Sure…it is common…but to be fair Steve doesn’t have one and there are a bunch of comparisons of the 500PF and the 200-500 around including both AF speed, features, and IQ…and he was up front about not including the latter. Your point about all the other comparisons being skipped as well based on other comparisons is valid…but he can only do what he can do. And…despite the 200-500 being pretty good optically…it’s limitations and issues are pretty well documented…but if he doesn’t have one or one he could have easily borrowed I’m not sure not including it is a big problem. Everyone knows by now that the Z lenses are pretty much across the board better and lighter than their F counterparts and why…larger throat, closer flange distance, and better optical design software than was available 10 years back when it was designed and the Z lenses maybe 4 years back when design started. But as he said…it came down to what he had and I think he said in the video he would have included it if he had one…and I, like probably more than half of Z body owners although I’ve not seen any statistics on it…have moved entirely to Z lenses because they’re just better. I know budget is part of the issue on keeping older glass as well as shapers does the output go and shooting style…but the continuing short supply of Z lenses tells me people are buying them.
Nikon 180-600 Sharpness And AF Speed Tests!
- Thread starter Steve
- 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).
I didn’t do anything but an eyeball test for screen sized output…and it’s an a to b and b to c comparison…but I saw little to no difference between the 500PF and the 100-400 and the 400 is a noticeable but not very noticeable better than the zoom. A little more difference in both cases at 1:1…but while pixel peeping is nice at screen output sizes it’s all downsampled anyway and that pretty much obscures any sharpness differences. Slight differences in bokeh and backgrounds of course…but to my eye in both cases it was “different” rather than “better/worse”. I can’t remember whether I got rid of the 500 before the 400 arrived or the other way around…but my LR test folder doesn’t have any head to head shots so I’m guessing it was before.
It works fine for me with the 1.4 and while it’s acceptable with the 2.0 its rare that I use the 2.0 over just cropping or doing a more environmental shot…but my output goes almost exclusively to the screen and peeping isn’t something I obsess over. I mostly use the 400 bare because it’s light but have the TC in my pocket just in case.
Virtually identical without a TC.
400 with a TC vs the naked 500PF, it's close but the 500PF edges it out.
500PF with a 1.4 (700mm) and 400 with a 2X (800mm), the 500 PF wins by sort of a landslide.
LOL, that's what I used for the capture screen!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
I've heard mixed things too. In my experience, most zooms just don't play all that well with TCs. I'm honestly surprised how well the 180-600 does with the 1.4,
It's actually missing the focus ring
By default, with that lens attached, the control ring acts as focus, but you can use it for exp comp too. This is one of my pet peeves with Nikon TBH (I write about it in my guide, in fact). The problem is, if you have more than one lens, there's a good chance you have different controls on each. It throws ergonomic consistency out the window. I'd rather Nikon took Sony's approach and keep the lens controls more or less consistent and simple and put an extra dial or two on the camera. There's room right next to the top LCD for one, in fact
Cameron T
Well-known member
I do wish nikon had a second ring on this lens, but I'm not sure what I'd personally use the second one for either (probably exposure comp, if anything).
LOL I never even paid attention to what Nikon called it I just new what it did out oft the box and it was the only ring on the lens that did itIt's actually missing the focus ring
By default, with that lens attached, the control ring acts as focus, but you can use it for exp comp too. This is one of my pet peeves with Nikon TBH (I write about it in my guide, in fact). The problem is, if you have more than one lens, there's a good chance you have different controls on each. It throws ergonomic consistency out the window. I'd rather Nikon took Sony's approach and keep the lens controls more or less consistent and simple and put an extra dial or two on the camera. There's room right next to the top LCD for one, in fact
Yes I have read the in your guide and agree it is frustrating and puzzling. Thought about what you had written yesterday. I am the photographer for our congregation and was using Z24-120 at our last outdoor picnic of the year after service. Manual focus and control rings 24-120 but not on the 180-600 where I will make changes to EV more often and the ergonomics of my hand holding style cry out for another lens ring
Oh well it is a great bang for the buck lens.
arbitrage
Well-known member
For those wanting 200-500 comparison, Steve does the IQ comparison between 500PF and 200-500 starting at the 25min mark in this video. Extrapolate from there to get some idea.
DrBob
Member
Quick sharpness comparison. I was out photographing Hurricane Lee and the Minot Light. The Minot Light is about 2 miles off the South Shore of Massachusetts. I grabbed my Z9, my 600mm f/4 with FIIZ and 2.0xTC (shot at 1200mm), and the Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 and 1.4xTC (shot at 840mm, ). I cropped the images and scaled to approximately the same size. I have to admit, I was very impressed with the sharpness of the 180-600.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
The 600 is sharper, but man, the zoom did pretty well!
I could sure live with that zoom shot!
All of the comparisons I’ve seen with more expensive primes in its focal range show it to perform quite well. So much so that I’m surprised (very happily!) that Nikon hasn’t priced the 180-600 lens higher.
eaj101
Well-known member
As another data point, I offer Thom Hogan's review of Nikon Z long lenses (sans the 180-600, of course). Illuminating, though one has to be careful not to over think Thom's use of 'Best', 'Acceptable', and 'Worst'. He's comparing the lenses against each other, and one listed as 'Worst' may be more than usable to many of us.
Best Telephoto Options in the Z Mount | Thom Hogan
What's the best telephoto option for a Z camera at 200-800mm?
www.zsystemuser.com
BlueGil21
Member
I had both and there’s no difference in sharpness that would be realized in the field. I decided to keep the 500PF.
Good to know how well this lens performs specially with its low price.
Nikon should pay you a commission on every copie they sell! So many people were waiting for your review to buy this lens.
Nope - the second they start paying me, everyone stops trusting me
eaj101
Well-known member
Don't know how much this affects decisions, but the 180-600 is 4lbs 11oz, the 100-400 is 3lbs 2 oz, the 400 f4.5 is 2lbs 12oz. For reference the 500 PF is 3.12 lbs, almost identical to the 100-400.
I loved how you said not to watch everything as it was a long presentation and to only watch the ones you needed to.
I kept thinking I would do that, but you just made it too much fun to watch and pretty soon, it was done.
I am very glad my lens is on order, wish I had ordered it sooner...
I kept thinking I would do that, but you just made it too much fun to watch and pretty soon, it was done.
I am very glad my lens is on order, wish I had ordered it sooner...
By the way, hope you're ready for all of the wrath that's going to be heaped on you for saying that focus speed isn't as important in the field as people make it out to be
LOL, as a bona fida geezer, I will not be one to complain about the extra time to focus. I only work at two speeds, and if my top speed of slow isn't good enough, you will really hate my other speed...
I like my 180-600 after using it birding one time but it will play second fiddle to my Z800.
Steve,Nope - the second they start paying me, everyone stops trusting me
This one of the things I like and respect about you and your opinion. You call it like you see it in way that is easy to understand without bias and remain respectful to the different manufactures. Thanks for taking the time to do this test.
Yes, across the board.