arbitrage
Well-known member
I use my 600/4 70% of the time....the other 29% is using my 400/2.8. The final 1% is my 100-400.
Handheld 98% of the time.
Handheld 98% of the time.
Super Telephoto F4 Lens Use
- Thread starter Abinoone
- 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).
ARClark
Well-known member
I've had 500mm f/4's for a dozen years. The focal length was the sweet spot for me for hand-holding between the heavier 400 f/2.8s and longer 600 f/4s. My 500E Fl is my sharpest lens. It's nice for lower light and subject isolation and takes TCs well. But truth be told, now in my early 70s and shooting mainly with a Z9 and Z8, I rarely use it anymore. It's been supplanted by the significantly lighter 800 PF and 500 PF for my small bird photography. I've kept it for situations where I plan on shooting in low light and/or am using a tripod and don't have to lug it too far. IQ of the 800 f/6.3 PF is on par with the 500E and 1.4x TC (700mm f/5.6), and better than the 500E and 1.7x TC (850mm f/6.7). It also features better connectivity with the camera such as using a programmable button to easily recall focus distance without fumbling for a button on the lens barrel. IQ of the 500 PF is very close to the 500E, and it's just half the weight and much smaller. It also takes a 1.4x TC quite well and focuses fast with Z8/Z9.
Bottom line, to the extent portability is paramount, I'd recommend a 400 f/4.5 with 1.4x TC, 500 PF, 600 PF or 800 PF over the 400 and 600 TCs. However, if you're going to be shooting from a tripod anyway and you'd appreciate the benefits of larger apertures and the built-in TCs (and can afford them!), then go for a Z exotic TC prime.
Last edited:
foxysport
Active member
You all are probably going to shout at me but I have a TC-17 on 600mm f4 FL with Z9 as a hand-hold only almost glued on combo (for some reason, my TC-14 is actually not as good, go figure). I occasionally use a Gitzo Systematic 3 with a Wimberley gimbal when patience and steady hand are essential. Each handheld "session" could last up to a minute and then I take a short rest--hanging the lens on a Mr JanGear "baby carrier" positioned symmetrically right in front of me. I am thinking 600TC as a replacement going forward at some point. For close-up bird in flight kind of fare, I use a 400mm 4.5 prime with a TC-1.4.
Perhaps the main reason is that in the UK, the birds are very skittish and the required distance is almost always higher than in the US where, trust me, you have it really good. I had a Cooper's hawk in Key West sitting a few feet up on the branch and nobody, including the bird, cares. Here, the raptors would be 50 meters away and watchful. Same goes for the songbirds.
Perhaps the main reason is that in the UK, the birds are very skittish and the required distance is almost always higher than in the US where, trust me, you have it really good. I had a Cooper's hawk in Key West sitting a few feet up on the branch and nobody, including the bird, cares. Here, the raptors would be 50 meters away and watchful. Same goes for the songbirds.
Last edited:
My 600 f4 is a G model so nothing light about it (except for its used price compared to some of the other options). It is so worth lugging around when it comes to getting that wonderful subject isolation and great background that only the f4 on a long lens can offer. I recently got my 500pf fixed and started using it as my take along lens when traveling to the store etc. I feel more often than not when I am grabbing it for an opportune shot, I am wishing I had the big lens with me.
Doug Herr
Well-known member
Birds' wariness varies considerably in different regions of the USA. In much of South Florida birds are far more approachable than in many other regions.
Hobbzz
Well-known member
When I switched to Sony last year I didn't replace all the glass that I collected over the years that was just collecting dust on shelves. Now I only have a 400 2.8, 1.4tc, and a 100mm macro.
10+ years ago the 600 f4 and to a lesser extent, the 400 and 500mm‘s were king and everyone who could afford it had one. A lot of us also had 300 f2.8’s as well plus the heavy aluminum tripod. This was standard kit for any serious bird/nature photographer. But, times change and as some of us are growing older, we want/need lighter gear. We now have PF lenses, ML bodies and carbon fiber tripods. I doubt the f4 super telephotos will disappear but I doubt you’ll ever see as many as you did way back when. It is tempting to pick one up as they are so cheap on the used market but you probably won’t use it nearly as much as you think.
Given my penchant in the last 4 years for birding and ID photography mostly on foot in a wide range of habitat and terrain but with subjects seldom less than 20 feet away and all handheld or occasionally from the rolling blind my SUV.
I have almost always carried the longest focal length lens I had ... included were Sigma 150-600 sport, Tamron 150-600 G2 and the last f mount variable focal length was the Sigma 60-600. Then I got lucky and got a great buy on a refurbished f mount 600 f/4E from Nikon USA that showed up just as they were having their periodic refurb sale. I used that lens almost exclusively after that an amazing lens and the last f mount lens I sold after I went all in on the Z system when I got my Z800 5-1-22. The Z800 has that extra reach I was always longing for and the logistics in the field and vehicle made it an easy choice for my needs. The Z180-600 is my backup for the Z800 or for use where I want variable focal length and or closer MFD which is probably less than 10% of the time. The Z180-600 has replaced the Z100-400 which now sits in my dry cabinet.
So far I have not been able to justify the $ and the extra weight of a Z600 f4 TC over the Z800 pf. For my use the Z400 f/2.8 TC has more appeal and noted by others above more versatility.
I have almost always carried the longest focal length lens I had ... included were Sigma 150-600 sport, Tamron 150-600 G2 and the last f mount variable focal length was the Sigma 60-600. Then I got lucky and got a great buy on a refurbished f mount 600 f/4E from Nikon USA that showed up just as they were having their periodic refurb sale. I used that lens almost exclusively after that an amazing lens and the last f mount lens I sold after I went all in on the Z system when I got my Z800 5-1-22. The Z800 has that extra reach I was always longing for and the logistics in the field and vehicle made it an easy choice for my needs. The Z180-600 is my backup for the Z800 or for use where I want variable focal length and or closer MFD which is probably less than 10% of the time. The Z180-600 has replaced the Z100-400 which now sits in my dry cabinet.
So far I have not been able to justify the $ and the extra weight of a Z600 f4 TC over the Z800 pf. For my use the Z400 f/2.8 TC has more appeal and noted by others above more versatility.
CJC2
Member
I'm a sports guy, so I use my 400/2.8 TC for just over 50% of my images. My buddy is a bird guy, who uses his 600/4 TC most of the time. I do, ocasionally, use something longer as does he, occasionally, use somethng shorter. Best of luck.
Jebu
New member
Have you ever actually used such a lens? You really have to carry and use a supertele to appreciate not only the unique images they can capture, but the commitment required to wield it. The varied replies to your original question thus far are quite telling considering the very niche audience of this forum.
Do you shoot from a car window or hike several hours to find your locations? Your enthusiasm for carrying a 600mm may be quite different depending on how far you carry it.
Have you considered all the ancillary weight? Big lenses require big tripods, gimbals and bags. I have tried forgoing a mono or tripod on some occasions and regretted it. After hiking for a couple hours I don't do well hand holding a 3kg lens. So I carry the additional 2+kg of a tripod and gimbal so it can bear the weight of my lens when I'm shooting.
I suggest renting a lens a couple times to actually get a feel for the reality of carrying one around.
To your question: 1 in 4 times I use a big lens (200 f2, 300 f2.8, 500 f4). 3/4 of the time I'll carry a lighter but not necessarily smaller lens (200-600, 70-200, 100-400). Or, I just carry an entirely smaller mFT system Olympus OM-1 + 300 f4.
Last edited:
FB101
Well-known member
I use my 600 f:4 for about 90% of my favorite shots every year... does it really matter if it's one day or 300 days?
But to answer your question, about 3 outings per year (from 1 day to 7 days) because that's all the time I can dedicate with my current workload.
On Sony I don't have the option of the 600 f:6.3 PF but based on price and performance, I would make that trade off if I shot Nikon - save a lot of weight / bulk and a lot of $ with a lens that is quite stellar.
RikWriter
Well-known member
The thing is, if you are prepared to drop the money for a lens like that, it's usually because you've tried the lighter and cheaper solutions and they haven't proven satisfactory.
Jebu
New member
True, but that's only half the equation. There's a big difference between thinking you need to use a big lens and actually using one. I make that calculus every time I shoot. For me, ease of carry wins out ~75% of the time. It's also a numbers game. When I go to a place where I know my odds of seeing a particular animal is low, I'm not humping a big lens and tripod over a long hike. I've carried a 500 f4 several hours round trip without ever shooting a single frame because there were no animals to be found. That feels like a failed photo trip. That really makes me question life choices when I get home. Whereas when I carry smaller "just in case" setup on that same hike and return with zero images, I feel like I had a great day hiking. So it's all about expectations. Are you going out with a specific goal and have legitimate expectations of seeing the animal you're hoping for? Or are you just going for a hike and want to be prepared in case you happen upon something?
RikWriter
Well-known member
Most of my photos are not achieved by miles of hiking.
Ltgk20
Active member
I don't know that if have been willing to lug the older super telephotos around, but the latest generation is substantially lighter. I don't give much thought to the weight of my 600f4, as it hangs from my black rapid strap easily enough. However, though they've made them lighter, they're still very large and it's the size that I think more about.
pkj
New member
Like many others I am also losing (some, not all) strength to age and handholding my big 600mm f/4 is no longer a realistic proposition. That said, it is still my 'go to lens' for all wildlife (except giraffes and elephants basically) - and especially birds. However, if buying I think you need to think about the (arguably essential) add on carry of a sturdy tripod and gimbal head. I feel the carry is worth it but it all depends on your ambition, stamina......and wallet. I do believe that in most cases very very good results can also be achieved using e.g. the 100-500mm w/Extender if you are worried about weight. This is also a much cheaper option, of course. Good luck!
I use my 600 mm Tc most of the time I am shooting , specially when I travel to destinations to photograph wildlife. Last year, I traveled two weeks to Mississippi and Florida, 7 weeks to Newfounland and 18 days Safari in Tanzania and Kenya plus every weekend in Spring and Fall to photograph bird´s migration Here in Quebec. I took more than 250 000 photos and Videos and at least 70% of them, were with the 600 tc.
When you pay more than 15 000 ( here in Montreal 23 000 including tax) , you better make use of it specially when you can get the best quality photo. The 400 tc and 600 tc are really amazing lenses and you can’t not be satisfied and happy if you get one of them.
Tomorrow, it is going to be my primary lens to photograph the eclipse. I am taking two others lenses with three body cameras. I will be using the 600 to photograph all stage of the eclipse, the 180-600 mmm for videos and some shots, and the 24-70 for composite landscape photos. The 600 mm tc is always in my bag when I am not doing landscape which is most of the time. Get one of them and i am sure you will never regret it