I have been a passive spctator for quite some time now, but it is a time for a big Hello 🙂.
I am a wildlife photographer who take her passion seriously. The thing is, after quite some time, i have almost collected enough money to get my dreamy, glassy, 600mm long Stradivarius.
Currently i shoot with sony a7 iv and 200-600 and can only say i love this combo. There are of course some things i like more than the others, but as it is my first serious camera i dont really have a reference point.
I have probably read and watched all the internet has to offer including some really geeky stuff from lensrentals which strangely enough i quite enjoyed. I cannot make a choice between nikon and sony. The fact that i already shoot sony does not matter, as i first and foremost care about the lens quality.
Do you know how does the two (600gm and tc vr s) compare regarding manufacturing quality? And also what about the impact of 3 vs 2 fluorite elements or 9 vs 11 diaphragm blades. Is there any difference in autofocus speed, precision and sound? And what about focus breathing? I know it is a lot of questions, but i want to get the best lens possible while being aware of its strengths and weaknesses.
I wouldn't get hung up on technical details that much and since there are no lens designers here - it's unlikely you'll get any solid answers to your questions regarding the lens construction itself.
Both 600mm will be equal in the image quality the produce with the only major difference Nikon being a 2in1 lens (600 F4 and 800 F5.6 with a flip of a switch) for a bit more $.
Steve Perry compared them a while ago - it's impossible to tell the difference in the results both of those lenses produce:
I agree with @lukemeup Lens quality for Nikon, Sony or Canon is just simply top notch.
I own the Nikon 600mm S f/4 TC and also shot with the Sony 600mm GM and impossible to keep the quality apart. The TC has the added benefit of the TC of course but it is the body that will make all the difference.
What body is right for you is really your preference as there is the size, features, GUI, ...
I also think that the body will make the bigger difference, not only ergonomics/performance etc, but also the rendering.
Nikon has a distinctly different rendering from Sony i.m.o. more neutral and somewhat subdued., which works really well for wildlife.
I owned the D500 and Z7II, but like the colors of the Z8/9 the best.
I now use the A1 with 600GM, but in honesty prefer the Nikon neutral color rendering over the Sony.
The 600GM however is absolute top notch.
I don't know that I fully agree with the assertion that nikon's lens quality is always top notch (disclaimer: I'm a nikon fan). They've had quite a few issues with copy to copy variance on the Z lenses. However, that tends to show up more the wider you go. But there has been decentering on a number of the S series lenses. Some seem more prone to this than others, but I've certainly seen it in person. This probably won't show up in most people's images, but point them at the stars and it shows up pretty quickly. I think nikon considers this acceptable variance.
The first 50m 1.8 I owned was ugly on one side of the frame and I traded it locally with full disclosure. The copy I have now is perfect. I've got a copy of the 85mm 1.2 that is crazy sharp wide open, but I've seen a few reviews that didn't have that experience. There are quite a few posts on the cloudy nights forum about de-centering issues with some of the S primes for astrophotography (the 24mm seems to be a common offender).
At 600mm with the 600mm TC, though, I highly doubt you're going to run into this. Copy variation might show up more in the 180-600, but at that focal length, again, something like decentering is going to be less of an issue.
Stick with the system you like. Once you get into 600mm prime territory, and with what those lenses cost, the quality difference is almost indistinguishable. All are ultra high end built for professional use and abuse. Hell, I think Canons 600 IS II is still considered slightly sharper than the Ver. III's and the RF mount.
I have the Z 400 F2.8 TC and the F mount 600 F4E and both are just works or art in my opinion. Simply stellar optics and ridiculous build quality.
Risking going slightly off topic, I would suggest considering the lighter weight offerings, especially the Nikon 600PF and 800PF. Most people can’t use the 600 F4 lenses handheld and must rely on a monopod or tripod that only adds to the weight. The question for you to answer is how important is the extra stop (and a bit) of light vs reduced comfort and mobility. I currently use the Sony 600 F4 and I’m considering getting the new 300 F2.8 with 2x TC. If I were to start from scratch I would be very tempted with the Nikon PF lenses.
Big thanks for all the answers 😁. I knew i can count on this forum. I had a chance to handhold a1+600gm combo and found it even easier to hold than my current a7iv+200-600. Wonder how does that compare to nikon setup. The pf's are great but this time it simply has to be the wildlife holy grail. Regarding canon - i've also read that optically-wise mk.2 excedeed mk.3 due to big weight reduction of the latter. There were examples of the case somewhere on that forum. Nhmorgan - many thanks for that entry. I have heard that sony lenses had same issue. Is there a way to recognize those flaws? And also did you guys have any experience with nikon warranty service and service in general (especially eu, maybe even pl?)? And about overthinking, i promise i do my best, but as a woman it is not exacly that easy (as some of you probably already know). Getting this lens is really a big thing for me and i do want to do it with proper attention to details
I wouldn't worry about copy variation / de-centering or any similar issues on a 600TC. They're not run of the mill lenses like 50 1.8 that cost 20x less. The lens has been available for a while - I'm yet to see a post mentioning any issues with it.
Paul Cz wrote:
Risking going slightly off topic, I would suggest considering the lighter weight offerings, especially the Nikon 600PF and 800PF. Most people can’t use the 600 F4 lenses handheld and must rely on a monopod or tripod that only adds to the weight.
I see loads of people using modern 600's handheld. I handhold my Sony 600 f4 all the time, even with a TC.
