Nikon 600PF First Look Field Review!
- 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 agree. $4800 for a 600mm Prime lens...If this were f/5.6 nobody would be complaining on price....but then it would not be as small or as light.
3.25 pounds and 11" for a 600/6.3 works for me at that price. I will rearrange the bag to make this fit and that's a definite advantage over my 500/4E (which sits all alone it it's own bag).
Honestly, I really like native glass - I don't like using adapters, so for me I'd ultimately want to be 100% Z mount. However, I see your issue with lower light scenarios and it might be best to hang onto it - at least for now - and see how much it gets used with the rest of the kit. Also, I'd hesitate on the 100-400 sale. Although I don't use my 100-400 very much, there are times it saves the day. I don't think I'd want to give up access to that focal range.It is really nice to have a source of unbiased information on new products. I really appreciate your videos, Steve.
It is great as well to see opinions of forum members and their arguments concerning the stuff. Appreciated as well.
As I am using mostly 500mm, 600mm and atmosphere permitting 800mm, and as I am not a member of billionaire family, my optimization would go in the direction of :
That will amount to approx 4000 Euro/5000 $ in expenses here in CZ. (2/3 of new Z 600 PF price)
- sell Z 100-400 as it is too short
- keep Sigma Sport 500 F4 F mount for low light scenarios and smooth background
- buy Z 600 PF for extra focal length and features
- keep Z 800 PF for astronomy and excellent weather
What are your thoughts on keeping F mount Sigma and selling Z zoom.
I am posting this as I have not seen so far any posts on remedies for the F 6.3 problem. If you find it a diversion from the main topic, just ignore me.
jwr50
Member
Thanks very much for the review, Steve. I was hoping you would do this -- you offer some of the most balanced, informative reviews anywhere on the internet.
Nikon problem would, but I don't allow it. They want to pay my travel expenses and such, but I think that sends a bad message, so I pay my own way - both for the reviews and when I order the lenses.@Steve great review again ! You show and tell us exactly what we want and need to know, in a very clear and to the point way. That is a gift !
Celticursa
Member
Once you have your production 600 in hand, please compare with the 400mm f4.5+1.4 TC…for me and evidently quite a few others in this forum, that comparison is key to the purchase decision of the new 600.
eaj101
Well-known member
Thanks for another great job with a lot of really useful information, Steve.
For me, this lens removes any desire for the 180-600. I think the perfect Yellowstone/Denali wildlife kit is going to be two bodies, one with the 600PF and one with the 100-400. In my experience, it becomes pointless to own a long zoom if you spend all of your time at max focal length anyway. As long as you have some easy way at hand to cover the shorter focal lengths. The 800PF isn't on my interest list because a) small birds aren't my most common subject, b) if you need 800mm in Alaska you're too far away.
So I should end up with two kits: 1) general use: 24-120, 100-400 2) wildlife focused: 100-400, 600PF. I might rethink the 180-600 as a hiking lens (though the weight gives one pause). For the (few) times I might *really* need 800mm, I think the 600PF+TC would fill the bill.
Now all I have to do is swallow the price
Thanks again, @Steve.
p.s. Kudos for your integrity, Steve.
For me, this lens removes any desire for the 180-600. I think the perfect Yellowstone/Denali wildlife kit is going to be two bodies, one with the 600PF and one with the 100-400. In my experience, it becomes pointless to own a long zoom if you spend all of your time at max focal length anyway. As long as you have some easy way at hand to cover the shorter focal lengths. The 800PF isn't on my interest list because a) small birds aren't my most common subject, b) if you need 800mm in Alaska you're too far away.
So I should end up with two kits: 1) general use: 24-120, 100-400 2) wildlife focused: 100-400, 600PF. I might rethink the 180-600 as a hiking lens (though the weight gives one pause). For the (few) times I might *really* need 800mm, I think the 600PF+TC would fill the bill.
Now all I have to do is swallow the price
Thanks again, @Steve.
p.s. Kudos for your integrity, Steve.
I will for sure, lots of requests. In fact, one of the biggest reasons I didn't include the 400 4.5 is that I am not confident it's really a competitor to the 600PF once you attach the TC. That's the #1 question with that combo and I had no way to test it. Hopefully I'll be home when the lens shows up this time - for the 180-600 I was in the middle of a trip
Ad Astra
Well-known member
Ad Astra
Well-known member
Your comment about the 100-400 is why I’m still on the fence about keeping mine…because it is smaller and lighter than the 180-600 and depending on where one is going and what one is shooting 400 might be plenty.
Milos
Member
If they would make it 5.6, would it effect the weight?
Cameron T
Well-known member
Yes, as the lens would have to be much bigger (especially the front element). It'd also be much more expensive.
fcotterill
Well-known member
As Steve concluded in his review, the optical quality and AF speed of this 600 PF is close to the 600 f4S TC. This alone justifies its price, which scales between the 400 f4.5S and 800 f6.3S PF. So compared to the 3.25 kg 600 TC a 1.47kg 600 PF ranks as significant Bang/$.
A 600 f5.6 PF would get to a 840 f8 (with ZTC14) so more intuitively attractive but the 108mm window would have increased the price and also weight a fair amount.
IMHO Nikon will enjoy healthy sales of this 600 PF. It's the ideal single solution for peripatetic birders and safari goers... especially on regional flights, and/or rigorous hikes
Add a 24-120 f4S and 100-400 S on a Z8... perhaps a ZTC14. This is a Highly compact, light and versatile Commando Kit. (But I would include the 800 PF too!)
bcgforums.com
A 600 f5.6 PF would get to a 840 f8 (with ZTC14) so more intuitively attractive but the 108mm window would have increased the price and also weight a fair amount.
IMHO Nikon will enjoy healthy sales of this 600 PF. It's the ideal single solution for peripatetic birders and safari goers... especially on regional flights, and/or rigorous hikes
Add a 24-120 f4S and 100-400 S on a Z8... perhaps a ZTC14. This is a Highly compact, light and versatile Commando Kit. (But I would include the 800 PF too!)
For those who have been to Africa - camera/lens combo options
Finally taking my first trip to Africa in August on a family trip. We’ll be spending a few days each in Madikwe game reserve in S. Africa, another private reserve near Greater Kruger, and Victoria Falls. I‘m trying to figure out what lenses to acquire/bring for the trip, particularly since...
bcgforums.com
Last edited:
If you win the powerball, you should buy lens for everyone on this thread
Calson
Well-known member
I received my NPS notice for a priority order of the lens this morning. I thought about whether to add this lens or not. I have the 400mm f/4.5, the 800mm PF, and the two Z teleconverters at this time.
When I have owned a 600mm lens in the past I used them 90% of the time with the TC-14 teleconverter attached for 840mm focal length. I now get 800mm with the PF lens and have 560mm f/6.3 using the 400mm f/4.5 and the 1.4x TC. The 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x TC weighs 3.2 lb or about what the 600mm PF lens weighs.
The 600mm with the 1.4x TC would provide me with a 840mm f/9 lens which is not really a gain over the 800mm f/6.3 lens that provides me twice as much light to the camera sensor.
I can hand hold the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x TC attached easily for hours and the same is true with the 800mm PF lens. If I shot in locations where 600mm was the desired focal length it might have some appeal. I cannot see the value to me of this $4,800 lens over my other options.
When I have owned a 600mm lens in the past I used them 90% of the time with the TC-14 teleconverter attached for 840mm focal length. I now get 800mm with the PF lens and have 560mm f/6.3 using the 400mm f/4.5 and the 1.4x TC. The 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x TC weighs 3.2 lb or about what the 600mm PF lens weighs.
The 600mm with the 1.4x TC would provide me with a 840mm f/9 lens which is not really a gain over the 800mm f/6.3 lens that provides me twice as much light to the camera sensor.
I can hand hold the 400mm f/4.5 with the 1.4x TC attached easily for hours and the same is true with the 800mm PF lens. If I shot in locations where 600mm was the desired focal length it might have some appeal. I cannot see the value to me of this $4,800 lens over my other options.
No idea at all. I just saw the bare lens.
I'd skip the 600PF then. If most of your stuff is at 800mm, I see very little reason for it. I think your idea of the 800PF and 400 + TC as needed is ideal.
Very interesting new lens. This will be a fantastic addition for many people and I wish you all the best getting your orders in and filled.
HOWEVER, I will pass on this lens for my own reasons. I have the 100-400 w/ TC14 and 20 along with the 800mm PFf/6.3 and the f-mount 500 PF/f5.6 w/ TC14Eiii. This set works for me and I am looking at a second Z9 body or Z8 body so I am not having to switch lenses so often. My Z6 is now relegated to family snapshot status. The trade in value of the 500pf and my D850 will not finance both a new body and the new 600 PG lens.
I like the 100-400 over the 200-600 due to its close focusing distances which is also nice for gardens and associated insects. The combo with the TC14Z is great for most of my work and the 200-600 doesn't quite meet that need.
I find the 800 to be a good one for me with and without the TC14Z. I do have mobility limitations so zooming with my feet is often not an option and the Z9/800 PF combo on a monopod with gimbal is very manageable of boardwalks and other quality trails in wildlife areas and my own back yards.
Qualifier - If I do win the Powerball jackpot ($1.7B tonight) this lens and a Z9 and maybe a Z8 and a new car to haul it all will all added to the buy list ASAP along with many other things.
HOWEVER, I will pass on this lens for my own reasons. I have the 100-400 w/ TC14 and 20 along with the 800mm PFf/6.3 and the f-mount 500 PF/f5.6 w/ TC14Eiii. This set works for me and I am looking at a second Z9 body or Z8 body so I am not having to switch lenses so often. My Z6 is now relegated to family snapshot status. The trade in value of the 500pf and my D850 will not finance both a new body and the new 600 PG lens.
I like the 100-400 over the 200-600 due to its close focusing distances which is also nice for gardens and associated insects. The combo with the TC14Z is great for most of my work and the 200-600 doesn't quite meet that need.
I find the 800 to be a good one for me with and without the TC14Z. I do have mobility limitations so zooming with my feet is often not an option and the Z9/800 PF combo on a monopod with gimbal is very manageable of boardwalks and other quality trails in wildlife areas and my own back yards.
Qualifier - If I do win the Powerball jackpot ($1.7B tonight) this lens and a Z9 and maybe a Z8 and a new car to haul it all will all added to the buy list ASAP along with many other things.
Fenrir
Member
Great review! I'm happy that I'm finally covered in the Z lineup, because up to this point I wasn't fully convinced by any of the introduced lenses. 180-600 and 800 were too big/heavy, 400 was too short. 600 seems like a sweet spot to me
I'll have to save some serious money first though.At some point you mentioned that "PF lenses sometimes do interesting things to backgrounds". Is this something you could elaborate on? Do you have any examples?
Sometimes the bokeh looks a little...odd. It's tough to describe and it's something I don't usually see - although others have. Maybe someone has something they can post.Great review! I'm happy that I'm finally covered in the Z lineup, because up to this point I wasn't fully convinced by any of the introduced lenses. 180-600 and 800 were too big/heavy, 400 was too short. 600 seems like a sweet spot to me
At some point you mentioned that "PF lenses sometimes do interesting things to backgrounds". Is this something you could elaborate on? Do you have any examples?
David, I have ordered mine from Park Cameras who quoted me end of October. They’ve been reliable re delivery dates for me on new Nikon products. Recommend…but maybe you have your own favourite source
Thank you Steve for this review on this new lens! You always anticipate and address the questions that most of us have. Even with your information, with all the choices from Nikon it makes the decisions difficult. I’m receiving my order of the Z 180-600mm tomorrow. I love the Z800mm! I need to decide if I want to keep the 180-600mm. With all the people waiting I’m sure someone on this form would want it. I just remember how much happier I was withthe 500mm pf than with the 200-500mm zoom. I’m afraid I’ll feel the same about the Z 180-600mm vs the new 600mm PF.