Nikon 600mm f/6.3 PF

photobunny

Released today. My pre-order is in and I can't wait to get it in my hands to do a bit of birding with the FW4.10 on the Z9.

Anyone else going for this one?
Is it going to be your main 600 or do you also have the f/4.0?
Are you planning on getting the 180-600 to go with it or will you use the 100-400 S for the in-between?

trolley

I'm watching at the moment. I've got my 500 f5.6PF & I was thinking of replacing it with the 400 f4.5. From what I've read the 180-600 might be a bit slow to lock on. The 600 is a lot of money - not saying it isn't worth it.

And I was thinking of a 100-400 to fill in, but maybe a 70-200 or thereabouts? Especially with a 1.4 TC

photobunny

Between the 70-200 and 100-400 it’ll depend a lot on what you shoot.

I take the 70-200 for people mostly, but I do put the 1.4x on it as it gets more gloomy in the forest and have gotten even small birds with it.

In normal light that isn’t “the sun doesn’t rise this month” the 100-400 is far more versatile as you can get a small bird, butterfly, spider, fox, and deer. All with the same lens and if the light is good you can even shove the 1.4x on it.

With the 70-200 I often take the 400 f/4.5 with me to cover that. With the 100-400 I’ll often have the 800 PF with me instead and to be honest those days I come back with better photos usually.

I can see me having the 100-400 and 600 PF with me on areas where I know the 800 is just too long.

I am also considering the 180-600, but subjects where it’s mfd advantage might come into play are very few and seem well served by the 100-400

donaldejose

I am sure it will be a good lens and whether or not it is needed depends upon how often you use 600mm and how many pixels you need to have. I don't need it. I have the 400 f4.5 and can shoot it at 600mm in DX mode. 20mp are enough for me. Here are two shots demonstrating the 400mm f4.5 on a Z9 in DX mode making it 600mm. I won't need more than this can give me so will not purchase the 600mm 6.3 PF (for now at least). Of course, 45mp is better than 20mp and a 600mm f4 is better than a 600mm f6.3 but I have to be realistic about capacity and cost.



and

WestEndFoto

The 400 4.5 is a great lens for this type of work. I used it quite a bit on my Yellowstone and Grand Teton trip.

WestEndFoto

Here is an example.

WestEndFoto

And another. Who said that you can't use a 400 for landscapes?

WestEndFoto

And I regret that I didn't have the presence of mind to use a 400 on this subject. I kicked myself when I saw someone else use it and how well it turned out.

photobunny

Some great pictures here. Once my 600 f/6.3 PF arrives I'll be sure to post some comparisons with the 400 f/4.5 and 800 f/6.3 since I own both these lenses. I anticipate for myself that the 600 is going to by my goto hiking companion since the 800 gets a bit heavy around 15Km in. The 600 will fit a lot better in my smaller backpacks. (I use the 400 at f/4.5 in the dim wooded areas with my 70-200 f/2.8, but I have the TC so I can show and provide some RAW images of like of like subjects assuredly.)

donaldejose

Great. You must shoot a lot of smaller subjects, like birds, to carry a 600 and 800 when hiking long distances. Please provide a link to your flickr photostream so we can see some of your work. Thanks.

photobunny

https://www.flickr.com/photos/thephotobunny/

Some of my photos will be in the 800mm group where you can see some from others if you follow through. The 800 is a great lens, but a bit heavy for long treks.

It seems to work best for shore birds with the 1.4x TC and once I get a picture of one I am happy with I’ll be sure to post it.

When the 180-400 f/4.0 TC comes out for Z I imagine that’ll be my main lens for in the hide.

You should see a good mixture of focal lengths form my gallery and I can assuredly give you my feedback on the pros and cons of them.

donaldejose

Very nice! I love what that 800 and the 400 f2.8 can do to the backgrounds. They are well worth the money and weight if a person can handle it.

WestEndFoto

photobunny said:

Some great pictures here. Once my 600 f/6.3 PF arrives I'll be sure to post some comparisons with the 400 f/4.5 and 800 f/6.3 since I own both these lenses. I anticipate for myself that the 600 is going to by my goto hiking companion since the 800 gets a bit heavy around 15Km in. The 600 will fit a lot better in my smaller backpacks. (I use the 400 at f/4.5 in the dim wooded areas with my 70-200 f/2.8, but I have the TC so I can show and provide some RAW images of like of like subjects assuredly.)

I picked up the 400 4.5 earlier this year. I have been waiting to see how the rest of the line fleshes out and now that the 600 is out, I am just going to go for the 800. I already have an 800 8.0ais and I think the focal length is pretty hand. I would note that my most commonly used telephoto lenses are up to 300, so I will flesh those out as Nikon launches them. 400+ is a niche for me, but an enjoyable niche when I am in it.

photobunny

Looks like mine is coming on Saturday or Monday.

photobunny

Thats the 600 f/6.3 PF arrived. Bit too late in the evening and pitch black outside to take pictures to try it out. So I'll get some tomorrow bright and early.

photobunny

Here's the 600 in the line with the 100-400, 400, and 800.

donaldejose

Wow!

photobunny

So some preliminary thoughts on the lens:

It is much lighter than the 800mm f/6.3 PF and feels better balanced than the 500mm f/5.6 PF.

It fits in my messenger bag and small backpack better than the 500 PF + FtZ ever did.

The button and dial layout alls feels natural and it feels nicer in the hand than the 400 f/4.5, more grippy, less plastic feeling as you have your hands on the rubber more.

AF is speed is quicker than my recollection of the 500 PF and other peoples tests show the 600 PF is up there with the 600 f/4.0 in AF speed. AF is much more accurate and downright snappy in my dimly lit living room to grab the the cats eye compared to the 400 f/4.5 TC and even compared to the bare 400 (the room is too small to do the test with the 800)

The only negatives I have so far is the lack of lens lungs on the barrel meaning my strap will be attached to the lens foot and camera body. The 800 has the strap fully attached to the lungs on the lens so it runs down the length of my back when I am climbing down to the beach with my hands free for balancing and occasionally falling on.

To summarise it feels really nice in the hands with sensible control locations. It feels more premium than the 400 f/4.5 in the hands with more substance to hold onto. I'll take it out for a good bit tomorrow and see if I can find some interesting subjects with the 800 and 400 in my backpack incase I find something that's just going to sit there for me to get similar shots. Though I am going out for me, test shots are not a priority when I could be following the fat squirrels about the burn.

photobunny

Some additional thoughts from being out for the morning in the rain:

• The lens is exceedingly light and feels much lighter than the 500 PF. It kinda feels like the 500 PF on the D500. Where on the Z9 the 500 PF occasionally loses connection and feels unbalanced due to the FtZ adaptor.
  
• The control layout and feel of the lens is much better than the 400 f/4.5
  
• The AF is really snappy. The fastest lens I have used and way up there with the 600 f/4.0 TC and 400 f/2.8 TC's I've used (But not fully committed to buying yet as I am holding off for the 180-400 f/4.0 TC replacement)
  
• It doesn't feel like it is going to snap off the Z9 if you have the Z9 on a strap on your shoulder. The whole thing feels like an integrated hole.
  
• The lighting and heavy downpour today meant even a 400 f/2.8 TC would be pushing into 10,000 ISO so the images from today are assuredly not keepers.
  

WestEndFoto

Photobunny, you are as addicted to superteles as I am to portrait lenses.

photobunny

WestEndFoto said:

Photobunny, you are as addicted to superteles as I am to portrait lenses.

Mine are bigger

photobunny

https://www.flickr.com/groups/14833638@N24 Started shoving up some images. Light is a bit dreadful just now so sadly the images aren't what I would call keepers. No f/4.0 would save these ones.

trolley

"The lighting and heavy downpour today meant even a 400 f/2.8 TC would be pushing into 10,000 ISO so the images from today are assuredly not keepers."
I'll look forward to the keepers appearing in about April then
It's really not photography weather at the moment

photobunny

trolley said:

"The lighting and heavy downpour today meant even a 400 f/2.8 TC would be pushing into 10,000 ISO so the images from today are assuredly not keepers."
I'll look forward to the keepers appearing in about April then
It's really not photography weather at the moment

Nah, the lighting was ok yesterday and when the snow hits we get interesting wildlife photos that doesn't tank the ISO.

photobunny

https://photos.photobunny.co.uk/burb.zip here is a full size edit and a RAW if anyone wants to see for themselves what images look like from the 600 at ISO 1000. I expect ISO 1000 to be a normal number as I rarely get to shoot at base ISO.

trolley

I'll be interested to hear what you think of the AF speed and 3-d tracking for BIF.
I should really buy the 400 f4.5 & slum it, but if there are offers on at any shows next year, I might well be tempted