fcotterill
Well-known member
There are so many choices across the Greater Nikon Ecosystem!
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Attachments
Last edited:
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).
Nice Bison shot. I just ordered a second Z9 a refurb from Nikon USA. It means I will double carry the Z800 on my right and the Z100-400 on my left side spring, summer and fall depending on the terrain and habitat the birds I am hunting are in. I have done that with our Z6II but if my wife was using the Z6II that day instead of her Z50 I was out of luck.It is fine at 400mm to 800mm for small subects. But for example with bison in Yellowstone the 400mm can be to restrictive in terms of its angle of view.
Example is this picture of bison with the 80-400mm lens and a focal length of 200mm. At 400mm all I would have gotten was his head.
There is also the matter of the weight of the 400mm f/2.8 lens. For me I would be using a tripod 100% of the time and that adds another 8 lbs of gear to haul around. I much prefer to have two cameras and one with a zoom lens mounted and the second with a prime lens. The 80-400mm and the 500mm PF were a great combo for use on land and on the water. Now the 100-400mm and the 400mm f/4.5 with a teleconverter or the 800mm PF lens are what I use.
View attachment 55691
Would be extremely happy with the 600 mm FL with external Tcs, and use the surplus fortune for other things that matter.I have been looking at the Nikon Z 400m f2.8 with internal teleconverter.
With this lens and 2x teleconverter you can get
- 400mm f/2.8
- 560mm f/4 with internal teleconverter
- 800mm f/8 with external 2x teleconverter
As such you can cover 400-800mm with one lens. For Nikon users would you consider this meets most wildlife situtations?
Hi AndyNever just one lens and never just "wildlife" -- far to broad a range of subjects, environments and behaviours.
In order of usefulness and shots used from Safari in Africa on an FX body -- all Nikkor Z-mount S-line:
I also take 14TC and 20TC but hope not to use them.
- 600/4 -- now the TC version. 65% of my shots and almost 100% of my action shots were taken with this lens, often with a 1.4 TC on board. Most BIF and Bird portraits too.
- 400/2.8 -- now the TC version also - pre-dawn and close to dusk AND for larger subjects or where I want more environmental shots. If there was only ONE lens with would be it the Internal TC makes it very flexible.
- 100-400 - this is my gap filler lens, I take this over the 70-200 to provide focal length options for when subjects come close
- 24-120/4 - this is my widest/shortest focal length
On occasions I will take a wide bright prime to to be able to shoot night/astro. So not wildlife.
No 600 pf on the horizon as far as Nikon's road map.I currently use my 500pf on my Z9 as my bird lens. I put a 1.4 TC on sometimes, but it is a 1.4ii, so I may lose a bit of quality. I would love to use a native lens and avoid the FTZ, and the 400 f4.5 looks like a great bargain but it is a tiny bit short for what I want. The 400 f2.8 is too heavy and so expensive. The 600 f4 is much too expensive and also too heavy! I really need a 600 pf I think.:(
Is the 1.4 iii noticeably better than the ii?
I
No. I am sad about that!No 600 pf on the horizon as far as Nikon's road map.
No 800 for me at this stage. Sad againI replaced the 500pf and 1.4TCiii with the Z100-400 and a Z1.4 TC if needed. I usually just go to dx mode if the 400 is a bit short but I do not use it much since I shoot a lot of small birds and have a Z800pf.
The 500pf is great. No doubt. And the FTZii is no real problem I just like the idea of native lenses. But I am coping...Nothing wrong with the 500pf and I took a lot of good shots mostly without the TC. Once I got the Z100-400 and saw the results with the Z1.4 or just using DX mode and my Z800pf was on the way I sold the 500pf before the price dropped.
I am hoping the Z200-600 get's released soon that would fill my gap between Z70-200, Z100-400 and Z800 without "having" to use a TC unless I wanted to for some other reason such as near macro with a TC 2.0 on the 70-200 but the Z100-400 does quite well in the near macro arena.
I have been looking at the Nikon Z 400m f2.8 with internal teleconverter.
With this lens and 2x teleconverter you can get
- 400mm f/2.8
- 560mm f/4 with internal teleconverter
- 800mm f/8 with external 2x teleconverter
As such you can cover 400-800mm with one lens. For Nikon users would you consider this meets most wildlife situtations?
What are your thoughts on swapping the 500mm PF for the new Z 600mm PF? It's a lot of modest upgrades, but positioned you well for the next 8-10 years. It also checks the boxes on light weight, excellent optics, small size, etc. The 400mm f/4.5 is also an option to replace the 500mm PF.The 500 PF is essential for travel, IMO. It is light and I can use my other travel lenses like the 14-24/14-30, 24-70 and 100-400 and add the 1.4x TCIII to the 500 to get to 700 f8.
A good combo for birding is the 500 + 800 PF and weighs in at just over the weight of the 400 bare! Also, using the 500 or 800 on the Z9 is much easier than the 400 f2.8 E FL VR.
It's a tough one. As I have the 500 pf and the 180-600, the 600 pf is probably not quite as urgently attractive. But there are some compelling reasons for it to be in my kit in the future after selling the 500 pf. It is a native Z mount, it has features that the 500 pf does not like AF recall on Fn buttons, and is 600mm over 500mm which would be a better fit with the 100-400 for travel. However, I do have the 180-600 and that can also serve as a one lens travel lens for birds and wildlife and it covers as much territory as the 100-400 and 600. As usual, it always comes down to use cases. It might be better to have a 70-200 f2.8 VR S + a 1.4x TC and the 600 in the travel kit, the 70-200 serving as a low light, shallow DOF lens.What are your thoughts on swapping the 500mm PF for the new Z 600mm PF? It's a lot of modest upgrades, but positioned you well for the next 8-10 years. It also checks the boxes on light weight, excellent optics, small size, etc. The 400mm f/4.5 is also an option to replace the 500mm PF.
Ken, like you, the Z800 and 180-600 are the lenses in my bag for wildlife and birds. I don't have the 24-120 f4 yet, but I may just get it for my travels and along with the 180-600 and 14-24 or 14-30 could be the perfect travel lens system - for me anyway.For me the closest thing now to 1 lens for wildlife is Z180-600 on Z9. Heralds back to my last one lens for wildlife option in DSLR days was Tamron 150-600 G2 or a Sigma 60-600 sport. These on D500, D850. At the end of my DSLR days I also used a 600 f/4E on D6, D850 and D500, it was a fantastic lenes and used primarily for birding. But it was a logistics headache and still less focal length than I wanted.
For a run and gun bird ID photographer who hand holds 100% of the time and who does not travel by air anymore the Z180-600 is now my back up and used if there is no doubt that I will want the flexibility of variable focal length and Z80mm to long and minimum focal distance of 16.5 feet to long. That situation of rare and I expect that the Z800 will continue to get used for bird ID photography at least 80% of the time.
While I have Z70-200 f/2.8, Z24-120 f/4 and Z100-400 f/4.5-5.6 I just ordered a Tamron Zmount 35-150 f/2-2.8 for use as an all around lens when photographing people, events and objects indoors and in low light for my church and some other non profits.
Before the Z180-600 and after getting the Z800 5-1-22 I would frequently head for a day in the field with the Z800, Z100-400 and Z24-120. Most of the time the only lens used was the Z800. Now it has become the Z800 and the Z180-600 and occasionally the the 24-120. After I get the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 it may or may not supplant the Z24-120.