Using Nikon 600mm f4E FL ED VR AF-S Lens with Z9 and Z8. Advice please or opt for Z 600PF?

[RichF]

Yes, that's a lot of assumptions. I would think a heavier lens would shake less while hand holding. Physics doesn't lie:

View attachment 93988

I will start to tire much more quickly with an additional 5 lbs of glass

 

[wotan1]

Yesterday I visited a photographer friend who is now mostly retired.

This guy is a photographer’s photographer. His specialty was architectural photography and he traveled all over the world for his projects. He shot mostly Phase 1 equipment with high end Zeiss perspective control lenses. He is incredibly creative and has an excellent eye not to mention full command of post processing programs and techniques.

With that sort of photography he had staff and porters. He said he used to bring 30 cases of photo equipment with him on travels as well as assistants.

I brought my birding gear along and showed it to him. He is not a wildlife guy. He said it looks too much like work. He said after carrying all that phase 1 gear all over teh world he now favors light gear. His cameras of choice are now the Sony 60mp and the Leica Q.

He told me a horror story of losing his Phase 1 setup when an assistant accidentally knocked the camera over.

Then he gave me a ten minute lesson on Photoshop. I took a lot of notes and I am going to sit down and do some playing around.

 

[Vincent_VdB]

Thanks for the replies so far. Weight is not too much of an issue, mostly concerned with performance and IQ with Z8/9 I shoot wildlife in the UK some birds (raptors) and mammals. We have foxes and badgers living in our woodland,so I'm very lucky.

Get the F-Mount 600mm E FL f//4 and don't look back . The lens is stellar and works beautifully with the Z8 or Z9. Look in the YouTube videos from Steven and you will see that the lens performs excellent without loss of IQ or speed. Hence, it focusses even faster with a TC on it on a Z8/9 compared to the flagship D5 or D6 .

 

[Nature Files]

If you think this, you've never handheld the two lenses in question, or done a comparison between a "big and heavy" lens and a "small and light" lens.

It isn't the lens that is shaking, it's the human that is shaking, and there's much more involved than a drastic oversimplification of mass vs acceleration.

If you have access to any of these lenses - go outside and do some testing. 600TC vs 600PF for example when shooting screech owls, I can consistently get sharp images at 1/6s handheld with the 600PF, but rarely get sharp images at 1/50 or slower with the 600TC. With a 600 F4E FL, that number would probably be 1/100 or faster.

Wotan is correct - the 600 F4E will have better subject isolation due to the shallower DOF, but a lot of commenters point at f6.3 lenses and say it must result in higher ISO, which isn't always true due to the differences in size and weight.

Rich was taking a bit more liberties with his assumptions, I meant shooting both wide open. so 600 F4E at f4 vs 600PF at 6.3. all else equal, you will be able to get the same level of sharpness at a lower ISO with the 600PF when handholding, despite the 1.33 stop loss in aperture.

Of course, if you shoot from a tripod - it matters much less and a monopod makes the difference between the two less than handholding, but not as drastic as the tripod.

and as for your "physics" comment and image taken out of context, look at examples of the affects of weight the further it is from your body. with a small, light lens you can keep it neatly up against you. with one of the big beasts, the center of gravity is further away, which induces more strain and shake.

it's why anyone can hold a mallet close to them without difficulty, but powerlifters challenge themselves to hold the same weight with their arms fully extended - and it's much more difficult.

torque is proportional to the distance from the weight to the point of suspension, your body. more force --> more ATP required --> more tiring -> more shaking

there are also many other factors that would make handholding the F4E more difficult. the existence of a larger hood which acts as a sail, the lesser VR/IS whatever, the older technology which means that lens is not built to be as well balanced as a 600PF/600TC, etc.

I've had plenty of experience with long glass, and I'll stick by my statement that you can hold a heavier lens more steady than a lighter one. I'm not talking about for minutes at a time, but more like picking the lens up, finding target, and snapping several bursts...so like 20 to 30 seconds. Obviously, your arm will wear out sooner with f/4 glass over long durations, but I'm specifically talking about quick bursts.
I do a fair amount of archery shooting, so I know that weight makes a huge difference in how 'shaky' we tend to be when aiming. A lighter bow at full draw will always tend to be more erratic when aiming than a heavier bow in my experience. Weight displacement also has a huge role as you'll notice when watching Olympic archers and their long weighted stabilizers.

 

[Vincent_VdB]

I've had plenty of experience with long glass, and I'll stick by my statement that you can hold a heavier lens more steady than a lighter one. I'm not talking about for minutes at a time, but more like picking the lens up, finding target, and snapping several bursts...so like 20 to 30 seconds. Obviously, your arm will wear out sooner with f/4 glass over long durations, but I'm specifically talking about quick bursts.
I do a fair amount of archery shooting, so I know that weight makes a huge difference in how 'shaky' we tend to be when aiming. A lighter bow at full draw will always tend to be more erratic when aiming than a heavier bow in my experience. Weight displacement also has a huge role as you'll notice when watching Olympic archers and their long weighted stabilizers.

My man This is indeed also what I experienced when I did shoot the 600PF for the first time. That was on a Z8 and that compared to a Z9 with the S 600mm TC. The light combo was so weird to hold at first and found indeed myself at the beginning in a bit of trouble.