Nikon 180-600 Sharpness And AF Speed Tests!

[Steve]

I have to be honest that I can rarely see a difference when these types of tests are done. Not sure if it's just my eyes or what You Tube does to the videos, or the resolution that I watch You Tube at so I have to trust your eyes and expertise on that front. I have the 100-400 and got my 180-600 last week. I've been impressed with both. I'm more of a landscape and sports shooter than most that are here. They both resolve the high MP of the Z9 extremely well in my mind and the short throw for the 180-600 is such a huge upgrade over the 200-500. Nice to have that extra 120mm in the range as well. Looking forward to taking the 180-600 out with 1.4 TC to capture some birds before they all fly south for the winter. Thank you for the review. You are one of the few on YT you can trust these days.

Yeah, YT makes it tough. The problem is, there are multiple "passes" when it comes to these kinds of videos. First, I capture it with screen flow and output it. Then I import it to Premier and output it for YT. Than YT may optimize it (I export in YT format from Premier, but who know what goes on behind closed doors at YT). Then, YT sends it to you and optimizes (compresses) the stream you watch.

That's why I narrate

I did do this one in 4K though, so hopefully that helped a little

 

[ajrmd]

Yeah, YT makes it tough. The problem is, there are multiple "passes" when it comes to these kinds of videos. First, I capture it with screen flow and output it. Then I import it to Premier and output it for YT. Than YT may optimize it (I export in YT format from Premier, but who know what goes on behind closed doors at YT). Then, YT sends it to you and optimizes (compresses) the stream you watch.

That's why I narrate

I did do this one in 4K though, so hopefully that helped a little

Agreed. Video compression can be challenging when trying to provide side-by-side comparisons and while I could discern the differences when you narrated, perhaps others due to display challenges could not. It might be useful (though it's a lot more work) to provide a couple high resolution .jpg images for those who need them.

 

[SCoombs]

I wonder if there's more going on though. The 200-500 should easily be able to keep up with running kids. I wonder if it's more about the accuracy of the focus motors in that lens than the speed itself. When the camera focuses, it sends a signal to the motor to focus a certain distance, and then continues to do so when shooting AF-C. However, if the motor in the lens doesn't go the exact amount the camera asked for, it can result in AF inconsistency. My guess (and that's all it is) is that the 180-600 with it's newer design and tech is probably less subject to those kinds of variations (although, in my experience, no lens is totally immune).

I have long wondered if there were something akin to sample variation that was impacting the AF buy haven't been ablr to think of an explanation for that which would make sense.

I have long felt like there's occasionally a little inconsistency with focus acquisition even when shooting still subjects, and Reikan's FoCal has several times complained the lens AF was erratic when trying to do calibrations on my D500 - but then you look and it's definition of "erratic" was something like 97% consistency, so I don't know what to make of that.

The thing is that it does make very sharp images at times, so the AF does do its job, just seemingly with some irregularity.

Your comments about testing methodology are also interesting. If the change resulted in a ~50% increase for the 500pf time, I suppose that could mean the 180-600 is about 33% faster than the 200-500.

 

[GregWCIL]

Steve, just watched your video and left a comment on YT. Thank you for your dedication.
I’m looking forward to hearing your feelings after taking it to the field. But your initial tests convinced me to order it. Looks like any minor shortcomings will be made up by the extra reach and flexibility of the zoom.
Makes you wonder what Nikon has up their sleave for the next few years. Hard to top the last two.

 

[Steve]

Steve, just watched your video and left a comment on YT. Thank you for your dedication.
I’m looking forward to hearing your feelings after taking it to the field. But your initial tests convinced me to order it. Looks like any minor shortcomings will be made up by the extra reach and flexibility of the zoom.
Makes you wonder what Nikon has up their sleave for the next few years. Hard to top the last two.

Nikon really has been hitting it out of the park. Although I don't think they've come right out and said it, it almost seems to me like they aren't as worried about sports shooters as they've bene in the past and the are setting their sites squarely at wildlife and bird shooters. I think if they were still prioritizing sports, we'd have seen things like a Z series 300 2.8 and 180-400 - and that hasn't happened yet. Instead, we have a fantastic selection of lenses seemingly made with wildlife in mind.

 

[GregWCIL]

Nikon really has been hitting it out of the park. Although I don't think they've come right out and said it, it almost seems to me like they aren't as worried about sports shooters as they've bene in the past and the are setting their sites squarely at wildlife and bird shooters. I think if they were still prioritizing sports, we'd have seen things like a Z series 300 2.8 and 180-400 - and that hasn't happened yet. Instead, we have a fantastic selection of lenses seemingly made with wildlife in mind.

Maybe their demographics studies recognized all of us retiring baby boomers. Or as my wife says: Us old codgers.

 

[RichF]

great video. Too bad you did not test against the 180-400 TC (F mount). I know you sold your copy but this, to my mind, is the gold standard zoom in this range.

Wonder what Nikon will do to replace the 180-400 TC?

 

[Len Shepherd]

As if I had any knowledge of steve's personal lens lineup before I made the suggestion.

I recall Steve saying in the video he no longer owned the 200-500

Can you at least admit that the 200-500 is the most comparable lens in the Nikon lineup to the 180-600?

I suggest the 100-400 with 1.4 TC.

The consensus on the 200-500 seems to be it is quite big, not easy to handle, relatively slow to AF though optically quite good.

 

[Steve]

great video. Too bad you did not test against the 180-400 TC (F mount). I know you sold your copy but this, to my mind, is the gold standard zoom in this range.

Wonder what Nikon will do to replace the 180-400 TC?

If I still had it, it would have been in the test for sure

I just can't afford to keep lenses I'm not using.

 

[Wes Peterson]

I recall Steve saying in the video he no longer owned the 200-500

I suggest the 100-400 with 1.4 TC.

The consensus on the 200-500 seems to be it is quite big, not easy to handle, relatively slow to AF though optically quite good.

I didnt hear him say it in the video. Timestamp?

An S line lens with a teleconverter is for sure not a closer comparison than the 200-500. The 180-600 is in fact the Z mount replacement for the 200-500

I get that steve couldnt do the test because he didnt have access to the lens. Its cool. But to posit the 100-400 with a TC is a closer comparison is delusional.

 

[John Navitsky]

I think if they were still prioritizing sports, we'd have seen things like a Z series 300 2.8 and 180-400 - and that hasn't happened yet.

i think it’s also a factor about which lenses are most in need of a refresh. the 120-300 2.8e is still super competitive

 

[Nimi]

Nikon really has been hitting it out of the park. Although I don't think they've come right out and said it, it almost seems to me like they aren't as worried about sports shooters as they've bene in the past and the are setting their sites squarely at wildlife and bird shooters. I think if they were still prioritizing sports, we'd have seen things like a Z series 300 2.8 and 180-400 - and that hasn't happened yet. Instead, we have a fantastic selection of lenses seemingly made with wildlife in mind.

A sidenote: sport photography, dominated by Canon, is actually starting to adopt the Red cameras (RF mount) and capture files similar in resolution from 4k/120p video footage. That's a push Red has made for the last 3 years and I'm sure Nikon is seeing the writing on the wall. Wildlife too.

 

[Anjin San]

Great video Steve. I was not considering the 180-600mm as I already have the 500mm f5.6 pf and the 100-400mm S for my Z9. I need to rethink things and I may decide to sell the 100-400mm and get the 180-600mm. I will keep the 500mm f5.6 pf as I still have a D850 and D500 that I use.

I’m actually thinking the same thing bout my 100-400…based on Steve’s observations it might be redundant once my 180-600 arrives. I would have kept the 500PF if I had any F bodies left but I don’t and despite it being really good…the Z glass is as a group just better and lighter.

 

[Anjin San]

It depends on what you need - the 100-400 is sharper than 180-600 at 200mm (and also goes down to 100mm with that same sharpness). So, if you need shorter focal lengths, it's worth having it.

I agree on keeping the 400 4.5 - I'm keeping mine. It's noticeably lighter and handy for when I want to keep the weight down when hiking.

Thanks…but my idea was that with the new lens putting the 70-200 Z on the other body gives good length coverage for any wildlife situations and putting the 14-30 in the bag as the third lens covers short needs. Most of the time…wildlife shooters are going to be more towards Lon than 200…and I’m gonna mostly have the second bod6 anyway and we know the 70-200 is excellent as well…and the prime for when
ight is more important than reach.

 

[Anjin San]

LOL, I'm bracing myself - so far, no flames, but I'm ready!

Ehhh…I’ve never really found AF speed to be limiting at all, especially if you use the limiter switch and pre focus at about the right range to help eliminate hunting. Your observations that it’s not a big deal parallel my admittedly amateur non scientific evaluation…but then I’m not interested in the fast expensive primes as they don’t meet the bang for the buck criteria and how much flexibility do I lose with the non zoom criteria for my needs.

 

[sdloeffler]

Great test video. I was really surprised at the autofocus speed, or slowness, of the 100-400 compared to others. While I haven't done any stringent testing, my 100-400 seems to be pretty quick in focusing. Actually, I really like my 100-400 along with my 500pf and 600 TC. That said, I may purchase this 180-600. Thanks, Steve, for the great insights.

 

[Cameron T]

Great test video. I was really surprised at the autofocus speed, or slowness, of the 100-400 compared to others. While I haven't done any stringent testing, my 100-400 seems to be pretty quick in focusing. Actually, I really like my 100-400 along with my 500pf and 600 TC. That said, I may purchase this 180-600. Thanks, Steve, for the great insights.

well, most of the time you're not going to go from 0 to infinity (or vice versa). So while the info is relevant on some level, it doesn't mean that the lens can't keep up.

 

[Anjin San]

As if I had any knowledge of steve's personal lens lineup before I made the suggestion.

Can you at least admit that the 200-500 is the most comparable lens in the Nikon lineup to the 180-600?

It is the closest comparison…but it’s clear that Z is the future amd he doesn’t own a 200-500 any longer…and my guess is that few Z body buyers will really want to bring the 200-500 anyway…the 500PF comes along based on cost and itks just really good…but given the advantages the Z mount provides it’s hard to see many F lenses other than some of the exotics holding up…unless budget becomes the biggest issue.

 

[Anjin San]

Yeah, YT makes it tough. The problem is, there are multiple "passes" when it comes to these kinds of videos. First, I capture it with screen flow and output it. Then I import it to Premier and output it for YT. Than YT may optimize it (I export in YT format from Premier, but who know what goes on behind closed doors at YT). Then, YT sends it to you and optimizes (compresses) the stream you watch.

That's why I narrate

I did do this one in 4K though, so hopefully that helped a little

To be honest…watching the video on my iPad I had a hard time really seeing the differences in the images you were comparing about half the time…might have been better on the Apple Studio monitor but that would have required moving my lazy ass to the office instead of the recliner…and it’s YT anyway so probably wouldn’t be much different anyway. Your looking at the real images in LR with commentary is the key for videos like this, along with somebody whose words and writings we’ve already learned to trust.

 

[Wes Peterson]

It is the closest comparison…but it’s clear that Z is the future amd he doesn’t own a 200-500 any longer…and my guess is that few Z body buyers will really want to bring the 200-500 anyway…the 500PF comes along based on cost and itks just really good…but given the advantages the Z mount provides it’s hard to see many F lenses other than some of the exotics holding up…unless budget becomes the biggest issue.

Its not about comparing to see which one you want. Its about comparing the new lens to a known quantity..... the 200-500 is EXTREMELY popular in that price range and provides a good baseline for understanding the 180-600s capabilities.

 

[sdloeffler]

@Steve have you done an official sharpness test between the 400mm 4.5 with TC vs the 500pf by any chance, or do you have an opinion on the comparison IQ wise?

 

[Ken Miracle]

Yeah, YT makes it tough. The problem is, there are multiple "passes" when it comes to these kinds of videos. First, I capture it with screen flow and output it. Then I import it to Premier and output it for YT. Than YT may optimize it (I export in YT format from Premier, but who know what goes on behind closed doors at YT). Then, YT sends it to you and optimizes (compresses) the stream you watch.

That's why I narrate

I did do this one in 4K though, so hopefully that helped a little

I enjoyed this video and yes I could see the differences you were describing. Watched it on a 27" apple studio display (calibrated with spyder x elite) and attached to Apple Mac Studio M1 max this combination lets me see most of my photo boo boos also

 

[thedesertratz]

In this video, we'll do some tests to discover how sharp the Nikon 180-600 is - pitting it against six popular contenders. We'll compare the Nikon 180-600mm against the Nikon 100-400mm, Nikon 400mm F/4.5, Nikon 800PF, Nikon 500PF, Nikon 600mm TC And Sony 200-600!

Will it impress? Will it embarrass itself on the test chart? The only way to find out is to watch the video!

In addition, we'll also compare AF speeds between those lenses and see which is the fastest, which is the slowest, and where the 180-600 fits in.

Check it out:

This is a great comparison review Steve, thank you for sharing all the data. The one thing that really surprised me was just how badly the 400 4.5 does when paired with TCs compared to all the other lenses. I have one, have used it with both the 1.4 and 2x and results have been mixed. I thought maybe it was me or maybe my copy but the native focal range is very sharp so this seems to confirm this lens just doesnt perform very well with the TCs.

 

[Ken Miracle]

It depends on what you need - the 100-400 is sharper than 180-600 at 200mm (and also goes down to 100mm with that same sharpness). So, if you need shorter focal lengths, it's worth having it.

I agree on keeping the 400 4.5 - I'm keeping mine. It's noticeably lighter and handy for when I want to keep the weight down when hiking.

My wife still has not let me use "our" 400 f/4.5 ... it pretty much lives on her Z7II .... she is not a BIF person and loves the light weight combo.

My most common, yet seldom, use for the Z100-400 is in the 100 to 200 mm range and used for portraits and quasi macro. My Z180-600 will not replace that part of the Z100-400 but with close in small birds including zippy swallows etc. and where I want that variable focal length the Z180-600 with that extra 200mm of focal length will be my choice.

Biggest thing I miss with the Z180-600 is not having a control ring I can program for exposure compensation (EV) change. I want the ring that I have for manual focus assist when I need the speed in tough focus situations (happens less oftern now with Z9 at firm ware 4.1) and to get on a bird deep in the bushes.

For all around bird ID photography out here in Southern Idaho where the distance to my subjects, of all sizes from Calliope Hummingbirds to Golden Eagles, is usually farther rather than closer. I am also normally on foot birding in rough terrain and in quickly changing habitat and lighting the Z800 will still live on one of my Z9's.

 

[Clark]

Thank you Steve. I got my Z180-600 recently however I haven't had a chance to use it outdoor. Your comparison video helps me know this lens better.