Thinking of getting a lens suited for wildlife photography.

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).

tahoemike00

tahoemike00

Member
Member's gallery
As a beginner wildlife/bird shooter wannabe:
I did do forum search here on the topic, as well as several youtube videos and other informational sources, but I thought I would ask you all as so many of you have been in the game for a long time. I am in "transition mode" between DSLR to mirrorless. (Z9 as you recall from my journey/saga)

I have lots of beautiful glass that I have collected over the years, even some jewels (bodies and lenses) back from the 35mm film days, all Nikon/Nikkor from when in used to work in mechanical engineering/accident investigation cases. Photo documentation was crucial. But I digress - none suited for wildlife / birds.

I currently have and currently use: (on my D5)
F mount 17-35 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 24-70 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 70-200 2.8 Nikkor
A FTZ ii adapter

Z-mount 70-200 2.8

What I am wanting to do is get a fast'ish zoom, something to 500 or 600mm.
My budget is $2k - possibly $2.5 k if it really gets me a push up to the "if you spend this much more, you'll get xxxx and xxxxx etc." must-have levels.

I've bounced around consideration between Tamron and Sigma as possibilities:
Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2
or
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget

Also started looking at some of the equivalent Nikon/Nikkor glass in the same class. Say 180-600?
Maybe jump right in with a Nikkor Z 180-600 f/5.6-6.3?

My main questions are should I go native Z or are there preowned glass zooms that are a "must have" even if it's an F mount.
In my research I start getting lost with all the alphabet soup lens model naming, and one letter can make a huge difference in the quality and performance (and price)
Also, is 5.6-6.3 "fast enough"?
And is specifically looking for a internal zoom mechanism unreasonable in the price range I'm in?
And I'm going to 'assume' that anything we talk about are all FX format...

Thanks for any comments/input/suggestions.

Cheers,
-Mike
 
Member's gallery
If you're looking at cheaper options I'd personally recommend looking at the Nikon 500mm f5.6. With birds and most wildlife you are going to be using the longer end of the zoom telephotos anyway so in my mind they are a bit of a useless extra weight that you are adding on to your kit. Native to the Z mount the 180-600 is a good lens but its is quite heavy. Alternatively you could save up a bit to grab a used copy of the 400mm 4.5 with the 1.4 TC, this would pair nicely with your 70-200 which would also be able to take advantage of the TC.
 
Member's gallery
When I sold my D850s and got a Z8, I decided to sell all my F mount lenses. I figured it only made sense to go all in on mirrorless. Of the options you list, I think Z 180-600 is the best option as long as you don't mind a little weight. It's not super heavy, but for me I found it got heavy after carrying it around for a while. I sold it and got a 600PF on this site used, but it was still beyond your budget so I think a new Z 180-600 is your best option. If you think it might be too heavy, a used Z 100-400 is next best.
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget
Click to expand...
The Sigma 150-600mm C is a great lens for the money, quite sharp at f8 and with decent features. I actually shot it against the Nikon Z 100-400 with 1.4x TC and at f8 the Sigma is consistently sharper.

It is let down by the AF speed which is very slow (you'll end up frustrated with missing shots) and having it on an FTZ adapter is not that nice to use.

IMO:
1) As a first Z-mount wildlife lens around 2k USD, the 180-600mm is the way to go.
2) f6.3 usually is enough but it will force you to think a bit more about how you place your subject against the background.
 
Member's gallery
There's the quicker route which is buy a Used F-mount telephoto such as the excellent 500 PF and learn with this, and/or a zoom telephoto. Add a Teleconverter and or upgrade as you refine your particular requirements and how, where, who you photograph.

Or the longer process is read through the articles, reviews etc on Photography Life, and ByThom and the exhaustive reviews etc with images by Brad Hill ... Also watch his video presentation, linked below.

Plus there's the wealth of BCG threads here asking which telephoto? Here's a schematic of the Greater Nikon Ecosystem depicting the options in F-mount and Z-mount

"Which Nikon telephoto(s)?" for Wildlife Genres: Updated

This question involves an interesting set of factors. The answer(s) depend on one's personal needs, and budget obviously, besides the diversity of subjects and respective conditions. Here's an attempt to sketch out the challenges, and outline where to find resources to help settling final...
bcgforums.com bcgforums.com
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
StefanSC said:
The Sigma 150-600mm C is a great lens for the money, quite sharp at f8 and with decent features. I actually shot it against the Nikon Z 100-400 with 1.4x TC and at f8 the Sigma is consistently sharper.

It is let down by the AF speed which is very slow (you'll end up frustrated with missing shots) and having it on an FTZ adapter is not that nice to use.

IMO:
1) As a first Z-mount wildlife lens around 2k USD, the 180-600mm is the way to go.
2) f6.3 usually is enough but it will force you to think a bit more about how you place your subject against the background.
Click to expand...
Yep I'm still using this one on my Z8. I think it's probably very similar in sharpness at 500-600mm stopped down just a little to the Nikon 180-600. The Nikon's got weather sealing, internal focus and better VR plus faster AF motors but for pure output I'm not so sure that it's going to be much different for the optics at the long end.

I think the Nikon 180-600 would be the way to go starting fresh, I have the Sigma from F mount and just am having trouble justifying spending 2k to replace it without getting really much difference in output. I probably will some day and I need to test the 180-600 against it first to be sure.

Mann's did a side by side with the Z9 against the 180-600 and honestly at 500mm they look extremely similar and 600mm stopped down a little the Sigma is right there. So I'm not sure if you already have this lens that getting the 180-600 is worth it unless you really want the other attributes of that lens.

Mines on a monopod all the time with a lens coat if it's mist/rainy and the VR is way less useful in those conditions and same for the weather sealing. I mostly use these lenses stationary in a hide so the 180-600 is tough to justify.

For walking around I think under 2k the 150-500 Tamron or 50-400 Tamron makes more sense.

The Sigma is basically a risk free purchase at about 500-600 for an excellent used copy and you can probably just send it right back to MPB for $400 with no hassle if you don't like it, consider it a $100-200 long term rental.

You may find it does what you need just fine. Otherwise the 180-600 is a good buy but more expensive.

Here's both side by side, check out the wide open and stopped down sharpness, if you have a 4k monitor that will help a lot. Really not that much different at 500/600mm. For typical prints and web sharing I think any actual difference will get lost in that output. It's a perfect is the enemy of good situation to me and seems like spending a LOT more gets very little difference at 500 or 600 for output. YMMV or needs for what you shoot.

 
Member's gallery
Thanks so far for the input, much appreciated. "Beat to death" I get that too. Pretty much goes without saying on any forum. I mean, sure you could just use the search function and read. And if everyone did that, well, there would be no more new posts.
That being said, I did do quite a it of studying, reading, research including here. But information overload for me.
Maybe I should have just posted "should I buy this lens" and be done with it. (NIKON NIKKOR Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR)

I felt my situation was not quite cookie cutter with my mix of gear and lenses. Hence my post.
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
Thanks so far for the input, much appreciated. "Beat to death" I get that too. Pretty much goes without saying on any forum. I mean, sure you could just use the search function and read. And if everyone did that, well, there would be no more new posts.
That being said, I did do quite a it of studying, reading, research including here. But information overload for me.
Maybe I should have just posted "should I buy this lens" and be done with it. (NIKON NIKKOR Z 180-600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR)

I felt my situation was not quite cookie cutter with my mix of gear and lenses. Hence my post.
Click to expand...
It's basically a how demanding of the gear are you situation. 180-600 is a no brainer to be honest for under 2000, but it's going to cost you vs a used sigma to the tune of 4x as much. This is the story of all these telephotos though including the highest end ones.

How much optical performance due you really need for your imagined output? Are you printing these huge or typical, or just sharing online. If it's just online get the Sigma because unless you're pixel peeping nobody's going to be able to tell if it was a 180-600 or 150-600 at 4k 8mp screen size or less. I don't think anybody's going to be able to tell in a typical print size either.

If you're printing the size of a wall then that's different.

We all get really wrapped up into the "best" instead of what do I actually need with camera's and lenses IMO.

I'm really tied up in the get the 150-500 Tamron for it's smaller ease of walking around with but same optic output as the 180-600 up to 500 and just keeping the Sigma for 600mm which when stopped down just a hair seems extremely close to output of the Nikon because that lens will be on a support and probably stationary. The Tamron has a huge advantage in ease of taking it with me. The Tamron and a used Sigma cost what the Nikon 180-600 costs alone.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Lee R said:
It's basically a how demanding of the gear are you situation. 180-600 is a no brainer to be honest for under 2000, but it's going to cost you vs a used sigma to the tune of 4x as much. This is the story of all these telephotos though including the highest end ones.

How much optical performance due you really need for your imagined output? Are you printing these huge or typical, or just sharing online. If it's just online get the Sigma because unless you're pixel peeping nobody's going to be able to tell if it was a 180-600 or 150-600 at 4k 8mp screen size or less. I don't think anybody's going to be able to tell in a typical print size either.

If you're printing the size of a wall then that's different.

We all get really wrapped up into the "best" instead of what do I actually need with camera's and lenses IMO.

I'm really tied up in the get the 150-500 Tamron for it's smaller ease of walking around with but same optic output as the 180-600 up to 500 and just keeping the Sigma for 600mm which when stopped down just a hair seems extremely close to output of the Nikon because that lens will be on a support and probably stationary. The Tamron has a huge advantage in ease of taking it with me. The Tamron and a used Sigma cost what the Nikon 180-600 costs alone.
Click to expand...
Very good points! And points taken. I am by any means not a professional. Although I have shot motogp and motocross since the 35mm film days, and even had a few photos posted in French 2 wheeled motorsports magazines, (long story there) But at this time in my life, it's "something to do in retirement" attempting wildlife and bird and landscape -- a hobby.
Posting online, possibly. Any printing would be on canvas to put in my cabin, or if I ever luck out on an extraordinary photo, maybe that would be printed and framed for my office. Not holding my breath, lol.
Just because I can afford a higher price point doesn't mean I should. (oh man, I'm sounding like my dad) "Money doesn't grow on trees ya know"
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
Very good points! And points taken. I am by any means not a professional. Although I have shot motogp and motocross since the 35mm film days, and even had a few photos posted in French 2 wheeled motorsports magazines, (long story there) But at this time in my life, it's "something to do in retirement" attempting wildlife and bird and landscape -- a hobby.
Posting online, possibly. Any printing would be on canvas to put in my cabin, or if I ever luck out on an extraordinary photo, maybe that would be printed and framed for my office. Not holding my breath, lol.
Just because I can afford a higher price point doesn't mean I should. (oh man, I'm sounding like my dad) "Money doesn't grow on trees ya know"
Click to expand...
I think you'll have a great time whichever way you decide to go. Both are fine lenses and will deliver really nice results when the atmosphere/lighting allows it. Be ready for a lot of soft shots due to atmospherics though and be sure to let the lenses stabilize to the temperature outdoors.

I think the Z9 will grow on you over time too, it's a great camera. I've had a Z8 for half a year and still am learning with it.

I'm no super wildlife photographer myself but grew up hunting and fishing in Maine and just really enjoy being outdoors. Anything to get the excuse to go out and sit in the woods and just watch nature happen around me is worthwhile time spent, even better with a camera to capture things as they happen. We were never wired for the hectic lifestyle of the modern-day and I'm reminded of that every time I get time to sit in the woods.

I think I could be entertained perpetually with a telephoto and a macro lens in a forest.

Feel free to ask questions as time goes on as I'm sure everyone here is along some timeline of constant learning with photography. One thing I learned being a pilot for 20+ years professionally is you never know everything and there's always something to learn. I feel that way about photography.
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
Very good points! And points taken. I am by any means not a professional. Although I have shot motogp and motocross since the 35mm film days, and even had a few photos posted in French 2 wheeled motorsports magazines, (long story there) But at this time in my life, it's "something to do in retirement" attempting wildlife and bird and landscape -- a hobby.
Posting online, possibly. Any printing would be on canvas to put in my cabin, or if I ever luck out on an extraordinary photo, maybe that would be printed and framed for my office. Not holding my breath, lol.
Just because I can afford a higher price point doesn't mean I should. (oh man, I'm sounding like my dad) "Money doesn't grow on trees ya know"
Click to expand...
I would go with the 500mm pf f5.6. I shoot mostly birds and since i purchased this lens no other lens has gone on my camera. You will probably almost always be shooting at 500mm or more with a 1.4 tc. You have the shorter distances covered for larger mammals that are close.
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
As a beginner wildlife/bird shooter wannabe:
I did do forum search here on the topic, as well as several youtube videos and other informational sources, but I thought I would ask you all as so many of you have been in the game for a long time. I am in "transition mode" between DSLR to mirrorless. (Z9 as you recall from my journey/saga)

I have lots of beautiful glass that I have collected over the years, even some jewels (bodies and lenses) back from the 35mm film days, all Nikon/Nikkor from when in used to work in mechanical engineering/accident investigation cases. Photo documentation was crucial. But I digress - none suited for wildlife / birds.

I currently have and currently use: (on my D5)
F mount 17-35 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 24-70 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 70-200 2.8 Nikkor
A FTZ ii adapter

Z-mount 70-200 2.8

What I am wanting to do is get a fast'ish zoom, something to 500 or 600mm.
My budget is $2k - possibly $2.5 k if it really gets me a push up to the "if you spend this much more, you'll get xxxx and xxxxx etc." must-have levels.

I've bounced around consideration between Tamron and Sigma as possibilities:
Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2
or
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget

Also started looking at some of the equivalent Nikon/Nikkor glass in the same class. Say 180-600?
Maybe jump right in with a Nikkor Z 180-600 f/5.6-6.3?

My main questions are should I go native Z or are there preowned glass zooms that are a "must have" even if it's an F mount.
In my research I start getting lost with all the alphabet soup lens model naming, and one letter can make a huge difference in the quality and performance (and price)
Also, is 5.6-6.3 "fast enough"?
And is specifically looking for a internal zoom mechanism unreasonable in the price range I'm in?
And I'm going to 'assume' that anything we talk about are all FX format...

Thanks for any comments/input/suggestions.

Cheers,
-Mike
Click to expand...
I have the Tamron 150-600 G
tahoemike00 said:
As a beginner wildlife/bird shooter wannabe:
I did do forum search here on the topic, as well as several youtube videos and other informational sources, but I thought I would ask you all as so many of you have been in the game for a long time. I am in "transition mode" between DSLR to mirrorless. (Z9 as you recall from my journey/saga)

I have lots of beautiful glass that I have collected over the years, even some jewels (bodies and lenses) back from the 35mm film days, all Nikon/Nikkor from when in used to work in mechanical engineering/accident investigation cases. Photo documentation was crucial. But I digress - none suited for wildlife / birds.

I currently have and currently use: (on my D5)
F mount 17-35 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 24-70 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 70-200 2.8 Nikkor
A FTZ ii adapter

Z-mount 70-200 2.8

What I am wanting to do is get a fast'ish zoom, something to 500 or 600mm.
My budget is $2k - possibly $2.5 k if it really gets me a push up to the "if you spend this much more, you'll get xxxx and xxxxx etc." must-have levels.

I've bounced around consideration between Tamron and Sigma as possibilities:
Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2
or
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget

Also started looking at some of the equivalent Nikon/Nikkor glass in the same class. Say 180-600?
Maybe jump right in with a Nikkor Z 180-600 f/5.6-6.3?

My main questions are should I go native Z or are there preowned glass zooms that are a "must have" even if it's an F mount.
In my research I start getting lost with all the alphabet soup lens model naming, and one letter can make a huge difference in the quality and performance (and price)
Also, is 5.6-6.3 "fast enough"?
And is specifically looking for a internal zoom mechanism unreasonable in the price range I'm in?
And I'm going to 'assume' that anything we talk about are all FX format...

Thanks for any comments/input/suggestions.

Cheers,
-Mike
Click to expand...
I have the Tamron 150-600 G2 and for me it's fine. It works great with my D850. It's weather sealed, is warranted for 6 years and has an arca-swiss foot.
 
Member's gallery
I shoot wildlife & birds with a Z9. My most-used lens is my 180-600. Versatile and light enough to lug for miles in soft snd or over rocks. Whenever I travel by air for photography, that lens goes with me. FWIW, I also own the 400 f2.8 TC (Z mount). That lens does not fly with me, nor do I lug it long distances over "tough" terrain.
Prior to my Z9 purchase, I owned (and still do) a D500. My most-used lens on that camera was the Tamron 150-600. The second most-used lens was my 500 f5.6 PF. I still own the 500 PF, but get much more use from the 180-600.
Prior to purchasing the 180-600, I used my Tamron 150-600 with the adaptor on my Z9. That combo went with me once to Africa, and once to Antarctica. It was more than "adequate".
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
As a beginner wildlife/bird shooter wannabe:
I did do forum search here on the topic, as well as several youtube videos and other informational sources, but I thought I would ask you all as so many of you have been in the game for a long time. I am in "transition mode" between DSLR to mirrorless. (Z9 as you recall from my journey/saga)

I have lots of beautiful glass that I have collected over the years, even some jewels (bodies and lenses) back from the 35mm film days, all Nikon/Nikkor from when in used to work in mechanical engineering/accident investigation cases. Photo documentation was crucial. But I digress - none suited for wildlife / birds.

I currently have and currently use: (on my D5)
F mount 17-35 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 24-70 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 70-200 2.8 Nikkor
A FTZ ii adapter

Z-mount 70-200 2.8

What I am wanting to do is get a fast'ish zoom, something to 500 or 600mm.
My budget is $2k - possibly $2.5 k if it really gets me a push up to the "if you spend this much more, you'll get xxxx and xxxxx etc." must-have levels.

I've bounced around consideration between Tamron and Sigma as possibilities:
Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2
or
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget

Also started looking at some of the equivalent Nikon/Nikkor glass in the same class. Say 180-600?
Maybe jump right in with a Nikkor Z 180-600 f/5.6-6.3?

My main questions are should I go native Z or are there preowned glass zooms that are a "must have" even if it's an F mount.
In my research I start getting lost with all the alphabet soup lens model naming, and one letter can make a huge difference in the quality and performance (and price)
Also, is 5.6-6.3 "fast enough"?
And is specifically looking for a internal zoom mechanism unreasonable in the price range I'm in?
And I'm going to 'assume' that anything we talk about are all FX format...

Thanks for any comments/input/suggestions.

Cheers,
-Mike
Click to expand...
Native tends to hold its value better.
And the 180-600 is a great value lens - and I can forgive the variable aperture .. 🦘
 
Member's gallery
You have 2 very nice lenses recommended to go with your Z9 that are in your budget. I am a bird ID photographer for citizen science so focal length and versatility are important to me. For background my favorite variable focal length lenses for birds and wildlife in the DSLR days were Sigma 60-600 sport and Tamron 150-600 G2 my go to lens for a long time. However the Z lenses have multiple advantages and I would recommend going that route.

I got the amazing Nikon Z 800 f/6.3 (pf) 5-1-22 and it was my primary birding lens for a long time. Then just as I had a surprise influx of cash Nikon put my dream lens on sale so I sold the Z800 f/6.3 and now my priimary birding lens is Z600mm f/4 TC (840mm f/5.6 with tc engaged) and my backup (usually used on my Z6III) is the Z600 f/6.3 (pf).

I have owned 2 Z lenses for birding and wildlife in your budget. I owned the Z180-600 when it first came out very good lens but it became the odd lens out so I sold it. I kept the Tamron Zmount 150-500 which is more compact and is my go to if I want variable focal length, near macro and shorter minimum focus distance another great lens.

With my emphasis on more focal length if I did not have the other 600mm and up options I would go with the Z180-600 if I had to use just one lens for birds and wildlife in that budget range.
 
Member's gallery
tahoemike00 said:
As a beginner wildlife/bird shooter wannabe:
I did do forum search here on the topic, as well as several youtube videos and other informational sources, but I thought I would ask you all as so many of you have been in the game for a long time. I am in "transition mode" between DSLR to mirrorless. (Z9 as you recall from my journey/saga)

I have lots of beautiful glass that I have collected over the years, even some jewels (bodies and lenses) back from the 35mm film days, all Nikon/Nikkor from when in used to work in mechanical engineering/accident investigation cases. Photo documentation was crucial. But I digress - none suited for wildlife / birds.

I currently have and currently use: (on my D5)
F mount 17-35 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 24-70 2.8 Nikkor
F-mount 70-200 2.8 Nikkor
A FTZ ii adapter

Z-mount 70-200 2.8

What I am wanting to do is get a fast'ish zoom, something to 500 or 600mm.
My budget is $2k - possibly $2.5 k if it really gets me a push up to the "if you spend this much more, you'll get xxxx and xxxxx etc." must-have levels.

I've bounced around consideration between Tamron and Sigma as possibilities:
Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2
or
Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary but they are F mount, and preowned in "excellent" condition and well within my budget

Also started looking at some of the equivalent Nikon/Nikkor glass in the same class. Say 180-600?
Maybe jump right in with a Nikkor Z 180-600 f/5.6-6.3?

My main questions are should I go native Z or are there preowned glass zooms that are a "must have" even if it's an F mount.
In my research I start getting lost with all the alphabet soup lens model naming, and one letter can make a huge difference in the quality and performance (and price)
Also, is 5.6-6.3 "fast enough"?
And is specifically looking for a internal zoom mechanism unreasonable in the price range I'm in?
And I'm going to 'assume' that anything we talk about are all FX format...

Thanks for any comments/input/suggestions.

Cheers,
-Mike
Click to expand...
No brainer. 500pf. Used. Perfect. Light. Sharp no brainer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top