit (MindShift Backlight 36L, Z8, 186, 800PF) is the way to go I’d normally bring my Fuji X-T5 and lenses, but instead should hopefully have the X100VI so that I can lighten the load somewhatI live in Florida and have a 800mm pf and 600mm pf. I try to come up with excuses to use the 600mm pf but keep wishing I had the 800pf when I use the 600mm. I would say the longer the better especially when you are shooting shore birds. The exception would be if you are somewhere like the St. Augustine Alligator farm or Wackodahatchee where there is a lot of close up shooting possibilities. At locations like that a 180-600mm or 100-400mm would work well.