Nikon 180-600 - Photo Share & Discussion Thread

[MatthewK]

Since we have numerous threads regarding ship dates and disappointments, figured I'd start one for discussing the 180-600 and sharing photos taken using it

I just received mine yesterday, but didn't have a camera body to use it on until my Z8 arrived back from Nikon today. So, went out this afternoon and was able to finally send some shots to my memory card. The lens is a bit heavier than my 100-400 was, it's solid feeling in hand and balances well right over the tripod foot. I was able to hand-hold it fairly easily, with the VR of the Z8 working well to stabilize things in the viewfinder. Going through the results, the lens is excellently sharp.

Fall birds are still here, namely Yellow-rumped Warblers, but we also have our recent winter birds arriving with the appearance of Dark-eyed Juncos. The Butter-butt is a full DX-mode capture, while the Junco is a 100% crop from a DX-capture to exhibit detail/sharpness. Both have been processed to taste in LR.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Cameron T]

I've been loving mine, and found it to be incredibly sharp, even with the 1.4x tc. I'm not going to claim these are the perfect shots for AF, if anyone wonders. Most of my shots in general are in really not ideal conditions early in the AM, or shooting into dark brush/trees.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[MatthewK]

Real life conditions, most of the time these small birds are under canopy, so seeing how the lens handles the not-so-optimal conditions tells us just as much as the perfectly-lit shots.

 

[MatthewK]

Since the lens is missing a Function button that I would normally set to "Set Lens Focus Distance", I've reassigned that function to the front Lens-Control buttons, and set the Recall Focus function to one of the front buttons on the Z8. Makes more sense to set the focus spot once using the buttons on the lens so you aren't needing to keep moving your hand out there to hit the recall, as even that movement can startle birds, so figure it's better to have it on the camera within finger's reach.

A couple more shots from the same outing. Shows how the lens handles messy backgrounds. Realize birds-on-a-stick aren't too tough of a benchmark to meet, but hey, it's what I got in my backyard to test the new lens with on short notice

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[SCoombs]

Since the lens is missing a Function button that I would normally set to "Set Lens Focus Distance", I've reassigned that function to the front Lens-Control buttons, and set the Recall Focus function to one of the front buttons on the Z8. Makes more sense to set the focus spot once using the buttons on the lens so you aren't needing to keep moving your hand out there to hit the recall, as even that movement can startle birds, so figure it's better to have it on the camera within finger's reach.

A couple more shots from the same outing. Shows how the lens handles messy backgrounds. Realize birds-on-a-stick aren't too tough of a benchmark to meet, but hey, it's what I got in my backyard to test the new lens with on short notice

View attachment 72626
View attachment 72627

These are now in the top 5 of sharpest photos I've seen from this lens.

 

[Cameron T]

These are now in the top 5 of sharpest photos I've seen from this lens.

I'm pretty sure at least one of mine is also up there. I just wish I could find some birds in better light, and shoot with lower ISO. Here's a semi-recent one I'm not sure I posted here, couple shots of an eastern bluebird in good light (though not the best position, or distance).

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Dinusaur]

And some high ISO images (7200 - 14000). I received mine on Friday of last week. It was a rainy day so I decided to head out to the deck in my backyard with a handful of peanuts. Lo and behold, a pair Blue Jay showed up almost immediately. I put the peanuts on the deck railing, about 20-21 feet away from where I was sitting. Here are the screen captures of three images at varying focal length and zoom (crop). Yes, the bird was quite close; however, at that ISO level they are still relatively clean and sharp.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Adriano]

I was not happy at the beginning... something was off concerning sharpness. Until the 180 600 I was using as long lens the 300 pf alone or with the 1.4 TC. IT WAS ME.I had to learn how to manage 600 mm and a bigger glass. After 2 weeks I love it

Not too heavy, satisfactory, flexible. 600 mm f 6.3 1/800 s 11400 ISO on Z8.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[MatthewK]

And some high ISO images (7200 - 14000). I received mine on Friday of last week. It was a rainy day so I decided to head out to the deck in my backyard with a handful of peanuts. Lo and behold, a pair Blue Jay showed up almost immediately. I put the peanuts on the deck railing, about 20-21 feet away from where I was sitting. Here are the screen captures of three images at varying focal length and zoom (crop). Yes, the bird was quite close; however, at that ISO level they are still relatively clean and sharp.

View attachment 72721View attachment 72722View attachment 72723

Nice! Peanuts.. will have to give that a try. Blue Jays are so skittish out in the wild, it's rare that I can get any shots of them.

The nice thing about the Nikon sensors the past 5-6 years (at least from the D850/D500 lines), is that even with shots at these high ISO and in not-so-great lighting situations, they still give you enough latitude to make something of them. May not always produce the perfect results we always hope for, but at least there's a chance to make something happen!

 

[MatthewK]

After the gorgeous, sunny Autumn light yesterday (in which my first shots this thread were shot in), weather turned dreary and overcast, so I used the opportunity to see how the new lens performs in that flat, uninspiring light.These are about ~25' from my back porch. Attached shot shows 100% crop.

So far, I'm not finding the resulting shots that difficult to process. Some are seeing that more sharpness is needed to coax out the detail... I'd say "yes" to that, when compared to my 800PF, which is sharp all day long, but there's a lot of slider bar in LR, and getting details from the 180-600 is not a problem.

un-edited (sharpening at 7 in LR):

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

edited (LR Denoise, masked sharpening and clarity, dehaze, and color correction:

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Kenny88]

I was not happy at the beginning... something was off concerning sharpness. Until the 180 600 I was using as long lens the 300 pf alone or with the 1.4 TC. IT WAS ME.I had to learn how to manage 600 mm and a bigger glass. After 2 weeks I love it

Not too heavy, satisfactory, flexible. 600 mm f 6.3 1/800 s 11400 ISO on Z8.

Curious what exactly in the 2 weeks timeframe did you learn and fix that resulted in changing your experience about the lens?

 

[Adriano]

Curious what exactly in the 2 weeks timeframe did you learn and fix that resulted in changing your experience about the lens?

The handling is completely different from the combo Z8 300 PF or 300 PF + 1.4 tc. Also being aware of looking for the good light helped a lot. Still my 300 pf is sharper and pops more, but I think this is to be expected...

 

[BarkingBeans Coffee]

Here are a couple using Steve's LR preset. Usually I link from the web but trying this to compare. The birds were done with Auto Capture and the wasp handheld

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Anjin San]

Pretty darned good…but mine isn’t here so I can’t offer any shots yet. That said…I’ve been watching the various threads and disappointments and excellent threads here…and even in the ones that say it isn’t as good…the side by side shots don’t seem better or worse on the screen for the most part…so the better or worse must be when looking in Lr at 1:1. While that may reveal differences overall in detail or aharpness or bokeh or whatever…that’s not the way we present images. They’re either printed or shown on screen…and I would wager that the mix is heavily skewed to the screen…and that means the images are downsampled and whatever differences exist at peeping levels gets downsampled away. My own tests with the 100-400, its TCs, the 400/4.5, and the 500PF before I sold it bear this out…so that the final output images at 1024 or 1280 pixels wide are no longer better or worse but just slightly different With slight changes in bokeh or whatever depending on lighting and PP. Given that…and that all (well, almost all) of my output is screen…and given my unwillingness to pay for (although I could if I wanted to) or carry the big/expensive lenses…I think I’m going to like the zoom whenever it arrives just fine. I haven’t decided to carry it, the 24-120 and maybe the 70-200 on my Africa trip with Steve next April or the 400/4.5 and TC and either the 180-600 or 100-400 and the 24-120…will test the lon* zoom when it arrives before deciding. He has some suggestions on the page about the trip along with what he will have depending on Sony or Nikon gear…and either of those combos will fit his suggestions.

I realize everybody has different tastes and opinions…but I’m not really getting the disdain for lack of a better word both this lens and the 600PF over not being 5.6 …and like several noted here…a lot of the differences are technique related rather than lens related. Lens variance is a thing as Steve said…but is there really that much of it in percentage of either variance or of output? Only Nikon knows that and they aren’t sayino…but basic line QC I’m guessing keeps those numbers low because every bad lens costs them.

 

[Dinusaur]

Now the AF performance and that too with Single Point -AF. After receiving my lens on Friday, Oct 20th I visited a local Toronto, Canada park on Saturday, Oct 21. It was a cloudy day; however encountered a friendly juvenile Red-tailed Hawk hunting for vole. I had my Shutter button programed for Single Point while the BB for 3D. When the bird suddenly took from near a brush I kept on shooting with Single-Point AF, forgot to turn the 3D on initially. I had 46 shots in that sequence; only two were out of focus as the bird came out of a brush after disappearing behind it for a brief moment. Here are some shots from that sequence, the first frame when the bird took off, a frame when the bird was behind the brush (still in focus), one of two out of focus frames as the bird came out of behind the brush and the next frame when the focusing was restored. All while hand-holding the lens.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Charles Loy]

Mine is making very clean/nice close in photos with the Z8 or Z9.
Here is an example of a half mile image. No edit, just full frame and crop. Photos whacked to 1200x862

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Cyprio42]

This is the first zoom I've owned and it's perfect for times like this. On the annual deer rut session I'd walk miles around the park and carrying 2 primes takes it toll. Plus swapping the lens in the field I'd often miss shots. This is a good priced lens to have in the collection.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Kenny88]

Out this morning testing the lens and seeing how it will resolve feathered details. Found a Blue Heron luckily that was approximately 50ft away.

RAW images saved as JPG - no post processing enhancements done or alterations. 600mm f6.3 1/640

 

[MatthewK]

This is the first zoom I've owned and it's perfect for times like this. On the annual deer rut session I'd walk miles around the park and carrying 2 primes takes it toll. Plus swapping the lens in the field I'd often miss shots. This is a good priced lens to have in the collection.



View attachment 72882

this shot is bonkers, just look at that light, and perfect capture of the calling deer.

 

[MatthewK]

Out this morning testing the lens and seeing how it will resolve feathered details. Found a Blue Heron luckily that was approximately 50ft away.

RAW images saved as JPG - no post processing enhancements done or alterations. 600mm f6.3 1/640

Looks good to me, a great base to start from.

 

[Cyprio42]

this shot is bonkers, just look at that light, and perfect capture of the calling deer.

Thanks MatthewK. To the left is his harem, about 15 strong. Approaching from the right is another dominant stag who also wants the harem. We had a good idea on what would happen so we slowly crawled in whilst it was still dark and laid on the grass. It was freezing, the grass was wet. They had a good roar at each other , both backed off and that was it until another day.

 

[BLev65]

I've seen a lot of discussion about whether this lens is sharp, worth the money, is capable, etc...
As is always the case, early reports often highlight the worst case experience because the lens may not be used in good light, or people have unrealistic expectations. As someone who has owns and shoots with the 400 f4.5 and 800PF, I am comfortable stating that I would not hesitate to use the 180-600 when flexibility or a simpler lens kit is required.

I shot this owl for the first time yesterday afternoon with my 800mm lens. The light was horrible and the bird was partially blocked by a branch (see 800PF thread). I decided to see if I could find it this morning. Much like yesterday, we had heavy overcast, drizzle, and 15 to 20 mph winds. I had to push my ISO to 3200 and couldn't use a tripod. The owl gave me about 4 minutes of its time before moving on... I am happy with the lens!

bruce

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[gdecamp]

I've seen a lot of discussion about whether this lens is sharp, worth the money, is capable, etc...
As is always the case, early reports often highlight the worst case experience because the lens may not be used in good light, or people have unrealistic expectations. As someone who has owns and shoots with the 400 f4.5 and 800PF, I am comfortable stating that I would not hesitate to use the 180-600 when flexibility or a simpler lens kit is required.

I shot this owl for the first time yesterday afternoon with my 800mm lens. The light was horrible and the bird was partially blocked by a branch (see 800PF thread). I decided to see if I could find it this morning. Much like yesterday, we had heavy overcast, drizzle, and 15 to 20 mph winds. I had to push my ISO to 3200 and couldn't use a tripod. The owl gave me about 4 minutes of its time before moving on... I am happy with the lens!

bruce

Sweet shot Bruce!!

 

[BLev65]

Sweet shot Bruce!!

Thanks George... I one-upped myself on yesterday's shot. This one is the mate... definitely a bit smaller and was soaked from a cold and rainy night.

 

[SCoombs]

I've seen a lot of discussion about whether this lens is sharp, worth the money, is capable, etc...
As is always the case, early reports often highlight the worst case experience because the lens may not be used in good light, or people have unrealistic expectations. As someone who has owns and shoots with the 400 f4.5 and 800PF, I am comfortable stating that I would not hesitate to use the 180-600 when flexibility or a simpler lens kit is required.

I shot this owl for the first time yesterday afternoon with my 800mm lens. The light was horrible and the bird was partially blocked by a branch (see 800PF thread). I decided to see if I could find it this morning. Much like yesterday, we had heavy overcast, drizzle, and 15 to 20 mph winds. I had to push my ISO to 3200 and couldn't use a tripod. The owl gave me about 4 minutes of its time before moving on... I am happy with the lens!

bruceView attachment 72904

But Bruce, unless this example is very heavily cropped or the smaller output size for the forum did more harm to the photo than is typical - in which case I retract what I'm about to say - my 200-500 would take a photo in these conditions that would completely blow this away. There's very little feather detail; with my old F mount lens there would be. The feathers on the head are all mooshed together like someone was doing an oil painting and smeared the canvas; with my old F mount lens they wouldn't be.

When I look at this photo I think of the 70-300 that came with my D5600, not a lens I'm going to spend almost $2,000 on and surely not one that is going to be mentioned in the same breath as the 800pf.

I very much want to be absolutely clear that I'm not criticizing you as the photographer. The photo itself looks great where everything you were in control of is concerned.

When I look at it to judge the lens, though, even given the conditions you mention I just don't see it, and here's the thing: you mention that you see people questioning the lens and think part of that is that early samples have portrayed the lens poorly, but to me a huge part of it - here, on DPreview, and especially on FredMiranda - is that when people have questioned how sharp the lens is, two or three people have posted a photo that is, IQ-wise and sharpness-wise, unimpressive and even outright bad (I wouldn't by any means say this owl shot has outright bad IQ!) and cite it as a photo that proves just how sharp it is. That's the big part of it, to me: not just that there are shots out there which aren't the sharpest, but that people keep posting obviously soft shots as examples to disprove suspicions that the lens is soft.

I'm just not sure what it is about this lens where the standards people seem to evaluate it based upon seem - at least from what people are saying about the examples I see posted - so drastically lower than the standards people seem to use to evaluate most other lenses, even less expensive ones.

Again to reiterate: this is the kind of shot that would get me to hire you as a photographer - but it's not the kind of shot that would get me to spend money on this lens!