@Ben_Stewart we bought the 400 and the 100-400 at about the same time. it quickly became obvious the 400 was something special. thanks for the comment!
Hello and thanks again for an excellent appraisal of the 600mm and 400mm. I don’t really know where you are in the states, but I seem to get your UA-cam’s, before you actually release? I’m in the UK. REALLY like your photography/video talks. Thank you…… TonyH
@tonyh4266 Thanks for the comment! West Coast USA in Washington state. Usually the Friday Evening Camera Talk is posted Thursday Evening. I post other vids whenever I get a chance to make 'em. More coming soon...
Hello there and greetings form Norway - and thanks for an informative video. I am looking for a longer lens to add to my system to extend the current reach I have with my Z 70-200 + TC's - mainly for wildlife and bird photography. I am deliberating between getting the 400 f/4.5 or the 600 f/6.3 or th 180-600 f/6.3 - I think you may just have nudged me towards the 400mm - the combination of image quality, portability and versatility as well as TC combo makes it an appealing option. The 600 is tempting but seem a tad more specialised for a guy just starting to explore said genre. The 400 and 560 focal lengths would probably be those I'd use the most. However, I am curious to hear your opinion; how does the 400 perform with the x2 TC?
@LBHorn I like the high quality produced by the 400 4.5 as a standalone. That said, the wife shoots the 600 6.3 with the 1.4 a lot of the time and likes those as a combo. It's hard to step wrong with the 400 4.5 though, for lightness and quality output. Thanks for the comment!
Evening! My, You're going to have to enlarge the ‘Corner Studio’ with all that Big glass! 😆 Oooh, sneaky and stealthy @ 01:42! 😯 I wont tell 😆 Always enjoy the video clips, and the sound of the water really adds to them. You keep mentioning the Leofoto, but You haven’t drawn any conclusion on it yet? I’ve seen it in one or two of your videos, and I am curious at to your opinion. I’m currently going back and forth between three tripods, so I share and understand your affinity on tripods. Take care.
@georgedavall9449 planning an update soon-ish on tripods. I have a tendency to revert to what is simple, lightweight, easy to use at the expense of extra features. thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera You're Welcome and Thanks for reply! FLM tripods might ‘fit the bill’ from what you are looking for? Their tripods are great quality, and their Head Guy, ‘Ari’ ( a nice Man ) is known to pop into the comment sections, and he is with FLM Canada/USA. I’ve found Leofoto products to be of high quality, and ‘Leofoto USA’ based in Louisiana, offers great support. Take care and have a great weekend.
The words "game changer" has become a cliché' to be honest, I had the 800 f5.6 G mount and was a fantastic lens but very limiting as a specialist small bird lens for me, I also used the 400 f2.8 and the 300 f2.8 and used these to lenses with TC's. I travel a lot for wildlife and the last lens that I packed if ever was the 800 not only because it was big but the few times I took it, it was reserved for a few bird shots. When the Z9 came along and I changed to mirrorless, I tested the 800 f6.3 and was impressed with size and weight but again 800mm as a fixed lens for me is not very practical on a African safari. Along came the 400 f4.5, this is a game changer.. Size, weight, IQ, focus speed. It reminded me of the 1000's of images I shot with the 300 f2.8 with TC 1.4. I agree Nikon has some amazing lenses for wildlife. Quality, price, weight, size.. Fid the one for your application it would be your "game changer". For some this is the 400 f4.5, others the 600 f6.3 or 800 f6.3 or 180-600 or the 400 f2.8 or 600 f4 with TC's. They are all "game changers".
@@jakesdewet3567 Obviously, you do you. The F 800 f5.6 FL ED VR weighs 10.2 lbs and is 18.2 inches long (does not fit in a carry on). The Z 800 PF is half the weight, 3 inches shorter (fits in a carry on), nearly as sharp, better in every other way optically/VR, only 1/3 stop slower, and $10k less. These are completely different animals. Now, if you find 800mm too zoomed in, well, its too zoomed in. You are right about that. You can't zoom out or crop out. But vs what came before and is available now at this reach, with or without TC's, the Z 800 PF is far ahead of everything else all considered. Its sharper than any other Z lens with a TC (internal and/or external) at 800mm+. Its sharper than anything Sony with a TC at 800mm+. Its sharper than anything Canon with or without a TC at 800mm+. The Z 400 f4.5, OTOH, there are plenty of lenses that are better, much faster aperture, cheaper, sharper, lighter, smaller, and/or so on, at this focal length. There is nothing game changing about that lens. In fact, its pretty ordinary. If if works well for you, great. Personally, in the Z system, I think the Z 100-400 is better all considered. On safari, it would be 100% the Z 100-400 over the Z 400 f4.5. I would also rather bring the Z 180-600 over the Z 400 f4.5. If I really wanted glory shots, I would be renting the Z 400 f2.8 TC and bringing the external 1.4x TC. If I want to be more of a tourist, that new Z 28-400 might be the best bet. The Z 400 f4.5 would almost be the last lens I would want to bring with me on safari. But, if it works for you, great. Different strokes.
Baffled why Nikon would make a 400 4.5 ? I own and use the Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s and have for years. At no time have I ever wished for a slower lens. ? Same thing with the Nikkor 600 6.3. I understand why some people might not want to lug the Nikkor 600 F4.0 IF-ED AI-s that I use, but the Nikkor 600 5.6 IF-ED AI-s is and would have been a far better model for Nikon to use when making new glass. For the life of me, I can't understand with all the new technology that Nikon has.. making lenses lighter and smaller. Why Nikon made these two 400 4.5 / and the 600 6.3 so slow.? As far as converters, my Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s with the TC-14b gives me a very respectable 540 f4.5 ...Clearly I am not sold on the new direction of Nikon lens line up. I thought the whole point of this new mount was that we where going to get faster lenses.?
@gregoryogalsky6937. It's a mistake to think a single metric such as F stop is the only factor to consider when Nikon designs lenses, or when we buy lenses as consumers. Re the last question about the 'whole point of this new mount'- It's a to have a substantial body of lenses to go with mirrorless hybrid cameras. As a video shooter I couldn't use any of that older manual focus(photography centric)glass for wildlife. thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera It's not just the F stop.. It's the way a faster lens draws the image. Sorry, you images dont have any 3D pop. Pick up an older Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s or better yet a Nikkor 400 2.8 IF-ED AI-s and you will see the difference. Why couldnt you use manual focusing for wildlife ?
@gregoryrogalsky6937 re 'Why couldnt you use manual focusing for wildlife ?' It's because wildlife subjects are typically moving. Autofocus is better than I can manually accomplish focus.
the 400 f4.5 is fantastic, for many yrs I shot the 300 f2.8 with a TC 1.4 (420 f4) and travelled many miles and trips all over africa with that lens, in the mirrorless worls this is one crazy good lens and value. f4 vs 4.5 really an issue? f6.3 vs 5.6 ?
If the 600 Pf came out first the I wouldn't have bought the 600 f4 or the 180-600. The 600PF seems even sharper than the 800 PF - a great lightweight lens ...🦘 ...
My 180-600 NAILS it on my Z8 >> tried it out for the first time this morning on Birds in our local coastal Lagoon >> Way better than my ex old DSLR F Mount 500mm F4 VR .. and so versatile
@roybixby6135 I've had the notion Nikon put out the 180-600 before the 600 as a calculated step. It was always going to appeal to a wider group of buyers. Thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera There was not a strategy with that. The Z 600 PF was announced before the Z 180-600 shipped and buyers had time to make their choice between those two.
The only lens sharper than the Z 800 PF at 800mm+ is the F 800 f5.6 FL ED. That includes all Nikon, Sony, Canon, etc., lenses and TC combinations. The Z 800 PF at f6.3 is noticeably sharper than the Z 600 PF with the 1.4xTC at f9, and if you stop down the Z 800 PF to f7.1 or f8 it is even sharper while still being faster. The Z 600 PF, by contrast, only gets less sharp if you stop it down from f6.3 (or f9 with the 1.4x TC). Having said that, all these lenses including the Z 180-600 are plenty sharp enough.
A lot of valid points made in this video. Keep up the Friday night studio talk.
I have the Z600pf and absolutely love it. My plan is to get the Z400 f/4.5 next. Very informative, thank you.
@myketripp3838 Thanks for the comment!
I've always loved my 400 4.5. Very versatile and light weight.
@Ben_Stewart we bought the 400 and the 100-400 at about the same time. it quickly became obvious the 400 was something special. thanks for the comment!
Hello and thanks again for an excellent appraisal of the 600mm and 400mm. I don’t really know where you are in the states, but I seem to get your UA-cam’s, before you actually release? I’m in the UK. REALLY like your photography/video talks. Thank you…… TonyH
@tonyh4266 Thanks for the comment! West Coast USA in Washington state. Usually the Friday Evening Camera Talk is posted Thursday Evening. I post other vids whenever I get a chance to make 'em. More coming soon...
Hello there and greetings form Norway - and thanks for an informative video. I am looking for a longer lens to add to my system to extend the current reach I have with my Z 70-200 + TC's - mainly for wildlife and bird photography. I am deliberating between getting the 400 f/4.5 or the 600 f/6.3 or th 180-600 f/6.3 - I think you may just have nudged me towards the 400mm - the combination of image quality, portability and versatility as well as TC combo makes it an appealing option. The 600 is tempting but seem a tad more specialised for a guy just starting to explore said genre. The 400 and 560 focal lengths would probably be those I'd use the most. However, I am curious to hear your opinion; how does the 400 perform with the x2 TC?
@LBHorn I like the high quality produced by the 400 4.5 as a standalone. That said, the wife shoots the 600 6.3 with the 1.4 a lot of the time and likes those as a combo. It's hard to step wrong with the 400 4.5 though, for lightness and quality output. Thanks for the comment!
Evening! My, You're going to have to enlarge the ‘Corner Studio’ with all that Big glass! 😆
Oooh, sneaky and stealthy @ 01:42! 😯 I wont tell 😆
Always enjoy the video clips, and the sound of the water really adds to them. You keep mentioning the Leofoto, but You haven’t drawn any conclusion on it yet? I’ve seen it in one or two of your videos, and I am curious at to your opinion. I’m currently going back and forth between three tripods, so I share and understand your affinity on tripods. Take care.
@georgedavall9449 planning an update soon-ish on tripods. I have a tendency to revert to what is simple, lightweight, easy to use at the expense of extra features. thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera You're Welcome and Thanks for reply! FLM tripods might ‘fit the bill’ from what you are looking for? Their tripods are great quality, and their Head Guy, ‘Ari’ ( a nice Man ) is known to pop into the comment sections, and he is with FLM Canada/USA. I’ve found Leofoto products to be of high quality, and ‘Leofoto USA’ based in Louisiana, offers great support. Take care and have a great weekend.
I think the 400 is easier to find subject and being 4.5 it’s better in low light, add a tc 1.4 and it basically becomes the 600.
@markkelly3739 In a game of king of the mountain the 400 is indeed a hard lens to displace. Thanks for the comment!
the absolute game changer is the 800mm f/6.3 S lens. its phenomenal.
@sunny8784. thanks!
The words "game changer" has become a cliché' to be honest, I had the 800 f5.6 G mount and was a fantastic lens but very limiting as a specialist small bird lens for me, I also used the 400 f2.8 and the 300 f2.8 and used these to lenses with TC's. I travel a lot for wildlife and the last lens that I packed if ever was the 800 not only because it was big but the few times I took it, it was reserved for a few bird shots. When the Z9 came along and I changed to mirrorless, I tested the 800 f6.3 and was impressed with size and weight but again 800mm as a fixed lens for me is not very practical on a African safari. Along came the 400 f4.5, this is a game changer.. Size, weight, IQ, focus speed. It reminded me of the 1000's of images I shot with the 300 f2.8 with TC 1.4. I agree Nikon has some amazing lenses for wildlife. Quality, price, weight, size.. Fid the one for your application it would be your "game changer". For some this is the 400 f4.5, others the 600 f6.3 or 800 f6.3 or 180-600 or the 400 f2.8 or 600 f4 with TC's. They are all "game changers".
@@jakesdewet3567 Obviously, you do you. The F 800 f5.6 FL ED VR weighs 10.2 lbs and is 18.2 inches long (does not fit in a carry on). The Z 800 PF is half the weight, 3 inches shorter (fits in a carry on), nearly as sharp, better in every other way optically/VR, only 1/3 stop slower, and $10k less. These are completely different animals. Now, if you find 800mm too zoomed in, well, its too zoomed in. You are right about that. You can't zoom out or crop out. But vs what came before and is available now at this reach, with or without TC's, the Z 800 PF is far ahead of everything else all considered. Its sharper than any other Z lens with a TC (internal and/or external) at 800mm+. Its sharper than anything Sony with a TC at 800mm+. Its sharper than anything Canon with or without a TC at 800mm+.
The Z 400 f4.5, OTOH, there are plenty of lenses that are better, much faster aperture, cheaper, sharper, lighter, smaller, and/or so on, at this focal length. There is nothing game changing about that lens. In fact, its pretty ordinary. If if works well for you, great. Personally, in the Z system, I think the Z 100-400 is better all considered. On safari, it would be 100% the Z 100-400 over the Z 400 f4.5. I would also rather bring the Z 180-600 over the Z 400 f4.5. If I really wanted glory shots, I would be renting the Z 400 f2.8 TC and bringing the external 1.4x TC. If I want to be more of a tourist, that new Z 28-400 might be the best bet. The Z 400 f4.5 would almost be the last lens I would want to bring with me on safari. But, if it works for you, great. Different strokes.
@@jakesdewet3567 In my opinion, a set of 300 f/4 and 500 5/6 pf nikon F will be better.
Baffled why Nikon would make a 400 4.5 ? I own and use the Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s and have for years. At no time have I ever wished for a slower lens. ? Same thing with the Nikkor 600 6.3. I understand why some people might not want to lug the Nikkor 600 F4.0 IF-ED AI-s that I use, but the Nikkor 600 5.6 IF-ED AI-s is and would have been a far better model for Nikon to use when making new glass. For the life of me, I can't understand with all the new technology that Nikon has.. making lenses lighter and smaller. Why Nikon made these two 400 4.5 / and the 600 6.3 so slow.? As far as converters, my Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s with the TC-14b gives me a very respectable 540 f4.5 ...Clearly I am not sold on the new direction of Nikon lens line up. I thought the whole point of this new mount was that we where going to get faster lenses.?
@gregoryogalsky6937. It's a mistake to think a single metric such as F stop is the only factor to consider when Nikon designs lenses, or when we buy lenses as consumers. Re the last question about the 'whole point of this new mount'- It's a to have a substantial body of lenses to go with mirrorless hybrid cameras. As a video shooter I couldn't use any of that older manual focus(photography centric)glass for wildlife. thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera It's not just the F stop.. It's the way a faster lens draws the image. Sorry, you images dont have any 3D pop. Pick up an older Nikkor 400 3.5 IF-ED AI-s or better yet a Nikkor 400 2.8 IF-ED AI-s and you will see the difference.
Why couldnt you use manual focusing for wildlife ?
@gregoryrogalsky6937 re 'Why couldnt you use manual focusing for wildlife ?' It's because wildlife subjects are typically moving. Autofocus is better than I can manually accomplish focus.
the 400 f4.5 is fantastic, for many yrs I shot the 300 f2.8 with a TC 1.4 (420 f4) and travelled many miles and trips all over africa with that lens, in the mirrorless worls this is one crazy good lens and value. f4 vs 4.5 really an issue? f6.3 vs 5.6 ?
If the 600 Pf came out first the I wouldn't have bought the 600 f4 or the 180-600.
The 600PF seems even sharper than the 800 PF - a great lightweight lens ...🦘 ...
My 180-600 NAILS it on my Z8 >> tried it out for the first time this morning on Birds in our local coastal Lagoon >> Way better than my ex old DSLR F Mount 500mm F4 VR .. and so versatile
@roybixby6135 I've had the notion Nikon put out the 180-600 before the 600 as a calculated step. It was always going to appeal to a wider group of buyers. Thanks for the comment!
@@folkartandcamera There was not a strategy with that. The Z 600 PF was announced before the Z 180-600 shipped and buyers had time to make their choice between those two.
The only lens sharper than the Z 800 PF at 800mm+ is the F 800 f5.6 FL ED. That includes all Nikon, Sony, Canon, etc., lenses and TC combinations. The Z 800 PF at f6.3 is noticeably sharper than the Z 600 PF with the 1.4xTC at f9, and if you stop down the Z 800 PF to f7.1 or f8 it is even sharper while still being faster. The Z 600 PF, by contrast, only gets less sharp if you stop it down from f6.3 (or f9 with the 1.4x TC). Having said that, all these lenses including the Z 180-600 are plenty sharp enough.