Z Lens

[FastGlassGuy]

I'm considering a 180-600 or a 600mm pf. I see a lot of BOTH lenses for sale used. Any idea why?

Karen: I have never owned or used the 600pf, so I can’t speak to that. I do own and use the 180-600 on my Z8. I think it is a great lens. I really like its versatility. In Steve’s post of his shots of the wild horses in Theodore Roosevelt NP, I commented to Steve that I notice that he used the 180-600 in three of his five posted shots, and that I really liked the 180-600 for its versatility. In his reply back to me Steve stated “The zoom was essential for these-they are always moving and being able to adjust the crop on the fly is really helpful.” I took this shot of the Barn Owl, at 180 on the 180-600. If I had had a 600 prime on the Z8 at the time, I would not have been able to get this shot.

I think some people’s disappointment with the 180-600 may just be an expectations issue. It is a great lens, but it is (was) a $1,699 lens, and it is never going to compare to a much more expensive prime especially at 600. There may be greater copy variation in the 180-600 than in the more expensive lenses. I know that was an issue with the 200-500. I had an exceptionally sharp copy of that lens, but when my wife purchased a 200-500 it was clearly not as sharp, even on the same D850 body.

I also think a lot of people shooting a long lens on a high MP count camera (like the Z8/Z9) are experiencing camera shake which translates into less than sharp shots. If they increased their shutter speed considerably I think that would help them get sharper shots.

If you think you would benefit from the versatility of the 180-600 range, I would not hesitate to buy one. Ken

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[macwalter]

I am not a big fan of large zooms and prefer primes for wildlife. I have the 400f4.5 and 600pf and both TCs. I also have the 100-400 which I use less often but it is the most versatile. As said above the 400f4.5 is an excellent option if you want to save money and in spite of what is said the 2x Tc works on it if you are careful and use good light. If I had one lens to carry that would the 400f4.5 and both TCs along with the 24-120 for wide angle. The 180-600 is i am sure fine but it is too big for me to love. also i must say the image quality of the 600of is better than the 400 with a 1.4tc and it does pretty well at 840mm with the 1.4tc. I do love this lens.
I guess time will tell where I end up in terms of faves. I have a freind who wants to sell her 600pf as she doesn’t use it often. It’s virtually brand new. I told her to go for the 400f4.5 instead as it handles so beautifully on the z8. She has the 1.4tc
I used the 100-400 in Brazil last year with the 1.4Tc as at the time it was the only lens I had. I got some excellent photos with it.
I kinda wish Nikon would go for a higher quality 180-600 zoom that was lighter faster with better optics that might get you closer to a prime.
if it were good enough you might not need so many alternatives.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Karen: I have never owned or used the 600pf, so I can’t speak to that. I do own and use the 180-600 on my Z8. I think it is a great lens. I really like its versatility. In Steve’s post of his shots of the wild horses in Theodore Roosevelt NP, I commented to Steve that I notice that he used the 180-600 in three of his five posted shots, and that I really liked the 180-600 for its versatility. In his reply back to me Steve stated “The zoom was essential for these-they are always moving and being able to adjust the crop on the fly is really helpful.” I took this shot of the Barn Owl, at 180 on the 180-600. If I had had a 600 prime on the Z8 at the time, I would not have been able to get this shot.

I think some people’s disappointment with the 180-600 may just be an expectations issue. It is a great lens, but it is (was) a $1,699 lens, and it is never going to compare to a much more expensive prime especially at 600. There may be greater copy variation in the 180-600 than in the more expensive lenses. I know that was an issue with the 200-500. I had an exceptionally sharp copy of that lens, but when my wife purchased a 200-500 it was clearly not as sharp, even on the same D850 body.

I also think a lot of people shooting a long lens on a high MP count camera (like the Z8/Z9) are experiencing camera shake which translates into less than sharp shots. If they increased their shutter speed considerably I think that would help them get sharper shots.

If you think you would benefit from the versatility of the 180-600 range, I would not hesitate to buy one. KenView attachment 95936

Cool image !! and exactly why there are days I have the two camera set up Z9 or Z6III with Z800pf or Z600pf and Z9 with Tamron z mount 150-500. It depends on where I am birding that day or on which stop of the day. On a few days I will use just Z9 and Tamron 150-500.

The Z180-600 is a great lens and I had a good copy. It was longer and heavier than the Tamron and I used it more in the 200-400 range and seldom at 600, it had started sitting in my dry box since it did not work as well with double carry or where I wanted a more compact set up. With the Z600pf or the Tamron 150-500 getting the work that the Z180-600 used to I got an offer I could not refuse so I sold the Z180-600 while they were still hard to get.

As I have mentioned things change on very low light situations then the Z6III comes out to play and usually with the Z600 pf.

 

[FastGlassGuy]

Cool image !! and exactly why there are days I have the two camera set up Z9 or Z6III with Z800pf or Z600pf and Z9 with Tamron z mount 150-500. It depends on where I am birding that day or on which stop of the day. On a few days I will use just Z9 and Tamron 150-500.

The Z180-600 is a great lens and I had a good copy. It was longer and heavier than the Tamron and I used it more in the 200-400 range and seldom at 600, it had started sitting in my dry box since it did not work as well with double carry or where I wanted a more compact set up. With the Z600pf or the Tamron 150-500 getting the work that the Z180-600 used to I got an offer I could not refuse so I sold the Z180-600 while they were still hard to get.

As I have mentioned things change on very low light situations then the Z6III comes out to play and usually with the Z600 pf.

Thanks. I think there are so many variables and use-cases and the individual's financial situation that come into play, ultimately it just comes down to what works best for each person, and really only they can make those decisions and choices, based on their particular set of circumstances. Ken

 

[Ken Miracle]

Thanks. I think there are so many variables and use-cases and the individual's financial situation that come into play, ultimately it just comes down to what works best for each person, and really only they can make those decisions and choices, based on their particular set of circumstances. Ken

Exactly! We are all different.

I have a birding friend that wanted "the lens I used for birding" the Z800 she got it but it was a bit heavy for her and she had trouble finding birds in flight and even sitting birds. As she said I showed her how to acquire the birds quickly by focusing on the bird, keeping both eyes open and bringing the viewfinder to your eye. She gets the concept and sees it work for me and others but as she decided she is just not wired that way

She got a Z600 pf when it came out and it works better for her, she still has challenges getting on birds but not as severe with the wider field of view. I give everyone that asks me on birding field trips a heads up that while I acquire birds quickly with my Z800 it is not as easy for all. I tell them I have been focusing on birds and tracking them in flight since I was twelve years old, back then it was with a shotgun. I also tell them that I have shot at least 500,000 rounds of shot gun shells in my life hunting and mostly shooting sporting clays. That gave me a lot of practice focusing on a target and bringing a shotgun up to my cheek/eye while focusing on the target. So for me what is automatic will take more practice for some.

 

[macwalter]

I must say that in many cases shooting BIF is easier with smaller wider glass. I have a very easy time with a 400mm lens and have to work a bit harder at 600mm. At 840mm (the 600pf with the 1.4tc) the bird needs to be further away and I tend to pass on these situations. However having a zoom for the big stuff when they get close comes in handy and I often miss out on these situations with shooting primes. I can see how the 800pf would be tough to shoot action in many cases. It’s a big long lens.

 

[Jadiehl]

I had my own saga on this issue.

At the time this came up for me I was using the 70-200 f2.8 with a 2x teleconverter.

When the 180-600 came out I tried to buy it but the wait times were interminable so I decided to look for something else. I looked at the 100-400 but decided instead to go for a prime, the 400mm f4.5. That sent me down a completely different path.

I have read a lot about the lenses you are looking at but have not used either of them.

I pretty much agree all down the line with EricBowles' recommendations.

The least expensive foray into this world is via the 180-600. You will be spending under 2 grand and will be able to do a lot with that lens.. On the other hand the combination of the 70-200, 400mm f4.5 and 800mm pf is much more effective.

It is all a matter of your budget and how far down this road you eventually are able or willing to go.

Some people have gotten the 180-600 and later added a super prime lens such as the 800mm pf or the 600mm f4 tc vr. That can be a working combination.

You can also see there are these days a lot of 180-600 available used. That says two things, one that you can get some better prices, and two that a number of people have not been happy with the 180-600 and have chosen to move on to something else.

The 100-400 has distinct advantages for some in that it can focus closely so is very useful for smaller critters and insects.

It helps to have a long range plan here.

My long range plan was to have someone give me a super prime either a 400mm f2.8 tc or 600mm f4 tc. So far that long range plan has not worked out for me but I am still hopeful some generous soul will see my pure haart and decide to reward my goodness with a special gift. I know you are out there somewherel.

Good luck on the special gift!!!

 

[macwalter]

Good combo I would say.

 

[Rick Kibbey]

Hi Folks,

Ive traded my D850 & D810 & all the lens as well , but I looking for a lens to replace my 200 - 500 for wildlife & landscape.

Ive been reading up about Nikon Z 100-400mm VR & the 180 - 600 but cant make up my mind. Any advice would be appreciated.

I had a tele conv mk3 which Ive also traded, is it worth purchasing a Z mount version

Thanks

I can tell you the 180-600mm is heavy. When mounted on a Z9 the two are a beast. On a Z8 it’s better but still heavy. I love it and my 100-400mm. It really depends on two things. What do you shoot. (Lots of walking, looking for your shot or are you stationary). Also depends how young and strong you are in this area. If you are older like me, heavy gets really heavy after a couple hours walking. The final consideration is does heavy and lots of walking hinder your photo lust. If so, go with the 100-400 with a TC ( I love my 1.4). Right now I live with heavy and walking if I need the 600 reach. But there is plenty of need for both so I have them. If only one is in your future think of the above before choosing. Good luck and great shooting to you.

 

[macwalter]

That’s why I go for the primes in most cases. I can walk all day with the 600pf or the 400f4.5 or the 100-400 zoom. I’m fit but slight and 76 years old.

 

[wotan1]

A lot of birds are far away and you need 800mm to reach them.

When I first tried out the 800mm I thought it would be impossible to catch a bird in flight with so long a lens.

I proved I was wrong. You struggle to get them in the frame but once you have them in teh autofocus on the Z9 (and I am assuming also Z8) works really well to grab and keep the bird in focus.

There is a heron rookery near me. Probably 150 or more birds in two or three trees. Sight lines are not ideal but I can get close enough wiht the 800mm. WHen the birds are in flight I might miss abotu 70-80 percent because they move too fast and the lens is too long but on the other 20-30 percent i get them in frame and get a lock. After a few hours of shooting like that I have plenty of tack sharp images to work with in post.

I can also handhold if I have the camera on a Holdfast strap but I also love to work with tripod/gimbal.

 

[macwalter]

I agree and have good results with 840mm with the 600pf and even 800mm with the 2x on the 400f4.5. The problem for me is often you don’t need 800mm and have options to go shorter as needed and there is no way handholding I can be as quick with a large lens like the 800pf. Looking at my photos from the Amazon usually taken at 600mm there were often times 800mm would be better