Видео

Yes it works very well have done this with 600mm lens no worries.

No mention of canons rf 200 = 800 mm is usm just saying?

Great info, Martin! When possible I use support. I also think the use of 60 or 120fps is great, especially for fast-moving birds.

Fantastic rundown/comparison, Martin! Would love to see more results from these. I do like my 400mm f/4.5 with the TCs. Even with the 2X I get good results.

My only gripe with the 180-600 is that the AF motor’s performance is inconsistent. Also the optical quality isn’t that great, particularly in challenging light conditions. The Sony 200-600 is much better optically, besides it operated by linear XD motors, not the budget STM that Nikon has used in the 180-600. Bummer!

Once Olympus would make just 25-28 mpx camera, I'd be sold with 150-400 TC. I know, the blurr is not as shallow, but practically for wildlife photography (including macro magnification) it's just neat..

I don't think I could live without my 180-600mm. The only thing I don't like about it is how narrow the focus ring is.

All lens have their advantages and disadvantages, the trick is to get the one that is right for what you do, not want, but maybe think you need. I have both the 100-400 and the 800 PF. When birding, I have the 1-400 on my Z8 and my 800 PF on my Z9. I have a shoulder harness that puts the weight onto my shoulders. Either camera/lens is easily accessible as they are on each side of my body. As a 70 year old, I do not find them heavy. The more that you use them, the lighter they become. I can hand hold both, finding the subject takes practice. You must invest the time to know your equipment and use it effectively.

Brilliant video for full time photographer, as you said it's hard to justify spending so much on a 800mm prime for a casual shooter

Nice video

I too bought an ME Super over 40 years ago whilst at college. I lost it somewhere maybe 15 years ago, perhaps when moving house? Still have the 50mm lens but how I miss that camera now. I've nearly bought another a few times when I see them 2nd hand but I really want 'my' camera back. Many happy memories. BTW I'm enjoying your other videos on the Z9 and lenses. I've a D500 and looking to go mirrorless sometime soon. Cheers now

Yes, I do need a 800mm lens. Unless of course Nikon releases a 1000mm f6.3 under 3kg.

For me weight difference not so big 2 kg vs 2.4 kg. I have z8 with 800 mm pf . Zoom lens has advantage of flexibility, prime lens superb quality. Both this lens have great value for money. As you said 800 mm pf have a bokeh which is much closer to very expensive primes bokeh. And must important for choosing lens who is your object of photography , if you love more very small insects of course better to choose lens with more magnification.

180-600 is my “kalashnikov” … 😂

Depends on what your preferred targets is .. that you want to photograph . Not every Hide offers ring side access lol . The Nature reserve i go to on occasion when i can be bothered lol the hide is a good distance from the water . A long reach lense is essential . I rarely bother with using the hide . Even though i capture Wildlife only when the oppertunity presents itself .

I have 840mm and it is often not enough. I am sure that I could use 5000mm if if it was possible to make one that could be handheld. As an example if i want a close up of a sparrow I need to be within 15 feet with my 840mm lens. This is too close. Bigger glass is better for the photgrapher and better for the wildlife.

I have the 180-600 AND the 800 PF lens - _ also have the Z 100-400. There are many locations where I believe the 800 is almost essential - for example, RSPB Pulborough Brooks. At this location the subjects are often quite a distance from the hide and i was often frustrated that I just couldn't get close enough. On the other hand there are other locations such as the Arundel Wetlands when the 800 is often too powerful. When I visit Pulborough Brooks, Warnham Nature Reserve and Pagham Harbour, for example, the 800 is my most used lens. Yes, the 180-600 offers great versatility however, there are times when I want to photograph butterflies and dragonflies / damselflies and for these subjects I find the Z 100-400 is the best solution as it has a close focus focal length of just over 1 metre - much closer than the 180-600 offers, let alone the 800!. They are all great lenses and each has its advantages and disadvantages. Don't forget, of course, the 800 was launched almost a year before the 180-600 and the 100-400 was launched almost a year earlier than the 800 so by the time the180-600 was announced many of us already had both 800s and 100-400s. It was therefore a hard decision to add in the 180-600. I think Nikon made a very clever marketing decision in releasing the 180-600 last. If it had been launched first I very much doubt they would have sold many 800s or 100-400s!!!

why English always say emmmmmm?

Use 100-400 mm with a 40 mp Apsc, which is 600 mm on a 26 mp. It have become my main lens, when I walk with my dog. It fullfill my needs very well and are soo practically. Cant use a bigger lens and dont need that reach.

With the 180-600 mm your are flexible and when it goes about quality and sharpness the prime lens NIkon Z 800 F6.3 is way ahead over the zoom lens

Great comparison and well thought out comments. As you know I have the 800mm of and love it but…… recently I’ve had a shoulder problem plus I’ve been concentrating on insects so I might be thinking of the 180-600mm instead but not sure if there is that much of a weight difference.I’ll have to look in to it. But I do own the 400mm f4.5 with the tc 1.4x which has produced great results and flexible when it comes to light and is incredibly light so I’m at a weird point in my photography.

Wonderful to see nature in the hustle and bustle of London city! Great capture and thanks for sharing ❤

Wow, wonderful video ❤❤❤

Keep up the great work! You got my subscription! 👍

Wonderful video ❤👍

Excellent footage of Gray Heron foraging. A big LIKE from me.

Absolutely great! Filming at 60 FPS and slomo at 30 FPS works fine. Patrick, Belgium

Since using a camera with IBIS, my tripod only stays at home. Because videos and photos are taken handheld only. Btw, thanks for sharing the footage. A big LIKE from me. Just sub your channel. I'm a birder from Singapore. Happy birding! 👍🔔

and a lot of patience to capture the moment. Wonderful video Martin.

Wow, amazing video ❤❤❤

Awesome video! 🙌

awesome so lovely capture. truly amazing footages

Very very nice 👍😎

Blimey Martin one of those magical sessions when it all comes together - behaviour, light and sharpness all in perfect harmony well up there with "high end" nature filming. Superb. 👍

That's why people turn to micro 4/3 some great shots and video👍😎

Of course, the whole thing also depends on how long you can hold the camera for🤣! Btw very nice footage.

Good to hear your opinion and experience using these two lenses

Nice video

If you shoot 1:1 macro and especially 1:2 macro don't go anywhere near F11, on 2:1 you can safely go up to f5.6 but any higher than that and deffraction starts to ruin your image, at f11-f16 the lens start to get unusably soft

When I do wildlife photography I use the Fujifilm X-S20 with the 70-300mm lens and a 1.4X teleconverter. The system is versatile in that it can photograph a wide range of animals from flies to swans. It is also small and lightweight and can be carried around for hours.

Nice video

Only advantage I see for 180-600 is little extra reach for small bird photography. Hope nikon comes with a new s line zoom 200-500 lens for Nikon z cameras .

I am happy to see you finding what I also have found. I have the Nikon Z8 and couple it to my Z180-600 mm lens along with the 1.4x teleconverter. In doing so, I have been able to capture a crystal sharp photo of a bumble bee that fills my computer screen. I end up shooting at 840 mm and love the results at short distances.

hi

Nice and beautiful video. Thanks for sharing & big like. New Friend from India.

If macro magnifies, then where is the larger sensor to fit something as large as a dragon fly. I am with you on this. We maybe use the term macro badly,

Non of your problems have anything to do with this lens in particular. Stop way down to get best depth of field and use flash to get sufficient exposure. Mother nature hasn't singled you out, we all have the same problems with macro.

I watched a few videos comparing both, and I have impression that 200-500 have better micro contrast, and somehow images look more saturated too, what is your opinion on micro contrast? will appreciate your opinion, thank you!

There is a dual head flexible head flash for like $80 that works pretty well for macro.

Why does your video look faded?