I like compact and light Lenses, but I do not understand why you chose a big and heavy camera ! Nikon Z9 1340 g, Nikon Z7II 705 g, I would have chosen the Z7II.
Hi, thanks for a great video. I agree with most of your comments except the one on autofocus performance. I obtained my 600PF 2 weeks ago, and in my humble view, the autofocus is very fast. I can't compare it to Canon, but compared to the old 200-500 or the new 180-600, the 600 PF outperforms both of them significantly. The biggest advantage of this new 600PF is the weight. Amazing lightweight, easy to use handheld. Keep up your videos, I've watched most of them and find them to be informative, honest and to the point.
Great video as always Fabian. Very interesting lens this Nikon. Really hope that Canon comes with something close to this. Wishing you a great weekend. Cheers, Bjoern
Thanks for doing this test - I did note on your shot with the 2x extender, it appears that the edge shot isn't focused on the eye, but instead on the back of the head. Notice how much sharper the edge shot is on the threads on the top/back of the head than on the eye.
great review! I really like your work, (also your pics!). I'm wonder how much of a difference there is between this lens and the 400mm f4.5 +1.4 tc , sharpness wise & focus accuracy /speed wise? ?
I have both. Not much difference in sharpness or focus speed on z8. I find the 400 with 1.4 is not long enough. I prefer to use the 1.4 telecenter on the 600pf as I don't shoot in low light so f9 is manageable. Also thinking of selling my 800pf because the 600pf is so much smaller and lighter.
Thank you. My wife is giving me the 600 for Christmas so your review is very timely. Don’t worry, I think she’ll love the platinum/diamond pendant she’s getting in return. It should be a fun Christmas. Your review with the extenders is very helpful. As much as I wish this lens had the built-in extender like the super-teles, I already know my TC1.4 and 2.0 extenders work much better than the old f mount counterparts - I often use them on my 70-200mm 2.8 with great results. Seeing the differences you found with the 6.3 aperture helps a lot. However, with my Z8, I’m inclined to either shoot at (effectively) 900 in crop mode or crop in post - 20MP after the crop is still plenty of resolution, especially with the tools we have in LR and PS today. Thanks again. Merry Christmas
Others have mentioned that the price of this is a bit high. However, Nikon had a 200-500/5.6 and 500/5.6 PF before in F-mount, and the price differential between those two lenses and the 180-600/6.3 and this 600/6.3 PF actually isn’t too far apart. That said, the F-mount 500/5.6 PF was a bit cheaper relative to this (I think by 400 dollars or so).
Is there any chance you could do a comparison video between the Nikon z600mm f6.3 pf prime and the earlier Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf prime on the Z8 or Z9. I’m considering the move from the 500, but i can’t find any straight comparison videos for the two lenses. I mainly shot birds and occasional low flying aircraft of motor sport. Thanks in anticipation.
Great review. The issue is that it pushes the ISO far higher, especially for dark mammals that are active during the early morning. An f4.0 lens will let 2.48 times more light, cutting the ISO for exactly that margin. That means ISO 1600 will turn into 650 and ISO 4K will drop close to 1600. Also for Nikon users, there is the built-in teleconverter. So it will boil down the health and money.
hi Fabian thanks for this informative video. If you want a compact camera system, OM-systems might be something for you. Have you ever tested the Olympus Om-1 with the 150-400? If not, I hope you'll give this a try. I'm really looking forward to the results of that. Kind regards from the Low Countries.
I own the 100-400, 180-600 and 800pf and am planning on picking up the 600pf for videoing warblers hand held next Spring. (The 100-400/400 f4.5 is too short, the 180-600 is tad heavy and 800pf a tad long). But I'm going to wait for the 600pf to go on sale which I expect will happen by next Spring since the 600pf doesn't seem to be selling all that quickly.
Great video s always, practical content. I appreciate your assessment on AF speed against the Canon 100-500. How would you compare the Z 400 f/4.5 AF speed against this 600 f/6.3 or the Canon 100-500? Thank you.
The Z 600mm f/6.3 PF is not currently in my budget. I have 400/4.5 S lens that I'm using with my Z8 and I extend it's reach with the DX Function button. I was wondering apart from the reduced number of pixels when I crop, would there be any quality issues with the images comparing it with new 600mm lens? A 2.0x teleconverter is not something I would consider.
From my experience the quality is better with TC compared to cropping. But no, apart from losing resolution (and making noise more visible) you should be fine with cropping
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography That is what I have found when I review my images in Lightroom. The DX function is good for ensuring that the subject is in focus. Cropping in Lightroom would seem to be the best option. I will get the 1.4x teleconverter. Thanks for you reply.
I wasn't so torn on getting this lens having the 400/4.5 with the 1.4 tele, and having tried the 180-600. I ended going off the deep end and getting the 800PF
I have an old 300 pf f4 on the F mount. I use it with a 2x teleconverter (effectively becomes 600 f8). It is a wonderful lens. Very light and portable. Ive no need for this z 600 6.3, even though it probably is better in lower light conditions
What are your thoughts on the Z 800mm f6.3 PF? It seems like the clear choice for situations where more reach is needed, and pairs up great with lenses like the Z 400mm f2.8 TC, Z 180-600mm, etc.
I find this lens to be way more expensive than it supposed to be. I found a camera store where I can get a Nikon 500mm F4 FL in almost new condition for the same price as the 600mm 6.3 pf. I would take the 500 any given day. All the good stuff happens when you have barely any light so for me 6.3 is way to slow.
Between the 600 f6.3 and the 600 f4, I would choose again and again the 500 f4 😊 with x1.4. It just has the best of the all worlds, and I don't know why this lens is less populer today among wildlife photographers. I'm so happy with this set (R5 + EF 500 f4 II + x1.4 extender.)
Hi Fabian, thanks for your review. I think you are an experienced Canon shooter, your images are great. However, If you don't mind me saying, I feel you should be more experienced in the Nikon system in order to get the max out of it and understand what this lens' intended use actually is.. It is a slight compromise in a few directions, it has to be, but on one has come up with a 600mm lens with such amazing image quality, handling and weight, but at f6.3 obviously. It is a fantastic piece of kit but if you can only get the shot at f4, use the f4...😊
Bought it and love it with my Z8 and am in the process of buying the Z9, Nice video but it seems you canon users like to always say Canon's better, I have both R3 and 100-500 and the 100-500 does not focus faster than the Z 600.
I agree, and have similar gear to you (2 x Z9's and I had a Canon R5/ R3 combo) along with the Z 400 f4.5, 600 F6.3 and 180-600 lenses. if you see Steve at Back Country Galley review, the Nikon 600 f6.3 is right up there, focus speed wise, with the new Z superteles with the built in TC's ( I have the 400 f2.8+1.4x) and they are way faster to focus than the Canon 100-500. the canon 100-500 is about on par with my z 180-600 zoom.
@@colincarter3120 Yes saw Steve's video, I also had the 180-600 but sold it to purchase the 600 f6.3, But I am also going to buy the Z 100-400 to pair with 600mm.
Thanks for your comment. I try to be as neutral as possible and as I mentioned, I wish Canon had a lens like this. Regarding the AF speed: did you see the test at @11:05? There the RF100-500 focuses clearly faster or how would you describe that
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Yes I saw it not sure why it was faster there but the fact is the 600 f6.3 is faster. Fact of the matter is I love both Nikon and Canon equally but if I go out for Birds the 600 f6.3 goes with me not the 100-500. Also I can afford any lens I want but would never buy a tank of a lens.
I think the biggest thing working against this lens is the price. Its an expensive price to pay for a 6.3. Especially with how cheap the 500pf is on the used market. In my area you can grab the 500 pf for less than 1/3 of the price you would pay for this new. While yes this one will be a bit better and you are native Nikon Z, but I think the price difference is so massive that its hard to justify. Personally, I'd just buy the 500pf and then pocket the remaining cash towards buying an 800 in the future.
@@fjphoto23 And you feel that is worth spending a 300% premium to get almost identical performance? (yeah it is a hair sharper, and focuses a hair faster but we are talking about two world class lenses here) If it was a close price, then the Z lens obviously wins, but for me I paid $2500 CAD for the 500 in pristine condition. To buy the new 600 it would cost me about $7400. Is it really $5000 better? I'm not saying no one should ever buy it and I'm not saying it is a bad lens. (All evidence suggests the contrary, its a world class lens) I'm saying at its price point a LOT of people will look at other options because spending THAT much money for an F6.3 is a big pill to swallow. Hell, I could go get a used F-mount 600 F/4 for that price. Even within the Z-mount ecosystem I'd probably go with the 400 4.5 long before I considered this lens and if I did decide to dump big $$ into a lens I'd be looking at the 800pf for a bit more money. Thats my point, I don't understand "who" this lens is for. Its too expensive for a budget oriented shooter and its too dark for a pro shooter. Who is this for? It feels like the lens for the rich enthusiast who already owns every other lens and just wants em all. (But how many of that guy exist?) but for someone looking to buy "a lens" for wildlife work, this lens will always be 3rd or 4th choice.
This would be very interesting! I would assume it would be noticeably bigger than the 500PF though. A 600/4 is also noticeably bigger than a 500/4. Still, this hypothetical 600/5.6 would probably still be very small
You can buy the presented equipment here (Affiliate Links):
Nikon Z9: bhpho.to/49YeGbe
Nikon Z600 f/6.3 PF: bhpho.to/47yjDG4
I like compact and light Lenses, but I do not understand why you chose a big and heavy camera ! Nikon Z9 1340 g, Nikon Z7II 705 g, I would have chosen the Z7II.
Hi, thanks for a great video. I agree with most of your comments except the one on autofocus performance. I obtained my 600PF 2 weeks ago, and in my humble view, the autofocus is very fast. I can't compare it to Canon, but compared to the old 200-500 or the new 180-600, the 600 PF outperforms both of them significantly.
The biggest advantage of this new 600PF is the weight. Amazing lightweight, easy to use handheld.
Keep up your videos, I've watched most of them and find them to be informative, honest and to the point.
Thanks a lot!
Great video as always Fabian. Very interesting lens this Nikon. Really hope that Canon comes with something close to this.
Wishing you a great weekend.
Cheers, Bjoern
Thanks! Yes, I‘m also hoping for this 😊
Thanks for review. It’s will be very interesting to see the 800 mm PF lens review.
Yes, I‘m planning to do that next year
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography 👍🙏
Thanks for doing this test - I did note on your shot with the 2x extender, it appears that the edge shot isn't focused on the eye, but instead on the back of the head. Notice how much sharper the edge shot is on the threads on the top/back of the head than on the eye.
Good point! I don’t know how that happened as the focus point was on the eye.
Well done and informative
Thanks!
Interested to see how the 400 f4.5 with a 1.4x extender compares to this
Me too! Unfortunately, I had no 400/4.5 at this point to compare
Yes, nice review, as usual from you.
But I would wait for a detailed review of the lens vis-a-vis 180-600/ f-6.3
Thanks!
great review! I really like your work, (also your pics!). I'm wonder how much of a difference there is between this lens and the 400mm f4.5 +1.4 tc , sharpness wise & focus accuracy /speed wise? ?
I have both. Not much difference in sharpness or focus speed on z8. I find the 400 with 1.4 is not long enough. I prefer to use the 1.4 telecenter on the 600pf as I don't shoot in low light so f9 is manageable. Also thinking of selling my 800pf because the 600pf is so much smaller and lighter.
Thanks! Unfortunately, I could not do a side by side comparison
Thank you. My wife is giving me the 600 for Christmas so your review is very timely. Don’t worry, I think she’ll love the platinum/diamond pendant she’s getting in return. It should be a fun Christmas.
Your review with the extenders is very helpful. As much as I wish this lens had the built-in extender like the super-teles, I already know my TC1.4 and 2.0 extenders work much better than the old f mount counterparts - I often use them on my 70-200mm 2.8 with great results. Seeing the differences you found with the 6.3 aperture helps a lot.
However, with my Z8, I’m inclined to either shoot at (effectively) 900 in crop mode or crop in post - 20MP after the crop is still plenty of resolution, especially with the tools we have in LR and PS today.
Thanks again. Merry Christmas
Does she know she's giving it to you?
@@alansach8437 yes, but I peaked 😉
Have fun with the lens!
I have a 500 PF as my primary lens for the z8 but I am not sure whether 600 at 6.3 and so costly lens to replace my 500 PF? what is your opinion ?
Unfortunately, I couldn’t try the 500 PF
Thank you
You‘re welcome
Others have mentioned that the price of this is a bit high. However, Nikon had a 200-500/5.6 and 500/5.6 PF before in F-mount, and the price differential between those two lenses and the 180-600/6.3 and this 600/6.3 PF actually isn’t too far apart. That said, the F-mount 500/5.6 PF was a bit cheaper relative to this (I think by 400 dollars or so).
Good point!
Is there any chance you could do a comparison video between the Nikon z600mm f6.3 pf prime and the earlier Nikon 500mm f5.6 pf prime on the Z8 or Z9. I’m considering the move from the 500, but i can’t find any straight comparison videos for the two lenses. I mainly shot birds and occasional low flying aircraft of motor sport. Thanks in anticipation.
Good idea! I‘ll see what I can do
Great videos Fabian, I have 600 mm f4 fl ed vr with Z9. I am thinking to replace 600 mm f4 with 600 mm pf 6.3. What do you think about it ?
I guess it depends whether weight or a large aperture is more important to you
Great review. The issue is that it pushes the ISO far higher, especially for dark mammals that are active during the early morning. An f4.0 lens will let 2.48 times more light, cutting the ISO for exactly that margin. That means ISO 1600 will turn into 650 and ISO 4K will drop close to 1600. Also for Nikon users, there is the built-in teleconverter. So it will boil down the health and money.
Thanks! Yes, a fast prime definitely still has its advantages
hi Fabian
thanks for this informative video. If you want a compact camera system, OM-systems might be something for you. Have you ever tested the Olympus Om-1 with the 150-400? If not, I hope you'll give this a try. I'm really looking forward to the results of that.
Kind regards from the Low Countries.
Hi! No, so far I could not test that combination.
Or even with the G9ii which has higher resolution and seemingly better AF
I own the 100-400, 180-600 and 800pf and am planning on picking up the 600pf for videoing warblers hand held next Spring. (The 100-400/400 f4.5 is too short, the 180-600 is tad heavy and 800pf a tad long). But I'm going to wait for the 600pf to go on sale which I expect will happen by next Spring since the 600pf doesn't seem to be selling all that quickly.
Hope that happens soon 😊
Great video s always, practical content. I appreciate your assessment on AF speed against the Canon 100-500. How would you compare the Z 400 f/4.5 AF speed against this 600 f/6.3 or the Canon 100-500? Thank you.
Unfortunately, I could not do a side by side comparison. In day to day use, all seemed quite fast (with the Z180-600 probably being the slowest)
Is this a lense for the mirrorless system?
Yes, for the Z system (mirrorless system of nikon)
The Z 600mm f/6.3 PF is not currently in my budget. I have 400/4.5 S lens that I'm using with my Z8 and I extend it's reach with the DX Function button. I was wondering apart from the reduced number of pixels when I crop, would there be any quality issues with the images comparing it with new 600mm lens? A 2.0x teleconverter is not something I would consider.
From my experience the quality is better with TC compared to cropping. But no, apart from losing resolution (and making noise more visible) you should be fine with cropping
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography That is what I have found when I review my images in Lightroom. The DX function is good for ensuring that the subject is in focus. Cropping in Lightroom would seem to be the best option. I will get the 1.4x teleconverter. Thanks for you reply.
Excellent review. How would you compare this to the new Nikkor 180-600mm? I'm thinking of selling my Nikkor 400mm f/4.5 to buy the 180-600
I‘m working on the video comparing these two. Should be out next week 😊
Thanks….looking forward to that!
I wasn't so torn on getting this lens having the 400/4.5 with the 1.4 tele, and having tried the 180-600. I ended going off the deep end and getting the 800PF
Have fun with the lens!
I have an old 300 pf f4 on the F mount. I use it with a 2x teleconverter (effectively becomes 600 f8). It is a wonderful lens. Very light and portable. Ive no need for this z 600 6.3, even though it probably is better in lower light conditions
Enjoy the lens! I heard great things about it
What are your thoughts on the Z 800mm f6.3 PF? It seems like the clear choice for situations where more reach is needed, and pairs up great with lenses like the Z 400mm f2.8 TC, Z 180-600mm, etc.
I will test the Z800/6.3 a bit later this year 😊
Would this pair pair well with d500 ? Also the newer afs 500 Nikkon prime PF ED has come down in price!
No, these new Z lenses don’t work on DSLR cameras like the nikon D500. An older lens, like the afs 500 that you mentioned would work
I find this lens to be way more expensive than it supposed to be. I found a camera store where I can get a Nikon 500mm F4 FL in almost new condition for the same price as the 600mm 6.3 pf. I would take the 500 any given day. All the good stuff happens when you have barely any light so for me 6.3 is way to slow.
Sure, I guess it’s a tradeoff of weight vs light
Between the 600 f6.3 and the 600 f4, I would choose again and again the 500 f4 😊 with x1.4.
It just has the best of the all worlds, and I don't know why this lens is less populer today among wildlife photographers.
I'm so happy with this set (R5 + EF 500 f4 II + x1.4 extender.)
It’s definitely a nice option as well. Just a pity that none of the big manufacturers has a version for the mirrorless cameras
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Thats true. I hope they will make...
Hi Fabian, thanks for your review. I think you are an experienced Canon shooter, your images are great. However, If you don't mind me saying, I feel you should be more experienced in the Nikon system in order to get the max out of it and understand what this lens' intended use actually is.. It is a slight compromise in a few directions, it has to be, but on one has come up with a 600mm lens with such amazing image quality, handling and weight, but at f6.3 obviously. It is a fantastic piece of kit but if you can only get the shot at f4, use the f4...😊
Thanks for the feedback. I‘ve shot around 50‘000 photos with the Z8/Z9 in 2023. but I prefer the Z600/4 over the 600/6.3 for my use
Bought it and love it with my Z8 and am in the process of buying the Z9, Nice video but it seems you canon users like to always say Canon's better, I have both R3 and 100-500 and the 100-500 does not focus faster than the Z 600.
I agree, and have similar gear to you (2 x Z9's and I had a Canon R5/ R3 combo) along with the Z 400 f4.5, 600 F6.3 and 180-600 lenses. if you see Steve at Back Country Galley review, the Nikon 600 f6.3 is right up there, focus speed wise, with the new Z superteles with the built in TC's ( I have the 400 f2.8+1.4x) and they are way faster to focus than the Canon 100-500. the canon 100-500 is about on par with my z 180-600 zoom.
@@colincarter3120 Yes saw Steve's video, I also had the 180-600 but sold it to purchase the 600 f6.3, But I am also going to buy the Z 100-400 to pair with 600mm.
Thanks for your comment. I try to be as neutral as possible and as I mentioned, I wish Canon had a lens like this. Regarding the AF speed: did you see the test at @11:05? There the RF100-500 focuses clearly faster or how would you describe that
@@FabianFoppNaturephotography Yes I saw it not sure why it was faster there but the fact is the 600 f6.3 is faster. Fact of the matter is I love both Nikon and Canon equally but if I go out for Birds the 600 f6.3 goes with me not the 100-500. Also I can afford any lens I want but would never buy a tank of a lens.
@@HotGates'I can afford any lens I want.....' what do you want, a round of applause???
You need to retest with firmware 2.0... it's beats the Canon RF now
I tested the Z9 with firmware v4
I think the biggest thing working against this lens is the price. Its an expensive price to pay for a 6.3. Especially with how cheap the 500pf is on the used market. In my area you can grab the 500 pf for less than 1/3 of the price you would pay for this new. While yes this one will be a bit better and you are native Nikon Z, but I think the price difference is so massive that its hard to justify.
Personally, I'd just buy the 500pf and then pocket the remaining cash towards buying an 800 in the future.
That sounds like a nice deal!
Yes. But it's a new generation and Z lens.
@@fjphoto23 And you feel that is worth spending a 300% premium to get almost identical performance? (yeah it is a hair sharper, and focuses a hair faster but we are talking about two world class lenses here)
If it was a close price, then the Z lens obviously wins, but for me I paid $2500 CAD for the 500 in pristine condition.
To buy the new 600 it would cost me about $7400.
Is it really $5000 better? I'm not saying no one should ever buy it and I'm not saying it is a bad lens. (All evidence suggests the contrary, its a world class lens) I'm saying at its price point a LOT of people will look at other options because spending THAT much money for an F6.3 is a big pill to swallow. Hell, I could go get a used F-mount 600 F/4 for that price.
Even within the Z-mount ecosystem I'd probably go with the 400 4.5 long before I considered this lens and if I did decide to dump big $$ into a lens I'd be looking at the 800pf for a bit more money.
Thats my point, I don't understand "who" this lens is for. Its too expensive for a budget oriented shooter and its too dark for a pro shooter. Who is this for? It feels like the lens for the rich enthusiast who already owns every other lens and just wants em all. (But how many of that guy exist?) but for someone looking to buy "a lens" for wildlife work, this lens will always be 3rd or 4th choice.
If they made it 5.6 it would be insane. Should not be that much bigger as the 500 PF isn’t significantly bigger. Maybe an extra 1/4 lb.
This would be very interesting! I would assume it would be noticeably bigger than the 500PF though. A 600/4 is also noticeably bigger than a 500/4. Still, this hypothetical 600/5.6 would probably still be very small
Thanks for the great review. By the way, the bird is a black-headed gull; there's no such thing as a 'seagull'. 🙂
Thanks!
I dont trust canon users.
Sounds like you have trust issues 😉