Nikon 600PF - Share Photos & Discuss!!!

[MatthewK]

The best way for anyone to evaluate for themselves, is for me to send NEF files, and let each person view in their own way, on their own system. It's near impossible to share exact results online after output jpeg compression, upload and website compression, etc. I guess files viewed in this way can be compared in a vacuum against one another since they each underwent the same process, but they aren't good for evaluating ultimate sharpness/clarity/acuity since a lot of that is lost.

I won't ever reach the level of testing acumen that Steve does; I'm more of a Brad Hill-esque tester, evaluating my shots from in the field under whatever conditions I find myself in, and over a long term get an idea of what constitutes a lenses performance. It isn't too often I do side-by-sides, there's just too many variables I forget to account for

So for the shots I'll upload later, do I reduced LR sharpening to 0, or just go with default value?

 

[MotoPixel]

Now with some light...I'm very satisfied with the performance of this lens with TC1.4 and adequate light. The files uploaded to here are downsized to 1920 on the long side from the full frame images...edited to taste.

Full resolution, uncropped images are here...

600pf + TC1.4 + DX Mode

Explore this photo album by Tom Stites on Flickr!

flic.kr

FX mode original image

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

DX mode original image

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

DX mode original image

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

 

[MatthewK]

Ok, just did some more test shots, but I don't think I'm shooting a good enough target to ascertain anything definitive. I will do another set of shots later, but am only going to test the 600PF 1.4TC vs. 800PF. This testing is a ton of work!

From what I am seeing though, my 800PF (on the left) is slightly sharper and clearer, which I would expect. Not by much though, the 600 + 1.4TC has remarkable IQ to be able to almost match a bare prime!
Screenshot 2024-02-14 at 1.43.18 PM by M K, on Flickr

 

[Marcepan]

@MatthewK

Thanks for Your work!
I think Yours conclusions are very likely.

Two lenses of the same class and the same f-stop.
One shorter, the other longer. A shorter + TC can never be better in quality than a longer one.
That would be illogical.
Additionally, diffraction at f9 vs f6.3 also does an additional bad job.

Steve conclusions are identical.

 

[Asafser]

Thank you very very much for your effort Matt !

 

[MatthewK]

Thank you, it was enlightening performing these tests; the very process of testing, and then finding out I could test better, and then re-doing them under different conditions with more exacting standards, demonstrates that you have to have a perfect setup in order to properly see accurate results. What that means is... regular photographers shooting under non-exact conditions will never be able to see the differences between these lenses.

 

[nmerc_photos]

I'm nowhere near as good of a photographer as Matt, nor have I had the time to do extensive testing yet - but this lens is clearly a winner.

Probably the most fun Nikon lens I've ever shot with. I'll admit I didn't believe the hype, even as I was purchasing it. But I get it now. Having 600mm at only 1.33 stops slower than the $15K big prime, while weighing similar to a 70-200 - is remarkable.

The IQ is definitely on par with the 400TC/600TC/800 PF. If you have enough light to use it, it's great.

Michigan weather is awfully grey this time of year and my subjects are lame, so I'm excited to take it down to SC next week.

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]

I'm nowhere near as good of a photographer as Matt, nor have I had the time to do extensive testing yet - but this lens is clearly a winner.

Probably the most fun Nikon lens I've ever shot with. I'll admit I didn't believe the hype, even as I was purchasing it. But I get it now. Having 600mm at only 1.33 stops slower than the $15K big prime, while weighing similar to a 70-200 - is remarkable.

The IQ is definitely on par with the 400TC/600TC/800 PF. If you have enough light to use it, it's great.

Michigan weather is awfully grey this time of year and my subjects are lame, so I'm excited to take it down to SC next week.View attachment 81690View attachment 81691View attachment 81692

Glad to see you putting the “500PF v2.0” to good use, Nick! Looking forward to some thermally-sourced owl shots with it at some point

 

[MatthewK]

Everyone is probably sick of seeing Nuthatches Trust me, I'm just as sick of not having anything else to photograph! At least they are plentiful when I need to test my gear!

The 600PF + 1.4TC combo is legit, no hesitation using it when I don't want to bring the 800PF. f/9 is probably going to be an issue once foliage returns and I'm shooting in deep shade, and that's where the 800PF will provide a 1-stop advantage. Ideally though, I'll get close enough to use the bare 600PF and not need a TC.

Both of these are uncropped, and at 100% are wonderfully razor 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.

 

[MatthewK]

Crops from above:

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.

 

[MotoPixel]

Whatever you changed, the images are zooming now and look much better. Totally in sync with your assessment of this lens and the use of the TC...as Steve P said, game changer...especially with the game changing capabilities of new NR capabilities that allow us to get useable images at higher ISO's than ever imaginable a couple years ago.

 

[Viathelens]

I love the 600PF, great lens, also loved the 500PF. This shot of an eagle in flight is from Yellowstone NP, January 2024. Her, or his, mate was in the other tree and she/he was heading over. Someone with me thought it was the female.

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

 

[Patty15]

Beautiful Patty! Well done

Thanks, Ralph!

 

[Patty15]

Great set of shots Patty...I see that you also enjoy the luxury of an area to shoot where you can have a gap from where your subjects are to the background. In the seasons other than Winter, I have a background that ranges from light green with Spring leaves to Fall colors with a great pastel mix of colors. The feeder that this shot is taken at is hanging from the bottom of the tree crown, so lots of perched shots available in the branches.

Cheers!

Thanks! I also shoot through our open kitchen from time to time! Your photos are lovely!

 

[Patty15]

I love the shots and your gardening strategy to bring in these beautiful birds. We have cherry, crabapple and apple trees in my backyard, but Waxwings turn their nose up at them because they never visit my yard! They're about impossible to photograph up close otherwise, as they are very skittish and tend to stick to the tops of trees.

One of the places I shoot at is the university arboretum, and I see a ton of gorgeous trees/shrubs I'd like to plant in my backyard to attract more birds. A water feature is another key element as well. Seems I have my work cut out for me to make this happen.

Thanks Matthew! My yard is always a work in progress.
You get some wonderful shots! I have a lot of lakes and rivers around me, where bald eagles and ospreys are plentiful in season, and the woods always bring in hawks to our area.

 

[Chappy]

A quick trip to Bosque del Apache.

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.

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.

A quick trip to Bosque del Apache.

 

[Carmel Nikon]

Chappy, these are lovely! Especially love the last one. I always look forward to seeing your images. Well done.

I'm guessing you were there at sunrise, based on the lighting - is that right?

 

[KP Birder]

Great shots! I find Buffleheads difficult at times, and you did a wonderful job on yours.

 

[M R Opp]

Here are two more examples of the 600 pf. The first is an immature White-crowned Sparrow (southern California) on the Z9 and the second is of Pintails (Bosque del Apache) on the Z8. Both are SOOC to show lens IQ. I must say that after I got the 600 pf, my 400 f4.5 pf has not been on the camera. I absolutely loved the 400 pf as a travel lens, but the 600 has supplanted it when I have to fly. I rarely use a TC with the 600. When I am able to drive, ie., down to Bosque, then I take the 800 pf as well, but for flying ... this lens on either the Z8 or Z9 is magical.

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.

 

[Chappy]

Chappy, these are lovely! Especially love the last one. I always look forward to seeing your images. Well done.

I'm guessing you were there at sunrise, based on the lighting - is that right?

Thanks, I appreciate it. Since this was more of a rest and relaxation trip, I didn’t push to get there at sunrise. It was and hour or two after sunrise. Wife wanted to sleep in. We did spend a lot of time there and also went to Bernardo.

 

[MatthewK]

Great shots! I find Buffleheads difficult at times, and you did a wonderful job on yours.

Man, I find any ducks or water fowl 100% difficult at all times. Wish there was a pond around me with tame ducks that would allow me to practice shooting, as the wild sort won't let me get within a mile of them, and I don't want to be forced to shoot my Z8 in DX mode + 800PF with the 1.4TC in order to get some crappy shots of a duck swimming away from me

Here are two more examples of the 600 pf. The first is an immature White-crowned Sparrow (southern California) on the Z9 and the second is of Pintails (Bosque del Apache) on the Z8. Both are SOOC to show lens IQ. I must say that after I got the 600 pf, my 400 f4.5 pf has not been on the camera. I absolutely loved the 400 pf as a travel lens, but the 600 has supplanted it when I have to fly. I rarely use a TC with the 600. When I am able to drive, ie., down to Bosque, then I take the 800 pf as well, but for flying ... this lens on either the Z8 or Z9 is magical.View attachment 82190View attachment 82189

The 400 4.5 isn't a PF lens

Totally with you on the results from your 600PF though, it's the real deal, and well worth the cost if you ask me. I'm really looking forward to putting it to more use once things warm up and we get more birds!

Depending on available light, I'll also be using the 600 + 1.4TC at times, when I don't want to travel with the 800PF. Getting excellent results with that combo.

 

[M R Opp]

Man, I find any ducks or water fowl 100% difficult at all times. Wish there was a pond around me with tame ducks that would allow me to practice shooting, as the wild sort won't let me get within a mile of them, and I don't want to be forced to shoot my Z8 in DX mode + 800PF with the 1.4TC in order to get some crappy shots of a duck swimming away from me


The 400 4.5 isn't a PF lens

Totally with you on the results from your 600PF though, it's the real deal, and well worth the cost if you ask me. I'm really looking forward to putting it to more use once things warm up and we get more birds!

Depending on available light, I'll also be using the 600 + 1.4TC at times, when I don't want to travel with the 800PF. Getting excellent results with that combo.

Yes, of course the 400 is not a pf lens. Not sure what got into my fingers.

 

[MotoPixel]

Here are two more examples of the 600 pf. The first is an immature White-crowned Sparrow (southern California) on the Z9 and the second is of Pintails (Bosque del Apache) on the Z8. Both are SOOC to show lens IQ. I must say that after I got the 600 pf, my 400 f4.5 pf has not been on the camera. I absolutely loved the 400 pf as a travel lens, but the 600 has supplanted it when I have to fly. I rarely use a TC with the 600. When I am able to drive, ie., down to Bosque, then I take the 800 pf as well, but for flying ... this lens on either the Z8 or Z9 is magical.

Mark,

Nice series, thanks for sharing!

I think you touch on one of the most important aspects of this lens...perhaps THE most important aspect of it...its portability/flexibility. Yes, I could spend the money on a 600 f4 TC, but the reality is hauling that lens around is doable, but it would certainly NOT be a joy! To some extent, the same is true of the 800pf...I ordered one of those when they were released and, thankfully, the delay in deliveries of that model allowed me to rethink my strategy about the time that rumors of a 600pf started to circulate. Made MUCH more sense to wait and see what happened, so I cancelled the 800pf and very glad I did. I'm done buying the long end, but that Plena is looking might attractive and I'd love a 28mm f1.2!

While I no longer fly all over the place as I did in the course of my working career, now mostly in my RV or on a motorcycle, it's great to be able to pack 4 lenses and cover from 14-1260mm (if you include DX mode), with some almost macro capability...and not want for appreciably better IQ. Throw in a small, fast wide/normal prime or two for walkaround or night shots. Just incredible...magical, as you say!

Cheers!

 

[M R Opp]

Mark,

Nice series, thanks for sharing!

I think you touch on one of the most important aspects of this lens...perhaps THE most important aspect of it...its portability/flexibility. Yes, I could spend the money on a 600 f4 TC, but the reality is hauling that lens around is doable, but it would certainly NOT be a joy! To some extent, the same is true of the 800pf...I ordered one of those when they were released and, thankfully, the delay in deliveries of that model allowed me to rethink my strategy about the time that rumors of a 600pf started to circulate. Made MUCH more sense to wait and see what happened, so I cancelled the 800pf and very glad I did. I'm done buying the long end, but that Plena is looking might attractive and I'd love a 28mm f1.2!

While I no longer fly all over the place as I did in the course of my working career, now mostly in my RV or on a motorcycle, it's great to be able to pack 4 lenses and cover from 14-1260mm (if you include DX mode), with some almost macro capability...and not want for appreciably better IQ. Throw in a small, fast wide/normal prime or two for walkaround or night shots. Just incredible...magical, as you say!

Cheers!

Thank you, Tom. I agree totally, the 800 is not a lens for traveling on a motorcycle. I now wonder if I should sell the 400 f4.5? I'll keep that 800 though because when driving and when you can use a tripod if you wish, that lens is awesome. I know this is a 600 thread, but I'll sneak an 800 image in here. This is another from Bosque, and was handheld at a relatively slow shutter speed. I was shooting 'static' cranes that were on the ground when I got a fly-over. This image is not cropped. So for me, as I mentioned the real question is what to do with the 400. I suppose I could get a 3rd camera body, maybe a second Z8! . Thanks again for taking a look at my photos and for your comment.

Best,
mark

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

 

[MatthewK]

Lovely capture of that Sandhill! Just the right amount of wing blur, and the colors are cooly and subdued. Don't mind an 800PF shot at all if it's going to look like this