Thoughts on this recent post - Nikon 600 w/TC
- Thread starter Bill G.
- 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).
Bill G.
Active member
Looking for thoughts on his general rationale not so much the brand part of the discussion - more the logic behind the comments.
I didn't even watch the video, but whatever we disagree. After much waffaling. I ordered mine. All it took was dinner with my wife, and a couple glasses of wine.....
He is saying why do you want to shoot a lion or a bear from a distance using long focal length lens, get 400mm lens instead and get close to the lion or to the bear. I think he is right. You will get the best photo ever, but some one has to find the camera and extract the photos
Then all of a sudden he switched topic to 30fps is better than 20fps, That was the only way he was able to take a photo for the mother cat licking its kitten. So this act of the mother cat is faster than 1/20 seconds . Hypersonic licking.
entertaining. It takes practice not to hate people who say things that you hate.
Then all of a sudden he switched topic to 30fps is better than 20fps
, That was the only way he was able to take a photo for the mother cat licking its kitten. So this act of the mother cat is faster than 1/20 seconds . Hypersonic licking.entertaining. It takes practice not to hate people who say things that you hate.
Last edited:
Woody Meristem
Well-known member
If I remember correctly there was a fellow killed by a bear whose camera recorded the the event.He is saying why do you want to shoot a lion or a bear from a distance using long focal length lens, get 400mm lens instead and get close to the lion or to the bear. I think he is right. You will get the best photo ever, but some one has to find the camera and extract the photos
John Navitsky
Well-known member
i’d totally suggest going wide. maybe 12mm. much more dramatic, especially when you fill the frameHe is saying why do you want to shoot a lion or a bear from a distance using long focal length lens, get 400mm lens instead and get close to the lion or to the bear. I think he is right. You will get the best photo ever, but some one has to find the camera and extract the photos
John Navitsky
Well-known member
but we all know the important thing is “but did you get the shot?!”!
Doug Herr
Well-known member
Tim Man said that when using 30 frames/sec with the Serval cats there was only one frame with the tail flicked the way he wanted it.Then all of a sudden he switched topic to 30fps is better than 20fps
The weight and the wait have kept me from the Z9. As far as I'm concerned it's a race between N and S: will N make and have in stock a lightweight high performance body before S makes PF-weight lenses? Time will tell.
FB101
Well-known member
I shoot sony and I couldn’t make it through all the BS in this video.
‘Truth is, if Sony had such a lens, many of us would be all over it.
‘But Sony doesn’t, so the question is whether a built-in 1.4x TC is enough to change a full system, trade in $30k or more worth of equipment and adapt to a new system. For most people the answer is simply no, not worth it. It’s got little to do with his 3 Ws.
‘Truth is, if Sony had such a lens, many of us would be all over it.
‘But Sony doesn’t, so the question is whether a built-in 1.4x TC is enough to change a full system, trade in $30k or more worth of equipment and adapt to a new system. For most people the answer is simply no, not worth it. It’s got little to do with his 3 Ws.
True
Assuming that the camera is found and the civil aviation investigation Bureau (Required because the camera will still be air born when they find you ) will cooperate to extract the photos from the a damaged CFexpress card, otherwise you will be wasted.
marc
Well-known member
Actually not brand bashing Andrew, as he has shoots both Sony and Nikon, I know Tin Man he's an excellent wildlife photographer who primarily shoots mammals, like myself, he's an f/2.8 guy and in fact has been waiting 7 months for his Nikkor 400TC. just like myself.
I take delivery of mine tomorrow.
I totally understand his reasons for not wishing to purchase the new Z600TC. I do not however agree with his 30FPS theory.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
card backup mode for the win!
Joel N
Well-known member
I too find his reasoning okay for his use case, he shoots mostly at 400mm and very little with tc1.4 on 600mm, the wait time is a very real factor as well. It’s actually a big factor for those who had waited and who are still waiting. If he can be in the environment that allows 400mm to get the shot, then shoot 400mm 2.8 all day, why need 600mm. I too will choose the same if I were in his position.
I watched the video. It didn't appear so much brand bashing as having a moan about wait time. I also felt he was looking to justify his reasoning with those 3 W's. "Wait" time ffs. Weight too, For about 1/2 lb weight difference it would affect how FAST he can move into position for a shot. That's ridiculous, The weight could be in his back pack or even his clothing! Drink some water to lighten the weight of the water bottle. So we have a disgruntled YouTuber who hasn't even used the lens. Click bait maybe? I doubt.
So I don't see it as brand bashing, but just somebody posting something. Needless he won't be on my watch list !
So I don't see it as brand bashing, but just somebody posting something. Needless he won't be on my watch list !
Yeah if a half a pound slows you down maybe you need an MD not a new lens! 
Anyway I've messaged Tin Man for years and always seemed to be a great guy. I agree on 2.8 lens being optimum for morning shooting but it depends on what you're shooting and where you're shooting it. The new 600TC will be awesome and way more versatile so you won't miss shots fiddling with a converter so there's that!
Also I'm sure Sony and Canon will come out with TCs built in to their big glass and Nikon will come out with smaller cameras. I bet Nikon will be first.
Anyway keeping my 400TC and 800pf and going to the gym!
Anyway I've messaged Tin Man for years and always seemed to be a great guy. I agree on 2.8 lens being optimum for morning shooting but it depends on what you're shooting and where you're shooting it. The new 600TC will be awesome and way more versatile so you won't miss shots fiddling with a converter so there's that!
Also I'm sure Sony and Canon will come out with TCs built in to their big glass and Nikon will come out with smaller cameras. I bet Nikon will be first.
Anyway keeping my 400TC and 800pf and going to the gym!
For 0.09 pounds he does not want to the time it takes add or remove converter.
Camera weight - does not include the convenience of the grip
WOnder how much Sony is paying him to do this video?
Camera weight - does not include the convenience of the grip
WOnder how much Sony is paying him to do this video?
Doug Herr
Well-known member
We don't all have the same priorities; I prefer to not use a grip. This is a YMMV thing.
There are many who consider the lower weight more important than the grip's convenience. In my case it's not the weight of a grip that's the problem, it's the weight of two grips, one on each camera body (been there, done that). Can't remove the grip from the z9.
If I want to go light, I take the Z 7ii
Doug Herr
Well-known member
Not the camera I'd use for silent shutter, bird eye AF & 30 frames/sec. I've tried using an older, lower-performance camera as the second body and it ended up collecting dust. High performance and light weight can be found in one camera model and as of this writing it's not a Nikon.
Let's stick to the OP's topic of discussions about the Z 600mm with built in TC....... Thanks!
Doug Herr
Well-known member
In the video Tin Man Lee said he doesn't like the weight of the state-of-the-art Z 600 TC along with the body required for state-of-the-art performance. I'd be OK with its weight if there were a lighter flagship body to put on it.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
random thoughts:
1) is a 600 f/4 the right lens for you (totally outside of the specific lenses under discussion)
2) does adding an integrated TC change #1
3) assuming #1 and #2 are true, do they provide enough advantage to make *replacing* existing len(es) make sense?
4) do they provide enough advantage to replacing existing ecosystems?
i'll suggest when you get down to #4, there's very, very, very, very few people left.
1) is a 600 f/4 the right lens for you (totally outside of the specific lenses under discussion)
2) does adding an integrated TC change #1
3) assuming #1 and #2 are true, do they provide enough advantage to make *replacing* existing len(es) make sense?
4) do they provide enough advantage to replacing existing ecosystems?
i'll suggest when you get down to #4, there's very, very, very, very few people left.
In watching the video, he's all over the place. It's really just clickbait to create controversy and try to get more views. The bottom line is that he's all over the place and the points makes, well accurate, are still pretty weak. Whining is not a good look.
In addition, he's also comparing apples to oranges with a 600 vs a 400. He should compare the Nikon 400 to the Sony 400. Don't pretend it's the weight and wait when really you like the 400 2.8 better than the 600 F/4. That's fine and to each their own. Although I would add that the final output from an image taken at 400mm F/2.8 at ISO 1600 and cropped to a 600mm FOV will look the same from a noise standpoint as an image with the 600 F/4 taken at ISO 3200 and not cropped. The only way the 400 2.8 gives you an edge in low light is to fill the frame the same way you would have with the 600. If you can't close that gap, you're not getting an edge.
In addition, he's also comparing apples to oranges with a 600 vs a 400. He should compare the Nikon 400 to the Sony 400. Don't pretend it's the weight and wait when really you like the 400 2.8 better than the 600 F/4. That's fine and to each their own. Although I would add that the final output from an image taken at 400mm F/2.8 at ISO 1600 and cropped to a 600mm FOV will look the same from a noise standpoint as an image with the 600 F/4 taken at ISO 3200 and not cropped. The only way the 400 2.8 gives you an edge in low light is to fill the frame the same way you would have with the 600. If you can't close that gap, you're not getting an edge.
I just don't understand why people support a person who has such half-baked reasoning. There are really good sources of information on the internet without being misguided by folks like this.
John Navitsky
Well-known member
yah, this fits into "is a 600 f/4 the right lens", it doesn't have much to do with this (or any) lens in particular