To zoom or not to zoom... Looking for a lens for my second body

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).

H

hrv

Well-known member
Member's gallery
Hi guys,

I am often sitting in a bird hide photographing small birds and have two bodies I use. One D6 and one Z9. I currently use both of them with a 500mm lens, as I own a 500 F/4 and the 500pf.
My 500pf is really my "take a hike" lens that I use whenever we walk in the woods, should something interesting pop up.

For my work in the hide I would like to have a different lens as the 500mm range is too much for larger birds.
Obviously I am very conflicted about what to get. The options I have been looking at are roughly the following.

300mm PF f/4
  • f/4, so decent light and decent shutter speed, especially on the D6 that copes much better with high ISO
  • Relatively cheap as a second hand
  • Works with both bodies if needed
The new 100-400 Z lens
  • Variable reach, more flexibility
  • Great price, if you can get one...
  • f/4.5-5.6 not as much shutter speed available, especially with the Z9
  • Only works on the Z9, but hey, it is the future...
  • Forces me to use the D6 for the 500 f/4 which is my main lens in the hide (with the downside of "limited" focus options (all very relative, I know))
I have also looked at others, the NIKKOR Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S is simply too expensive for now. Nothing is available second hand either. And the AF-S NIKKOR 120-300MM F/2.8E FL ED SR VR looks like a great option as well for low-light. I would love f/2.8 glass. But it is also very expensive, and again, not much second hand availability yet.

I guess the main challenges are:
  1. Zoom or Prime - I love primes
  2. F or Z mount
  3. Convincing my wife
Any insights on item 1 or 2 ;). What would you do in my case?
 
Member's gallery
I haven't owned a prime lens (other than a macro lens) since my days of shooting film ended. Back in the olden days zoom lenses weren't very good, but the image quality from modern zooms is so close to that of prime lenses that I just won't give up the versatility and go back to having to frequently change lenses. I suppose if you frequently make poster-size, or larger, prints you might be able to justify prime lenses, but for what most of us do we just don't need them.
 
Member's gallery
For what it's worth.....I pair my 600mm with an 80-400 AF-S lens and find that the two lenses cover a wide focal range very, very well.

On an upcoming trip, I will have the 600mm (with or without tele) with adapter on the Z9 most of the time. My back up camera is a D850......so the 80-400 AF-S combo will be used again. HOWEVER, I hate to leave the 100-400 Z at home!!!!!!!!!
 
Member's gallery
I would not get the 300 PF unless the light weight is extremely attractive to you. It's a nice lens but 300mm is just not all that useful for a prime lens for wildlife. IMO the D6 mounted on the 500 f4 on a tripod and Z9 on the 100-400 would be an awesome combo. Similar to what Karen described my typical setup for serious shooting historically has been FX body on a 500 f4 on tripod and a DX body with 80-400mm on a strap. That has worked great for me.
 
Member's gallery
Steve W said:
If you would like to be able to use on both bodies you could also consider 70-200 f/2.8 FL + TC14E-III. It’s quite a versatile combo.
Click to expand...
True, but the focal range is much smaller than the 100-400 or 80-400. The 100-400 takes a tele very well. The 80-400 not so much.
 
Member's gallery
Butlerkid said:
True, but the focal range is much smaller than the 100-400 or 80-400. The 100-400 takes a tele very well. The 80-400 not so much.
Click to expand...
I guess so, the zoom range is only 70-200 f/2.8 / 98-280 f/4. As you say, don’t think he should bother with 80-400 (any version).... too slow
 
Member's gallery
Faced with your decision with d-500 cameras and 500pf as the primary lens, I opted to purchase 300pf. As that is still a bit long I have 70-300DX available. I assumed that 500-600mm on a FX body would be typical for a blind so a 450 FX equivalent would be perfect while a 500pf, 750mm equivalent would give me more magnification than a 600 f4 in FX mode.

In your case I would probably opt for the 70-300 non DX lens which is also very cheap.

Tom
 
Member's gallery
Steve W said:
I guess so, the zoom range is only 70-200 f/2.8 / 98-280 f/4. As you say, don’t think he should bother with 80-400 (any version).... too slow
Click to expand...
Not my experience at all. It is a terrific lens. It tracked this Giant Kingfisher diving into the water, doing under, and coming out of the water. Not too shabby at all! LOL!

_KD54843_a%3Bt-X2.jpg
 
Member's gallery
Butlerkid said:
Not my experience at all. It is a terrific lens. It tracked this Giant Kingfisher diving into the water, doing under, and coming out of the water. Not too shabby at all! LOL!
Click to expand...

it's probably worth nothing there were two generations of that lens, so it's always hard to know if you're talking about the same one.

i (briefly) had the older one, and i found the af was too slow for my taste and never gave it a chance past that.
 
Member's gallery
John Navitsky said:
it's probably worth nothing there were two generations of that lens, so it's always hard to know if you're talking about the same one.

i (briefly) had the older one, and i found the af was too slow for my taste and never gave it a chance past that.
Click to expand...
I always specify the 80-400 AF-S....latest model. It always goes with me to Africa and always brings home stellar images. But it is confusing when Nikon released so many versions of that lens. That said, I had an older 70-300 model that did wonderful with flashed hummers!
 
Member's gallery
I have the Z9 with 500mm PF and a 1.4x TCiii now and it is a nice combination. Obviously the extra stop you get from the F/4 would be very welcomed, but it’s too big for me most of the time so I‘be ruled that out. Right now I have the F mount 70-300mm AF-P as my shorter lens and it is really nice, though I think the Z100-400mm would be a better solution. I plan to get the Z200-600mm when released so my dilemma is do I bother with the 100-400mm at all. I like primes, but zooms are very handy. My experience with the Z zooms so far has been very good and wouldn’t hesitate on them for IQ reasons. Given your current lenses, I’d probably go with the Z100-400mm. I don’t have first hand experience other that a short time with a demo model so can’t say much about it other than it is well balanced.
 
Member's gallery
Steve W said:
If you would like to be able to use on both bodies you could also consider 70-200 f/2.8 FL + TC14E-III. It’s quite a versatile combo.
Click to expand...
Planning to shoot full time with a TC is not a great idea. The AF-S version of the 80-400 is a pretty good lens as Karen pointed out. Covers the full focal range of the 70-200/TC plus a LOT and costs less. If someone just wanted a short term stop gap they can be picked up used for about $1000. Personally I think the lens gets a bad rap because of the confusion with the older screw drive version(which I also owned). It has always focused as fast as I've needed it to. All that said owning a Z9 I'd opt for the 100-400.
 
Member's gallery
My travel kit is now the Z9 and Z6 II with 500 f5.6 pf, TC-14 III, FTZ II, 100-400 f4.5-5.6 and 24-70 f4. I'm primarily a wildlife photographer and those two big lenses are really nice for travel and quality. I also have the 300 f4 pf, 70-300 f4.5-5.6 AF-P, and 70-200 f4. The 100-400 covers all the other bases and is higher quality than all of them.
 
Member's gallery
I had high hopes you would all make it easier for me to decide :cool:

I do not think I am much closer to a decision yet, but you have given me a lot to think about. Thanks for all the insights and viewpoints.
 
Member's gallery
hrv said:
I had high hopes you would all make it easier for me to decide :cool:

I do not think I am much closer to a decision yet, but you have given me a lot to think about. Thanks for all the insights and viewpoints.
Click to expand...
It looks like my 100-400mm order is processing now so my decision has been made for me. I only ordered it a couple weeks ago so they must be shipping enough of them. I expected a longer wait time.
 
Member's gallery
Second everything that has been said re: the Z100-400. I haven't had mine long, but I am quite impressed with how sharp it is, and as mentioned, it pairs nicely with the 1.4Tc on my Z6ii.
 
Member's gallery
personally I’m pretty pleased with the z70-200 with the 2xTC

these two images from my garden are of a neighbour‘s chimney 150’ away past a wire 15’ from me. The AF was remarkably quick switching back and forth, an I feel it’s sharp enough for my needs


D2E52406-9F29-43C8-B11C-E46A85187FFF.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

FCAC4519-7AA1-43B4-94DE-8C5AAF14326A.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

FE18B34F-5B2B-4F5A-A81C-5DF2627714A7.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
For shooting from a hide I want a zoom lens to adjust for varying camera to subject distances. It allows for showing the critter in its environment instead of ID head shots and to change the focal length when there are multiple subjects engaged in interesting behavior. I can take multiple shots at different focal lengths in a minute and capture behavior I would miss while making lens changes.

When I owned the 200-500mm lens I found it often too long at 200mm for situations and would take the 80-400mm lens as well. For small critters a 200mm focal length is OK but with anything the size of a deer, moose, bison, elk, egret, etc. the 200mm can be too restrictive with its view angle even with a full frame camera.

The Canon 100-500mm would be ideal but not worth buying a Canon camera to be able to use it - for me but it may be OK for others.
 
Member's gallery
hrv said:
Hi guys,

I am often sitting in a bird hide photographing small birds and have two bodies I use. One D6 and one Z9. I currently use both of them with a 500mm lens, as I own a 500 F/4 and the 500pf.
My 500pf is really my "take a hike" lens that I use whenever we walk in the woods, should something interesting pop up.

For my work in the hide I would like to have a different lens as the 500mm range is too much for larger birds.
Obviously I am very conflicted about what to get. The options I have been looking at are roughly the following.

300mm PF f/4
  • f/4, so decent light and decent shutter speed, especially on the D6 that copes much better with high ISO
  • Relatively cheap as a second hand
  • Works with both bodies if needed
The new 100-400 Z lens
  • Variable reach, more flexibility
  • Great price, if you can get one...
  • f/4.5-5.6 not as much shutter speed available, especially with the Z9
  • Only works on the Z9, but hey, it is the future...
  • Forces me to use the D6 for the 500 f/4 which is my main lens in the hide (with the downside of "limited" focus options (all very relative, I know))
I have also looked at others, the NIKKOR Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S is simply too expensive for now. Nothing is available second hand either. And the AF-S NIKKOR 120-300MM F/2.8E FL ED SR VR looks like a great option as well for low-light. I would love f/2.8 glass. But it is also very expensive, and again, not much second hand availability yet.

I guess the main challenges are:
  1. Zoom or Prime - I love primes
  2. F or Z mount
  3. Convincing my wife
Any insights on item 1 or 2 ;). What would you do in my case?
Click to expand...
I love primes too.
But zooms are so versatile.
Although I have the 300mm f2.8 - I love the 300mm f4 for its size and sharpness.
The old 300mm f4 and an optional teleconverter is great for long walks.
I had the older 80-400mm nikkor and hated it so i'm a bit prejudiced against the 100-400mm Z lens. 🦘
 
Member's gallery
hrv said:
Hi guys,

I am often sitting in a bird hide photographing small birds and have two bodies I use. One D6 and one Z9. I currently use both of them with a 500mm lens, as I own a 500 F/4 and the 500pf.
My 500pf is really my "take a hike" lens that I use whenever we walk in the woods, should something interesting pop up.

For my work in the hide I would like to have a different lens as the 500mm range is too much for larger birds.
Obviously I am very conflicted about what to get. The options I have been looking at are roughly the following.

300mm PF f/4
  • f/4, so decent light and decent shutter speed, especially on the D6 that copes much better with high ISO
  • Relatively cheap as a second hand
  • Works with both bodies if needed
The new 100-400 Z lens
  • Variable reach, more flexibility
  • Great price, if you can get one...
  • f/4.5-5.6 not as much shutter speed available, especially with the Z9
  • Only works on the Z9, but hey, it is the future...
  • Forces me to use the D6 for the 500 f/4 which is my main lens in the hide (with the downside of "limited" focus options (all very relative, I know))
I have also looked at others, the NIKKOR Z 400mm f/2.8 TC VR S is simply too expensive for now. Nothing is available second hand either. And the AF-S NIKKOR 120-300MM F/2.8E FL ED SR VR looks like a great option as well for low-light. I would love f/2.8 glass. But it is also very expensive, and again, not much second hand availability yet.

I guess the main challenges are:
  1. Zoom or Prime - I love primes
  2. F or Z mount
  3. Convincing my wife
Any insights on item 1 or 2 ;). What would you do in my case?
Click to expand...

Hi guys,

Thanks for all your opinions, tips and thoughts. Just thought I would report back on my decision and purchase.
I went for door number three (obviously) and purchased the AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II. After all the advice I did end up deciding on the versatility of a zoom lens, but stil wanted something relatively fast and relatively affordable.

Over time I may end up trading in my 500 f/4 for a 600 f/4 for the more distant wildlife when I am not in a blind, but for now, I hope to get good results with the combination of a 500 f/4 prime and the 200-400 f/4 zoom.

I have no idea yet how well this lens will perform with my Z9, but as the 500 f/4 performs very well with it, I don't think I will have any issues with it. Overall I am still not impressed at all with the ISO performance of the Z9 compared to my D6, so every bit of light I can capture to keep ISO lower helps.
It should be delivered coming Tuesday and I have another bird hide booked for the last week of April, so that is when I am going to put it through its paces.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top