Sharpness Showdown! Nikon 600mm TC Vs. Nikon 800 PF, Sony 600 GM, and Nikon 600 F/4 E!
Ever since I did my first look review of the new Nikon 600 TC lens, I've had people asking how it compares in sharpness to other glass - namely the outgoing 600 F/4E, the 800 PF, and the Sony 600 GM. So, I did a quick video with my focus test chart between all of those lenses and the results are in the video.
Nikon Z9 Setup Guide:
bcgwebstore.com/product/the-u...
Website / Newsletter Signup:
backcountrygallery.com
Backcountry Gallery Nature Photography Forums:
bcgforums.com/index.php
Books / Video Workshops:
bcgwebstore.com
Master Index Of All My Videos / Articles:
backcountrygallery.com/the-bc...
Follow me on Instagram:
/ backcountrygallery
Have nature and wildlife photography questions? Check out the BCG Forums! Ask and answer gear and technique questions questions, post photos and more. Check it out and sign up today!
bcgforums.com/index.php
Great video Steve. Your reviews of camera and lenses are the ones that have made an impact on my choice of gear. You cover everything from low light situations, birds in flight, action etc. My first DSLR was the D500 and the 200-500mm thanks to you, and that combination served me well. I really appreciate your videos, gear or photography tips. Thank you Steve!
What a great time to be a photographer! The tools we use have come so far in a very short period of time. The Nikon with or without the TC is stunningly sharp... congrats Nikon and Nikon shooters. I recently rented the 600GM and I'm now saving for the purchase. :) Thanks for another great video, Steve.
I honestly believe the biggest limiting factor with all ofthese would be the form factor and weight, since those will impact your maneuverability and to some extent have an impact on your technique. Great video! Just bought your Z9 Setup Guide and will read through that now. I've already bought three of your guides and I'm very thankful. Keep it up!
Nicely done, as always. You (and Ricci) have a talent for making pixel peeping watchable for me :) Can't wait for my Nikon 600 to arrive. Thanks, Steve.
Thanks :) I try to make it painless :)
Masterfully done video, concise, filled with good info and I love how honest and unbiased you were!
Thanks :)
In the end the game changer is clearly the built-in TC in the Nikon Z lens. I also noticed a major shift from Canon towards Nikon at the current World Cup soccer.
yes i was shocked to see it too. Hype does sell cameras on youtube, but big boy glass and big boy cameras are sold at the world cup and the olympics, nikon seem to have put their eggs in that basket and it's working out.
Very nicely done as always Steve, It helped me a lot. Thank you. :)
Thanks Steve! Crazy timing. This is the exact information i was looking for yesterday. Awesome work.
I work part-time as a mind reader :D
Thank you for another great video. Would love to see some tests or even a review of the Sony 200-600
Wow, you got that done quick Steve, thanks buddy, it's appreciated. The Nikon 600with built in tc literally opens up another world of options. Fantastic photos you put up, the B&W hippo is extraordinary , way to go. Cheers.
Thanks - getting the video out fast was mostly because I've been getting daily questions about this lens vs that lens for the last month LOL!
Love your videos Steve. Always to the point and informative.
Wonderful comparison! I think this beautifully demonstrates how a dedicated TC, one that's truly designed for one optic, can practically avoid a loss in sharpness. Canon snuck a 2x optic into their RF 400/2.8, called it an RF 800/5.6 and the resultant MTF was still very good.
Hello Steve, Just like to say what an honest review. Setting out all sorts of things and limitations first. I know you always do. So thank you. Keep well, keep safe and please continue to inspire. P,S. I do not think I will ever be able to afford any of these lenses other than in my dreams.
I love the thumbnail picture ! It’s literally our reaction hearing your results 😂
Excellent and helpful side-by-side info as always Steve, thanks! Can't go wrong with any of these, so it looks like it just comes down to the basics - budget, and use case. The only one I can consider owning someday (from a budget perspective) is the 800 PF, good to know it performs at such a high level. 👏🏻
I own the 800 PF coming from the older 600 F4 VR, what a difference, the IQ is significantly better in the 800PF. I have cleaned house and only kept the 100-400 Z and the 800 PF. All the other old pretenders are now gone. I was concerned that the F4 of the old 600 would be important over the F6.3 of the 800 PF, I can tell you it is not! The ability to maneuver with the 800 far exceeds any benefit of the old 600 F4. This lens is magic, the reach will give you shots that you never imagined. Buy it if you are into wildlife.
Fantastic review as always !
Thanks Steve. Still waiting (8 mos. so far) for the 800 6.3, so I'm glad I didn't see anything here to make me regret placing the order. You seemed so giddy over the thing, I couldn't help but place the order.
Thanks for another great video with objective testing and perspectives. I recommend Steve’s e-books for anyone who is on the fence about them. You’ll understand your cameras auto focusing systems so much better.
Thank you so much!!
So happy with my 800mm Z lens, with the Z9 the best combo I've ever had
I requested this comparison in your last Video. Thanks for putting it together, as I thought, it's really hard to distinguish which photo was taken with which lens. All are pro and limitation is with Photographer, having said that I will be looking for used 600 G version :) . Thanks for clarifying Steve.
thankyou so much for doing the tests!! i was hoping to upgrade my 600E version but now im not feeing as left out in terms of upgrading
Many, many thanks for your excellent job. This is a great comparison, you answered the questions of many people I think. Happy I chose the Nikon Z 800mm 6.3 over the Nikon Z 600mm 4.0 TC, I need the 800mm reach for my work and the 800mm 6.3 absolute matches the 600mm 4.0 TC with activated 1.4 TC. Telling me also the 800mm 6.3 is clearly the better value. And I still keep my older Nikon 600mm 4.0 FL, it’s also absolutely comparable with the new Z version in terms of sharpness. No need to upgrade.
Good video. A key difference for me is that the 800mm PF lens is 2 pounds lighter than the new 600mm lens and so I can hand hold the 800mm lens but not the 600mm one.
EXCELLENT comparison. This is exactly what I was looking for. For wildlife and birds any focal length is always less and you always want more and with a 10,000 $$$ difference in price, the 800PF is clearly the winner. Plus the weight of the 800PF. At 3kgs the 300mm f/2.8 G ED VRII was just borderline manageable for me so the Z 600 TC in the same weight class would be even tougher considering it's double the focal length. Either way the Z 600 and even the F 600 are WAAAAAY outside my budget.
Thanks for the great work Steve!!
Hey JD - the big question is, did you order one?
@@backcountrygallery yes. Sold my old one and two of my last f-mount lenses and ordered it. :-)
@@JDLVHIGHROLLER Awesome - I think you'll really like it.
Good Work Steve - Brand loyalty or budget concerns might drive one to want different conclusions, but your comment "there all perform about the same" is the right answer. No system is better or worse than any other -- the best thing to do is to go out and shoot and stop trying to look for the "best" which is always transitory as new and "better" gear keeps being developed and released. What is interesting is that all the main systems now have a full line-up of long lenses and each system is building out supporting and cheaper players.
AMEN my friend! The only reason I did this video was because I was getting so many questions. You're 100% spot-on - they are ALL great and as photographers I think we tend to worry too much about a 3% difference in sharpness (that we'll never see in the field) and should instead concentrate on honing our craft (or at least, just getting out and having some fun shooting) :)
Thank you Steve! Still waiting for my Nikon 800 PF since April 2022 (ordered from Nikon Switzerland). When the 600 with the integrated 1.4 converter was introduced, I briefly thought about changing my order. But only very, very briefly. Spend 2.3x as much and 900grams more weight speak against the 600. Especially because I already use the 180-400 with the integrated 1.4 converter (with FTZII) and thus have almost 600mm.
It's worth the wait :)
@@backcountrygallery Yes, I know, also thanks to your videos and tests! I just hope Nikon gives me a Christmas present. Because in January I'm going on a Tiger 'hunt' to India.
@@FlyingLeopard 🤣 People from Switzerland get a chance to see tigers before people in India. I've never had the opportunity myself to go on a tiger "hunt" despite being in India. Please upload photos with 800 PF.
Thanks Steve, a very interesting set of comparisons. I was most interested in the comparison between the Z 600 TC and the Z 800 PF. Interesting that it is nigh on impossible to differentiate as far as sharpness is concerned especially when you consider the 600 is 2.5 x the price of the 800 - well here in the UK anyway. I have the 800 and it was delivered 24 hours before the new 600 was announced. My first reaction was "Oh, hell, did I buy the wrong lens" - but then I saw the price of the 600 and was vey happy with my purchase. As a retired UK pensioner the 600 is way, way out of my reach - it was hard enough to justify the 800!!! At least I can just about reach the 600's focal length with the 1.4x TC on my Z 100-400 to bridge the gap!!!
I’m in the same boat, I am waiting on the 2.0 teleconverter to arrive for my z100-400 and hopefully to two together will be better than my Sigma 100-600 Contemp which I currently use on my Z6ii or z5
@@nathanfrisby3133 As I mentioned, I used the Z 2xTC with my Z 100-400 while waiting for the arrival of the Z 800. I was impressed with the sharpness of the images, particularly considering the lower sharpness one always expects from a zoom v a prime, and the effect of a 2xTC. The biggest limitation, for me, anyway, was the significant increase in the "wide-open" aperture which, at 400mm (800mm with the TC) was f/11 which really meant it was limited in its usefulness unless the conditions were pretty well ideal.
Great comparison, I purchased the 800mm and have found that the relatively light weight and size combined with the low price makes it a winner. I would love the 600mm but the price here in N.Z. is astronomical, especially for an amature.
Great video, can’t wait to get my Nikon 800pf, if I had the budget I would do the 600 tc but the 800 hits the sweet spot with its price and weight, I’d love to see more of your images with it Steve
I'm planning a year-end video with my favorites, it'll have more 800PF shots :)
You are a lucky dog ! 👍 IF I had the money, I still wouldn’t go with the 600 TC. I’d go with the lens your getting, and would still often put a TC on it. Enjoy your new lens 🙂 I can only dream…
My friend did the test with his new Nikon 600 and did send me 3 NEF's, one at 600mm, one where the TC was engaged and the third one with the TC engaged AND the 2x TC. All three resulted in a crazy sharp and nicely rendered photo. I have one on backorder along with a second Z9 and the 100-400mm, let the wait begin :-)
The new lens is great, isn't it?
@@backcountrygallery That lens is insanely sharp and renders nicely OOF. I hope to visit my friend this coming week before he goes to Antartica for +2 months :-) I took the Sony 600mm on one of my safaris and was also very pleased with that lens but yeah, I am Nikon ;)
Great video. Like most people, the 600 is way out of my budget. But the 800 PF may be doable. Great info, Thank you
thanks nice review that encourages me to keep my 600mm F4 E and compliment with a 800mm pf instead of getting the 600mm f4 TC Z lens
Thanks Steve. Great unbiased review of this lens. Good to know my z 800mm PF is good enough and I don't have to buy the z 600mm TC.
Yup, the 800 is impressive :) It's not as versatile as the 600 TC, but it's the lens I would grab if I were fairly confident I wasn't going to need 600mm. It's light and a bit easier to hand-hold.
Your comparison against the extender may be the most important one. As you say, Ferraris against Lambos against Porsches. But these new lenses with the built in extenders seem phenomenal; better sharpness and who wants to fumble with a separate TC, especially if shooting handheld or on a mono. Also, that 800 is one heckuva lens versus the price point - and relative portability.
Thank you again for an excellent review , my supertele is now on Canon land (EF 500mm f4 IS ll) but I am diving more to the Nikon camp -I have already z 180-600mm. I will receive my Z8 next thursday and I consider to trade the ef 500mm to Z 800mm pf or F 500mm f4 FL VR...
Thanks a lot for your quick review between lenses. It’s super helpful as always. I thought 800PF is not sharp enough compared to 600TC though the result you showed was surprising. I’m currently using 600FL and planning switching to 600TC, but I’m going to have to make my expectations slightly low.
Again, remember I'm only testing a single copy of each lens under a single set of conditions. Once you get into the field, you may discover more differences.
Thanks for the comparison. Very helpful, though not unexpected results. One small request. Most You Tubers put the camera data to the side of the image. When you put it under the image it is obscured by the closed captioning for those of us who rely on CC.
Ahh, I never thought of that. I like the frame filling image though, so I'll probably stick it along the top - that should work.
Very nice, surprised by the 800mm f6.3 ,what i did notice was a colour shift in the 600mm when the t/c was engaged ,which was more noticeable than any sharpness difference which is to be expected when reviewing at only 1080 resolution ,all good for nikon shooters though .there could also be a difference in the light transmission of the lenses if the nikon 600mm showed up being darker than the sony with the same exposure .
Yeah, I'm not sure what happened with it. I may have messed up somehow too - although I don't see how at the moment. Still, I'm more inclined to think I moved a light and didn't get it back perfectly than the camera is messed up :)
nice tests as always, still waiting on my 400 f/2.8 and 600 f/4 :-( like that focus chart, where can I get one? Thanks as always.
Always excellent
As always Thanks for the great review Steve!! Something a bit unrelated, how does the Z9 autofocus perform after your tests with the firmware 3.0. Has the keeper rate for the small erratic birds improved, which u said was a bit of an issue in your previous vedio. Thanks in advance.
Overall, I think it's better. I wouldn't say it's like shockingly better, but it does seem like, overall, it's better. However, I haven't done many small erratic birds - just larger ones.
Nice. My budget would only allow the Z9/800PF combo. Probably just use my 200-500 until I could muster upfor the 400-4.5. Anyway, when you tested the Z600 lens against itself, shouldn't you be showing the results at a larger size for with the TC engaged since it would yeild a lmore frame filling photo? Thanks for any replies 7 the vid.
Hey Steve, great video! Have you compared the Nikon 400mm f2.8 with 2X TC vs the 800mm PF? I always tried to stay away from 2X TC ‘S but I hear the Z TC are quite good and the f2.8 is super sharp.
excellent video
Hi Steve. I follow you and enjoy your educational videos. I own Nikon z9 and 400 tc and , on occasion I add 2x teleconverter to get to 800mm f5.6. I do not own 600 tc and was wondering how the IQ compares on 400 with 2x converter and 600 with tc engaged. Do you have any comparison samples you could share? Thank you in advance
The 600 f/4 E appears much brighter compared to the Z 600mm f/4 TC (both at 840/850 f/5.6) Very noticeable at 6:00. The Sony lens was also brighter than the Z 600mm f/4 but with the TC engaged/added on, the difference is much more noticeable. (Nikon dims down)
Keep in mind it may be how Adobe is rendering it or how the camera recorded the WB (some color appear brighter than others). I noticed the 600 TC seemed to have a very slight green cast. Exposure was based on being 2/3rd of a stop over the camera's recommendation with the target filling the frame. Also, the 600 E was shot over a month ago (same technique and lights though) - I had to sell it to afford the 600 TC. So, maybe the lights were more warmed up for the 600 E Thant eh 600 TC or something (I use fluorescent bulbs designed for studio work at the moment) . I'm switching to LEDs in the future :) At any rate, I wouldn't read anything into it. Too many variables at play.
Steve, can you recommend older Nikon 600mm f4 lenses? I don’t have the money for a newer lens right now. I shoot with the D850. Thank you.
Yes, technique, and support, are going to matter far more than which of the lenses you get.
Thanks Steve for this useful review.The fact that the sony reveals lighter (at same settings) : could this be a results of a difference in T stop between the lenses e.i. the sony lets more more light onto the sensor?
Not sure - it could be the way Adobe renders the file. So many variables...
I am wondering would there a difference of image quality in using the internal 1.4X vs the external 1.4X?
Hi Steve, Great comparison. Someday I hope to own one of the Nikon lenses. 🙂 Since we are attempting to discern subtle differences in sharpness, wouldn't it make sense to upload the video in 4k resolution? It might make any small diffs more apparent than in 1080p? Just a thought.
I'd thought about it, but I wanted to match the resolution of the screen I was using to the video format. I have a 1080 monitor and a 5K one - but not a 4K. FWIW, when I look at it on the 5K monitor at 100% or 200%, the conclusions are the same. :)
Good comparison Steve. I am waiting for my 600 f4 to arrive. Now I am using Z9 with my old 500 f4 FL from my D500 body. This my opinion. On d500 the lens is exceptional sharp with TC 1.4 and without. On Z9 body without the TC still exceptional sharp. With TC remarkable less sharp then on d500 .
Really - that's interesting. Usually the opposite is true. Normally, people see better accuracy with the adapted glass, not worse. I don't usually recommend AF Fine Tuning for mirrorless, but you might want to take a look and see if the softness is due to consistent front or back focus. I know with my 600 E and TC, the results were noticeably more consistent than on any DSLR.
I was lucky enough to get a screaming deal on a used 600 F4 VR. Went out eagle watching with it a couple months ago. While it worked well on my D850, the keeper rate was much higher with my wife's Z9. We got similar results with the 500 PF
Curious if you've ever compared the 800pf to the 800 5.6? MTF charts appear to show a significant advantage to the f mount but would be interesting to see how much those differences show up in the field.
INCREDIBLE!!!!! NOW NIKON Z 600MM F4 TC IS MY NEW DREAM LENS!!!!😭SOMEDAY NIKON, SOMEDAY!
Awesome video! I would love to see a comparison of sharpness between the Sony 600mm vs Sony 200-600mm at 600mm, with and with out T/C. I know the prime would edge it out but I would just like to see the difference. I love the fact that the Nikon has T/C built in, I would switch to Nikon just for that convenience.
I may do a quick video down the road. I have some new stuff coming to make tests like this easier (better lights, geared tripod head), so I may do a few other tests just to try the new setup.
@@backcountrygallery You’re the man! Thanks Steve.
I have both and did controlled tests. The zoom is fairly sharp in the center, but unsurprisingly generally not as sharp as the prime, particularly outside the center. In the very center the naked zoom is ever so slightly slightly sharper than the prime is with the TC1.4 installed (so significantly softer than the naked prime). While installing the TC on the zoom is also an option, it gets much softer and you gain only very little detail (maybe the equivalent of 10-15% more FL). Since the IQ also suffers in terms of contrast and CA, I rarely bothered with the TC on the zoom, even for perched birds. The prime fares much better and I really like the TC1.4 on the prime for perched birds. And as a side note: for BIF the prime is noticeably faster than the zoom for fast flying birds, where the zoom is quite capable for bigger & slower ones.
Love your videos! Have to notice, I have Canon RF 600/4 with RF TC. And I was doing test with a short range distance, capturing USD banknote. It was extremely good with TC. But in the field when capturing birds I can see IQ difference very easy. So yeah, all those f/4 are good, and unfortunately, TC reduces IQ, sharpness, microcontrast etc.
There are just so many variables in play. The other thing to consider is that if you're using a TC, you're likely at a farther distance for the same subject as you'd be if you didn't need the TC. This means more "atmosphere" - particles, heat distortion, that kind of thing. Sometimes it's the things outside of our control that get us :)
The built-in TC of the Nikon 600mm f4 TC has a lot less impact on image quality than the external TC of the Canon. The reason being that it is part of the lens design and matched during manufacturing. While the Canon TC is a generic part designed to deal with several lenses. And I also believe that Nikon is currently leading Canon in lens technology.
@@bernardlanguillier7970 it could be true, and it’s sound reasonable but the new Canon RF 800/5.6 and RF 1200/8 have built in factory TC and their charts are very close to RF 400/2.8 and 600/4. Nikon solution is good and not new, as for me, I use 2x TC
Just a quick question, did you use the 600 GM on the Sony A1? I’ve done similar testing, however using the 600mm GM on the Megadap ETZ21 on the Z9 so that I’d have the same sensor for both lenses.
It was on an a1. I don't have an adapter and I'm not going to use the 600 GM on the Z9 so the comparison is accurate since I (and I think most) are using the lens on the a1 (or another Sony) and we need to see how it performs on that camera.
Hi Steve ! Do you think the dslr 800 FL remains out of reach for these modern Z super tele ?? I suspect the IQ from corner to corner of the 800 FL is remarkable better... Am I wrong ?
I just don't know - I don't have an 800FL to test. All I know is I'm happy with my 800PF results and I've used a LOT of long glass in my time :)
Very nice comparison of the “Big Guns” and I agree it should be a big difference at this price point. Is there an explanation on why the 600 range appears to be slightly closer on the different lens?
The a1 is higher res so it looks a bit closer. What's REALLY weird is that some of the Nikon comparisons looked that way to me too. In fact, I went so far as to take a screen shot when I thought one looked larger and check it. I took the screenshot into Photoshop. copied one side to the other, dropped the opacity, and they were absolutely the exact same size. So, it's some kind of optical illusion on some of them - but it did cause a bit of a freak-out on my part until I verified it LOL!!
@@backcountrygallery Thanks for the clarification and explanation! Great process for sure and just need to sell my 500f4G!!
Thanks Steve. I believe many would have used case to have both Nikon Z 600 and z 800, but with sharpness so close.. would you think many would be served to have Z 400 2.8 and Z800 pf if they were to pick a combo? 560f4 when needed and 400 2.8 when closer or in low light. And I guess z 400 is slightly easier to handhold. Would help to have your opinion. Would also love to see an example of Z400 sharpness with in built tc with Z 600 bare. Thanks again.
I'm planning on a 400 vs 600 video (not just for Nikon, but in general). My advice is to pick the lens with the native focal length you'll use the most. Although the 600 TC and 400 TC are incredibly good with their TCs engaged, one thing I find among all lenses is that with a TC, AF accuracy suffers to a greater or lesser extent. In addition, consider the TWO focal lengths you use the most - that's where the TC lens should live. If it's in the 560/600 range and 800mm, the 600 TC makes more sense. If it's between 400 and the 560/600 range, with only occasional 800mm use, then the combo you suggest wins. The thing is, the TC lenses are only advantageous if you are switching between your two most common focal lengths. If you're still constantly taking a lens on and off, you made the wrong choice.
@@backcountrygallery totally makes sense, thanks. I mostly shoot small birds so I know 600+ right now is my focal length choice and 800mm seems like would do good justice but I also hear it’s AF is not as fast for BIF. Justifiable given the price. There maybe occasional safaris coming in future for which 400 is a good fit, and for dark forest areas. It’s all hypothetical at this point. Thanks for getting back. I have purchased 2 of your books and I can’t think of a better person to ask for an opinion.
@@rohitkhetarpal2945 FWIW, I have zero issues with the 800 PF speed for BIF work :) 400mm does have it place though - that F/2.8 can come in handy.
@@backcountrygallery that’s so good to know. 800pf is looking more and more enticing with all these results and feedback. Thanks again!
I would love to see the same tests comparing the 600 TC with the 400 TC with use of internal with both external teleconverters
I'd love to have a 400 TC to test. However, I am trying to get Nikon to loan me one, we'll see.
Where did you get that test chart?
I've just ordered a used Nikon 600mm f4 AF-S II IF-ED. I am not rich enough for the newer versions :( I am looking forward to seeing what quality improvements I'll get over my Sigma 150 - 600 C
Hei, I´m considering the same, how is it going with your used Nikon 600mm f4? Autofocus with the FTZ Adapter, Handling etc. ? :)
Among these lenses, handholding technique (I don't use tripods much), shutter technique, and similar user abilities will affect sharpness far more than which lens you are lucky enough to have. Edit: Oops ... I wrote the above comment before I got to the end of your video. Great minds 🙂
Thank you Steve for the great (as always) vid! I'm on the waiting list for the 800mm and cant wait for delivery ... If its possible, it will be amazingly helpful adding the 400mm Z-TC for the comparisons with the 600 & 800pf. The 400mm with tc engaged (560mm) and plus external tc with/out internal tc for 560/784 mm. I wonder how the 400mm will hold up ?Another very interesting comparison is the AF speed of the 800pf against the primes . p.s. I really appreciate your z9 wildlife guide- its very helpful !
Considering I’m always needing more reach, it would be the PF 800 F6.3 for me all day long. And I could still put a TC on that if I needed to….. plus it’s far cheaper than any brand of 600 F4.
Great Review of the lenses.. they all looked really close to almost undistinguishable.. maybe I could have decided if you had stopped on each test point a little longer than the ⅒ of a second you seemed to be doing.. lol.. but overall Great Review..
FINALLY got mine. This PF lens is a stunner and Nikon has perfected PF with learnings from 300 and 500 PF. Other than slightly more contrast on the 800mm f/5.6 which gives it the false impression of being very slightly sharper than the PF, there is absolutely no need to spend 10 THOUSAND dollars more for that monstrosity because the contrast is not at all worth 10 THOUSAND dollars more. And if you are looking for background blur, this 800 PF delivers it in truck loads. Any bashing about the PF bokeh is just an attempt by 800mm f/5.6 owners who just lost 10 THOUSAND dollars on their splurge because I ordered an 800mm f/5.6 used from KEH, did all my testing and returned it so I am damn sure the 5.6 is neither sharper, nor has better bokeh... only very slightly more contrast.
Great o hear - I never tested the two side by side. All I know is I'm VERY happy with the PF lens :)
If I have enough money, for sure Nikkor Z 600mm with TC is my choice 😁😁
Steve, was this test performed with the Z9 body?
Yes, I forgot to mention it in the video.
Thanks for all the Nikon tips you give in your videos. I just picked up my Z9 and will be using it for the first time at a basketball game next week.
The whites and light grays on the 600/4 TC all look muddy compared to all the other lenses, both with and without the TC enabled.
I can certainly tell the difference between 30 fps JPEG and lossless raw :)
Is there a significant difference in sharpness between the primes and their zoom companions? Enough to justify the cost for your “hobbyist” subscribers? I “think” the answer is yes, but I don't recall any head to head tests like this one. Thanks for all you do for us!
I might do a test like that down the road. The 100-400 and Sony 200-600 are both excellent, but I don't think you'll find they are on the level of these primes. At least, they don't seem to be based on my field work with them. However, the key is that even though they aren't insanely sharp like these primes, they are sharp enough for professional use and I don't hesitate to use them when needed. I also don't hesitate to send the photos I take with them to magazine editors if they ask. Some of my best shots are with those zooms!
any of these lenses cost 1/2 of an arm, so you'd best be sure, but...at this level, with Canon, Sony, or Nikon, it's probably best to choose the *system* that offers the best set of features and functionality for *you*
Do you have something similar for the 400 2.8s?
Sadly, no - I don't own a 400 2.8.
Still thanks for the answer, do you remember differences between the 400 TC and 600 TC from your usage experience ?
@@ArneGlodde I didn't get a pre-production copy of the 400 2.8. I have handled one, but that's about it. Still, if I had to guess, I'm confident the results would be similar - close enough not to matter.
Personally it seems like the 600TC was the sharpest, especially if you look lettering, it was sharp. The GM had hazy, like the rest.
Good review. Shame I don’t need a tele prime! 😢
Even needs a big lens :)
Hey Steve thanks for all your good tips and videos. I'm not to sure this is a valid test as my experiences with different lenses is a little varied depending on which camera body used with each lens. The same lens can perform differently on different cameras. My "two Cents worth" from a retired lens Technician who worked for Nikon USA for 39 years.
Only so much I can do - I can't test it on every body :) All the Nikon shots were the Z9 though.
@@backcountrygallery an option to use a etz adapter - I currently use a Megadap Etz21 with the z9 and the sony 200-600. For the few days I got this combo its working surprisingly well
@@aser75 I think it's important to put the lens on the camera most likely to be used by the shooters of such lens. The truth is, there are SOOOOOO many other factors that come into play in the field that minor differences in controlled test- especially as minor as these - really means nothing. Shooting the lens on the exact same camera might make a 1 or 2% difference, but who cares? In the real world, it doesn't matter. And, as photographers, real-world results are what we should be considering. :)
Is the 800 PF lens body made of metal or plastic?
Metal.
👍
Would love to know how much worse 200-600mm really is, it is less sharp vs. 500pf for sure.
I haven't formally tested it, but I tend to agree that it's not quite as sharp as the 500PF - however, it's still decent. For me, the 200-600 is more about when a zoom is essential for getting the shot. If you have an animal that's at varying ranges, I think it's better to get the shot on a decently sharp lens than miss it on the prime. :) Also, I have plenty of images from eh 200-600 that I would have no hesitation sending to a magazine for publication, so I feel like it's good enough for professional use.
It is insane how good the new Z 600 is. Even with the tc engaged the sharpness is almost if not the same. Well I guess that is why you pay 16 grand :D Shame these lenses are out of my budget. Still waiting for the Z verzion of the 200-500 and perhaps a Z500. :)
I was very impressed. I kinds thought that the sharpness was identical when looking at my stuff from the field, now I see why! Nikon has a 200-600 on the roadmap :)
👍🏾🙏🏾
So basically i should go with the Sony because i like the color white the most
If you dont like the built in TC and like ~half your hand dangling in the air while holding the camera, yes
There must be a difference. by the way，you may used wrong picture of 600E
This is useful but to a point that is almost irrelevant as even the "worse" lens is quite sharp. my point, online compression and software tricks (like Topaz) can make all this images basically the same. We tend to trick ourselves thinking we are David Yarrow selling wall-size prints of our images but in reality 99.99% of our images will never leave a digital medium. So lets "Focus" on focus speed and acquisition rather than technical sharpness.
I agree. I honestly don't really care for doing these kinds of videos - I think there are other things that are FAR more important. However, if I don't I get to answer several e-mails a day asking about sharpness, so this is easier :)
@@backcountrygallery many thanks for the reply. you are a class act. I bought the z9 guide. my only challenge is to find the time to read it :)
@@DanielRodriguez-fg5ll Thanks so much :)
Great video Steve. Another thing to think about is real world sharpness with the 800pf. Since it’s a f6.3 lens, your ISO will typically be higher shooting with this lens, therefore decreasing image quality and sharpness ever so slightly. So in reality, the gap between the 600z and the 800pf is more substantial than what it appears in this controlled environment.
It's only a third of a stop, so it's pretty minor. Often (not always of course), you can drop the shutter speed by a third and have the same ISO quality.
@@backcountrygallery That's fair. You may have just saved me thousands!
Talking about lenses for the price of a family car... LOL
They are pricy for sure, but it's all relative. For me, they are a business expense and make me far, far more than they cost. If I wasn't shooting for a living though, I'd be lucky to just have one of 'em :)
We have to take your word. Much appreciated. However, next time, please share 400% comparisons on KZhead. 100% on a high res monitor does not transfer to KZhead. Somebody viewing this at 1080p, if you recorded a 5k Mac monitor session, is actually viewing 33% magnification plus the compression artefacts ...
This was recorded on a 1080P monitor for that reason. I don't like overcoming on my 5K Mac monitor because it's no longer truly 1:1. I have a monitor that is 1:1 so I think that gives better results. I can't so anything about YT compression though :)
@@backcountrygallery Thanks a lot for the clarification. But even then, a 200% side by side may still be easier to watch for most people. Esp. if you haven't any line-pair patterns included in your chart. Don't worry, still love your videos though :)
Sony would come 4th. but my Sony TV is sharp for a Tv
No such thing as a bad 600
Yup!!!
Sony 600 is the sharpest. Because that's the one I own.
let me explain why that test doesn't mean much. the lenses were tested on a full frame 45mp sensor. yes it's a high resolution but not enough to show differences with such high end lenses. even the D7200 exposes much more problems with lenses than the D850. if you tested the lenses on a 60mp sensor the difference would be much more noticeable. so if there is a slight difference in sharpness between lenses on a 45mp sensor, lets say a slight blur on one lens compared to another, on a 60mp sensor that slight blur becomes a very soft image.
Long story short.. Teleconverters still degrade Image quality.
Hey...the only disadvantage I found with the Nikkor Z 800mm 6.3 (or maybe it is a general issue with the Z9) is that focussing in low light is a pain in the ass. I simply missed shorts here I would not miss with the Sony A1 and Sony 600mm 4.0 GM. This might be related to the f/6.3 vs f/4.0 but I am not sure yet.
This was pointless