Thank you!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
Nikon 600PF - Share Photos & Discuss!!!
- Thread starter MatthewK
- 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).
Do you hear the focus motor when using auto focus? Mine seems louder than I would expect.
While I do hear the focus motor clearly when the lens has to do a major focus change from distant to close or vice versa, the focusing activity when tracking a subject or small changes is very quiet for lenses of this size. it is not as quiet my 24-120, but much quieter than any of my present or former F-mount tele's, including the 500pf, 300 f2.8 VR II or 70-200E FL. I shoot quite a bit of video so I'm attuned to this aspect of lenses.
Just returned from a trip to Cancun, MX. Ended up taking the 600PF (and 1.4TC) over either my 180-600 or 800PF, as I wanted to travel light, and I didn't know for sure if I'd be birding at all. Well, ends up I did in fact get some time out in the field, and the 600PF delivered. This was my first "real" trip since I got the lens, and it lives up to the lightweight legacy of the 500PF. My only slight concern with the lens is the 13' MFD, but it was rare that I ever ran into that limit. The times I required more reach, I mostly used DX mode, but occasionally brought the 1.4TC. Were there times the zoom of the 186 come in handy? Sure. Were there times that the reach of the 800PF would have been a better choice? Absolutely. But neither offer the lightweight advantage that the 600PF provides. Overall, just really liked traveling with this lens.
I took the shots below along the beach outside of our resort; a female Willet, and a Spotted Sandpiper.
I took the shots below along the beach outside of our resort; a female Willet, and a Spotted Sandpiper.
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.
As I normally do when I get new equipment, I go to the zoo. I am pretty happy with tha sharpness of the 600PH.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
I decided to try out the 600pf on my Z8 for some baseball photography. While its not wildlife these baseball players can get pretty wild.
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.
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
I just got back from a wild 2 weeks mainly in South Carolina, with 2 days spent in Kentucky. It was a family trip, so photography took a backseat but I still ended up getting out pretty consistently.
I brought 2x Z9, the 400 2.8 TC, 600 PF and 800 PF. Of 7800 images taken, 600 were 400 2.8, 1500 were 800 pf, and the rest were 600 pf. Partially because I went out of my way to use the 600 pf for testing, and partially because I just gravitated to that lens as the most fun wildlife lens I've ever used. The 600 PF is the only lens in my kit that I have marked as an absolute will not sell. I have begun the process of flipping coins to see if I sell the 400 2.8, 800 pf, or both...
I'll be the first to admit that when the 600 pf released I thought "that's a dumb lens at a dumb price", and I am fully eating my words on it now. I was able to easily walk 5+ miles a day (which for me, is a big deal) with no inconvenience with that lens. it allowed me the opportunity to see so much more wildlife than I would've with any of my other bigger lenses. I was also able to quickly get prone, for eye level water shots, and jump back up to maneuver for anything else needed.
The 6.3 aperture didn't limit me as much as I expected. My main lens prior was the 400 2.8, so I thought coming from 2.8 would be impossible. However, what I didn't account for is that I prefer to handhold - and in low light, the 600 6.3 actually gave me better results because I could handhold it more than 3 stops slower shutter speed with a higher success rate. IE 600 PF at 1/6s vs 400 TC @ 1/50s. This was apparent when shooting screech owls in pre-dawn conditions.
My favorite thing about the 600 6.3 after the weight, is the background rendering. it just looks super visually appealing to me
Here are some of my favorites
I brought 2x Z9, the 400 2.8 TC, 600 PF and 800 PF. Of 7800 images taken, 600 were 400 2.8, 1500 were 800 pf, and the rest were 600 pf. Partially because I went out of my way to use the 600 pf for testing, and partially because I just gravitated to that lens as the most fun wildlife lens I've ever used. The 600 PF is the only lens in my kit that I have marked as an absolute will not sell. I have begun the process of flipping coins to see if I sell the 400 2.8, 800 pf, or both...
I'll be the first to admit that when the 600 pf released I thought "that's a dumb lens at a dumb price", and I am fully eating my words on it now. I was able to easily walk 5+ miles a day (which for me, is a big deal) with no inconvenience with that lens. it allowed me the opportunity to see so much more wildlife than I would've with any of my other bigger lenses. I was also able to quickly get prone, for eye level water shots, and jump back up to maneuver for anything else needed.
The 6.3 aperture didn't limit me as much as I expected. My main lens prior was the 400 2.8, so I thought coming from 2.8 would be impossible. However, what I didn't account for is that I prefer to handhold - and in low light, the 600 6.3 actually gave me better results because I could handhold it more than 3 stops slower shutter speed with a higher success rate. IE 600 PF at 1/6s vs 400 TC @ 1/50s. This was apparent when shooting screech owls in pre-dawn conditions.
My favorite thing about the 600 6.3 after the weight, is the background rendering. it just looks super visually appealing to me
Here are some of my favorites
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.
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.
Last edited:
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
some more
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.
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.
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
more
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.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Outstanding, Nick, really glad to see you putting this thing to use. You see people poo-poo’ing the 600PF as being overpriced or not being f/5.6 (and a whole lot of other laughable stuff), but the lens is utterly fantastic in use.
Now, let the new car smell wear off a bit before you make a move on the 400 or 800. I was starting to tilt towards selling the 800PF too, but after shooting with the 1.4 TC and f/9, I promptly saw what the 800 brings to the table, when you need all the light you can get.
Garfield
Well-known member
Hope this is OK to post this video here in the photo forum, but thought it was worth sharing the results of an informal video test of the 600pf + 1.4xTC in FX and DX mode. The video was recorded on a Z9 in 4k60p H.265, graded and sharpened. The subject eagle was about 65 metres distant. The FX (840mm equivalent) clips were very sharp but the eagle small in the frame. The DX (1176mm equivalent) was bigger of course but there was a definite loss of acquity.
Unsurprisingly, my take-away is don't hesitate to use the 1.4TC with the 600pf (light permitting) but try not to crop too heavily.
Unsurprisingly, my take-away is don't hesitate to use the 1.4TC with the 600pf (light permitting) but try not to crop too heavily.
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
I enjoyed reading your synopsis about Cancun, Matt! You really hit the nail on the head about the value of the 600 PF for travel.
I just finished typing up my 800mm for sale ad. Going to go into the studio and take some pictures and post it tonight I figure.
I don't know if it's my shooting style changing or what, but I find myself just not shooting past 800mm nearly enough to justify the lens. When I shot Canon, 840mm was my main focal length, and I often pushed to 1200mm, 1600mm, or 2240mm (stacked extenders). With Nikon, it's been almost a dead tie between 400mm and 560mm (600mm). I bought both the Z 1.4x and Z 2x TC, and have not used either of them on any of my lenses.
Between F6.3 and F9 is no big deal to me because if I am using either the 600 PF or 800 PF - it's going to be mainly in pretty good light. Also as I found with those Screech Owls, the 600 PF performed well even in pre-dawn conditions as long as the subject was stationary. In my real world experience, the only thing I could think of needing faster would be shooting the canopies in Hawaii. Little birds + quick motion + low light = probably too difficult for either 600 or 800 PF. When true low light capability is needed, I can bring out the 400 2.8 which cannot be beat.
I am tried of carrying around my Mr Jan Boris IV backpack with 2x Z9, the 400 2.8 and 800 PF. That's nearly 20lbs that I've lugged on several trips, only to sparingly use the 800.
However... I told my girlfriend about my conundrum and then was showing her your flickr account and now she says I should keep the 800 PF until migration is over...darn it all
Don't mean to throw any wrenches in the plans wrt/ the 800PF! Your lens selection strategy is sound, and you def have narrowed down the FL/range you prefer for your subjects. Best part is, you have numerous means to reach 800mm if necessary, and if someday you find yourself needing a dedicated 800 again, they're readily available. It'll be interesting to hear how the pared down kit works for upcoming Spring migration!
Personally, I'll be keeping the 800PF at least through Spring migration I'll be leading with the 600PF in order to see how well it does as my dedicated birding lens, but will have the 800PF on standby in case I'm lacking reach for warblers. I'm ok with using DX mode, so that may influence how often I mount the 800 as well.
Here's an uncropped shot of a Mangrove Vireo taken down in Cancun, a good example of the kind of look I'm wanting to get in terms of subject size in frame. These birds are a bit more bold and aren't afraid to sit at eye level, so when it comes to the more skittish warblers that like to sit at the tops of trees, this may not be as realistic and the 800PF may be the better choice.
Personally, I'll be keeping the 800PF at least through Spring migration
I'll be leading with the 600PF in order to see how well it does as my dedicated birding lens, but will have the 800PF on standby in case I'm lacking reach for warblers. I'm ok with using DX mode, so that may influence how often I mount the 800 as well.Here's an uncropped shot of a Mangrove Vireo taken down in Cancun, a good example of the kind of look I'm wanting to get in terms of subject size in frame. These birds are a bit more bold and aren't afraid to sit at eye level, so when it comes to the more skittish warblers that like to sit at the tops of trees, this may not be as realistic and the 800PF may be the better choice.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
This shot really catches my eye, the Oyster Catcher really pops, the fore/background blur are really nice. I keep reading/hearing "the PF lenses have terrible background rendering", but in all my years of shooting w/ these PF lenses, I've never once encountered a messed up background. In fact, the 800PF renders one of the nicest backgrounds I've seen yet, and the 600PF is up there too.
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.
Last edited:
Couple of morning shots from my neighborhood. Hot air on a cold morning. Can you see the power lines at the base of the far mountains. And the Saguaro talking to the moon. This and the Plena are by far my favorite lens.
Also posted this environmental shot
bcgforums.com
Also posted this environmental shot
Death Looming in the Sunset Rain of the Desert
Water is never easy in the desert. This red tail makes it that much more so.
bcgforums.com
Last edited:
One from a lunch time walk at my local birding hotspot, where I went to check and see if any early Yellow-rumped Warblers had shown up, but nothing as yet.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
Thank you for the kind words, Joel.
They’re the first warbs to return, so it’s like the opening day kickoff of the season. We get a boatload of them here as well.
Cold and blustery afternoon at the local arboretum. Very wide open and clear understory, so longer reach is often needed at this location, and the 1.4TC was put to use.
Stumbled upon a Fox Sparrow, which has been elevated to "nemesis bird" status. I cannot get this bird in the open, on a clean perch, and they pop smoke the instant a camera is pointed their way.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Stumbled upon a Fox Sparrow, which has been elevated to "nemesis bird" status. I cannot get this bird in the open, on a clean perch, and they pop smoke the instant a camera is pointed their way.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
Poping smoke
I love those shots. how hard did you work to get the AF to see through the branches?
Thanks, Joel! The 2.0 firmware was a big jump up for the Z8’s AF, it get confused a lot less now; for that shot, I used Single Point AF, and it picked the sparrow out of the tangle without a problem. I’d say the Z8’s single point AF is nearly on-par with the D500 now.Poping smoke
I love those shots. how hard did you work to get the AF to see through the branches?
Clearly see who the boss is.
Last edited:
Sharp as a razor, wowClearly see who the boss is.
