Nikon Z 200-600 lens, WHEN?

MrFotoFool

DaveyJ said:

MANY of us who own F Mount lens do NOT want to use them on our Mirrorless Nikons. I own the Z50 and the two excellent kit lens, the Zfc and the one 16-50 kit lens and the Z 6 II and the 24-70 F4 S lens. That leaves me with NO LONGER Z lens. I have the F mount adapter #1 and have NEVER used it. I ordered the Z 100-400 and that is the lens I MOST need now. Nikon also NEEDS to have a firmware update on the Z 6 II. Firmware updates are NOT all that easy to do....

I am with you. Currently I am still shooting DSLR only (D850 and D500). If I do go to Z mirrorless, I would not bother with an adaptor, I would just get Z lenses. Part of the rationale for switching (as I see it) is the new lenses are sharper.

WestEndFoto

MrFotoFool said:

DaveyJ said:

MANY of us who own F Mount lens do NOT want to use them on our Mirrorless Nikons. I own the Z50 and the two excellent kit lens, the Zfc and the one 16-50 kit lens and the Z 6 II and the 24-70 F4 S lens. That leaves me with NO LONGER Z lens. I have the F mount adapter #1 and have NEVER used it. I ordered the Z 100-400 and that is the lens I MOST need now. Nikon also NEEDS to have a firmware update on the Z 6 II. Firmware updates are NOT all that easy to do....

I am with you. Currently I am still shooting DSLR only (D850 and D500). If I do go to Z mirrorless, I would not bother with an adaptor, I would just get Z lenses. Part of the rationale for switching (as I see it) is the new lenses are sharper.

There are still some very nice f-mount lenses. The f-mount counterparts to the current 1.8 primes are significantly inferior. However, the 28 1.4E and 105 1.4E and perhaps the 400 2.8E compared to the unevaluated 400 2.8S TC, all of which I have, are quite competitive. I intend on putting the FTZii on the 28, 105 and perhaps the 400 and using them on the Z9.

I also have the 8-35 3.5-4.5E, 14-24 2.8G, 24-70 2.8E and 70-200 2.8E which would go nicely on the Z9 with the FTZii. While the 14-24 is not competitive, the other three are (the 8-35 because there is no Z counterpart, but it is very good).

By competitive, I do not mean equal. For example, the Z mount 24-70 2.8S and 70-200 2.8S are upgrades to the f-mount counterparts, they are modest upgrades. Kind of like the upgrades that we saw in the f-mount.

Of course, switching adapters is a pain, so I intend on leaving an adapter on each of these lenses full time.

photobunny

@WestEndFoto there is more to it than IQ. That 400 2.8E for instance and my 500 PF keep their VR engaged an a noisy fashion (compared to native Z). They also don't focus as quickly or surely as a native Z lens does and lack both the second lens function button and the control ring (which is exposure compensation for me).

These may be secondary too IQ, but are real considerations when it comes to using the lens. I have to use the focus preset on the 500 and 400 lenses on the Z bodies and didn't on the DSLR's when subjects where close. And having the VR in sport mode should mean it is silent/unactivated when following a subject until I click the shutter or at least activate AF.

I also tried the 70-200E vs my Z and found it exhibits the same weird behaviour where you can constantly hear the hum of the VR and the AF just isn't as quick or quick feeling (The Z lens just seems to know where the subject is and races to it vs the E that races to about where the subject is then almost hunts, mostly due to the differences in AF motor types I suspect.)

mhedges

I feel like adapters are of more use very early in a system's life. Yes sure the Z mount is still fairly new compared to F mount but the lens lineup is starting to fill out pretty well. I wouldn't use a F mount if there is an equivalent Z mount available.

DaveyJ

I have ordered? the 100-400 Z lens. That will do pretty much what I want and can even use it on my Z50 which I now use exclusively with the excellent 50-250. I have also ordered the Z9 and expect it will be the last camera I ever buy (an age thing) But admit that a D500 level Z Camera like a Z70 or 80 would be for me maybe more ideal. The BIG Z9 will be ideal sometimes and TOO big sometimes.

I am happy with the 200-500 Nikon and that is on my trusty D7500 and I have NO reason to get a FTZII as there is NO F Mount lens I would buy today to add to what I have. I have used the F mount 500 5.6 PF and took a distinct disliking to the fixed 500 as where I tried it 200 would have been better. I owned thousands of dollars in view camera and medium format lens and not ONE was a zoom. I want NO prime lens. I am in places where I can't move and have to zoom in or out to get the right composition.

MrFotoFool

Many of us will eagerly await the reviews and test shots of 200-600 when it finally comes out. (Nikon announced all roadmap lenses will be available by 2023, but hopefully we will see this one in 2022). It is presumably not an S series, and since I am a stickler for sharpness and focus speed it may not be for me. But it will be interesting to watch and perhaps to rent to see for myself. The F mount equivalent - 200-500 - has conflicting opinions. Some people love it, but others say it's not sharp enough and/or the focus is not fast enough. My brother had it and got the 500PF (which I also use) instead because the 200-500 was not sharp enough for him.

photobunny

If you are a stickler for sharpness and AF speed why not just cut the 200-600 (which is already known to be a non s-line lens that’ll be as good (or bad) as the 200-500 and Sony 200-600) and get the 100-400 with a 1.4x TC when need be? Unless the optics are way ahead of the 200-500 I would expect you to get better IQ from the 100-400 S even with the TC and assuredly faster AF, lower weight, and better weather sealing.

MrFotoFool

photobunny said:

If you are a stickler for sharpness and AF speed why not just cut the 200-600 (which is already known to be a non s-line lens that’ll be as good (or bad) as the 200-500 and Sony 200-600) and get the 100-400 with a 1.4x TC when need be? Unless the optics are way ahead of the 200-500 I would expect you to get better IQ from the 100-400 S even with the TC and assuredly faster AF, lower weight, and better weather sealing.

Yes I am leaning towards the 100-400 with 1.4. However I am waiting until Z8 comes out, as I don't think Z7ii would be any better (and possibly worse) than my current D850 and D500.

DaveyJ

To MrFotoFool, What is the CAT in your image? I do have a Siberian Forest Cat, MoJo.

I have the Z 6 II which I am currently using with the new S Z 100-400 lens. Having used a LOT of Nikon lens and cameras, I rate the D 850 and D 500 as about the same quality, I haven't even been able to order the Z 9 as my "local" dealer can't do that for me despite getting the 100-400 very quickly. I do NOT have the 1.4 TC yet but know I will need it.

I do use a LOT the Z 50 with the 50-250 lens and that is currently my most USED camera and lens. I feel the Nikon 200-500 F 5.6 I use a LOT with the D7500 is very, very good. Personal opinion now is the subject is the most important aspect with a good enough camera. The non S 200-600 to me is going to be good enough.

I know photo pros that MOST want a Z version of the D 500. Thom Hogan is using the Z 9 in Africa and his second camera is the Z 50! I think the smartest thing Nikon could do is a DX high grade Z camera and it has to have longer zoom lens.

MrFotoFool

DaveyJ said:

To MrFotoFool, What is the CAT in your image? I do have a Siberian Forest Cat, MoJo.

It's not my cat, it belonged to the San Diego Zoo! It's a Pallas' cat, also known as manul.

DaveyJ

I thought maybe it was your cat! Now I see what it is. I have tracked Mountain Lions after seeing one in 1957. And I was doing research on them in Idaho before I got drafted during the Vietnam War. In the eastern USA I even encountered them while I worked as a Fish and Wildlife Biologist in West Virginia.

While I was on these assignments I was lucky enough to own some decent film cameras back then Minoltas but after they kept changing their mounts I switched to Nikon . Then I got into large and medium formats which I regret as they were really expensive and not as productive as my Nikon F100s to the Nikon F 5 I still own and use. Unfortunately when i was around Cougars I never had long lens beyond 135mm. I still have and use my Nikkor 20-35mm but wildcats are probably where long telephotos are needed.

MrFotoFool

DaveyJ said:

I thought maybe it was your cat! Now I see what it is. I have tracked Mountain Lions after seeing one in 1957...

We are getting off topic, but as a wild cat lover I am fascinated. My dream is to photograph a wild mountain lion (which live in the hills near me in Tucson), but I doubt that will ever happen. I have been fortunate enough to find a local place with bobcats that are relaxed around people and photographed them dozens of times throughout 2021.

DaveyJ

The best place I know to actually photograph wild Mountain Lions is Wind River Range in Idaho. I spent several years in Idaho and since I was doing interviews with Nez Pierce Native Americans ( I was selected as I was part Mohawk) and some very old White settlers. I was working with a graduate from Frank and John Craighead University of Montana I was sometimes at the right place, at the right time. Cougars have a very wide territory and are incredibly elusive but you already know that. I have been at times less than five foot away from them, but only the cubs. The cubs by the way are really, really cute! Sure wish I had some of the cameras I have today! I spent quite awhile near Tucson and did a stint at Old Tucson Studios, I saw Cat sign there, but never a Lion.

MrFotoFool

DaveyJ said:

The best place I know to actually photograph wild Mountain Lions is Wind River Range in Idaho...

Idaho? According to Google Maps it's in Wyoming.

DaveyJ

I drove by my Chevy Pickup truck to Wind River a lot. It was a 300 mile drive from Univ. of Idaho where i was a graduate student in Moscow Idaho. I did my field work from Hells Canyon on the Snake River, to the Clearwater and then over to Wallace Idaho to Shoshone which is in Wyoming. Most of the cats I saw was in Idaho but MrFotoFool is right that is NOT in Wind River Range.

The best chance to photograph them for me was right on the Blue Star Trail just over the Idaho Line heading towards Missoula Montana. Getting in to the Wind River Range is a long hike. We had a radio collared lion. And followed quite a few that were untagged or collared. They are solitary except when with cubs or mating. We saw a lot of tracks and killed deer and elk. It was pretty evident they are great hunters. I myself am not very fond of lion dogs used to chase them and they will tree. A couple of those hunters list ads for photographers AND hunters. NOT a good mix by my standards. There are quite a few in places like Yellowstone but the NPS regulations make it very hard to see the Cougars.

MrFotoFool

Getting back to lens talk, I am currently renting a Sony 200-600 G and a Sony A7iv body. I did my first test shots yesterday morning (with wild bobcats and ducks) and have it for another week. I love the lens but the body is too small. I mean the grip is so close to the large lens that my fingers are squished between them and are constantly touching the lens. If the body was a bit bigger I would be tempted to dump all my Nikon F gear and switch to Sony. However I think the lens is a perfect all-in-one solution for wildlife (I currently have to carry two setups). A larger aperture would be nice, but for the size and price it's a compromise I think I can accept? I enlarged a couple shots taken at 600mm to actual pixels and they are very sharp. For a lens that cost less than two grand it's a bargain - and it's internal zoom! I hope Nikon will announce their version very soon and I hope they make it internal zoom like Sony. (I also hope they announce a Z8 at the same time, as currently they don't have a mirrorless body I want).

WestEndFoto

MrFotoFool said:

Getting back to lens talk, I am currently renting a Sony 200-600 G and a Sony A7iv body. I did my first test shots yesterday morning (with wild bobcats and ducks) and have it for another week. I love the lens but the body is too small. I mean the grip is so close to the large lens that my fingers are squished between them and are constantly touching the lens. If the body was a bit bigger I would be tempted to dump all my Nikon F gear and switch to Sony. However I think the lens is a perfect all-in-one solution for wildlife (I currently have to carry two setups). A larger aperture would be nice, but for the size and price it's a compromise I think I can accept? I enlarged a couple shots taken at 600mm to actual pixels and they are very sharp. For a lens that cost less than two grand it's a bargain - and it's internal zoom! I hope Nikon will announce their version very soon and I hope they make it internal zoom like Sony. (I also hope they announce a Z8 at the same time, as currently they don't have a mirrorless body I want).

How about a Z7ii with the grip. I have two of those and they are pretty good. They are tiding me over until I get a Z9.

MrFotoFool

@WestEndFoto The main reason to switch would be for the 200-600 lens. Since Nikon hasn't even made a development announcement yet, it would be pointless to go out and buy a Z7ii right now.

DaveyJ

I see the Z 400 with the built in teleconverter is $13, 000 + . Nikon MORE needs a 200-600 that could be the Z equivalent of the 200-500 which is a GREAT lens IF YOU GET a good one. Mine is most excellent. But I just questioned even packing up the older FTZ adapter. I have never even put it on a camera, and looking closely at it, probably never will. What a piece of junk. Nikon needs a Z version of the D 500 more than any other camera. An above $10,000 is strategically of less value to getting and keeping customers.

Jared on FroKnows just did an after a year Sony A1 review and said the Z9 was better for video. WE own the A1 and I have seen proof he is right. I myself require a camera that will shoot stills AND video. And the Sony 200-600 we own was a decently priced lens. Nikon needs to get that 200-600 out real soon! I have the new Z 100-400 and use it on my Z 6 II. I'll get a Z9 when I can. Haven't even been able to pre-order one yet. But I sure do NOT want or need a 2.8 lens for ANYTHING. I am not shooting for narrow depth of field.

photobunny

The 400 f/2.8 is needed way before a 200-600 consumer lens. We'll see the 200-600 with an appropriate consumer body like a Z6iii, Z50ii, or even a stacked sensor Z90.

PB_PM

Yup, the 200-600 can wait. Nikon needs pros to switch to Z pronto if they want to maintain any semblance of stability long term.

DaveyJ

Well the 400 2.8 with teleconverter is announced and available for pre-order. But I have been many places at National Parks, etc., where pro photographers sold or traded in their huge Nikon lens to buy a 200-500 F 5.6 Nikon. And they are usually using D 500 for the camera. There are QUITE a FEW PROS on You tube who use the 200-500 lens a lot. I'd like that equivalent in Z lens ASAP. Today I could have shot the best wildlife scene I have seen in a few months and after briefly trying the Z 6 II and the new 100-400 Z S lens I did the actual shooting with the D7500 and the 200-500 F 5.6 Nikon. The FX gear was in this case, worthless. The QUICKEST people to abandon Nikon are PROS.

photobunny

That you see people using the 200-500 on the d500 is kinda the point. In order for the 200-600 to make sense there has to be a body to put it on. The Z9 users are going to use the pro lenses like the 100-400 and 400, and those lenses are launched with the Z9 and I am waiting patiently for both to turn up in my mail box.

There is nothing sensible to mount the 200-600 on at the moment so it is nonsensical to release it. All of the Z glass has been launched with matching bodies so I fully expect we’ll get a weekend warrior Z90 stacked crop body to go with the lens and when we start hearing about this new body or a Z6iii we’ll also hear or see hints of the 200-600.

DaveyJ

Well I agree with photobunny about that. I do think the Z90 or a Z 6 III is where Nikon will bring ou the 200-600. . Owning a Z 6 II I do feel I would NOT invest in a Z 6 III. Another factor is that I use the Z 50 a lot and sparingly use the Z 6 II. I rarely change lens on these cameras and if I got a Z 9 it would be in quite a large part due to the Sensor Shield. I hope the Z cameras in the future have sensor shields as it is a GREAT feature. An advantage of the Z 9 is price.

Nikon will sell a LOT of them! And myself I look more for attributes on a camera when I am mostly photographing. When I am wading in a stream trout fishing, I want a Z 50 and the two wonderful kit lens. I even used the D3200 and two kit lens for that until very recently. I have drowned 3 cameras during my grad school era in Aquatic Science and when working towards a PhD that is rough and I could hardly afford to buy the cameras I did buy.

DaveyJ

We need to keep PRO photo people and amateurs, and get NEW entrants!