Slimming down gear
- Thread starter sh1209
- Start date
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).
O
Well-known member
Completely understand your purpose and reasoning,
O
Well-known member
Sounds like your covered from 70-800mm and that's even without a TC or using DX mode. If you put a TC 1.4 on the 70-200 you have a zoom for around 100 - 280
You certainly have it all well covered.
It seems you don't like the outcomes of the 180-600 from past experiences.
These slimming down thought are for birding only not people and landscape stuff that I have already slimmed down.
While involved with a discussion on another thread "Best Low Light Nikon Telephoto Lenses" I came down to a possible funky change that would slim down my birding lenses. @Lance B got me thinking when he mentioned hand holding the Z600 f/4 TC.
Z800 f/6.3 on Z9 is no problem for me to hand hold and I used to hand hold a D6 and 600 f/4E heavy and long , until the Z800 came along 5-1-2022.
Z800 f/3.6 5.6 x 15.2" 5.25 lbs
Z400 f/2.8TC 6.2 x 15 6.5 lbs
Z600 f/4TC 6.5 x 17.3" 7.19 lbs
600 f/4E 6.5 x17" 8.4 lbs.
The Z400 f/2.8 TC only 2.3" shorter and .69 lbs lighter than the Z600TC. I would probably have the 400 f/2.8 TC engaged all the time so f/4, and no advantage in low light, and it would still be less focal length than what I usually need.
For sliming down my lens inventory If the 600 TC felt right at + 2.1" and + 2.04 lbs. I "could" sell off the Z600 and Z800 f/6.3 since the one lens would cover both ranges. I would still have the Tamron 150-500 for a lighter shorter focal length close range or big flock lens.
So 600TC may be the NPS Loaner to try out.
While involved with a discussion on another thread "Best Low Light Nikon Telephoto Lenses" I came down to a possible funky change that would slim down my birding lenses. @Lance B got me thinking when he mentioned hand holding the Z600 f/4 TC.
Z800 f/6.3 on Z9 is no problem for me to hand hold and I used to hand hold a D6 and 600 f/4E heavy and long , until the Z800 came along 5-1-2022.
Z800 f/3.6 5.6 x 15.2" 5.25 lbs
Z400 f/2.8TC 6.2 x 15 6.5 lbs
Z600 f/4TC 6.5 x 17.3" 7.19 lbs
600 f/4E 6.5 x17" 8.4 lbs.
The Z400 f/2.8 TC only 2.3" shorter and .69 lbs lighter than the Z600TC. I would probably have the 400 f/2.8 TC engaged all the time so f/4, and no advantage in low light, and it would still be less focal length than what I usually need.
For sliming down my lens inventory If the 600 TC felt right at + 2.1" and + 2.04 lbs. I "could" sell off the Z600 and Z800 f/6.3 since the one lens would cover both ranges. I would still have the Tamron 150-500 for a lighter shorter focal length close range or big flock lens.
So 600TC may be the NPS Loaner to try out.
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
"one of us... one of us..." I swapped from the 400TC + 800PF to the 300GM + 600TC and love it. a bit more expensive, but it made my kit much smaller and lighter.
FWIW, my 400TC vs 600TC weighed almost 1lb different (with all accessories) on paper, but in the field the 600TC feels lighter. perhaps different balancing?
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Interesting weight of the 600TC in your photo. My 600TC weighs in at 3.54kg which is 7.80lb, your weight shows 8.48lb. The Lenscoat and Zemlin hood must make up the extra .68lb! I purposely didn't get the Zemlin hood as it seemed more weighty than the original hood nor a Lens coat as it also adds weight.
O
Well-known member
Regardless of brand etc i have always been a fan- lover of 300mm F2.8 and 600mm F4 glass, its a great all round spread, for what i did or do.
Only an opinion
So you shoot with two different systems? No zoom?
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
it's also not a super fair comparison, because my 400TC had all the cheap ebay knockoffs (lens foot and lens cap) while the 600TC came with the much nicer (and probably heavier) Zemlin stuff
I agree. 300 f2.8 + 600 f4 is a killer combo. If Nikon releases a 300TC, I would be in heaven
you can see all the gear I own in my signature. I don't shoot with two different systems, (ie bodies), I just own a lot of Sony glass because it all works exceptionally on Nikon systems.
I have a 35-150 and 100-400 right now, and I've previously owned the 70-200 and 180-600 - but zooms have never been my first choice for anything. I like big fast fixed primes. I only use zooms as a last resort when traveling.
What adaptor do you use?
nmerc_photos
Well-known member
Megadap ETZ 21 (not pro)
I have like 10 of them because I don't like swapping them from lens to lens, so I keep one on each Sony lens. I think I paid around $100 each used for them
O
Well-known member
Why i like the 300 2.8VR II tool is if i take a few steps back i get nearer a 200 mm look, take a few steps forward i get nearer 400mm, if i use the 1.4 TCIII when needed is perfectly fine it gives me 420 at F4. I can still step backwards or forwards, In exceptionally good light conditions the 2xTCIII does deliver very usable results.
400mm F2.8 was too heavy too big to close in range to the 600mm.
The Other option is flicking in and out of DX mode to fill the frame, which isn't an issue and very effective.
Add to that whatever option i use i can always crop a little and because of the incredible micro detail and contrast added to great lower light performance the outcome can be quite significant especially with 45mp, if the Z7III comes out with 60mp even better.
Plus the VR II is backwards compatible Z8 Z9 to D850 D6.
The key benefits is just the natural looking image quality, the formulae of this lens has been used by Nikon for around 40 years to build all the DSLR lenses.
Plus i have had the 300 2.8 VR II for so long now, i dread the thought of the mirror less version price point to save 1kg or have a built in TC
The closest thing to the 300 2.8 VR II currently in mirror less is the 400 F4.5 certainly not better but closer to.
When the light falls of the F2.8 comes into play and the 300 VR II is sharp detailed above all natural looking at F2.8 always.
For high end exotics i work on a cost to use ratio to determine ownership, this is where the renting option comes in to play.
The 300 2.8 VR II is used for Soccer matches mostly at night, in door night time basketball events, motocross events, tennis matches, along with a 70-200 FL, Rodeo events, car and motor racing events. Outdoor Model shoots. Land scape, Some wild life.
The 600 F4 needs no explanation.
In good light there is no denying the 200-500 180-600 zooms are excellent.
MTF Charts are fine to determine facts, but should not be the deal breaker or maker, in the end its how the photo you make looks and makes you feel.
If the Z version is half the weight and optically still looks natural then hey it may get a look in.
Only an opinion
Last edited:
I've gone back and forth a lot on gear. About 2 years ago, I switched from Nikon to Canon mainly because I wanted a change. This gave me cause to re-evaluate my gear. My current lens kit is 10-18, 16mm prime, 100mm macro, 24-105, 100-500 tele zoom. I find these lenses cover everything I realistically want to shoot. The 16 prime I use the least but I do use it for some landscape and some astro stuff.
If I had to get rid of one of them, the 16 would be it.
If I had to get rid of one of them, the 16 would be it.
O
Well-known member
Gee i better get ready if Nikon makes a 300 F2.8 Z at 1.5kg. I recon it may be around 8-9k AUDThe Nikon 300 f2.8G VRII I had was superb, one of Nikon's finest. I would love a new Nikon Z300 f2.8 as long as it had as good IQ as the old G VRII version or better. The Sony version is only 1.5kg and by all accounts is also superb. It would be perfect to go along with my 600TC.
The G version just has that natural magical engaging look
I have always stayed with the 300 F2.8 - 600 F4 combo of tools especially for cropping and lower light tolerance.
The 300 2.8 VR II G just picks up so much micro detail and contrast.
Only an opinion