Slimming down gear

[Anjin San]

Your other lenses - I'd argue you can ditch the 200-600, or the 600 prime. But that's just me, and I'd likely keep the 200-600. Everyone should have a 24-70 or similar. And the 20, 50, and 90 macro are keepers (again for me). You could probably also sell the 14 or 20, but personally I love a good 20 prime.

I kept both the 600PF and the 180-600 along with the 100-400. My 2 lens/2 body outing kit is the prime and shorter zoom…the longer zoom is for a lighter load if I only want to carry one or if it's a longer hike where weight becomes important. If I had to choose I would lose the long zoom before the 600PF hands down…and may end up selling the longer zoom depending on how much it gets used. I also had and sold the 70-200 because it never got used…too short for wildlife and on the few occasions it was used f2.8 wasn't important. But yeah…use case is important.

 

[macwalter]

I do mostly wildlife and owned both the 70-200 and the 100-400mm. The 70-200 is a wonderful lens, it is incredibly sharp and handles well. That being said I sold it and kept the 100-400 as for me it is more versatile and I found that except in a few cases the 70-200 was not long enough. I also have the 400f4.5 for lower light where once again the 70-200 was too short. I am in the same boat as to having more than I need and so I also purchased the 24-120mm for the wider angle shots which I use more often than the 100-400 these days. I will keep that lens though it is very versatile and sharp enough. I mostly use the 600pf, then The 400f4.5 then the 24-120 and finally the 100-400. If I get anything else it would be a macro or a lightweight 300f2.8 and sell the 400f4.5. I have both TCs as well.as an aside I was shooting in my back yard with the 600mm and the 2xTC just for fun handholding and although the hit rate was poor and the focus speed slow, I was pleasantly surprised to see that when I did hit the shot it was quite sharp with excellent feather detail etc. I would not recommend this combo overall But it will work in a pinch.

 

[Patrick M]

I have too many lenses but my wife says I don’t need to sell, so don’t! After 47 years, no wonder I’m still In love!

 

[gvrao88]

I have made a final decision.. sell off my 180-600 Z and replace with Z 400 mm 4.5 and add Z800 MM PF. I go once in a year to Safari and i think i should be good . I have Z9 ,Z9 and D850 with 70-200 mm 2.8. Any thoughts?

 

[sh1209]

I have too many lenses but my wife says I don’t need to sell, so don’t! After 47 years, no wonder I’m still In love!

lol that’s a good wife

 

[O]

The 70-200mm lens is used primarily for landscape photography, including stitched panoramas. It is also an option for macro photography as I can no longer use the Nikon 200mm macro lens with my Z cameras.

Cant you use the 200 F4 macro manually on the Z cameras, its such a stunning lens optically.

 

[Ken Miracle]

There two different completely tools.

Can you do everything you need on the 100-400 ?
if not Keep them both you have nothing to worry about, its when you sell one then you will need it is usually the case LOL.

For myself If it doesn't get used in 6 months it goes on a certain wire shelf, if it then it doesn't get used by the time 12 months is up its sold or given away, regardless of what it is.

The less is more principal is a blessing.

For myself Digital products always have a high obsolescence depreciation rate.

Newer technology in cameras a lenses is such that quality lower cost zooms can deliver some very impressive results.

I saw a photographic and painting gallery open this week, many of the photos from the D850 and 28-300 hand held works sold, the clinically blindingly sharp accurate technically photos didn't get sold.

Buyers didn't see or care let alone know about CA, Noise, Flair, softness, it was the mood, colour, and composition that engaged them.


Only an opinion

The 28-300 strikes again ... as I sit here looking a images on the wall taken with it My wife's Z28-400 has a lot of the same characteristics and ignored by many

 

[O]

The 28-300 strikes again ... as I sit here looking a images on the wall taken with it My wife's Z28-400 has a lot of the same characteristics and ignored by many

The 28-300 is very underrated, size color versatility cost, and in many cases more than sharp enough, i take it the Z 28-400 is a fraction better or much the same ?

 

[Ken Miracle]

The 28-300 is very underrated, size color versatility cost, and in many cases more than sharp enough, i take it the Z 28-400 is a fraction better or much the same ?

28-300 was a workhorse on D4S on my only trip to Africa. I have only seen the results with the Z28-400 from my wife's Z7II, she never takes it off. She replaced a Z400 f/4.5 with it and she can do everything she did at the long end and with it and has the rest of that focal range to use. It is subjective but I would say that it is a bit better, focus speed and IQ.

 

[O]

I have made a final decision.. sell off my 180-600 Z and replace with Z 400 mm 4.5 and add Z800 MM PF. I go once in a year to Safari and i think i should be good . I have Z9 ,Z9 and D850 with 70-200 mm 2.8. Any thoughts?

You ask for any Thoughts...

My self i would rent each lens for a weekend and shoot at subjects be it birds cars planes trees emulating the focal distance and conditions expected on safari, its going to show you hands on what to expect, be it the good the bad or the ugly.

May i ask what is the most common focal range that you used to date on safari, how does that compare to what you felt you lost of missed out on ?

A question, what are the environmental conditions in changing lenses in the field on Safari. Is that something you do or do not want to do, the D850 would be more vulnerable to sensor dust than the Z9.

The 800mm is stunning PERIOD, it will transform your photography in general not just on safari or long range shooting in fact my friends use it more for closer shots than longer.
Such a long lens like most long lenses adds compression to an image offering a nicer back ground.
Shooting that lens as close as possible to the subject will impress you be it a lion or even a flower only meters away.

The 400 is stunning even with a 1.4 TC.

As is the 600 PF and may work well with a TC 1.4

In good light there isn't much wrong with the 180-600 but may be far from ideal with a TC.

The 70-200 can always be in your bag, your past image focal length data analysis will determine the priority or strategy.

My self i felt the range of 100-600 was excellent focal range, but you would know more based on your location on Safari.

Only an opinion

 

[O]

28-300 was a workhorse on D4S on my only trip to Africa. I have only seen the results with the Z28-400 from my wife's Z7II, she never takes it off. She replaced a Z400 f/4.5 with it and she can do everything she did at the long end and with it and has the rest of that focal range to use. It is subjective but I would say that it is a bit better, focus speed and IQ.

Thank you Ken, nice to hear.

 

[Ken Miracle]

You ask for any Thoughts...

My self i would rent each lens for a weekend and shoot at subjects be it birds cars planes trees emulating the focal distance and conditions expected on safari, its going to show you hands on what to expect, be it the good the bad or the ugly.

May i ask what is the most common focal range that you used to date on safari, how does that compare to what you felt you lost of missed out on ?

A question, what are the environmental conditions in changing lenses in the field on Safari. Is that something you do or do not want to do, the D850 would be more vulnerable to sensor dust than the Z9.

The 800mm is stunning PERIOD, it will transform your photography in general not just on safari or long range shooting in fact my friends use it more for closer shots than longer.
Such a long lens like most long lenses adds compression to an image offering a nicer back ground.
Shooting that lens as close as possible to the subject will impress you be it a lion or even a flower only meters away.

The 400 is stunning even with a 1.4 TC.

As is the 600 PF and may work well with a TC 1.4

In good light there isn't much wrong with the 180-600 but may be far from ideal with a TC.

The 70-200 can always be in your bag, your past image focal length data analysis will determine the priority or strategy.

My self i felt the range of 100-600 was excellent focal range, but you would know more based on your location on Safari.

Only an opinion

Your spilling the beans on one unsung features on the Z800 f/6.3 ... time to get to bed and take the Z800 and Z9 out to play chasing a rare bird tomrrow

 

[Snapshot2020]

I have too many lenses but my wife says I don’t need to sell, so don’t! After 47 years, no wonder I’m still In love!

When I mention to my wife that I want to sell a couple of my Nikon DSLR’s and some Glass I haven’t used since transitioning to Mirrorless she quickly responds “No way”. Oh… 54 years of marriage with a Queen of Finance.

 

[Patrick M]

I have made a final decision.. sell off my 180-600 Z and replace with Z 400 mm 4.5 and add Z800 MM PF. I go once in a year to Safari and i think i should be good . I have Z9 ,Z9 and D850 with 70-200 mm 2.8. Any thoughts?

On my safari in June with the z180-600, 25% of my images were at 600mm, 25% under 200mm. We were in those 10 seater transporters. I’d have been ok with just the z70-200/2.8 tbh. As for your z800mm won’t hear haze be an issue? On my trip, it was ok with one lens but there were 3 of us in each row, so a big 800 additionally won’t have been possible.

 

[gvrao88]

Thank you Patrick.. I do private safaris and don't go with groups, so the space is not a problem. I took my 500 mm F4 G and it's too heavy and getting rid of that lens . 180-600 did well , but the pics were not scary like F4. Wish i can share few pictures here. I tried but looks like there is a size limit.

 

[robert_in_ca]

I have made a final decision.. sell off my 180-600 Z and replace with Z 400 mm 4.5 and add Z800 MM PF. I go once in a year to Safari and i think i should be good . I have Z9 ,Z9 and D850 with 70-200 mm 2.8. Any thoughts?

Which country and what time of year are you going? I go several times a year to TZ and SA and depending on location and season my kit slight changes. However with that said for Eastern Africa the 800mm would work (I prefer 600mm), but unless you're solely focused on birds it's not the idea focal length for Kruger or parks in SA.

My standard kit for over 2 years was Z9, Z8, 400TC, 70-200mm, 1.4TC and 24-120mm (which I rarely used). Then I sold my 400TC and 70-200mm and 1.4TC and went with the 600TC and 100-400mm.

 

[gvrao88]

Which country and what time of year are you going? I go several times a year to TZ and SA and depending on location and season my kit slight changes. However with that said for Eastern Africa the 800mm would work (I prefer 600mm), but unless you're solely focused on birds it's not the idea focal length for Kruger or parks in SA.

My standard kit for over 2 years was Z9, Z8, 400TC, 70-200mm, 1.4TC and 24-120mm (which I rarely used). Then I sold my 400TC and 70-200mm and 1.4TC and went with the 600TC and 100-400mm.

Thank you Robert. I just go once in a year to Masai Mara! Wildlife photography is my hobby.. so can’t afford the 400 mm 2.8 ! Most of the times the 400 or 500 mm works. But at times i miss an extra reach.

 

[O]

I do mostly wildlife and owned both the 70-200 and the 100-400mm. The 70-200 is a wonderful lens, it is incredibly sharp and handles well. That being said I sold it and kept the 100-400 as for me it is more versatile and I found that except in a few cases the 70-200 was not long enough. I also have the 400f4.5 for lower light where once again the 70-200 was too short. I am in the same boat as to having more than I need and so I also purchased the 24-120mm for the wider angle shots which I use more often than the 100-400 these days. I will keep that lens though it is very versatile and sharp enough. I mostly use the 600pf, then The 400f4.5 then the 24-120 and finally the 100-400. If I get anything else it would be a macro or a lightweight 300f2.8 and sell the 400f4.5. I have both TCs as well.as an aside I was shooting in my back yard with the 600mm and the 2xTC just for fun handholding and although the hit rate was poor and the focus speed slow, I was pleasantly surprised to see that when I did hit the shot it was quite sharp with excellent feather detail etc. I would not recommend this combo overall But it will work in a pinch.

Good info, thanks for sharing the experience, despite all it seems a lot of people i know are all looking for a 300 F2.8 but lighter, it would be great if Nikon made one, i find my 300 F2.8 G VR II is just so hard to let go of despite the 2.9kgs, i mean i have no issue with the weight as i am very fit and very strong, but i wouldn't want to do a 3 day hike with it if you know what i mean. regardless of what anyone says, i enjoy fast glass F2.8 F4 in the 600mm prime, especially in low light.

I like the flow of your 24-120, 100-400.
One could almost replace the 300 2.8 with the 400 F4.5 it’s that good i am told.

 

[O]

Your spilling the beans on one unsung features on the Z800 f/6.3 ... time to get to bed and take the Z800 and Z9 out to play chasing a rare bird tomrrow

i hear nothing but spectacular feed back on this tool, to me its not just for far away subjects it seems.
Hope you get what your looking for tomorrow, if anyone can nail it you and the 800 will.

 

[ButlerKid]

........Wish i can share few pictures here. I tried but looks like there is a size limit.

Why not re-size processed images to jpg and 1200 pixels on the long size? That's what the rest of us do.

Or use this preset from Steve Perry...

 

[gvrao88]

Why not re-size processed images to jpg and 1200 pixels on the long size? That's what the rest of us do.

Or use this preset from Steve Perry...

Thank you

 

[gvrao88]

These are from my Z8 and 180-600 Z

 

[gvrao88]

And there is no option to post pictures under my profile.

 

[Ken Miracle]

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.

i hear nothing but spectacular feed back on this tool, to me its not just for far away subjects it seems.
Hope you get what your looking for tomorrow, if anyone can nail it you and the 800 will.

I found it. Hooded Warbler a immature female. This is the 6th one reported and recognized by the Idaho Rare Bird Committee for Idaho. They breed in the south eastern US and migrate accross the Gulf of Mexico to various Caribbean islands, Mexico and Northern Venezuela for the winter. So Idaho way off course. It was very sculky, in and out of shade and sun moved very fast chasing bugs around. Partly cloudy and windy so had only the back half of my Zemlin 2 piece hood on to avoid the sail effect. Light was craze and leaves and branches whipping around. So I was happy to get bird ID record shots that showed the plumage on head, neck and back white on outer tail feathers and facial pattern that are not found on any other bird in the same combinations. Better than what others were able to get with 200 to 600 mm glass or super zoom bridge cameras (long enough lenses but not fast focusing enough). Hand holding was the only way to get low enough and be able to move quickly to find holes in the willows and grasses to catch this bird.

 

[O]

I found it. Hooded Warbler a immature female. This is the 6th one reported and recognized by the Idaho Rare Bird Committee for Idaho. They breed in the south eastern US and migrate accross the Gulf of Mexico to various Caribbean islands, Mexico and Northern Venezuela for the winter. So Idaho way off course. It was very sculky, in and out of shade and sun moved very fast chasing bugs around. Partly cloudy and windy so had only the back half of my Zemlin 2 piece hood on to avoid the sail effect. Light was craze and leaves and branches whipping around. So I was happy to get bird ID record shots that showed the plumage on head, neck and back white on outer tail feathers and facial pattern that are not found on any other bird in the same combinations. Better than what others were able to get with 200 to 600 mm glass or super zoom bridge cameras (long enough lenses but not fast focusing enough). Hand holding was the only way to get low enough and be able to move quickly to find holes in the willows and grasses to catch this bird.

Fantastic, hand holding as well, WOW.

Great moment seeing this rare bird.

The long lens with all that compression delivers excellent back ground and foreground blur, that last image is a wall hanger, good on you mate.