Nikon or Canon 600/4

snakebunk

The new Nikon 600/4 lense is probably the best lense right now for a bird photographer like myself. And the Canon 600/4 is probably also the best bird lense right now, the specifications are very similar. But there is a big difference, If I switch to Canon I can get the 600/4 and a very good camera (EOS 5D Mark III) for the price of the Nikon 600/4.

Why is the Nikon lense so much more expensive?

WestEndFoto

I think the relevant comparison is the old Nikon vs the Canon.

Then think about the premium in light of upgrade from the old Nikon to the new Nikon.

Ironheart

Think about the overall system. You get to use a D8x0 on the Nikon version. There is nothing like it the canon lineup.

spraynpray

The 7D2 is good too, making it 960mm and Nikon have nothing like the 7D2 atm.

Coastalconn

Well, I faced the same question in May. FYI, Canon upgraded the 600 F4 the about 3 years ago to the IS II. Weight wise it is equivelent to the new Nikon. Same with the 500. My 500 f4 is the equivelent of the 500 f4 VR and I got it used for 4300 with a 1.4x extender and lens coat included. So if you are a dedicated birder on a "budget" like me, the decision is fairly easy. I grew tired of waiting for a D400 when the 7dm2 was just sitting there and the price was dropping. Now it can be had for 1250 after rebate with a Canon pro 100 printer and some other freebies. If you do more generalized stuff the 5dm3 is a good camera. If you are doing it just for birds, I would consider 1DX (about 3800 new) 1dM4 (about 1500 used) or the 7dm2... Of course just my humble opinion.

TriShooter

@snakebunk

I have not used the latest version of the Canon 600mm, and will vouch for @CostalConn as one of most proficient BIF shooters here on Nikon Rumors. I cannot compare these lenses and camera combinations directly, but confident from what I have read that the latest version of the Canon 600mm is quite good.

However, I do own the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 600mm f/4E FL ED VR Lens so can say this lens beats every other Nikon lens I own in resolution, sharpness, and contrast in any kind of light. I have taken impossible shots using it that would have been in the trash can with any of my other lens combinations including the 400mm with tc.

The VR in the new 600mm f/4E lens is akin to something out of "Star Wars" being astonishingly good. The VR in the 600mm even manages somehow to compensate for the camera's shutter click when the lens is tripod mounted which blew my mind. Normally I turn VR off, and leave it off, but leave it on with 600mm f/4E FL. This lens is very special.

You may want to read thread below to get a feel for why some people do not have an issue with the price Nikon is charging for it. @snakebunk LOL. I just saw, and remembered that you made a number of comments in the thread below, but will leave the link for others.

New Nikon 600mm is as Sharp as the Otus55mm

snakebunk

I would like a better understanding of why the lense is so expensive, but I think the only answer is that there is a market.

I will take a closer look at Canon and compare the systems. If I ever change system, the time is now, before I buy a 600/4. I also have hopes that Sigma will put out a great long tele lense. I think they can do wonders for half the price of the Nikon lense. Another option is to buy the old Nikon 600/4.

By the way, I laugh at myself when I go to the gym and picture myself holding a large lense .

Thank you all for your input! I read everything carefully.

TriShooter

@snakebunk

I understand your frustration. I just made the decision to trim down my gear to FX, DX, Nikon 1, and a Fuji X100T. Being retired is making me less of a tester, and more of a shooter which is probably good.

For me the real difference in price between the two lenses is the sharpness at higher pixel densities which does not show up as dramatically on aps-c sensors as it does on fx sensors at the present time. My guesstimate is that the new 600mm is about 30 percent MP sharper than the 600mm VR. The difference between the old and the new version is better but does not leap out at me on close shots. But, at a distance when cropping, it is very significant on both the D800, and the D7200 to my eyes.

Lenses last much longer than cameras so I am not sure spending the difference on a new camera is as good an investment longer term. Cameras are starting to be replaced by all the manufacturers faster now than I seem to want to buy them. I guess my age is showing @snakebunk.

I personally would buy the last version of the 400mm f/2.8 and use a teleconverter before I would buy the last version of 600mm VR. My very old, okay ancient, 400mm f/3.5 is still a superior bird lens when used with a modified autofocus TC-16A on a D800. This combination shoots like champ using semi-autofocus much faster than any super telephoto autofocus lens I own without manual assist, including the new 600mm f/4E FL.

I still shoot with this lens because it takes great images of bif faster than anything I own, but it does require slightly more effort which is actually fun for me. These four shots were taken last winter on the link below with the 400mm f/3.5 and a modified TC-16A both of which can be bought easily for less than 1700 US Dollars.

I cannot shoot as quite as early in the morning, or as late at night with my oldest 400mm plus TC, but with the teleconverter it is 640mm, and this particular teleconverter was made for this particular 400mm lens because Nikon was lagging Canon at the time, and it still works like a dream on the current digital bodies. The TC-16A (I own two of them) is easily acquired in the Modified Version for modern cameras on e-bay. The conversion is not hard , but it is tedious, and a loose screw can do 400 bucks worth of damage to mechanical shutter link on a digital camera in a heartbeat. The vendor I bought from is still selling them the last time I checked for him online.

Ancient Nikon 400mm f/3.5 with Modified TC-16A

snakebunk

@TriShooter: Thank you for sharing your experiences! I like to hear that the new 600/4 is sharper than the older lense. I don't think 400 is my ideal focal length, but it is interesting to hear that you like the old 400/2.8 that much.

haroldp

My 400/2.8 VR (1) with tc-20eIII is good enough that I will stay with it. The 400/2.8 is also fast enough for my theater work.

... H

9viii

Why so expensive?





I just about cry when I think about how much human energy, effort and ingenuity these lenses represent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immersion_lithography
Also note that Nikon, Canon and ASML (with heavy investment from Intel) are the only three companies worldwide manufacturing modern lithography machines for microchip production. Basically every microchip produced since 2008 (everything 45nm and under) is using those machines.

You can see some good (if old) animations of the process here.



I actually just discovered this today, but I've been wondering for years where ASML gets their lenses...


Figures.

TriShooter

Why so expensive?

........

I just about cry when I think about how much human energy, effort and ingenuity these lenses represent.

Also note that Nikon, Canon and ASML (with heavy investment from Intel) are the only three companies worldwide manufacturing modern lithography machines for microchip production. Basically every microchip produced since 2008 (everything 45nm and under) is using those machines.
.........

@9VIII thank you for sharing these video with us. The videos were interesting to watch, and explain a lot about why high quality lenses are a precious possession.