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).
Thank you Steve! Do you think the 70-200 f2.8 with 1.4 tc is as sharp as the 180-600 at something close to 300 mm ? In certain situation I feel that my 600 mm tc is too long for close subject and I need something between 300 and 500mm. And How about the bokeh? Does it compare to the 400 mm 4.5 at 400 mm? Maybe it is good idea to have both the 400 f4.5 and the 200- 600. The last one can be used mainly for hiking. Difficult to decide.
I agree, but my habit in the past has often been to couple a long prime with a 'mid-range' zoom (70-200 being 'short' in this scenario). For a long time it was the 80-400 and a 500 F4D, or the 200-400 if I knew I didn't usually need the reach. The 500PF replaced the 500F4 (I still have reservations about that). I find that when I need the reach I will stay there, and if you're always at the maximum reach of a zoom a prime has a lot of advantages (I don't hear Sony people replacing their 600s with 200-600s. More the other way around). This is the outfit I've taken anywhere I can carry/fly with it (not everywhere).
I only had one 200-500 but it went back to Nikon under warranty twice and then a Nikon recall and that finally made it a quite capable lens and it got fixed in time for my only trip to Africa and it did great. For wildlife primarily birds I eventually replaced it with a Tamron 150-600 G2 and Sigma 60-600 sport and finally last f mount set up a unique trio of Tamron 100-400, Nikon 500 PF and Nikon 600 f/4E. Now Z9 with Z800 and Z100-400 and Z180-600 ordered.
Ricci did precede his review by talking about the horrible shooting conditions, like the morning fog. I suspect that’s what the problem is. Every other review has shown nice crisp images.
It’s not the first time that a lens as announced had a different focal range than was indicated on the roadmap. During development, specs can change. I wonder if this is a derivative of a Tamron optical design or if it’s Nikon developed? Regardless, I preordered one.
The video reviewers I’ve watched say that their time with the two new lenses was very limited—just an hour or two. He wasn’t quite as clear but Ricci may not have had much shooting time, either.
Yes, I’m certain there will be four or five options in due time.
i thought he claimed to have it for a while. there seems to be a difference tho. some reviewers had it for days, some for hours
From my quick review of Ricci’s video last night, I thought he said the switchover to f/6.3 is 400mm. I could be wrong though.
Hadn’t considered that. You’re correct.
Steve clarified that the 180-600 is Nikon designed, not a Tamron derivative.It’s not the first time that a lens as announced had a different focal range than was indicated on the roadmap. During development, specs can change. I wonder if this is a derivative of a Tamron optical design or if it’s Nikon developed? Regardless, I preordered one.
yes. but some of the reviewers have had it for days, some hours. agree, Ricci has had it longer much longer than everyone else due to being a Nikon employee
I recall Ricci saying he’d had a pre-production Z8 since early March.
I think he was only shooting the 180-600 in the fog. All his comparison shots with the ColorChecker were done at home in good conditions. I don't think he showed any 200-500 in the field.
I honesty don't know. I don't use the 70-200 that much and very seldom with the TC. It's a good one to add to the test list
