Nikon Z* mirrorless

wookie6262 said:
Nikon kit just arrived. Z9 feels good in the hands but will have to wait to test it as batteries needed charged. I'm going to give it a good trial and make the decision on whether to move from Sony in the next few months. If it performs as well as the A1 I suspect I may go for it
Click to expand...
It's the best camera I've used bar none. Focus takes getting used to as it lacks a "one size fits all" option in preference for a number of specialised options. 3D tracking is incredible.
 
I've spent the last few hours enjoying having the Z9 in my hands. First impressions are excellent and there is no doubt I like the feel of it better than the A1. I can pretty much operate every function I would need in my A1 without removing my eye from the eyepiece. Not quite worked that out in the short time I have played with the Nikon but it should be fairly easy to get a similar set up.

Some things that really annoy me on the Sony are not an issue on the Nikon. Recall camera settings on the Sony is fine but you can't select a different white balance. So shooting a match with half shade and half sun means I have to use AWB. The Nikon does what I need and also allows me to set a button so it is toggle on and off and the same AF button can then be used.

The bigger back screen might mean I actually use it. The Sony rear screen is terrible in comparison and I pretty much use the EVF for everything.

Ergonomics are miles better and everything feels very well put together. When I put my hand on the 100-400 the function button was perfectly placed.

FTP seems to work well and having the ability to both rate an image and wire it simultaneously with a single button press will make life easier for me

The control ring is brilliant. I like shooting auto iso at games and the ability to use the control ring for exposure compensation means everything can be changed really quickly.

Instant start is really nice the A1 is pretty slow to go

The front function buttons are or will be useful

A few things I haven't worked out or are not possible.

Can't get trim/crop onto a single button press - However as a plus you can crop without always losing both horizontal and vertical pixels. A1 crops in top and bottom slightly even if you want to go 4:3 from a 3:2 in landscape images

Can't get subject recognition on/off on a single button press but having the auto recognition may make up for that

So a few hours basically playing with menus and setting up FTP locations. Mostly very positive. The next few days will be about learning the focus system and getting buttons programmed so I can quickly change whatever I need to. Once I have got to grips with AF I will start to actually compare output both in terms of the files and how easy it is to get sharp images. Already I think AWB looks better. The plan is to play with the Nikon, the three lenses I have and also adapt my Sony lenses so I can get a feel for what a full scale move would bring. Even after a few hours I'm already hoping the quality of files and AF are as good as I definitely like the feel of the camera better. No rush though as I also need to see how it plays with flash and also some horrible light that I have to shoot in at Boxing and other events. A real luxury having an extended trial and it may be Sony comes up with a spoke in the wheels while I am deciding.
 
wookie6262 said:
I've spent the last few hours enjoying having the Z9 in my hands. First impressions are excellent and there is no doubt I like the feel of it better than the A1. I can pretty much operate every function I would need in my A1 without removing my eye from the eyepiece. Not quite worked that out in the short time I have played with the Nikon but it should be fairly easy to get a similar set up.

Some things that really annoy me on the Sony are not an issue on the Nikon. Recall camera settings on the Sony is fine but you can't select a different white balance. So shooting a match with half shade and half sun means I have to use AWB. The Nikon does what I need and also allows me to set a button so it is toggle on and off and the same AF button can then be used.

The bigger back screen might mean I actually use it. The Sony rear screen is terrible in comparison and I pretty much use the EVF for everything.

Ergonomics are miles better and everything feels very well put together. When I put my hand on the 100-400 the function button was perfectly placed.

FTP seems to work well and having the ability to both rate an image and wire it simultaneously with a single button press will make life easier for me

The control ring is brilliant. I like shooting auto iso at games and the ability to use the control ring for exposure compensation means everything can be changed really quickly.

Instant start is really nice the A1 is pretty slow to go

The front function buttons are or will be useful

A few things I haven't worked out or are not possible.

Can't get trim/crop onto a single button press - However as a plus you can crop without always losing both horizontal and vertical pixels. A1 crops in top and bottom slightly even if you want to go 4:3 from a 3:2 in landscape images

Can't get subject recognition on/off on a single button press but having the auto recognition may make up for that

So a few hours basically playing with menus and setting up FTP locations. Mostly very positive. The next few days will be about learning the focus system and getting buttons programmed so I can quickly change whatever I need to. Once I have got to grips with AF I will start to actually compare output both in terms of the files and how easy it is to get sharp images. Already I think AWB looks better. The plan is to play with the Nikon, the three lenses I have and also adapt my Sony lenses so I can get a feel for what a full scale move would bring. Even after a few hours I'm already hoping the quality of files and AF are as good as I definitely like the feel of the camera better. No rush though as I also need to see how it plays with flash and also some horrible light that I have to shoot in at Boxing and other events. A real luxury having an extended trial and it may be Sony comes up with a spoke in the wheels while I am deciding.
Click to expand...

Would really interested in hearing thoughts on the AF and performance with megadap adapter.
Also if you end up selling that 400mm f2.8, give us a shout ;)
 
nandbytes said:
Would really interested in hearing thoughts on the AF and performance with megadap adapter.
Also if you end up selling that 400mm f2.8, give us a shout ;)
Click to expand...
I've ordered the adapter so will give it a good try out when it arrives. I have a Sony and Nikon 100-400 so I can do a direct comparison at least on those focal lengths. I have meant to do a proper 400mm comparison for a while and can now add the Nikon to a few options I have with Sony. It will be interesting to see how lenses do adapted but it will take a while to get used to the different methods of focusing. Sony certainly has the usability nailed with their tracking. I pretty much have it on the medium sized box permanently. Saying that usability isn't as important as performance and assuming the Z9 can match up in terms of speed and accuracy I can live with doing some brainwork and button pressing to be in the right settings.
 
wookie6262 said:
I've ordered the adapter so will give it a good try out when it arrives. I have a Sony and Nikon 100-400 so I can do a direct comparison at least on those focal lengths. I have meant to do a proper 400mm comparison for a while and can now add the Nikon to a few options I have with Sony. It will be interesting to see how lenses do adapted but it will take a while to get used to the different methods of focusing. Sony certainly has the usability nailed with their tracking. I pretty much have it on the medium sized box permanently. Saying that usability isn't as important as performance and assuming the Z9 can match up in terms of speed and accuracy I can live with doing some brainwork and button pressing to be in the right settings.
Click to expand...

I can suggest watching this video to setup Z9
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB8zRWvQCKc


I used this video to setup and trial with a Z8. It was my friends Z8. I trialed it with 400mm f4.5 and also with 1.4x TC.
We were mostly shooting pigeons and gulls in a local reserve. We were also shooting against a busy background.
At the time (couple months back I guess) the AF or subject tracking of Z8 was basically on the same level as my A7IV+200-600mm (which by no means is bad). Z8 obviously wins out overall purely because you have a higher frame rate and blackout free shooting. Subject tracking itself we both agreed was no better or worst than my A7IV.

So I felt A1 would have been slightly better at subject tracking than Z8. I believe Z9 has since been updated via. firmware so I cannot comment on that.

The issue for me is A1 even used is like £4K, the 400mm f2.8 is really hard to find used as you well know.
Z8 is £3.5K used and will most likely come down a fair amount to £2.75-3K if I give it another 3-6 months. The Z400/4.5 is easy enough to find in used market and even new is a lot cheaper than Sony 400mm f2.8. I am losing 1.33 stops of light but I have an extra body in Z8, lighter setup, and still cheaper than one 400mm f2.8.

I am more than happy with the tracking of Z8. Requires a bit more setup than Sony as shown in the video above. I am sure that will also improve over time and Nikon have already promised FW updates. Z8 makes a lot more sense for me for wildlife shooting in the long run unless Sony can bring out a cheaper body and cheaper tele primes.
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I can suggest watching this video to setup Z9
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bB8zRWvQCKc


I used this video to setup and trial with a Z8. It was my friends Z8. I trialed it with 400mm f4.5 and also with 1.4x TC.
We were mostly shooting pigeons and gulls in a local reserve. We were also shooting against a busy background.
At the time (couple months back I guess) the AF or subject tracking of Z8 was basically on the same level as my A7IV+200-600mm (which by no means is bad). Z8 obviously wins out overall purely because you have a higher frame rate and blackout free shooting. Subject tracking itself we both agreed was no better or worst than my A7IV.

So I felt A1 would have been slightly better at subject tracking than Z8. I believe Z9 has since been updated via. firmware so I cannot comment on that.

The issue for me is A1 even used is like £4K, the 400mm f2.8 is really hard to find used as you well know.
Z8 is £3.5K used and will most likely come down a fair amount to £2.75-3K if I give it another 3-6 months. The Z400/4.5 is easy enough to find in used market and even new is a lot cheaper than Sony 400mm f2.8. I am losing 1.33 stops of light but I have an extra body in Z8, lighter setup, and still cheaper than one 400mm f2.8.

I am more than happy with the tracking of Z8. Requires a bit more setup than Sony as shown in the video above. I am sure that will also improve over time and Nikon have already promised FW updates. Z8 makes a lot more sense for me for wildlife shooting in the long run unless Sony can bring out a cheaper body and cheaper tele primes.
Click to expand...
My most frequent use is team sports. The face recognition is sometimes as much a hindrance as a help as the player drops their head and the focus jumps to another face. An extended review was the only way I can make a proper judgement. The Z8 is handy too as that means I can have a smaller body if I want lighter. My A1s are nearly always gripped so size and weight don't really matter too much for the bulk of my use but it is sometimes nice to have a walk with a smaller camera and lens
 
Yes I have. The 1.4 works really well. The problem with the 2.0 is that in my back garden I can produce sharp shots of the fence. But the distance is not far.
Out in the field I have tried it for much more distant objects and so far no success. Of course the longer you go the more atmospherics affect the image.
All my trials have been handheld.

One from yesterday with the 1.4 - fairly close to the hide.

Warnham Oct 23 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr
 
wookie6262 said:
Another small tick for the Z9. The hot shoe accepts the Godox XPro triggers easily. On the Sonys the Xpro is a real wrestle to put on.
Click to expand...
yeah Sony multi-whatever fancy hotshoe is really hard to operate. Each time feels like I will break something!
 
Peter123 said:
Yes I have. The 1.4 works really well. The problem with the 2.0 is that in my back garden I can produce sharp shots of the fence. But the distance is not far.
Out in the field I have tried it for much more distant objects and so far no success. Of course the longer you go the more atmospherics affect the image.
All my trials have been handheld.

One from yesterday with the 1.4 - fairly close to the hide.

Warnham Oct 23 small by Peter Stephens, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Thank you for the feedback.
I have tried with 1.4x TC and I cannot see any difference (to my eyes anyway). 2x TC will always degrade IQ at long distances but if it's usable at short to medium focus distances, its still really useful for small birds for example to completely fill the frame.
 
psybear said:
I see Panamoz have reduced the Z8 to £3250. I think I'm right in saying that's the cheapest it's been available since launch.... I'm tempted.
Click to expand...
Me too. I’ve been keeping my eye on Z8 prices here and E-infin and will probably place an order when prices go below 3000. I held off moving from Nikon F to Z for so long waiting for the Z8 before giving in and getting the Z6ii initially and then the Z7ii. A month after I got the Z7, the Z8 was launched, but it was way too expensive for me when the Z’s I had were perfectly fine. But I still fancy getting one for some reason, I’ll probably justify it as a 50th birthday present to myself next year :)
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Me too. I’ve been keeping my eye on Z8 prices here and E-infin and will probably place an order when prices go below 3000. I held off moving from Nikon F to Z for so long waiting for the Z8 before giving in and getting the Z6ii initially and then the Z7ii. A month after I got the Z7, the Z8 was launched, but it was way too expensive for me when the Z’s I had were perfectly fine. But I still fancy getting one for some reason, I’ll probably justify it as a 50th birthday present to myself next year :)
Click to expand...
See I have the Z6 and Z7 and really wanted the Z8 to have the same form factor, but obviously it's bigger and heavier. One of the things putting me off jumping onto the Z8 is the fear that within months of me doing so they will release a Z7III....

I really don't need the video capabilities of the Z8 but it ticks all the other boxes (apart from size).
 
psybear said:
I see Panamoz have reduced the Z8 to £3250. I think I'm right in saying that's the cheapest it's been available since launch.... I'm tempted.
Click to expand...
I'd decided to go for a UK Z8 and was about to order one as I didn't think the price difference to grey was worth it but that's definitely more at the point I'd consider going grey.
 
psybear said:
See I have the Z6 and Z7 and really wanted the Z8 to have the same form factor, but obviously it's bigger and heavier. One of the things putting me off jumping onto the Z8 is the fear that within months of me doing so they will release a Z7III....

I really don't need the video capabilities of the Z8 but it ticks all the other boxes (apart from size).
Click to expand...
Having used a D810 and D4 for several years, I was glad of the size and weight reduction of the Z bodies, but in the end I’ve ended up putting hand grips (not battery grips) on both bodies to give me a little more room underneath the camera for my fingers (I have quite big hands). They now fit perfectly and combined with the smaller lighter lenses still represent a reduction in bulk from the F bodies. I know the Z8 is closer to the D810 in size and weight but combined with the smaller lighter Z lenses it’s still at an advantage.
 
Hi good folks

I’m still shooting with a D800 I bought almost exactly 11 years ago (bargain 1800 at the time and it’s still going strong)

I think the time had come to upgrade.

Any real world experiences of the Z8?

I think I’d plan to get the ftz converter to use my current lenses and slowly upgrade over time.

Thanks for your help

S
 
I have the z50 since it came out, and its for ever getting s***ted up, needs constant cleaning of sensor , never had this much trouble from previous nikons, even the v systems
cameras wasn't this bad, anyone else get this problem? and i very rarely change lenses with it, i keep a sigma 150-600 on it all the time.
 
Had my first go with the Z9 today. It was a second camera at a rugby match I was shooting. Only for fun so didn't matter if it did a job or not. I paired it with the 100-400 and it saw a fair bit of use. I was shooting it side by side with an A1. The Sony had the 400mm F2.8 on it though so not really fair to judge focus speeds on this occasion but my thoughts were it felt pretty slow especially when there was any great change in distance. That said I am not used to shooting lenses with such small apertures. Lots of sharp images though so perhaps not the issue it appeared.

I went with 3d on back button and it seemed to work fairly well. I was using subject recognition and I think it finds faces further away than the Sony does. It also sticks to them really well unless they turn away and it then jumps very quickly to any other face. The Sony does that too but the Nikon was even keener. I've not had a chance to look at the RAW files but the jpegs looked OK. Shot with the standard profile and a bit contrasty and sharp for my tastes but that can be changed easy enough. Colours were good and I like them slightly better than the AWB of the Sony which is a bit warmer.

Some other points. The zoom ring on the 100-400 is at the furthest point from the camera on the Nikon. The Sony 70-200 is nearest the body which makes it far easier to use. Might be easy to get used to in time though. The body was very easy to get to know. I was able to change everything I needed very easily and the camera felt really good in the hand. I preferred the EVF on the Sony particularly reviewing images. The back screen on the Z9 and the flip ability was handy taking a low portrait shot of a conversion and was better to use in general.

If I didn't have experience of the A1 and A9s then I think the Z9 would have blown me away. As it is the AF is not as easy to set up. With Sony you have lots of options to use tracking and it is easy to see what choices it is making. The Z9 can only really use 3d or the full area for tracking from what I can see. In Rugby or Football that only really leaves 3d that can be used for groups of players and the point that it starts with is very small. No issue if you have time to line up a shot but not easy when jumping from player to player. Megadap should be here tomorrow so that will give me an idea of how the camera works with faster lenses albeit not native.

I'll take my time and try to do some proper head to heads with the native 100-400s. I'm beginning to wish I had got the z70-200 but too late to swap now.

Any hints and tips on what AF tactics anyone uses on Sport events would be useful
 
mark richards said:
I have the z50 since it came out, and its for ever getting s***ted up, needs constant cleaning of sensor , never had this much trouble from previous nikons, even the v systems
cameras wasn't this bad, anyone else get this problem? and i very rarely change lenses with it, i keep a sigma 150-600 on it all the time.
Click to expand...
I had the same problem when I had mine no idea why it happened all of the time, I ended up selling it in the end. Superb image quality but this issue was a real pain to say the least.
 
So about a week ago now I took delivery of the Nikon Zf+40mm/2 kit so thought I'd put my thoughts up. Long and short I think I'm returning it.

I've only taken about 60 shots with it so not a long term test.

IQ, it is basically the same as the Z6ii as far as I can see. So very very nice as you would expect. The colours are rich and beautiful as you would expect from Nikons 24Mp sensors. The build quality is far above the Zfc, Z30 and I would say feels more solid than even my Z8. One of the big things I hated about the Zfc was it had a plasticky, cheap feel to the body and the knobs. Not so here, this feels like a quality Nikon product. The idea of using the mSDcard and an SDCard I think is fantastic, because you have the backup option but without the extra size in the body. It's fast too, almost as good on AF as the Z8, this is big news for me, Nikon have it 100% right now with far far better AF.

But, for me I just don't think it fits what I was after. It's heavier than I thought it might be. Now I wanted heavier, but now it's so close to the weight of the Z8 that it's not that noticeably lighter if you have both in the hand with the grip attached to the Zf. So as a walk around keep in the bag at all times, it's not gaining me much weight or even size wise. Also it has, and this might be just me as I've not heard anyone else mention it, a problem with the front command dial use when you have the grip attached. The grip kind of gets in the way when using the dial. If I was to use the camera exclusively I think that I'd adapt, but I found when I swapped between the Zf and the Z8 and then back I then found it awkward to use the front dial. It still has very awkward auto-ISO config which you have to set through your i menu as the C setting on the dial can't really be used to activate auto-ISO which is disappointing. And the recall shooting function is missing, I really can't see why they left that out as it gets you out of trouble so much when the AF fails you.

So those handling downsides are really making me think it's not the camera for me, given I have the Z8 it just seems like this doesn't fit the purpose I bought it any better than the Z8, but with a couple of downsides. If I didn't have the Z8 then I'd keep it, but yeah, not sure it fits the bill right now which is a shame.
 
Well I returned mine.
I started photography with an FM2 and 3 primes so I thought I would like it.
NO - Did not fit well in the hand (Smallrig grip made it worse).
I bought it to replace my Z7 but this feels so much more comfortable in the hand than the Zf.
Also, the only top dial I am likely to use is the exposure compensation.
I did however like the flip out screen and the Z8 level autofocus.

Let's see which bodies come next from Nikon.
 
Peter123 said:
Well I returned mine.
I started photography with an FM2 and 3 primes so I thought I would like it.
NO - Did not fit well in the hand (Smallrig grip made it worse).
I bought it to replace my Z7 but this feels so much more comfortable in the hand than the Zf.
Also, the only top dial I am likely to use is the exposure compensation.
I did however like the flip out screen and the Z8 level autofocus.

Let's see which bodies come next from Nikon.
Click to expand...
Who did you order yours through?
 
wookie6262 said:
Had my first go with the Z9 today. It was a second camera at a rugby match I was shooting. Only for fun so didn't matter if it did a job or not. I paired it with the 100-400 and it saw a fair bit of use. I was shooting it side by side with an A1. The Sony had the 400mm F2.8 on it though so not really fair to judge focus speeds on this occasion but my thoughts were it felt pretty slow especially when there was any great change in distance. That said I am not used to shooting lenses with such small apertures. Lots of sharp images though so perhaps not the issue it appeared.

I went with 3d on back button and it seemed to work fairly well. I was using subject recognition and I think it finds faces further away than the Sony does. It also sticks to them really well unless they turn away and it then jumps very quickly to any other face. The Sony does that too but the Nikon was even keener. I've not had a chance to look at the RAW files but the jpegs looked OK. Shot with the standard profile and a bit contrasty and sharp for my tastes but that can be changed easy enough. Colours were good and I like them slightly better than the AWB of the Sony which is a bit warmer.

Some other points. The zoom ring on the 100-400 is at the furthest point from the camera on the Nikon. The Sony 70-200 is nearest the body which makes it far easier to use. Might be easy to get used to in time though. The body was very easy to get to know. I was able to change everything I needed very easily and the camera felt really good in the hand. I preferred the EVF on the Sony particularly reviewing images. The back screen on the Z9 and the flip ability was handy taking a low portrait shot of a conversion and was better to use in general.

If I didn't have experience of the A1 and A9s then I think the Z9 would have blown me away. As it is the AF is not as easy to set up. With Sony you have lots of options to use tracking and it is easy to see what choices it is making. The Z9 can only really use 3d or the full area for tracking from what I can see. In Rugby or Football that only really leaves 3d that can be used for groups of players and the point that it starts with is very small. No issue if you have time to line up a shot but not easy when jumping from player to player. Megadap should be here tomorrow so that will give me an idea of how the camera works with faster lenses albeit not native.

I'll take my time and try to do some proper head to heads with the native 100-400s. I'm beginning to wish I had got the z70-200 but too late to swap now.

Any hints and tips on what AF tactics anyone uses on Sport events would be useful
Click to expand...
Could offer a loan of my 70-200 to see how you like it.
 
Reports are that the Z9/Z8 is poor in low light in compariosn to D5/D6 Nikons.

Is there any truth in it?. The Science would support it.
 
shapeshifter said:
Reports are that the Z9/Z8 is poor in low light in compariosn to D5/D6 Nikons.

Is there any truth in it?. The Science would support it.
Click to expand...

A 20Mp sensor will always give a cleaner output than a 45Mp one. But if you resized the 45Mp file to 20Mp there wont be that much difference. Since Lightroom sorted out its noise reduction I've not worried about noise on the Z8 or Z9.
 
shapeshifter said:
Reports are that the Z9/Z8 is poor in low light in compariosn to D5/D6 Nikons.

Is there any truth in it?. The Science would support it.
Click to expand...
Not really... and I'm not sure what science you are referring to.

If you overlay the various later Nikon's SNR results they are all pretty comparative. The Z9 is pretty much identical to the D4/D4s and a bit better than the D5/D6... it also goes one step better than most because it has a lower base ISO.

SNR3.jpg

But note that this is comparing the recorded image at the same magnification (output size; not zoom level)... the Z9's (D850/etc) higher resolution allows you to view the results more critically at greater magnification, and that can make it seem like it is doing worse than the other cameras.
 
Last edited:
Talking of returning stuff, I'm thinking of returning my new Nikon Z 180-600 F5.6-6.3 VR lens, that I purchased 2 weeks ago from Nikon UK (still within the 14 days return period). I've tried it a number of times on all my Nikon Z bodies (Z6 II, Z7 II and my Z9), and I'm just not seeing the sharpness acuity at 600mm that I expect to get from Nikon Z glass. I've put it against my 500mm F5.6 PF (with the zoom also at 500mm), and the PF is noticeably sharper (even with the 180-600 stopped down to F8). I then tested it against my 100-400 at both 400mm and with the 1.4x on the 100-400 (so 560mm FL), and again the 100-400 lens is sharper at all of the longer focal lengths. That's why I haven't posted any images from it yet. Maybe I just got a bad copy, but I'm also surprised just how big this lens is compared to both aforementioned units.

And now for the really bad news, when comparing the lens mounted on my Z9, vs my Olympus 300mm F4 Pro mounted to my OM-1 body, not only is the Olympus combo by a margin sharper (yes I know it's F4 vs F6.3), but what also surprised me is the focussing speed. The Olympus combo hammers the Nikon combo at not only at initial acquisition speed, but also the continuous AF speed. In a burst of 30 images on the Nikon shooting some magpies in flight at approx. 50-70m, I got about 12 sharp (and those sharp ones still wasn't as sharp as I had hoped for). On the Olympus a few minutes later, I got some more Magpies at a similar distance and shot 73 images on the OM-1 and all but 2 were tack sharp ! Yes, I know the whole full frame vs cropped sensor arguments and equivalence etc. but the Olympus set up continues to amaze me for things like BIF.

I know it's an F6.3 zoom lens, but the 100-400 is only F5.6 and that appears much much quicker to focus. Like I say, I think I just got a bad copy.
 
Quite a few posters on the US forums are saying the same.
I’m not interested in this lens as it’s too heavy for me.
In relative terms it is not an expensive lens, so I assume the S class ones justify their premium.
 
Sootchucker said:
Talking of returning stuff, I'm thinking of returning my new Nikon Z 180-600 F5.6-6.3 VR lens, that I purchased 2 weeks ago from Nikon UK (still within the 14 days return period). I've tried it a number of times on all my Nikon Z bodies (Z6 II, Z7 II and my Z9), and I'm just not seeing the sharpness acuity at 600mm that I expect to get from Nikon Z glass. I've put it against my 500mm F5.6 PF (with the zoom also at 500mm), and the PF is noticeably sharper (even with the 180-600 stopped down to F8). I then tested it against my 100-400 at both 400mm and with the 1.4x on the 100-400 (so 560mm FL), and again the 100-400 lens is sharper at all of the longer focal lengths. That's why I haven't posted any images from it yet. Maybe I just got a bad copy, but I'm also surprised just how big this lens is compared to both aforementioned units.

And now for the really bad news, when comparing the lens mounted on my Z9, vs my Olympus 300mm F4 Pro mounted to my OM-1 body, not only is the Olympus combo by a margin sharper (yes I know it's F4 vs F6.3), but what also surprised me is the focussing speed. The Olympus combo hammers the Nikon combo at not only at initial acquisition speed, but also the continuous AF speed. In a burst of 30 images on the Nikon shooting some magpies in flight at approx. 50-70m, I got about 12 sharp (and those sharp ones still wasn't as sharp as I had hoped for). On the Olympus a few minutes later, I got some more Magpies at a similar distance and shot 73 images on the OM-1 and all but 2 were tack sharp ! Yes, I know the whole full frame vs cropped sensor arguments and equivalence etc. but the Olympus set up continues to amaze me for things like BIF.

I know it's an F6.3 zoom lens, but the 100-400 is only F5.6 and that appears much much quicker to focus. Like I say, I think I just got a bad copy.
Click to expand...
I got the lens a while ago and only got my Z8 back from the service advisory before the weekend. I took them both out for a spin and I'm also not happy with the results. I had to use a monopod, as I've joint problems and forgot to switch off the VR. So I'll give it another test before sending it back.
 
wilt said:
I got the lens a while ago and only got my Z8 back from the service advisory before the weekend. I took them both out for a spin and I'm also not happy with the results. I had to use a monopod, as I've joint problems and forgot to switch off the VR. So I'll give it another test before sending it back.
Click to expand...
I doubt the issues you are seeing are due to the VR and a monopod. I use VR on lenses all the time and never had an issue. I wonder if it's just that the 180-600 isn't an S lens
 
Maybe Pete, perhaps it's just made to a price ? It's a shame as by all accounts the Sony 200-600 Lens is supposed to be a cracker ?

I was really surprised that albeit an S class lens, that the 100-400 WITH 1.4x converter still outshined the bare 180-600 ?
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
.................I then tested it against my 100-400 at both 400mm and with the 1.4x on the 100-400 (so 560mm FL), and again the 100-400 lens is sharper at all of the longer focal lengths..............
Click to expand...
That's interesting.
The 100-400mm was on my wish list but then the 180-600mm was released and everyone was saying it was sharper.
Those comments made me put my purchase on hold.
The 180-600mm doesn't really fit my needs but my confidence in purchasing the 100-400mm was certainly dented.
Anyone else feel the sharpness is good on the 100-400mm when comparing the two at comparable focal lengths (180-400mm) and then using the 1.4x on the 100-400mm ?
 
Interesting comments about the 180-600. I have the sign 150-600 C with FTZ attached and it is overwhelming when zoomed out, so I was thinking of the new Nikon as it is internal zoom.

All the guys on YouTube are saying it is great for wildlife with quick focussing and sharp images. Seems not to be the case then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top