TC's are worth it. Bird photography is very hard at long focal lengths and even harder when you add TC's. You do lose a lot of light and some focus speed. I would say they are still worth it !! The best part about a full frame camera is the built in crop mode, it's like having a built in TC with no F stop loss.
But what about crop mode WITH the TC :) For my personal use, the TC will be a huge use for doing fluid head video of eagle nests, feedings, osprey platforms ect. That 4k/120 2.3x crop is insane with the TC.
Great review. I have that same set up and I've used it for local birds a couple of times. Not perfect but its certainly usable and much cheaper than other 600mm options. I can't wait to use this lens and tc for airshow season. The TC will come in real handy for aerobatic planes that tend to not be close most of the routine. I used 100-400 and TC last year and still had to crop a lot. I'm going to have to get shoulders ready for it but it will be worth it. LOL
I'm surprised your acrobatics are so far away from show center. But at least with the TC and 180-600 you'll be right in the middle of the action! I might take this TC with me for an airshow or two as well. Not sure yet, as most of the Airshows here are within 100 meters of seating or over your head.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective When they fly across show center they are close but when they go vertical or if a jet demo team is doing a short radius turn they can get pretty far away. Longest lens I've used at a show was 200-500. 180-600 will obviously give a little more reach. I'll have TC if I think I need it. Like you said atmospheric haze is an issue when you go out to far and I do have Dx set to function button so that will be my first choice. Nice to have the extra reach when you need it though.
i think that the TC's on Z are a lot lot better than F mount versions, most people in reality cant tell the difference in a small iphone screen. I think the one stop lens + TC is a good option for most, but since using the 500pf and now 600pf i just like the prime speed of focus, and as long as i plan the images around the suns direction in morning and evening its ok, doesnt need an F4 or 2.8 to sit out in those lower light points to keep that iso down. lovely examples of TC on this, I even ordered the 180-600 but cancelled it after 3 months of waiting as it was so popular, guess all the 200-500 users swapped.
Great review. IMHO, you are better off not using the 1.4x TC on the Z 180-600. If you really need to punch in just go DX, get closer, return to FX as soon as you can. On the Z 100-400 its worth it, but mostly for what you get at the wider end in macro situations. Astonishingly good macro from 140mm to about 250mm with the 1.4x TC. As a Z 180-600 substitute, the Z 100-400 is sharper at 400mm than the Z 180-600 at 600mm. The Z 100-400 with the 1.4x TC is perhaps not as sharp as the Z 180-600 in the lab, but in the real world the images are practically indistinguishable between those two. The Z 100-400 is lighter and smaller, but the Z 180-600 is an internal zoom and $1250 cheaper (sale price, inclusive of the 1.4x TC for the Z 100-400) That's what the choice really comes down to.
I am mostly shooting video anymore, so its very useful for that. It basically lives on my 180-600 now. The 100-400 is a S tier lens. It should be sharper. But also, its still only 400mm. So spending more to get the same results as a 180-600 is not great. Recently I got the 105 2.8 MC Macro, and was disappointed when it didnt accept a TC like the F mount versions did. But its no loss at all. Slowly saving my beans for a 400 2.8 TC Z.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective It depends on your subjects, and, obviously, how much you are willing to spend. I own the Z 100-400, Z 180-600, Z 600 PF and Z 800 PF. My wife does come shoot with me sometimes, so having lighter/smaller options for her is a must especially when we travel. If I had to sell one of these lenses, its the Z 180-600. The Z 100-400 is just a better overall lens and far more useful, and the PF's are just amazing. I have not shot with the Z 400/600 TC lenses. If I were to get one, the Z 400 f2.8 TC is the one I would get. The Z 600 f4 TC, while I am sure incredible, is just too big, heavy, impractical vs the Z 600/800 PF's.
Thanks for uploading, some good results. It looks to me that the ones with TC seem a tad overexposed loosing some contrast. Try stopped down one stop plus keep the histogram a tiny bit nearer the centre..It would be interesting to view those..😊
Thanks! All the example photos of birds were on the TC. The chart was over the course of an hour with light changes. I didn't edit anything in those. So the changing sun will do that. All TC photos will loose contrast. Regardless of f stop.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective Yes, I agree. I have this lens and the TC too, of course there is always some degradation and loss of contrast with any TC. I must say though that The Z mount TC's are so much better than the old F mount ones. I find If I lower the exposure very slightly and stop down even a third stop, the raw files seem to contain a bit more detail for processing.. Anyway, I think this lens and TC is an absolute bargain for the quality one can get. Just have to work and process a little more. Again, thanks for the video..
I’ve noticed a decline in image quality when using the 2x teleconverter with my 180-600 lens. The images are of better quality when I don’t use the teleconverter and crop them afterwards. However, when I use the 2x teleconverter with my 70-200 lens, the quality drop is not as noticeable. This difference might be due to the 70-200 being an S-Line lens, while the 180-600 is not. To be honest this is the first time I’ve noticed a quality difference between S and non-S lenses, as they all have been super fantastic. Using a 2x TC on a non-S lens is definitely an extreme stretch for sure.
Is that a sun conure I can hear in the background haha? Also, loving the 2x tc on my 70-200. I know there is degradation, but really not enough to matter to me - I don’t notice it.
Thank you so much buddy according to what I saw in this video i think it would be better to just crop on a hi res sensor than getting a tc. Btw i got a big question what happens if we use dx mode with 1.4x tc. Will the image lose all the details and it would be same as zooming and cropping the image to that extent. Btw once again great content amazing job appreciate your hard work and how nice and simple you kept this video while showing the difference so well. I just became your new subscriber and a permanent fan
Thank you! I appreciate the subscription and following. I hope I can keep you entertained through 2024. The image will still have details, you will still have a 20mp image to edit. Feeding larger files into a plugin like DxO will recover a lot of those lost details. Through editing you can mitigate the loss from a TC. Having 45mp at 840mm and editing that will give a superior image than a 20mp image at 900mm when it comes to file flexibility and print sizes. One day I hope to get such a great imagine without cropping I can print it on A1 or A0 size paper and frame it. I couldn't do that if i only shot in crop mode.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective I got the Sony 200-600 and the video stabilization just sucks. Together with the RAW options on Nikon, I think it makes sense to switch, thanks for your video!
Nope. Never take moon photos. I'm sure you'd have a sharper image without it though. Shooting through 60 miles of atmosphere and the TC magnifying the distortions.
![Nikon 180-600 Ten Month Ownership, Good or Bad? [Pittsburgh Zoo]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/inrN5xLILyg/mqdefault.jpg)
![Nikon 180-600 Ten Month Ownership, Good or Bad? [Pittsburgh Zoo]](/img/tr.png)
![Nikon 180-600 Z vs Sigma 150-600 C [And Sharpness Testing]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Q7AUrTrtQMg/mqdefault.jpg)
TC's are worth it. Bird photography is very hard at long focal lengths and even harder when you add TC's. You do lose a lot of light and some focus speed. I would say they are still worth it !! The best part about a full frame camera is the built in crop mode, it's like having a built in TC with no F stop loss.
But what about crop mode WITH the TC :)
For my personal use, the TC will be a huge use for doing fluid head video of eagle nests, feedings, osprey platforms ect.
That 4k/120 2.3x crop is insane with the TC.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective Agreed !!
I like your content very much. Your dialogue and delivery is clear, comprehensive and very informative. Thank you!
Thanks!
I appreciate it.
Great review. I have that same set up and I've used it for local birds a couple of times. Not perfect but its certainly usable and much cheaper than other 600mm options. I can't wait to use this lens and tc for airshow season. The TC will come in real handy for aerobatic planes that tend to not be close most of the routine. I used 100-400 and TC last year and still had to crop a lot. I'm going to have to get shoulders ready for it but it will be worth it. LOL
I'm surprised your acrobatics are so far away from show center. But at least with the TC and 180-600 you'll be right in the middle of the action!
I might take this TC with me for an airshow or two as well. Not sure yet, as most of the Airshows here are within 100 meters of seating or over your head.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective When they fly across show center they are close but when they go vertical or if a jet demo team is doing a short radius turn they can get pretty far away. Longest lens I've used at a show was 200-500. 180-600 will obviously give a little more reach. I'll have TC if I think I need it. Like you said atmospheric haze is an issue when you go out to far and I do have Dx set to function button so that will be my first choice. Nice to have the extra reach when you need it though.
i think that the TC's on Z are a lot lot better than F mount versions, most people in reality cant tell the difference in a small iphone screen. I think the one stop lens + TC is a good option for most, but since using the 500pf and now 600pf i just like the prime speed of focus, and as long as i plan the images around the suns direction in morning and evening its ok, doesnt need an F4 or 2.8 to sit out in those lower light points to keep that iso down. lovely examples of TC on this, I even ordered the 180-600 but cancelled it after 3 months of waiting as it was so popular, guess all the 200-500 users swapped.
Thank you!
Ya it's been on a massive back order. I was lucky to get it through NPS on day 1.
I just Crop >> use the 180-600 on my Z8 >> I use the 1.4 x Convertor on my 70-200 S
Hey it def works great on the 70-200!
Great review. IMHO, you are better off not using the 1.4x TC on the Z 180-600. If you really need to punch in just go DX, get closer, return to FX as soon as you can. On the Z 100-400 its worth it, but mostly for what you get at the wider end in macro situations. Astonishingly good macro from 140mm to about 250mm with the 1.4x TC. As a Z 180-600 substitute, the Z 100-400 is sharper at 400mm than the Z 180-600 at 600mm. The Z 100-400 with the 1.4x TC is perhaps not as sharp as the Z 180-600 in the lab, but in the real world the images are practically indistinguishable between those two. The Z 100-400 is lighter and smaller, but the Z 180-600 is an internal zoom and $1250 cheaper (sale price, inclusive of the 1.4x TC for the Z 100-400) That's what the choice really comes down to.
I am mostly shooting video anymore, so its very useful for that. It basically lives on my 180-600 now.
The 100-400 is a S tier lens. It should be sharper. But also, its still only 400mm. So spending more to get the same results as a 180-600 is not great.
Recently I got the 105 2.8 MC Macro, and was disappointed when it didnt accept a TC like the F mount versions did. But its no loss at all.
Slowly saving my beans for a 400 2.8 TC Z.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective It depends on your subjects, and, obviously, how much you are willing to spend. I own the Z 100-400, Z 180-600, Z 600 PF and Z 800 PF. My wife does come shoot with me sometimes, so having lighter/smaller options for her is a must especially when we travel. If I had to sell one of these lenses, its the Z 180-600. The Z 100-400 is just a better overall lens and far more useful, and the PF's are just amazing. I have not shot with the Z 400/600 TC lenses. If I were to get one, the Z 400 f2.8 TC is the one I would get. The Z 600 f4 TC, while I am sure incredible, is just too big, heavy, impractical vs the Z 600/800 PF's.
6:07 did you try to use DD instead of TC? or in addition TC+DX?
Interesting but I'd like to see what your ISO's were for the pattern comparisons because that can make a huge difference in image quality.
They were at base iso of 64. You can see the exposure in the top right of the video at the side by side comparison sections.
Thanks for uploading, some good results. It looks to me that the ones with TC seem a tad overexposed loosing some contrast. Try stopped down one stop plus keep the histogram a tiny bit nearer the centre..It would be interesting to view those..😊
Thanks!
All the example photos of birds were on the TC. The chart was over the course of an hour with light changes. I didn't edit anything in those. So the changing sun will do that.
All TC photos will loose contrast. Regardless of f stop.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective Yes, I agree. I have this lens and the TC too, of course there is always some degradation and loss of contrast with any TC. I must say though that The Z mount TC's are so much better than the old F mount ones. I find If I lower the exposure very slightly and stop down even a third stop, the raw files seem to contain a bit more detail for processing.. Anyway, I think this lens and TC is an absolute bargain for the quality one can get. Just have to work and process a little more. Again, thanks for the video..
Thank you 😊
I’ve noticed a decline in image quality when using the 2x teleconverter with my 180-600 lens. The images are of better quality when I don’t use the teleconverter and crop them afterwards. However, when I use the 2x teleconverter with my 70-200 lens, the quality drop is not as noticeable. This difference might be due to the 70-200 being an S-Line lens, while the 180-600 is not. To be honest this is the first time I’ve noticed a quality difference between S and non-S lenses, as they all have been super fantastic. Using a 2x TC on a non-S lens is definitely an extreme stretch for sure.
Yeah, that's why I opted for the 1.4, along with a 6.3 aperture.
Is that a sun conure I can hear in the background haha?
Also, loving the 2x tc on my 70-200. I know there is degradation, but really not enough to matter to me - I don’t notice it.
I sure hope there isnt any of those birds here lol. They would be several thousand miles away from home.
Thank you so much buddy according to what I saw in this video i think it would be better to just crop on a hi res sensor than getting a tc. Btw i got a big question what happens if we use dx mode with 1.4x tc. Will the image lose all the details and it would be same as zooming and cropping the image to that extent. Btw once again great content amazing job appreciate your hard work and how nice and simple you kept this video while showing the difference so well. I just became your new subscriber and a permanent fan
Thank you! I appreciate the subscription and following. I hope I can keep you entertained through 2024.
The image will still have details, you will still have a 20mp image to edit. Feeding larger files into a plugin like DxO will recover a lot of those lost details. Through editing you can mitigate the loss from a TC.
Having 45mp at 840mm and editing that will give a superior image than a 20mp image at 900mm when it comes to file flexibility and print sizes.
One day I hope to get such a great imagine without cropping I can print it on A1 or A0 size paper and frame it. I couldn't do that if i only shot in crop mode.
感谢测试，对于拍风光来说，剪裁+AI放大应该是更好的方案
Well, I probably wouldn't use this lens for any landscape photography.
Which application did you use for stabilizing the handheld video? THX
For which part of the video? Some is handheld, others is a tripod and fluid head.
Actually stabilzing the video was DaVinci Resolve.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective from min 9:20 to 10:30, that looked so good
oh, just Davinci Resolve? Well, looks like magic
@@jochenretter using 120fps footage along with vr sport mode on the lens really helps give you a good start for stabilization in resolve.
@@MannsWoodlandPerspective I got the Sony 200-600 and the video stabilization just sucks. Together with the RAW options on Nikon, I think it makes sense to switch, thanks for your video!
Do you have any shots of the moon with the TC on?
Nope. Never take moon photos. I'm sure you'd have a sharper image without it though. Shooting through 60 miles of atmosphere and the TC magnifying the distortions.
if its a genuine tele it should not wiggle
All lenses I've ever owned have a 1mm play or wiggle. Has been for decades. By wiggle I mean a rotational wiggle.