Nikon AF-S 180-400mm f/4E TC1.4...or not?

[westlight]

My accountant has suggested spending some $'s before the end of the year for tax purposes. I will be spending almost 2 months this winter guiding my winter photo tours. I'm considering purchasing the 180-400mm. Here is what I current have.

Shooting a D850 and D500 and then hopefully a Z7ii which I've ordered via NPS. Hope it arrives in time. I have the ZTF adapter and the TC 1.4 ordered as well.

I have a Nikon 600mm f/4 G and a Nikon 80-400mm G as far as teles go.

The 80-400mm is usually on my D850 sitting on my lap as we're driving around since it's easy to stick out the window for those times when we can't step out of the snowcoach. I love the focal length range of this lens for these tours.

The 600mm is usually on the D500 in the back of the coach ready to mount on the tripod. It's getting a bit too heavy and more difficult to set up in a hurry especially when it's -20f outside.

I've been considering either the 180-400 mm TC1.4 as it's lighter and smaller than the 600mm and the focal length range would be handy.
The other option I sorta considered is the 600mm f/4 E in which case I'd sell my current G series next year.

Any thoughts? Thanks!

 

[Laurence Jackson]

What a nice position to be in! It sounds to me like the 180-400 would be almost perfect for your line of work, especially with the TC inbuilt. I know another photo tour guide who uses it instead of lugging the 500/4 and 200-400 around. I suppose though the 180-400 is still quite a beast of a lens, I remember my 200-400 was pretty big and heavy to use whilst driving around in the confines of a vehicle and so the 80-400 would still be ideal for that role. I think you may find you need both the 180-400 and the 600E...

 

[Thern]

Since my retirement in 2011 I became a Wildlife Reserve manager in Belgium (where we lived then)
Part of the job was registrational photography for 3 nature reserve organisations doing research in the areal.
I hiked twice a day (12 miles total) with a 200-400 on a Spiderpro holster and a 600G on a monopod over my shoulder.
When the 600E was released I bought it and I was pleased with the lesser weight. (Handholding ability and better balance didn’t bother me I could shoot the G wo a problem)
Then the 180-400 was released and I bought it as a replacement for the 200-400.
After some months of having used it I witnessed the fact I left the 600E more and more sitting at home, so I sold it and started using the 70-200E for its fast aperture with my second body.
Well we moved to France this spring and as a result I stopped working.
I’m living now in one of the areas in Europe with the largest birdpopulations (and most species) and with a lot of birdhides for waterfowl.
This made me buy the 800mm, the 180-400 with TC engaged is on the short side.
(FTR I shoot lowrez bodies exclusively.)

Looking at your questions I’d not recommend to buy the 180-400 for your applications.
You don’t tell wether you’re happy with the performance of the 80-400 but if you are I would keep on using it.
The 180-400 IS a very nice lens but it’s also a heavy large brick to have it on your lap.
If you however don’t really like the performance of the 80-400 I’d suggest to buy a 300PF plus 500PF plus a third body and a cameraharness.
You will get better performance in small packages and you’ll have enough money left to trade in your 600G....
Just my (11.5K worth LOL) two cents.

 

[Steve]

I think it depends on how much you really use that focal range and how happy / unhappy you are with the 80-400.

The 180-400 is fantastic when used in that range - it's like having primes from 180-400 at every focal length. (Almost, the 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 are sharper.) Plus, the lens is really versatile and has the built in TC when needed. In fact, the main reason I keep that lens is for the versatility. My biggest problem is that I just don't use that focal range nearly as much as 500mm and 600mm (and 600mm + 1.4TC). So, the lens can go for days, even on a photo trip, without seeing the light of day. However, when I need something in the 180-400 range, nothing else comes close. It's one of those things where I don't use it much but I love to have it when I need it.

I think the biggest issue, at least for me, is that I really don't like Nikon 80-400 lens. I had one and tried to like it, but we never got along (the AF was often jittery in tricky situations). Had that lens been as good as my Sony 100-400, I'm not sure I would have have gone with the 180-400. I like F/4 in that range, but not sure it's worth the extra expense for how little I use it.

In addition, the 180-400 it is heavy. Like Roger says, I'm not sure If I'd want it on my lap all day. I also think his suggestion of a 300 PF, 500 PF and upgrading to the 600E merits serious consideration.

 

[westlight]

I think it depends on how much you really use that focal range and how happy / unhappy you are with the 80-400.

The 180-400 is fantastic when used in that range - it's like having primes from 180-400 at every focal length. (Almost, the 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 are sharper.) Plus, the lens is really versatile and has the built in TC when needed. In fact, the main reason I keep that lens is for the versatility. My biggest problem is that I just don't use that focal range nearly as much as 500mm and 600mm (and 600mm + 1.4TC). So, the lens can go for days, even on a photo trip, without seeing the light of day. However, when I need something in the 180-400 range, nothing else comes close. It's one of those things where I don't use it much but I love to have it when I need it.

I think the biggest issue, at least for me, is that I really don't like Nikon 80-400 lens. I had one and tried to like it, but we never got along (the AF was often jittery in tricky situations). Had that lens been as good as my Sony 100-400, I'm not sure I would have have gone with the 180-400. I like F/4 in that range, but not sure it's worth the extra expense for how little I use it.

In addition, the 180-400 it is heavy. Like Roger says, I'm not sure If I'd want it on my lap all day. I also think his suggestion of a 300 PF, 500 PF and upgrading to the 600E merits serious consideration.

Ha! I almost "reported" you instead of clicking the reply button.

Thanks for you insight and opinion Steve. I've watched your vids on the 180-400mm and actually used one I got from NPS for one of my tours in Yellowstone last winter. If I do purchase this lens I'd probably sell the 600 G next year, again tax reasons.

As we're driving around in the snowcoach I've always liked the focal range of the 80-400 to have on my lap since one minute the shot is fairly close then the next is farther out in the meadow. It's primarily during these winter tours that I use big glass.

Thanks again!

 

[westlight]

What a nice position to be in! It sounds to me like the 180-400 would be almost perfect for your line of work, especially with the TC inbuilt. I know another photo tour guide who uses it instead of lugging the 500/4 and 200-400 around. I suppose though the 180-400 is still quite a beast of a lens, I remember my 200-400 was pretty big and heavy to use whilst driving around in the confines of a vehicle and so the 80-400 would still be ideal for that role. I think you may find you need both the 180-400 and the 600E...

Yes regarding "nice position to be in" but it's one of those good news bad news things.

As far as the size of the lens. Either way I'll need a bigger lap! I've had the 200-400 and that like the 180-400 it is rather large to quickly stick out the window of the snowcoach, especially with heavy winter clothing on. We do have plenty of times when we're out of the coach and have the time to set up a tripod and get the 600 out.

Thank you for your thoughts!

 

[westlight]

Since my retirement in 2011 I became a Wildlife Reserve manager in Belgium (where we lived then)
Part of the job was registrational photography for 3 nature reserve organisations doing research in the areal.
I hiked twice a day (12 miles total) with a 200-400 on a Spiderpro holster and a 600G on a monopod over my shoulder.
When the 600E was released I bought it and I was pleased with the lesser weight. (Handholding ability and better balance didn’t bother me I could shoot the G wo a problem)
Then the 180-400 was released and I bought it as a replacement for the 200-400.
After some months of having used it I witnessed the fact I left the 600E more and more sitting at home, so I sold it and started using the 70-200E for its fast aperture with my second body.
Well we moved to France this spring and as a result I stopped working.
I’m living now in one of the areas in Europe with the largest birdpopulations (and most species) and with a lot of birdhides for waterfowl.
This made me buy the 800mm, the 180-400 with TC engaged is on the short side.
(FTR I shoot lowrez bodies exclusively.)

Looking at your questions I’d not recommend to buy the 180-400 for your applications.
You don’t tell wether you’re happy with the performance of the 80-400 but if you are I would keep on using it.
The 180-400 IS a very nice lens but it’s also a heavy large brick to have it on your lap.
If you however don’t really like the performance of the 80-400 I’d suggest to buy a 300PF plus 500PF plus a third body and a cameraharness.
You will get better performance in small packages and you’ll have enough money left to trade in your 600G....
Just my (11.5K worth LOL) two cents.

Thank you for your 11.5k worth!

The 180-400 seems to be a popular lens, or at least in short supply at the moment so I guess I could always sell it after my winter tours are over...or sell the 600G. I'd keep the 600 on hand for any of my clients to use that are shooting Nikons. Plenty of room in the back of the snowcoach for the gear. Not the case as it pertains to my lap!

Take care!