Nikon Shooters - Would you switch to another brand (or have you?)

[GrandNagus50]

Nikon 600mm PF Z mount? that might get me to stay awhile.
I imagine the Z9 will have decent animal eye tracking before it is released. Add a 600 PF lens and that would be awesome, theoretically

Just to be sure people are being realistic, I have seen the construction parameters of PF technology analyzed, and I was/am convinced that Nikon will never make a 600mm f5.6 PF lens, as the front element would be too large and the lens either front-heavy or just too big and heavy (and expensive) to be sufficiently appealing to people looking for hand-held portability. It's more likely they would try to concoct a 600mm f6.3, or even a 600mm f8, if they could bring the price of the latter down sufficiently. Canon is selling a lot of 600 and 800m f11 lenses, surprisingly, largely because these are so cheap.

But no new PF lens is even hinted at on Nikon's Z mount "lens road map," so we can dream on . . .

 

[Jo Wuori]

Wow, well before preorders even opened, which was last November 17. OTOH, I preordered at Amazon right away (based on the mistaken notion that part of Amazon's rapacity is its ability to get scarce items for its customers, stupid, stupid) , and then a few months later (!) Amazon abruptly canceled my order, stating that "the item is not available." Whoa! To make matters more infuriating, I could NOT get through to anyone at Bezos, Incorporated, to protest or argue what the heck, keep the order open, why not? It was like a chapter out of Kafka. I had to reorder at another store, a smallish outfit in Texas that gave slight priority to people willing to put in partial prepayment. Even now, there are still people who preordered the lens on November 17 and have not received theirs. This is just in case you aren't counting your blessings and feeling good enough about having pre-preordered.
.

Wow, well before preorders even opened, which was last November 17. OTOH, I preordered at Amazon right away (based on the mistaken notion that part of Amazon's rapacity is its ability to get scarce items for its customers, stupid, stupid) , and then a few months later (!) Amazon abruptly canceled my order, stating that "the item is not available." Whoa! To make matters more infuriating, I could NOT get through to anyone at Bezos, Incorporated, to protest or argue what the heck, keep the order open, why not? It was like a chapter out of Kafka. I had to reorder at another store, a smallish outfit in Texas that gave slight priority to people willing to put in partial prepayment. Even now, there are still people who preordered the lens on November 17 and have not received theirs. This is just in case you aren't counting your blessings and feeling good enough about having pre-preordered.
.

We work with Hunt's in Melrose, Mass. Very great customer service--we work with Alan Samilion. You get to work with your own salesman

 

[ChrisM]

Just to be sure people are being realistic, I have seen the construction parameters of PF technology analyzed, and I was/am convinced that Nikon will never make a 600mm f5.6 PF lens, as the front element would be too large and the lens either front-heavy or just too big and heavy (and expensive) to be sufficiently appealing to people looking for hand-held portability. It's more likely they would try to concoct a 600mm f6.3, or even a 600mm f8, if they could bring the price of the latter down sufficiently. Canon is selling a lot of 600 and 800m f11 lenses, surprisingly, largely because these are so cheap.

But no new PF lens is even hinted at on Nikon's Z mount "lens road map," so we can dream on . . .

I don't agree with that at all. People even shoot the modern Canon and Sony 600mm f4 lenses handheld, and thése have large front elements. I'll take a f5.6 front element over a f4 front element every day.
The patent for the 600mm f5.6PF that Nikon issued (together with the patent for the 500PF) showed the 600PF being 33cm long, which is not too long at all. Talking about the cost involved making a 600PF being too high is also biased, since it would be fár, fár below that of the 600mm f4 lenses. I also wonder how many 600mm f4 users shoot their lens at f4 all the time, since it blows the background out too much in many cases as far as I am concerned.
Certainly now with the new improved mirrorless TC's in all brands and the improved auto focus with a narrow f8/f11 apertures, ánd the improved image stabilization coming from in-body IS and lens OS combined, I feel that I can make a much, much better case against a 600mm f4 lens than I could ever make against a 600mm f5.6PF lens.

I would buy a 600mm f5.6 lens in a heartbeat, and never look back.

 

[GrandNagus50]

I will not reiterate my points, but I stand by what I said. The difficulties of manufacture, and the size/weight/balance of a 600mm f5.6 PF, even one that is 33cm long (and how heavy?) render it highly unlikely. Sure, there was a 600mm f5.6 AI/AIS lens years ago (I actually still own one), so there was a market and I am sure there still is. But in between a big, professional 600 f4 (already on the lens road map) and a truly small, handheld lens like the 500mm f5.6 PF, if would be neither fish nor fowl in some ways. A 600mm f5.6 that is too big and front heavy to be easy for most people to handle is just not likely anytime soon. As for f4 superteles, the idea that f4 "blows out the background" has it backwards, really, as lots of photographers (not me so much) WANT that separation between subject and background that you get with f4. And if you are keen to handhold a 600mm f4 in the field, go ahead; not many people do this for more than a minute or two, and it seems like a bad photographic strategy overall.

And if, as you suggest, there is now improved autofocus (on mirrorless cameras) at say, f8, not to mention improved noise reduction at high IS0 levels, that is all the more argument for a 600mm f8 PF lens that would be considerably smaller, lighter, and less expensive than a 600mm f5.6. Or how about 600mm f6.3? What would be wrong with that? Improved autofocus, better high ISO noise reduction, etc. For the amount smaller it would be, I think it's definitely more likely than a 5.6, and the surprising (to me, anyway) popularity of the Canon pop-out f11 superteles only underscores this.

 

[eaj101]

I will not reiterate my points, but I stand by what I said. The difficulties of manufacture, and the size/weight/balance of a 600mm f5.6 PF that is "only" 33cm long (and how heavy?) render it highly unlikely. Sure, there was a 600mm f5.6 AI/AIS lens years ago (I actually still own one), and a lens that size could be engineered, probably a bit smaller and lighter. But in between a big, professional 600 f4 (already on the lens road map) and a small, handheld lens like the 500mm f5.6 PF, if would be neither fish now fowl and I doubt Nikon relishes marketing something like this. A 600mm f5.6 that is too big to be easy for most people to handle is just not likely anytime soon. As for f4 superteles, the idea that f4 "blows out the background" has it backwards, really, as lots of photographers (not me so much) WANT that separation between subject and background that you get with f4. And if you are keen to handhold a 600mm f4 in the field, go ahead; not many people do this for more than a minute or two, and it seems like a bad photographic strategy overall.

So if, as you suggest, there is now improved autofocus at say, f8, not to mention improved noise reduction at high IS0 levels, that is all the more argument for a 600mm f8 PF lens that would be considerably smaller, lighter, and less expensive than a 600mm f5.6. Or how about 600mm f6.3? What would be wrong with that? Improved autofocus, better high ISO noise reduction, etc. For the amount smaller it would be, I think it's definitely more likely than a 5.6, and the surprising (to me, anyway) popularity of the Canon pop-out f11 superteles only underscores this.

One of the major problems with small aperture telephotos is that you lose subject isolation. That's even a problem with the 500PF, though less of one, because you can shoot it wide open without any loss of sharpness, which is really unusual. To me the f11 Canon lenses are simply silly, even if cheap. They're not even sunny-16 lenses, and in marginal light your ISOs are going to be terrible. Take up digiscoping instead...

 

[ChrisM]

Your point of view is representative of what I see happening with the new mirrorless systems, Canons, Sony ánd Nikon: there is a strong tendency to erode the middle segment and devide up into a consumerclass and a professional high end class. In the consumer range nothing is objectionable: f11? no problem, the camera will solve things for you. At the other end, there is a no-compromise mentality, it has to be f4 and otherwise it is worthless.

The same goes for all relevant parameters: consumer class: cost hás to be down to where you can switch systems every year, otherwise it is too expensive and nobody will buy it. High end pro class: cost no issue, 14.000,- for the 600/4 and 7000,- for the Z? no problem, you get what you pay for right?
Consumer class weight: anything above 1,5 kg is out of the question, unless it is a 200-600 zoom (somehow that one escapes the weight policing). High end pro: weigth is measured in "weight-savings" the Z600/4 3.1 kg? No problem: that's 700 gr less than the AF-S 600?4, so feather weight-practically.
Same goes for size, quality control, weather sealing etc. etc.

The mirrorless market is a mess this way, in which there is little of interest for me, and for many D500 owners I assume. Keep in mind that your 600mm f5.6 lens is an ancient one: imagine the weight savings on the 400, 500, 600/4 lenses, and apply that to your 600mm f5.6 lens, that might produce a very attractive and high performing lens, something the 200-600's (or thereabouts) of the current camera market cannot touch.
Result is that I will most likely set my own switch to mirrorless on hold for at least five years, and wait untill attractive middle segment products like a 600/f5.6PF or a Z900 high performance crop body hopefully start to appear to fill the gap.

 

[eaj101]

Your point of view is representative of what I see happening with the new mirrorless systems, Canons, Sony ánd Nikon: there is a strong tendency to erode the middle segment and devide up into a consumerclass and a professional high end class. In the consumer range nothing is objectionable: f11? no problem, the camera will solve things for you. At the other end, there is a no-compromise mentality, it has to be f4 and otherwise it is worthless.

The same goes for all relevant parameters: consumer class: cost hás to be down to where you can switch systems every year, otherwise it is too expensive and nobody will buy it. High end pro class: cost no issue, 14.000,- for the 600/4 and 7000,- for the Z? no problem, you get what you pay for right?
Consumer class weight: anything above 1,5 kg is out of the question, unless it is a 200-600 zoom (somehow that one escapes the weight policing). High end pro: weigth is measured in "weight-savings" the Z600/4 3.1 kg? No problem: that's 700 gr less than the AF-S 600?4, so feather weight-practically.
Same goes for size, quality control, weather sealing etc. etc.

The mirrorless market is a mess this way, in which there is little of interest for me, and for many D500 owners I assume. Keep in mind that your 600mm f5.6 lens is an ancient one: imagine the weight savings on the 400, 500, 600/4 lenses, and apply that to your 600mm f5.6 lens, that might produce a very attractive and high performing lens, something the 200-600's (or thereabouts) of the current camera market cannot touch.
Result is that I will most likely set my own switch to mirrorless on hold for at least five years, and wait untill attractive middle segment products like a 600/f5.6PF or a Z900 high performance crop body hopefully start to appear to fill the gap.

It's a nit, but the 600 f5.6 AIS lens and the 400 f5.6 AIS lens are both great lenses. The 400 especially is sharp, light, and nimble,(almost PF range) and I wish I still had mine. I wish Nikon made AF versions of both.

On your observations on the change in the market, I think you're right, but I still think the f11 Canons are a step (or a lens ) too far. Can we agree that while the f4 lenses are often both cost and weight prohibitive, there are limits to acceptable compromises?

 

[ChrisM]

It's a nit, but the 600 f5.6 AIS lens and the 400 f5.6 AIS lens are both great lenses. The 400 especially is sharp, light, and nimble,(almost PF range) and I wish I still had mine. I wish Nikon made AF versions of both.

On your observations on the change in the market, I think you're right, but I still think the f11 Canons are a step (or a lens ) too far. Can we agree that while the f4 lenses are often both cost and weight prohibitive, there are limits to acceptable compromises?

Absolutely, I did not mean to say that the Canon f11 lenses are for me, far from it. It is just that there is a radically different approach in the consumer segment, where f11 is no objection because the R5 or R6 camera will solve all issues, at least that is what is common believe amongst the users of these lenses. With the AF capability and the high iso performance, these lenses seem to be a viable alternative to the 600mm f4 super telelens. Yet when you move up, you fall into a void before you reach the shore of the high end class, where the common believe is suddenly that f5.6 does not stand a chance in a prime lens (the 500PF being thé exeption as well as proof that this is nonsense, although I feel that 600mm is needed at f5.6 to give ideal subject isolation)

I guess this is all illustrative of the state of the current camera market, but it does lead to product announcement after product announcement of cameras and lenses that I personally don't want to spend my money on. Crop mirrorless bodies are in an appalling state, but also the lens offerings above 200mm are underwhelming, either as a product in itself, or otherwise from a cost perspective.

 

[mackster]

I've recently thought about possibly switching to Sony. I have been shooting with Nikon gear for close to 15-years but have grown tired over the slow introduction of products, and when they finally do introduce new products, their availability is in short supply. I remember when the 500mm PF was introduced a number of years ago and I placed my order for one with B&H. After 6-months of waiting for one I canceled my order because I was so fed-up with the delay. I'm not NPS (I should be considering how much I've spent on Nikon gear over the years!) so I have not been able to take advantage of that perk in terms of getting Nikon gear sooner rather than later/never. I haven't decided yet but was quite impressed with the Sony a9 II and 200-600mm after renting them. The AF was crazy good.