Nikon 800mm f/6.3 VS The new upcoming 200 - 600mm

[Feiertag]

I have been on the waiting list for quite some time regarding the 800mm. With the announcement that the 200 - 600 will be available in the near future.
I am contemplating buying it if I can get my hands on it sooner than the 800.

What are your opinions regarding my game plan? Wait for the 800, or buy the 200 - 600 (when available) in the future)?

 

[Marcus]

If you shoot small birds at distance primarily then I would say wait for the 800. If however your subjects are larger/closer, and dependent on the final aperture of the 200-600 (or what ever the minimum focal length turns out to be) then that'll likely make more sense. Depends on if you use 600mm already and often find yourself wanting on the long end (like a million percent of small bird photographers!)

 

[Winston Churchill (Sir)]

Two different lenses and applications. One cant comment on your game plan if one doesn't know what you want to shoot

 

[Krümelkraft]

I'd wait for the 800.
First because I think it's going to be delivered soon*, and the 200-600 waiting list won't be any shorter, so I don't expect you would get your hands on it sooner.
Second because the 200-600 is likely gonna have the same weight and size (extended) as the 800, but less focal length.
Latest tests (done by me) indicate that the 800 is at least as sharp as the 500PF (both wide open).

Personally, I would consider a 200-600 only if it's an internal zoom, like the Sony.

*that is from a german standpoint, since it seems that germany has just been flooded with 800's. It may be different in Canada.

 

[ssheipel]

For me, the practicalities of product delivery would dictate the final decision. Yes, need case should be the first consideration but the 800 delivery time from order date in Canada was just over a year for those first on the list. I'm 8 months waiting for the 600 and best intel is nobody's got one (but a very tiny number of NPS folks, if any). So, if it was me and it's about getting a long lens in your hands (all things else being equal in your choice) I'd look at it as stepping out of a lineup for one lens, to wait for the next lineup to even form (eg the 200-600 lens hasn't even been announced yet; then there's the wait to launch date; then the wait to delivery dates). But, again, if you can wait, go with what you have decided will work best for you. Good luck with your decision. Cheers!

 

[Feiertag]

If you shoot small birds at distance primarily then I would say wait for the 800. If however your subjects are larger/closer, and dependent on the final aperture of the 200-600 (or what ever the minimum focal length turns out to be) then that'll likely make more sense. Depends on if you use 600mm already and often find yourself wanting on the long end (like a million percent of small bird photographers!)

I sometimes shot small birds like puffins but primarily go for raptors and owls. Finches, sparrows, and songbirds, I only shoot them as a last resort.

 

[Feiertag]

Two different lenses and applications. One cant comment on your game plan if one doesn't know what you want to shoot

I like puffins, raptors, and owls. Especially in-flight.

 

[Charles Loy]

The 800 has proved it's an amazing lens by all who have received it. Hard to predict the 200-600 as it's only a promise at this time.

 

[Feiertag]

I'd wait for the 800.
First because I think it's going to be delivered soon*, and the 200-600 waiting list won't be any shorter, so I don't expect you would get your hands on it sooner.
Second because the 200-600 is likely gonna have the same weight and size (extended) as the 800, but less focal length.
Latest tests (done by me) indicate that the 800 is at least as sharp as the 500PF (both wide open).

Personally, I would consider a 200-600 only if it's an internal zoom, like the Sony.

*that is from a german standpoint, since it seems that germany has just been flooded with 800's. It may be different in Canada.

Good tips and suggestions. I own the Nikon 200 - 400mm f/4. When I did use it, I like the fact that cutting the wings off when they flew toward me was prevented by zooming out. This feature is also a factor.

 

[Feiertag]

For me, the practicalities of product delivery would dictate the final decision. Yes, need case should be the first consideration but the 800 delivery time from order date in Canada was just over a year for those first on the list. I'm 8 months waiting for the 600 and best intel is nobody's got one (but a very tiny number of NPS folks, if any). So, if it was me and it's about getting a long lens in your hands (all things else being equal in your choice) I'd look at it as stepping out of a lineup for one lens, to wait for the next lineup to even form (eg the 200-600 lens hasn't even been announced yet; then there's the wait to launch date; then the wait to delivery dates). But, again, if you can wait, go with what you have decided will work best for you. Good luck with your decision. Cheers!

Good points. Cheers!

 

[Feiertag]

The 800 has proved it's an amazing lens by all who have received it. Hard to predict the 200-600 as it's only a promise at this time.

Thank you for your comment. If I had the money, I would buy both if the reviews are as favorable as the 800.

 

[Patrick M]

Well the 200-600 was in the first Z lens roadmap for a long time now. Everybody wants one…me too…even though it’s not a S lens .. and likely f5.6-6.3
I can imagine not only a long waiting list but a long waiting time too!
if one has the 800mm in order, stay with it. The demand should hold the resale price up should you get it then change your mind.

 

[arbitrage]

I like puffins, raptors, and owls. Especially in-flight.

What lens and which body (to gauge "reach") are you shooting those subjects with currently? If you buy the 800PF will you also have a shorter lens like 100-400 or 400/4.5?

To discuss this point I'm going to make the assumption that the forthcoming Nikon 200-600 will be a similar design to the Sony (ie internal zoom, f/6.3 at the long end, same size/weight/price). The roadmap silhouette looks like it is going to be like the Sony and not external zoom. Also size looks like f/6.3 and not f/5.6 which would be a bigger front element.

I think the 800 is a great lens but it is very specialized in not being able to get any wider than 800mm. I tend to favour 600mm FOV for most birds and I only use my 600/4 at 840/5.6 like 10-15% of the time even though I do shoot songbirds as well as raptors and owls. For owls I actually find myself shooting 400mm for Barred, GHO and GGO more than 600. 800mm would be too limiting to shoot the owls. I suppose 800 can work for SEOs in Vancouver, I sometimes do shoot them at 800 but still the majority at 600.

Of course the 200-600 is going to be way more versatile but I'd say for the most part it is a 600mm lens max and trying to push it to 840 and being stuck at f/9 wouldn't be my choice for many BIF. The Sony 2-6 is about 1/2lb lighter than the 800PF and 7cm shorter. So easier to carry, pack and handhold for BIF. Although, the 800PF should be no issue to handhold as it is still a relatively lightweight lens.

But the big question is how long one might have to wait for the 200-600. We have a rumour from May of a June-July announcement. If that is even correct then some lead time to order and release. Then the big unknown is if Nikon will pull off a "Z8" and have a lot of stock ready to meet demand or if it will be relatively obtainable like 400/4.5 and 100-400 were OR if it will be unobtainium like 800PF, 400TC, 600TC.

I think if your ticket comes up for the 800PF and you have a shorter lens to compliment it then just go for it. When the 200-600 eventually comes out you can reconsider and sell the 800PF (which should hold its value well due to low supply) and save a bunch of $$ by buying the 200-600 (estimated at $2700 CAD if like the Sony). I don't know if your dealer has given you any updates on 800PF but my dealer in ON said he could get me a 800PF in 4-6 weeks now as supply has improved significantly in the past month or so.

 

[Feiertag]

What lens and which body (to gauge "reach") are you shooting those subjects with currently? If you buy the 800PF will you also have a shorter lens like 100-400 or 400/4.5?

To discuss this point I'm going to make the assumption that the forthcoming Nikon 200-600 will be a similar design to the Sony (ie internal zoom, f/6.3 at the long end, same size/weight/price). The roadmap silhouette looks like it is going to be like the Sony and not external zoom. Also size looks like f/6.3 and not f/5.6 which would be a bigger front element.

I think the 800 is a great lens but it is very specialized in not being able to get any wider than 800mm. I tend to favour 600mm FOV for most birds and I only use my 600/4 at 840/5.6 like 10-15% of the time even though I do shoot songbirds as well as raptors and owls. For owls I actually find myself shooting 400mm for Barred, GHO and GGO more than 600. 800mm would be too limiting to shoot the owls. I suppose 800 can work for SEOs in Vancouver, I sometimes do shoot them at 800 but still the majority at 600.

Of course the 200-600 is going to be way more versatile but I'd say for the most part it is a 600mm lens max and trying to push it to 840 and being stuck at f/9 wouldn't be my choice for many BIF. The Sony 2-6 is about 1/2lb lighter than the 800PF and 7cm shorter. So easier to carry, pack and handhold for BIF. Although, the 800PF should be no issue to handhold as it is still a relatively lightweight lens.

But the big question is how long one might have to wait for the 200-600. We have a rumour from May of a June-July announcement. If that is even correct then some lead time to order and release. Then the big unknown is if Nikon will pull off a "Z8" and have a lot of stock ready to meet demand or if it will be relatively obtainable like 400/4.5 and 100-400 were OR if it will be unobtainium like 800PF, 400TC, 600TC.

I think if your ticket comes up for the 800PF and you have a shorter lens to compliment it then just go for it. When the 200-600 eventually comes out you can reconsider and sell the 800PF (which should hold its value well due to low supply) and save a bunch of $$ by buying the 200-600 (estimated at $2700 CAD if like the Sony). I don't know if your dealer has given you any updates on 800PF but my dealer in ON said he could get me a 800PF in 4-6 weeks now as supply has improved significantly in the past month or so.

When Photo Experts in Delta was operational, I bought most of my equipment with them. Now I'm making my purchases with Camera Kingston. Don the owner said to me the other day that he was going to try and get an update for me. I'm first on the list to get one.

 

[Feiertag]

Well the 200-600 was in the first Z lens roadmap for a long time now. Everybody wants one…me too…even though it’s not a S lens .. and likely f5.6-6.3
I can imagine not only a long waiting list but a long waiting time too!
if one has the 800mm in order, stay with it. The demand should hold the resale price up should you get it then change your mind.

I'm going to stay with the 800mm for now. I'm 1st. on the list to get one from my local camera store.

 

[Anjin San]

What lens and which body (to gauge "reach") are you shooting those subjects with currently? If you buy the 800PF will you also have a shorter lens like 100-400 or 400/4.5?

I think the 800 is a great lens but it is very specialized in not being able to get any wider than 800mm.

You’ve pretty much hit it on the head why I don’t have an 800 yet…too little flexibility and because of size weight it would very likely be the only lens on the hike. Add in my output is almost exclusively screen, the fact that I’m an amateur making nothing from photography except satisfaction…and the combo of 400/4.5 with the TC that give me 560 or 840 in DX and even more if I use the admittedly not quite as sharp 2.0TC…and the 100-400 gives me the most flexibility, bang for the pound if you will. Is this as ‘good’ a lens combo as the 800 or 600? Nope…especially if one is making money at it…but better is many times the enemy of good enough. It’s not really a matter of absolute affordability…more a matter of flexibility, overall utility, and what I can carry vs what I have to give up if I carry xxx vs yyy. I’m not going to get a ghillie suit either or crawl 50myards through the grass for a shot either…and I’m not going to spend multiple hours in a spot or blind hoping something might happen. We’ve all seen that photo of the guy that got the perfect diving kingfisher shot…but it took him years of going to the same spot daily or weekly or whatever it was and it took him hundreds of thousands of images IIRC to get ‘the shot’…and I’m happy for him, love the shot, and wish I could get one like it…burnt not enough to do what he did to get it.

 

[Krümelkraft]

To discuss this point I'm going to make the assumption that the forthcoming Nikon 200-600 will be a similar design to the Sony (ie internal zoom, f/6.3 at the long end, same size/weight/price). The roadmap silhouette looks like it is going to be like the Sony and not external zoom. Also size looks like f/6.3 and not f/5.6 which would be a bigger front element.

To me, the road map silhouette looks like external zoom.
See the little gap at the front end? I think that's where inner and outer tubes separate.

I have no other explanation for that gap and I don't think I have seen something like that on a prime lens or internal zoom lens.

 

[Feiertag]

To me, the road map silhouette looks like external zoom.
See the little gap at the front end? I think that's where inner and outer tubes separate.
View attachment 62835
I have no other explanation for that gap and I don't think I have seen something like that on a prime lens or internal zoom lens.

I think it may be a deal breaker if, in fact, it is an external zoom. I'm looking forward to reading the future reviews.

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

What are your opinions regarding my game plan? Wait for the 800, or buy the 200 - 600?

Based on what has been assumed about the 180/200-600 NON-S-line lens - these are two entirely different lenses and I would argue not remotely comparable.

The OP and others should think vary carefully about their use case for any such lenses -- a relatively expensive FIXED long focal length/prime lens with one job that it does quite well -vs- a variable aperture zoom whose longest focal length is 75% (shorter) of the prime.

No decision should be made between a guessed spec and an actual lens.

The OP could perhaps consider just how much they desire the Z 800/6.3 PF -vs- all other currently available alternatives -- perhaps the Sigma or Tamron equivalent zoom lenses in F-mount with an FTZii -- both can be tried or even rented in most places. Trying before you buy and only wait for the Z 180/200-600 if the trial proves fruitful.

 

[Geoff_G]

I can't begin to wrap my head around choosing between a fantastic 800mm S lens and a mythical (thus far) 200-600 non-S lens and knowing squat about the zoom...that said, I don't see them serving the same photographic needs.

 

[Patrick M]

To me, the road map silhouette looks like external zoom.
See the little gap at the front end? I think that's where inner and outer tubes separate.
View attachment 62835
I have no other explanation for that gap and I don't think I have seen something like that on a prime lens or internal zoom lens.

I would expect an external zoom in the same way. that the F 200-500 is. Plus the variable aperture. These two as well as (perhaps) the quality of glass, is what kept the price down on the 200-500 and will do so fr the 200-600 ... as it's not S. I'd also not be surprised by a long S zoom, with a constant aperture, tho the 100-400 might fill that gap?

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

 

[Kip Cotter]

I haven't read all the comments above, so this may be redundant, but the two lenses really don't seem comparable at all. I have the 800PF. I will say, it's a bit of a bear in comparison to my 500PF to routinely get on critters quickly. So if a 'birder' really wants to take advantage of the 800PF, it likely had better be stationary birds or birds that are in the distance. It's a tough, no go, for things like warblers, etc. that are on the constant move in thick stuff. Taking the 800mm out for slower moving, larger mammals is cool, but in the parks where I can shoot it often proves to be too much lens and I would miss MANY good shot opportunities with just the 800mm. Also, atmospheric conditions get in the way of that reach awfully quick as the sun comes up depending upon what terrain you're shooting over, how far away is the subject, the background, etc. I've taken some decent photos with the 800mm, but am really finding its sweet spot (FOR ME) to be early morning videos (talking first light type stuff) where the ISO for photography would make me unhappy with the results. It really shines for video clips IMO. For most birding work, I honestly thing a good 600mm would be superior. The 200-600mm would bring great utility if on a walk about without a specific target or plan. If there was a 600mm PF, I'd trade the 800mm PF for it in a second. Just my views.

 

[EricBowles]

I have been on the waiting list for quite some time regarding the 800mm. With the announcement that the 200 - 600 will be available in the near future.
I am contemplating buying it if I can get my hands on it sooner than the 800.

What are your opinions regarding my game plan? Wait for the 800, or buy the 200 - 600?

The 800mm PF is a terrific lens. It's ideal for small birds. But I have run into a number of situations where it is too long. In my case, the 70-200 and 400mm f/4.5 cover the shorter focal lengths and work well with the 1.4 TC. I probably won't get the 200-600, but I expect it to be a very good lens. It's likely to be an external zoom and variable aperture, which provides functionality and saves weight and size.

I expect Nikon to produce a lot of 200-600 lenses for the initial release.

As opposed to Kip, I find the 800mm PF is great for small birds that are small but active. But I have a lot of practice using the 500mm PF with a 1.4 TC, so the focal length difference is not a big issue. It's difficult - but I can be precise and focus on just a part of a bird and get an ID shot. Of course, field of view is very narrow and it takes practice to get used to finding the subject in the EVF.

 

[jeffnles1]

Honestly, it depends on what you need and when you need it. If you really need 800mm then keep on waiting for that lens to be delivered to your shop. It will probably be delivered before the 200-600 is available. If you can wait and you prefer the flexibility of the zoom and you don't need 800mm then see when/if Nikon decides to launch the 200-600 or whatever it ends up being and see what the specs are. I have a suspicion (nothing but suspicion haven't heard anything concrete) the 200-600 or 180-600 could well be a Tamron or Sigma made lens with tweaks to make it a Nikon branded lens. It is not a big trick to change the gearing of the zoom mechanism to make the minimum focal length 180 instead of 150,

Jeff

 

[Feiertag]

I haven't read all the comments above, so this may be redundant, but the two lenses really don't seem comparable at all. I have the 800PF. I will say, it's a bit of a bear in comparison to my 500PF to routinely get on critters quickly. So if a 'birder' really wants to take advantage of the 800PF, it likely had better be stationary birds or birds that are in the distance. It's a tough, no go, for things like warblers, etc. that are on the constant move in thick stuff. Taking the 800mm out for slower moving, larger mammals is cool, but in the parks where I can shoot it often proves to be too much lens and I would miss MANY good shot opportunities with just the 800mm. Also, atmospheric conditions get in the way of that reach awfully quick as the sun comes up depending upon what terrain you're shooting over, how far away is the subject, the background, etc. I've taken some decent photos with the 800mm, but am really finding its sweet spot (FOR ME) to be early morning videos (talking first light type stuff) where the ISO for photography would make me unhappy with the results. It really shines for video clips IMO. For most birding work, I honestly thing a good 600mm would be superior. The 200-600mm would bring great utility if on a walk about without a specific target or plan. If there was a 600mm PF, I'd trade the 800mm PF for it in a second. Just my views.

I also own the 500mm PF which is a great lens. Do you regret buying the 800mm, considering the various hang-ups that you mentioned?