Which would you chose?

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).

AstroEd

AstroEd

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Member's gallery
If you could only afford one of the lenses for the Nikon Z series (HOPEFULLY Z9) which would you get and why? Would the f/2.8 be better for using a 1.4 or 2.0 TC with? Or would you skip them both and save for the f/6.3 800mm prime?
AA5ED4F1-A13D-4030-8054-D3A66F378180.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
I received the 100-400 S in December and the Z9 in January and two weeks ago the 800 PF. I’ve used the F Mount 70-200 2.8 E FL on the Z7II with and without the TC. If I had to buy only one hands down the 100-400S. Add the 1.4 TC you have 560mm of reach. That range of Zoom is so versatile for my hiking and Birding photography.
 
Member's gallery
This will depend on how you shoot, how close do you get to your subject, what are your subjects, and how much light do you have when shooting. An F/2.8 lens will work better with teleconverters than an F/5.6 lens, but keep in mind a 70-200mm F/2.8 becomes a 140-280mm F/4 with the 1.4x and a 200-400mm F/5.6 with the 2x. This means you gain nothing at 400mm and likely lose some overall IQ and AF performance, and it will be heavier. If you find the 70-200mm focal length works well for your subjects, it would be a great lens. For me, it is too short and the 100-400mm is a better range so this is what I went with. The 800mm PF is a great lens, but again, how would 800mm work for your subjects? For me, I could easily shoot the 800mm for some subjects and it would be way too tight for others. If I remember correctly, you’re not shooting Z right now and this is for future consideration so I’d recommend an option that you didn’t list; the upcoming Z200-600mm lens. It should cost less than the 100-400mm, will be larger and heavier, but will provide a really nice focal range for wildlife. I plan to buy this lens when it is released as I think it would be very versatile. I am also hoping the 400mm PF is F/4. If so, I’ll probably buy that as well and sell my 500mm PF F mount lens.
 
Member's gallery
About 75% of my shooting is done at Sunrise or Sunset, distances between 80'-over 500', I am trying to get a Nikon DSLR 1.4x, 1.7x, and 2.0x teleconverter to use my current DSLR lenses. A Sigma 150-600, Nikon 70-300, and 500mm PF on a mirrorless once I get it with the F-to-Z adapter. (I already have Sigma 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters but I am not sure they will work on a Nikon Z# with the F2Z adaptor).

I am trying to get the affordable items for my future Z camera, like a few lenses (one at a time), teleconverters, card readers, storage cards, etc. then save for a Z9 or wait to see how the z8 will be for wildlife. My hope is the z8 will be to mirrorless what the D500 is to DSLR's.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I’d probably skip all but the 1.4x TC for your current lenses. The best option for now might be to get some good CFE Type B cards first as they will work in the D500 as well. I’m not sure if the Sigma TCs work with the FTZ either, but someone here may know. Unless you plan to get a Z camera really soon, I’d wait to how the 200-600mm is or at least to what is available around the time you plan to get it. At a minimum, wait until you find the lens on sale or a deal for a refurbished copy.
 
Member's gallery
abc123brian said:
I’d probably skip all but the 1.4x TC for your current lenses. The best option for now might be to get some good CFE Type B cards first as they will work in the D500 as well. I’m not sure if the Sigma TCs work with the FTZ either, but someone here may know. Unless you plan to get a Z camera really soon, I’d wait to how the 200-600mm is or at least to what is available around the time you plan to get it. At a minimum, wait until you find the lens on sale or a deal for a refurbished copy.
Click to expand...
I did not realize the D500 and Z9 used the same CFexpress cards, TY. I was just looking at a ProGrade Digital CFexpress Type B & UHS-II SDXC Dual-Slot USB 3.2 Gen 2 Card Reader to handle bot the storage cards I thought I would need. but if I switch to all CFexpress Type B then I could get the faster Thunderbolt 3 version to use on my future Mac mini M1 Max setup that I hope to use to replace my current 17 8700K PC, I THINK the Mac mini will load and edit photos faster than my current PC.
 
Member's gallery
AstroEd said:
I did not realize the D500 and Z9 used the same CFexpress cards, TY. I was just looking at a ProGrade Digital CFexpress Type B & UHS-II SDXC Dual-Slot USB 3.2 Gen 2 Card Reader to handle bot the storage cards I thought I would need. but if I switch to all CFexpress Type B then I could get the faster Thunderbolt 3 version to use on my future Mac mini M1 Max setup that I hope to use to replace my current 17 8700K PC, I THINK the Mac mini will load and edit photos faster than my current PC.
Click to expand...
With a recent firmware update, the D500 supports CFE type B cards. There is no advantage to using them over XQD cards in the D500 other than faster import speeds. There are only a few card readers that read both XQD and CFE, most have reviews that are inconsistent so it is difficult to know if one is actually reliable. I decided to sell my XQD cards and buy CFE cards to replace them and got the ProGrade Digital reader you’re looking at. I opted against the thunderbolt version as that also had some reviews complaining about driver issues so I’d suggest reading the reviews to ensure compatibility.
 
Member's gallery
abc123brian said:
With a recent firmware update, the D500 supports CFE type B cards. There is no advantage to using them over XQD cards in the D500 other than faster import speeds. There are only a few card readers that read both XQD and CFE, most have reviews that are inconsistent so it is difficult to know if one is actually reliable. I decided to sell my XQD cards and buy CFE cards to replace them and got the ProGrade Digital reader you’re looking at. I opted against the thunderbolt version as that also had some reviews complaining about driver issues so I’d suggest reading the reviews to ensure compatibility.
Click to expand...
Ok, I looked at both and figured since I plan to buy a Mac studio just for photo editing and designing my sublimation products and it has an SD reader built in I would just get the thunderbolt version, but thanks for the warning I will research and see if it has had a firmware fix or anything.
 
Member's gallery
What other lens do you have? do you need to shoot in low light where F2.8 is critical. If you need reach, go with the 100-400. Not sure but I suspect that the 70-200 is tad sharper (if you are a pixel peeper and measure that sort of stuff). But the 100-400 will give much more range.
 
Member's gallery
I don't own either of these lenses and do not have a Z camera so no "dog in the hunt." The answer really depends on what type of photography you do. Do you routinely need less than 100mm? Do you consistently need 400mm? For the record, I shoot a D500 and the 3 lenses I use most are 200-500, 105 macro F2.8 and , 24-70 F2.8. For the most part, these 3 cover my needs. I have a 100-400 in F mount that I use sometimes and a couple other lenses but honestly, the 3 above are the ones I use.


I'm not sure if the 100-400 can be used with a TC. If so, it would be a go to lens for me but I may shoot different stuff than you do.

Jeff
 
Member's gallery
For MY needs, the 100-400 would make sense. In 2018 I bought a Sigma 100-400 for F-mount cameras. It has been my most used lens since then. I would only get the 70-200 if I was working indoors, or in lower-light conditions.
 
Member's gallery
Craig Yuill said:
For MY needs, the 100-400 would make sense. In 2018 I bought a Sigma 100-400 for F-mount cameras. It has been my most used lens since then. I would only get the 70-200 if I was working indoors, or in lower-light conditions.
Click to expand...
I have the 180-400 so the 70-200 made a lot of sense as extend the range wider. However with the 100-400, I am rethinking if i will keep the 70-200
 
Member's gallery
RichF said:
What other lens do you have? do you need to shoot in low light where F2.8 is critical. If you need reach, go with the 100-400. Not sure but I suspect that the 70-200 is tad sharper (if you are a pixel peeper and measure that sort of stuff). But the 100-400 will give much more range.
Click to expand...
Camera Nikon D-500, Lenses Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM | C, AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR, AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-80mm f/2.8-4E ED VR, AF-P NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR

Most of my photography so far has been just at Sunrise or Sunset.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
For wildlife photography the 100-400mm is the better choice. The advantage of the 70-200mm lens is with people photography and with landscapes where the 70mm to 105mm is important. Even though I have the latest 70-200mm f/2.8 f-mount lens and TC-14 III and TC-20 III teleconverters, I used my 80-400mm for wildlife 100% of the time. For people and landscape I choose to use the 70-200mm 100% of the time.

Where the f/2.8 was important was in photographing dimly lit church weddings and outdoor receptions where VR was not enough.
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
For wildlife photography the 100-400mm is the better choice. The advantage of the 70-200mm lens is with people photography and with landscapes where the 70mm to 105mm is important. Even though I have the latest 70-200mm f/2.8 f-mount lens and TC-14 III and TC-20 III teleconverters, I used my 80-400mm for wildlife 100% of the time. For people and landscape I choose to use the 70-200mm 100% of the time.

Where the f/2.8 was important was in photographing dimly lit church weddings and outdoor receptions where VR was not enough.
Click to expand...
I started wildlife photography with the Sigma 150-600mm lens, but I THINK my 500mm Prime has a sharper image more often. But I like the ability to zoom in and out for better framing that the Sigma 150-600mm offered, I just wish I had a sharper zoom lens than the Sigma that is good in those early sunrise hours, and late sunset (Golden) hour.
 
Member's gallery
AstroEd said:
If you could only afford one of the lenses for the Nikon Z series (HOPEFULLY Z9) which would you get and why? Would the f/2.8 be better for using a 1.4 or 2.0 TC with? Or would you skip them both and save for the f/6.3 800mm prime?View attachment 38471
Click to expand...
I have no problem - although a little short the 70-200mm is fantastic (maybe with a TC).
The 100-400mm reminds me too much of the old 80-400mm that I gave away to my daughter...🦘
 
Member's gallery
AstroEd said:
About 75% of my shooting is done at Sunrise or Sunset, distances between 80'-over 500', I am trying to get a Nikon DSLR 1.4x, 1.7x, and 2.0x teleconverter to use my current DSLR lenses. A Sigma 150-600, Nikon 70-300, and 500mm PF on a mirrorless once I get it with the F-to-Z adapter. (I already have Sigma 1.4x and 2.0x teleconverters but I am not sure they will work on a Nikon Z# with the F2Z adaptor).

I am trying to get the affordable items for my future Z camera, like a few lenses (one at a time), teleconverters, card readers, storage cards, etc. then save for a Z9 or wait to see how the z8 will be for wildlife. My hope is the z8 will be to mirrorless what the D500 is to DSLR's.
Click to expand...
As has been said above, the choice between the two lenses depends a lot on what you shoot and the lighting you shoot it in. Both lenses have gotten great reviews, so neither should disappoint you in terms of IQ. But I am a bit confused as you are buying, or wanting to buy Z lenses when you have no Z body. If you are waiting and saving for a Z9 or what you believe will be a Z8, then you might be sitting on these lenses for some time. And, I assume that you are aware that F series TC's will only work with select F series lenses.

If I was in your shoes, I would decide if I still want to continue shooting with a DSLR when you get a Z body, figure out which F series lenses you want to use with either system and which are compatible with select teleconverters, and then start to plan what Z lenses you want to buy. Your 500PF will go nicely with a new Z body, albeit it is a f/5.6 lens. Your AF-P 70-300 should also be a good carryover, and it generally performs above its price point if you have the FX version. Finally, what full focal range do you need in the Z series. Personally, I would go directly to a Z body and possibly a kit lens first. The 24-70 is a decent lens, albeit the new 24-120 is getting a lot of good press these days (but it is not a kit lens). I guess I am just not clear about what is the advantage of sitting on new glass that you cannot use?

--Ken
 
Member's gallery
Replytoken said:
As has been said above, the choice between the two lenses depends a lot on what you shoot and the lighting you shoot it in. Both lenses have gotten great reviews, so neither should disappoint you in terms of IQ. But I am a bit confused as you are buying, or wanting to buy Z lenses when you have no Z body. If you are waiting and saving for a Z9 or what you believe will be a Z8, then you might be sitting on these lenses for some time. And, I assume that you are aware that F series TC's will only work with select F series lenses.

If I was in your shoes, I would decide if I still want to continue shooting with a DSLR when you get a Z body, figure out which F series lenses you want to use with either system and which are compatible with select teleconverters, and then start to plan what Z lenses you want to buy. Your 500PF will go nicely with a new Z body, albeit it is a f/5.6 lens. Your AF-P 70-300 should also be a good carryover, and it generally performs above its price point if you have the FX version. Finally, what full focal range do you need in the Z series. Personally, I would go directly to a Z body and possibly a kit lens first. The 24-70 is a decent lens, albeit the new 24-120 is getting a lot of good press these days (but it is not a kit lens). I guess I am just not clear about what is the advantage of sitting on new glass that you cannot use?

--Ken
Click to expand...
Not buying now, I am trying to decide on one native lens to buy WITH the Z9 when I do get it.
 
Member's gallery
AstroEd said:
If you could only afford one of the lenses for the Nikon Z series (HOPEFULLY Z9) which would you get and why? Would the f/2.8 be better for using a 1.4 or 2.0 TC with? Or would you skip them both and save for the f/6.3 800mm prime?
Click to expand...
I have both…along with the 24-70 and the 100-400 with the two TCs gets far more use. The 70-200 is useful primarily when you need a really shallow DoF. If I were buying again I would skip the 70-200. Also have the 500PF and an 8p0PF on order Along with a Z9.
 
Member's gallery
AstroEd said:
If you could only afford one of the lenses for the Nikon Z series (HOPEFULLY Z9) which would you get and why? Would the f/2.8 be better for using a 1.4 or 2.0 TC with? Or would you skip them both and save for the f/6.3 800mm prime?
Click to expand...
at what FL and conditions are you looking to shoot? i would not buy either of them to shoot at 800mm with any regularity -- in that case, yes, the 800 6.3 is going to be a better bet.

as others have said, both are good lenses, but which one (if any) really depends on what you want to shoot and in what conditions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top